Augustus, Domitian and the So-called Horologium Augusti

Heslin, Peter

doi:10.3815/000000007784016106

Cited by 24 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Buchner (1976;1980;1982) va trobar en una de les seves excavacions, restes de les lloses i marques, així com algunes lletres en grec fetes en bronze que mesuraven els moviments del sol. També es va trobar un obelisc egipci a prop de la plaça del Parlament -on segurament estava emplaçat-i que es va traslladar a la plaça de Montecitorio (Hesling 2007; Alberi i Tuscano 2014) on avui encara es troba. Suposadament, l'ombra d'aquest obelisc arribava fins a l'Ara Pacis, concretament en la data del naixement d'August (23 de setembre), aquesta afirmació ha estat rebutjada per Rodríguez-Almeida (1978-1980 i Schütz (1990), que han demostrat que era impossible.…”

Section: El Càlcul Del Temps En èPoca Romanaunclassified

Un model de rellotge de sol trobat a Iulia Libica (Llívia)

Monfort¹,

Farré²

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Un model de rellotge de sol trobat a Iulia Libica (Llívia) A model of a sundial discovered at Iulia Libica (Llívia) Cèsar Carreras Eduard FarréLes recents excavacions del fòrum de Iulia Libica han proporcionat un model de terracota amb línies ben traçades que recorda un petit rellotge de sol. Sembla que el model no era suficientment acurat per fer-se servir com un rellotge de sol portable, però es va dissenyar per utilitzar-se en la latitud de Iulia Libica. Aquest article intenta explicar la funció de l'objecte així com fer una reflexió sobre com es mesurava el temps a l'antiguitat.Paraules clau: rellotge de sol, terracota, fòrum, gnòmon.The recent excavations of the Iulia Libica forum yielded a terracotta artefact bearing well-with well-traced lines and interpreted as a small sundial. Although not accurate enough to serve as a portable sundial, it was nonetheless designed to operate at the latitude of Iulia Libica. The current study attempts to explain its function and advance notions as to how time was measured in Antiquity.

show abstract

Section: El Càlcul Del Temps En èPoca Romanaunclassified

Un model de rellotge de sol trobat a Iulia Libica (Llívia)

Monfort¹,

Farré²

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…103 The Horologium of Augustus has been a focus of renewed interest: in particular, Heslin, drawing on earlier work by Rodríguez Almeida and Schütz, has presented a new study of the Augustan and Domitianic phases of the monument. 104 Rather than being an extensive sundial, as argued by Buchner, this is now shown to be a solar meridian with the principal aim of checking the accuracy of the calendar, which (according to Heslin) is to be associated with Augustus' accession to the rôle of Pontifex Maximus. As a result, the idea that Augustus' obelisk cast a shadow on the Ara Pacis on the Princeps' birthday, widely accepted in the scholarly literature, has had to be abandoned.…”

Section: The Campus Martiusmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘The City of Rome Revisited: From Mid-Republic to Mid-Empire’

Patterson¹

2010

J. Rom. Stud.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This survey article provides an update for the Journal's readers on research relating to the City of Rome in antiquity since 'The City of Rome: from Republic to Empire' appeared in 1992. 1 Extensive archaeological investigations have continued to take place in the city in recent years, given additional impetus by special funding from the Italian state in preparation for the 'Giubileo' (or Millennium) in 2000; while more generally the topography of ancient Rome has continued to be central to the work of historians writing about the city. Recent archaeological work in the city can be roughly divided into three categories: (i) the process of conservation and restoration of the individual monuments, under way since the 1980s; (ii) investigations in areas of the city due to be affected by new building or other infrastructural projects, and unexpected discoveries in similar circumstances; and (iii) research-led excavations in areas of the city hitherto not fully explored. 2 Perhaps most striking of the restoration projects, in terms of the debate it has generated, has been the work on the Arch of Constantine. The restorers concluded that the surviving monument had replaced a demolished Flavian arch on the same site, and was constructed in two phases, one dating to the Hadrianic period, and the other to the early fourth century A.D. The sculptural panels of Hadrianic date on the Constantinian arch might therefore come from an earlier phase of the same monument, rather than having been brought from * I am very grateful to the Editor, Mary Beard, Henry Hurst, and Andrew Wallace-Hadrill for comments on earlier drafts and advice of various kinds; particular thanks are due to Robert Coates-Stephens for guidance on recent discoveries in the city. Needless to say, none of these are responsible for errors or omissions in what follows. The Classical Faculty Library and the University Library in Cambridge, and the Library of the Institute of Classical Studies in London, all provided vital bibliographical support. The following abbreviations are used:

show abstract

“…The latter obelisk functioned as the gnomon of an enormous solar calendar, which traced the progression of the seasons through the changing length of the shadow cast along a meridian line at noon each day. A recent reassessment of this monument stresses the fact that the only excavated remains are those of a meridian line that was reset in a pavement of Domitianic date (Heslin 2007). This restoration of the Augustan monument was apparently an attempt to recalibrate the device, which Pliny the Elder (NH 36.73) says had become inaccurate over time.…”

Section: The City and Its Godsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Remaking Rome

Gallia¹

2016

A Companion to the Flavian Age of Imperial Rome

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rulers of great empires tend to lavish special attention on their capitals. By shaping the fabric of urban life at the center of power, they can advertise the achievements on which their authority is founded, stake out the core values they claim to represent, and generally demonstrate the benefits that accrue from their control over the state. As Suetonius recognized, Augustus was the first to endow Rome with an ornamental splendor that accorded with the majesty of its empire, so much that he rightly could have claimed to have taken over a city of brick and left one of marble (Suet. Aug. 28.3; cf. Tac. Ann. 1.9.5). Contemporary scholarship is solid in its embrace of this assessment, with multiple studies demonstrating how Rome was transformed into a vehicle for a new Imperial ideology in the Augustan age (Haselberger 2007, Rehak 2006, Favro 2005). Although no one should doubt the profound impact of monarchy on Rome's monumental and administrative character, a reign-by-reign approach to the study of the city's development under the Caesars imposes certain limitations that need to be acknowledged. Unlike Persepolis or Khanbalikh, Rome was not a new foundation when it became the seat of imperial authority, much less when it fell under monarchical control. As such, the city did not offer a blank canvas upon which a ruler could project a discrete vision of his power. Indeed, Augustus was particularly adept at incorporating existing urban features into his new, marble Rome. For * Published in A. Zissos (ed.), A Companion to the Flavian Age of Imperial Rome. (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2016). example, he made sure that an ancient thatched hut, touted as the "house of Romulus" (casa Romuli), was assiduously maintained on the slope of the Palatine, not far from his own residence and the gleaming temple of Apollo he built next door (Dion. Hal. Ant. 1.79.11). For later emperors, the challenge of dealing with a preexisting urban landscape encompassed not just monuments hallowed by antiquity, but the interventions of their predecessors as well. Within the richly layered landscape of Imperial Rome, novelty, however significant, would always be seen as part of a continuum. The greatest drawback to a discussion of Rome's urban development organized according to the reigns of successive emperors is that it may obscure the importance of overlap between them. It was not uncommon for a project conceived under one emperor to be completed by another. The Flavian Amphitheater (Colosseum), which was begun during Vespasian's reign but inaugurated by Titus and only fully completed under Domitian, is a classic example. While we can still safely describe this monument as "Flavian," we are on less solid footing with a monumental complex such as the one begun under Domitian but dedicated after his assassination as the Forum of Nerva (Suet. Dom. 5). Scholars who emphasize links between the architectonic decoration of this structure and the policies of the emperor in whose reign it originated may choose to promote the late antique nickname "For...

show abstract

Augustus, Domitian and the So-called Horologium Augusti

Cited by 24 publications

References 3 publications

Un model de rellotge de sol trobat a Iulia Libica (Llívia)

Un model de rellotge de sol trobat a Iulia Libica (Llívia)

‘The City of Rome Revisited: From Mid-Republic to Mid-Empire’

Remaking Rome

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About