“Area Sacra”: Largo Argentina

Modern name for a sacral area in the S *Campus Martius which contained a series of small temples; first explored in 1926, and subsequently preserved as an archaeological site, its area was bound on the W by the *Porticus Pompeianae, on the N by the *Hecatostylum, and on the E by the *Porticus Minucia, while the S boundary remains undetermined. Situated between the *Villa Publica and the *Circus Flaminius, this sacral area was near the beginning of most triumphal processions; thus, its temples (four known through excavation and four more postulated) are assumed to have been constructed ex manubiis by triumphators of various families, and to have constituted a mode of aristocratic competition. For this reason, the older temples were regularly enhanced and aggrandized to match the quality of the newer dedications. Currently visible are four small Republican temples, roughly aligned and facing E, built between the late 3rd and early 1st c. B.C.; the attributions of these temples are extremely conjectural, and as a consequence they are commonly referred to as Temples A, B, C and D, proceeding from N to S (Richardson 33; index nos. 23a-d for details regarding the individual temples, s.v. *“Area Sacra” [Largo Argentina]: Temple A, C and D; *Fortuna Huiusce Diei, Aedes).In the late 2nd to early 1st c. B.C., the disparate structures in the region were unified into a single monumental unit when a tufa pavement was laid, possibly by Q. Lutatius Catulus, concurrent with the construction of Temple B, the latest of the four known temples. Two porticoes were added soon after the original tufa pavement. One runs E–W just N of Temple A, and was later replaced by the columns whose remains are currently visible; it is slightly off-axis from Temple A, and seems related to the series of rooms behind it. The other portico, built E of the temples and running N–S, was replaced under Domitian, when the ground level of the area was raised and repaved in travertine. The Domitianic version of this second Minucia Vetus portico consists of engaged columns facing E which, as Claridge has pointed out (218-19), do not seem to relate to the Area Sacra temples; assuming this new portico reflects the orientation of the original one, we must discard Coarelli’s theory that these columns represent the Porticus (1981; s.v. *Porticus Minucia). A square structure, whose inner room was richly decorated in marble, was later inserted between Temples A and B. It had an initial phase in opus reticulatum, which led Coarelli (1981) to date it to the end of the Republic or early Empire and identify it as the statio aquarum erected by M. Agrippa; this attribution, not followed here, depends heavily on a series of tenuous assumptions culminating in the identification of Temple A as that of Iuturna, and the “Area Sacra” di Largo Argentina as the Porticus Minucia. A more plausible alternative holds that it was a shrine, built as late as the Flavian era (Pensabene has shown the similarity of sculptural fragments found in this area to other Flavian-era relief sculptures); hence, it is not shown on our map.Inscription fragments provide evidence of two Augustan monuments erected in or near the Largo Argentina; one was set up in honor of M. Licinius M.f. Crassus Frugi by his clients from Seleucia in Peiria, and little is known of its appearance (Alföldy). Another, an inscribed statue base, may have supported a group of Julio-Claudian portrait-statues including Augustus and Gaius Caesar; this group may have been placed near the N boundary of the Area Sacra, just N of Temple A in an area Alföldy identifies as the *Porticus ad Nationes (Alföldy).Up to four more temples of similar size and aspect may exist in the unexcavated area to the S (Richardson). Using the Severan Marble Plan (frags. 234 a,b,c), Manacorda (1990, 40; LTUR) has plausibly reconstructed the area to the S and offers possible identifications of three temples which stood in that region: Iuppiter Fulgur (s.v. “Area Sacra” [Largo Argentina]: Temple D), *Iuno Curritis, and *Vulcanus. Though their identifications remain conjectural, the two temples that appear on the Marble Plan are indicated on our map (index nos. 23 e, f) since they probably stood during the Augustan age. Only one of the four excavated temples has a widely-accepted identification: Temple B is thought to be the Temple of Fortuna Huiusce Diei (c. 101 B.C.: Plut., Mar. 26.2, 8; Coarelli 1981, 38, 46; Ziolkowski 1986; Gros). Though Temple D has been equated with the Temple of the Lares Permarini (c. 179 B.C.: Livy 40.52.4; Coarelli 1981, 46; Ziolkowski 1986, Pietilä-Castrén; contra, Zevi, Claridge), this requires recognizing the Area Sacra as the *Porticus Minucia, and is not accepted here. Temple A has been proposed as the Temple of *Iuturna (c. 241 B.C.: Coarelli 1981, Pietilä-Castrén) and as a Temple of *Feronia (of L. Aemilius Papus, c. 225 B.C.: Ziolkowski 1986); neither identification is satisfactory. Coarelli considers Temple C to be a Temple of Feronia (this of M. Curius Dentatus, c. 272 B.C.), while Ziolkowski suggests this was the Temple of Iuturna. The conflicting identifications and dates offered by Coarelli and Ziolkowski highlight the manifold problems which arise from the absence of definitive literary, archaeological and epigraphic evidence. Since three or more temples stood immediately S of the excavated portion of the sacral area, and since there are more Republican temples attributed to the Campus Martius than there are excavated remains, all identifications, save that of Temple B, must await further evidence.