Diana Aventina, Aedes

Temple precinct of Diana Aventina in the *Lauretum on the *Aventine, the main sanctuary of the goddess in Rome (Diana Aventina: Prop. 4.8.29, Mart. 6.64.13; or Aventinensis: e.g., Festus 164) and a place of strong plebeian self-representation. Allegedly founded by the slave-born Servius Tullius, the sanctuary was once the assembly-place of the Latin cities under Rome’s leadership and also a notable asylum (Livy 1.45.2-3; Dion. Hal., Ant. Rom. 4.26.2-5); its festival on the Ides of August continued to be the holiday of slaves (Festus 460). Further, the sanctuary served as an important archive for legislation; a bronze pillar, still standing in the Augustan period (Dion. Hal., Ant. Rom. 4.26), included the Icilian law of the mid-5th c. B.C. de Aventino publicando which provided allotments of Aventine land to the plebs (Livy 3.31.1; Dion. Hal., Ant.Rom. 10.32.1-5). No remains of this temple have been identified, yet the building and its precinct are represented on fragment 22 of the Severan Marble Plan, next to the Temple of *Minerva (Carettoni et al., Pianta 79-80, pl. 23, frags. 22 a,b now lost; Rodríguez Almeida, Forma pl. 15; Richardson 108: “almost certainly”; Vendittelli, LTUR 12; cf. Templum Dianae et Minervae in the Regionary Catalogues, Regio XIII). Under the Augustan program of ‘adorning the city’, the temple was rebuilt or restored by L. Cornificius (Suet., Aug. 29.4: a L. Cornificio aedes Dianae). Since the name DIANA CORNIF. is attested independently (CIL VI 4305=ILS 1732), the label CORNIFICIA[... on the Marble Plan clearly refers to Diana Cornificia or Cornificiana and thus establishes the identification. The footprint of the octostyle podium temple shown on the 3rd-c. A.D. fragment is presumably still that of Cornificius’ building; it is surrounded by a precinct with a double-colonnaded portico (or, perhaps, a double line of trees: Richardson 108) along its flank (its likely twin, as well as a portico along the rear side, are tentatively depicted on our map). The position of fragment 22, never securely fixed, comes under debate as a result of recent excavations. The traditional position falls within rather narrow spatial limits, about halfway between S. Sabina and S. Prisca, and depends upon the adjacent balneum Surae fragment (frag. 21). The long street on fragment 21 had been plausibly identified with the ancient street found under the modern Via di S. Prisca (for the arrangement: Scagnetti; Vendittelli 1987, 34 fig. 2; ead. 1988, 109 fig. 10), and thus both fragments 21 and 22 are fairly securely positioned. However, Vendittelli’s revision of the Aventine topography places fragment 22 about 300 m further SE, under S. Alessio (1990, 163 fig. 1, 164 fig. 2), based upon a tentative identification of some excavated walls with those on the balneum Surae fragment (1990, 166 fig. 4). More importantly, Vendittelli’s thesis requires the Marble Plan’s joint lines be altered by no less than 25°, which is not acceptable; in addition, the placement of fragment 22 under S. Alessio ignores the existence of an ancient street under the modern Via di S. Sabina (s.v. *Vicus Armilustri). Vendittelli’s latest assessment (LTUR 12-13) places fragment 22 at about the same site (with the Temple of Diana falling at the junction of Via di S. Alberto Magno with Via di S. Sabina); yet previously she had rejected this location (1987, 34 fig. 2), and once again the ancient street under Via di S. Sabina is ignored. All this confirms, at least indirectly, a certain legitimacy of the previous assumptions; our map follows — albeit with caution — the position of fragment 22 as advanced on Vendittelli’s earlier plans (1987 and 1988) and as rendered by Scagnetti.