No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 August 2013
The position of the Sublician Bridge and its relation to the Island of the Tiber are vexed questions in Roman topography. The discussion which follows is the result of a re-examination of the existing evidence during a short period of topographical study at Rome.
The Traditions of the Regal Period
According to the narrative of Livy, the Pons Sublicius, the first bridge across the river, was built by Ancus Marcius, and its raison d'être was to establish communication with the Janiculum, which (if Livy's words are taken at their face value) was also included within the city-walls, although this is before the time of the Servian Wall.
1 I am much indebted to Mr. I. A. Richmond and Mr. C. G. Hardie, former Directors of the British School at Rome, for the time they have given not only to reading the paper, but to very full and helpful criticism of various points.
2 Livy, i, 35, ‘id non muro solum, sed etiam ob commoditatem itineris ponte sublicio rum primum in Tiberi facto, coniungi urbi placuit,’ vide also Plut. Numa, 9. Richter, Die Befestigung des Janiculum,has a detailed consideration of the question, vide especially pp. 4, 5, 11, 22. My paper was written in essentials before I read this pamphlet, and various minor points in which we agree are undesigned coincidences. Throughout I have used Besnier, L'île tiberine, as a guide to various sources of information.
3 Ant. Rom. iii, 45.
4 See also v, 24, and ix, 68. 2. Dionysius came to Rome in 30 B.C. and published his Ῥῳμἅική Ἀρχαιολογία in 7 B.C. This passage (iii, 45) and that in v, 24 remarking of the bridge, 
, form part of the argument, which to me seems conclusive, against the view that the (stone) Aemilian bridge in the second century B.C. was built on the actual line of the Sublician bridge, and took its place, vide infra, p. 140.
5 De vir. ill. 5.
6 Livy, ii, 10, and Dion. Hal. v, 22 and 23.
7 v, 23. 2.
8 v, 27 sqq. and v, 33, also v, 26, and Livy ii, 11.
9 ii, 5.
10 v, 13.
11 Poplic. 8.
12 Berichte d. Sächs. Ges. d. Wissenschaften, 1850. Epigraphische Analekten, 323. Contrast the great bridge of Augusta Emerita (Mérida) in Spain which crosses the Guadiana over the island opposite the town. (Richmond, I. A, Archaeological Journal, 87, 1930, 104–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar.)
13 
. Dion. Hal. v, 23.
14 This statement, published before the researches of Dr. von Gerkan and Dr. Saeflund, assumes that the wall, or branches from it, came down to the Tiber-bank. On this point vide infra,pp. 146–147.
15 Platner-Ashby, Top. Diet. s.v. ‘Pons Sublicius.’ In contrast to this theory of the ‘original ford,’ Jordan thinks that the river-bank between Capitol and Aventine was protected by the ‘breite reissende und selbst in der Zeit des niedrigsten Wasserstande strudelreiche Fluss’ (Topog. i, 236); cf. Dionysius' account, ix, 68. 2, τά δὑπό 
.
16 Saeflund, Le Mura di Roma Repubblicana, 189, ‘il Ponte Rotto (Emilio-Sublicio),’ 183, n. 1, and 188.
17 It seems to be founded on Servius in Aen. 8. 646, ‘per sublicium pontem hoc est ligneum qui nunc lapideus dicitur,’ which is generally considered a late and erroneous addition, cf. Aethicus in Pomponius Mela, p. 716 (ed. Gronovius), ‘per pontem Lepidi qui nunc abusive a plebe lapideus dicitur’ (vide infra, pp. 144, 151). Ovid, , Fasti, v, 622Google Scholar, writes of ‘roboreus pons’ more than a century after the completion of the Aemilius; and Hist. Aug. Ant. Pius 8 records a restoration of the Sublician bridge by that Emperor. See also supra, p. 137, n. 4.
18 Mommsen, however, believed that the walls reached the Tiber above the Island. Mommsen, , Berichte d. Sächs. Ges. d. Wiss. Leipzig, 1850, 320–326Google Scholar, and Hist. (Eng. trans.) i, 65. Jordan, Comment, in hon. Th. Mommseni (1877), 366, and Topog. i, 401 (ii, 632, is Huelsen's view). Both Mommsen and Jordan are inclined to place the bridge across the centre of the Island.
19 Cf. Hal., Dion.Ant. Rom. iii, 45Google Scholar, V, 24, ix, 68 (ἣν ἔλυον ἐν τοīς πολέμοις). Richter, for example (Die Befestigung des Janiculum, 14–15), uses this as an argument for his view that the Janiculum was unfortified till die later Republic. A fort would be needed to protect the crossing only in the case of a permanent stone bridge. In the tradition, however, Ancus Martius built both the Sublician bridge and the Janiculum fort. For the religious motive, vide Frazer, , The Fasti of Ovid, iv, 95Google Scholar.
20 Varro, , L.L. v, 83Google Scholar. Plutarch, however (Numa, 9), considers the etymology γελώμενον.
21 Servius, in Aen. ii, 166Google Scholar.
22 vi 55.
23 Appian, , Bell. Civ. i, 26, 117Google Scholar; Plut. C. Gracch. 17; Val. Max. iv, 5, 2; Vell. Pat. 11, 6; Orosius, v, 12; de vir. ill. 65.
24 Platner-Ashby, Top. Dict. s.v. ‘Lunae aedes.’
25 Huelsen in Röm. Mitt. 1907, 227; Mélanges, xxviii (1908), 283Google Scholar, and xxix (1909); Bull. Com. Arch. xxv (1907), 45ffGoogle Scholar.
26 Frazer, , Fasti, iv, 276Google Scholar.
27 Fasti, v, 621–622; cf. Plut. Quaest. Rom. 32 Διὰ τί 
28 Tristia, ii, 549–552; cf. Frazer, vol. i. introd. p. XV.
29 Met. xv, 739–741. ‘Insula nomen habet’ can have two possible meanings, (1) ‘It has the name Island,’ i.e. is the Island par excellence, cf. Platner-Ashby, Top. Dict. s.v. ‘Insula Tiberina,’ ‘It was often called simply Island.’ (2) ‘The Island has a name,’ which Ovid cannot express in metre, i.e. inter duos pontes. I prefer (I), as all the references which indubitably apply inter duos pontes to the Island are much later than Ovid.
30 Fasti, i, 290–294.
31 Livy, , Epit. xiGoogle Scholar; Ovid, , Met. xv, 719 ff.Google Scholar; Val. Max. I, 8. 2; De vir. ill. 22.
32 Poplicola,8.
33 Apol. Pr. 16. Simon is apparently a Christian misunderstanding of the cult of Semo Sancus on the Island, vide infra,p. 149.
34 Aethicus in Pomponius Mela, 716 (ed. Gronovius).
35 Mon. Germ., Auct. Antiq. ix, 1–143.
36 Livy, xxxv, 21; Macrobius Saturn, iii, 16.14; Horace, Sat. ii, 2. 31–34Google Scholar; Pliny, , N.H. ix, 54Google Scholar.
37 Livy, xl, 51. 4.
38 There has been considerable dispute over the building and the date of this bridge. Vide Delbrück, (Hellen. Bauten in Latium, I. 18–19, 22Google Scholar) and Tenney Frank, Roman Buildings of the Republic, 139–141, ‘Some time after 12 B.C., according to an inscription [CIL. vi, 878] Augustus rebuilt the bridge. In the eastern pier of the Ponte Rotto, which is doubtless the Pons Aemilius, we have some remnants of a Republican structure. … All that we can clearly assign to the second century B.C. is the core of the pier.’ It collapsed in 1598, hence the name of ‘Rotto,’ but was rebuilt by Pope Paul V (1605–1621), whose arms are on the surviving fragment. Vide Pl. XIX, 1.
39 It was apparently a haunt of suicides, see Hor., Sat. ii 3. 36Google Scholar:
atque a Fabricio non tristem ponte reverti
The echo in Juvenal, vi, 24:
cum tibi vicinum se praebeat Aemilius pons
has been used as an argument for the identification of the two bridges. But surely suicides are not confined to one bridges on any river? The inscription of Innocent XI (1679) beside the Pons Fabricius tells how he restored ‘duos uno in ponte Fabricium et Cestium.’ This is a curious phrase, for the two bridges impinge on the Island at different angles, and are separated by its whole width.
40 CIL. vi, I, 1175.
41 Loc. cit. supra, P. 143.
42 I.e. one spanning the river and one from each bank to the Island.
43 Cassius Dio, 37, 58; 50, 8; 53, 33; 55, 22; Tac., Hist. i, 86Google Scholar.
44 Jordan, Forma Urbis Romae, no. 42.
45 S.H.A., Pius, 8, ‘Opera eius haec extant … instauratum amphitheatrum, mausoleum Hadriani, templum Agrippae, pons sublicius.’ This medallion possibly was struck to commemorate the restoration.
46 See the illustration in Besniei, L'île tiberine, 114.
47 Richmond, I. A., Trajan's Army on Trajan's Column, 32–34 (in Papers B.S.R. xiii, 1935Google Scholar).
48 We may note that the Fasti Amiterni record on December 8th a festival ‘Tiberino, in insula.’ See also A. W. Van Buren, ‘A Medallion of Antoninus Pius,’ J.R.S. 1911, 195.
49 The Pons Aemilius was, of course, in historical fact not built at the time of the arrival of the serpent.
50 Huelsen and Dressel, supported b y Bernhart (op. cit. Text, p. 138); see the references there given.
51 A. W. van Buren, ‘A Medallion of Antoninus Pius,’ J.R.S. 1911, 187–195—a very careful summary of the arguments, which decides in favour of the Island view; cf. Bernhart, Handbuch zur Münzkunde d. röm. Kaiserzeit, Textband 138.
52 R. Mitt., xlvi, 1931, 153–188Google Scholar.
53 Le Mura di Roma Repubblicana, 1932, esp. 176–188.
54 Dr. von Gerkan shows the suggestions of earlier archaeologists, op. cit. 157, Abb. 1—an elaborate plan giving five different positions for this line of wall. His own view is shown in the plan Abb. 7, p. 179, and that of Dr. Saeflund in the ‘Pianta Ge̗nerale’ which forms the frontispiece to his book. Both place the Sublician bridge just below the later Aemilian.
55 Livy, i, cc. 36. 1; 38. 6.
56 Livy, i, c. 45. 3.
57 iv, 13.
58 Die Brücken in alten Rom (Erlangen, 1884), 36Google Scholar.
59 Cf. Livy, v, 40. via quae sublicio ponte ducit ad Ianiculum.
60 Platner-Ashby, Top. Dict. s.v. ‘Pons Probi.’
61 The identification seems to date from the latest (fifteenth century) Mirabilia (Anonym. Magliabecchianus), see Urlichs, Codex Urbis Romae, 158: ‘Pons Sulpitius id est pons in Aventino juxta ripam Romaeam ruptus est et marmoreus et Horatii Coclis, ut in historiis patet.’ For the plans, cf. Bufalini, 1551; Lici, 1557; Cartaro, 1575, 1576; Van Elbst, 1597; Anonima, 1600.
62 E.g. a fourteenth-century Mirabilia, Urlichs, op. cit. 143. ‘Porta Carmentalis quae est a dextro monte Jani dicitur hodie porta sci Pancratii,’ and Bull-Com. 1914, 79 (from a sixteenth-century MS.). ‘Porta Flumentana ad ripam Tiberis e regione murorum quos Ancus in Janiculo extruxerat. Nunc alibi sita: dicitur porta Populi.’
63 Supra, pp. 137, n. 4, and 144, and infra, p. 151.
64 v, 40.
65 Jordan, Topog. i, 405.
66 Cic. De nat. deor. iii, 24, 62; Ovid, , Fasti, i, 292Google Scholar; iii, 429–449, and Frazer's notes in loc. Veiovis is a later form of the name.
67 Wissowa in Roscher Lexikon s.v. ‘Vedjovis,’ and in Religion u. Kultur der Römen (2nd edit.), 236–238.
68 Saturn, iii, 9, 10.
69 Aulus Gellius, v, 12. 12—presumably as a substitute for an earlier human sacrifice.
70 Fasti, iii, 437 ff. (where Ovid denies any connection of Vediovis with thunder).
71 The reading Veiovis is found in the early printed edition of Gelonius who had before him the important Codex M (Hersfeldius), now lost. The existing MSS. reading Vegonicis, emended to <vel> Vegonicis, is explained as referring to a nymph Begoe (or Vegoe), who, according to Servius, in Aen. vi. 72Google Scholar ‘artem scripserat fulguritarum apud Tuscos.’
72 Collected in Roscher Lexikon and Paul. Wiss. both s.v. ‘Tages.’
73 ILS 3474. Such an inscription is probably the origin of Justin Martyr's tale of Simon the Magician. Supra, p. 143.
74 See Besnier, op. cit. 279–282.
75 This inscription was dedicated by a haruspex. ILS 3038; cf. Huelsen-Jordan, , Topog. ii, 636Google Scholar.
76 In Livy, xxxi, 21. 12, L. Furius Purpurio in 200 B.C. in a battle against the Cisalpine Gauls ‘aedem deo Iovi vovit’; in xxxiv, 53. 7, in 194 B.C. ‘in insula Iovis aedem C. Servilius duumvir dedicavit: vota erat sex annis ante Gallico bello ab L. Furio Purpurione’; in xxxv, 41. 8, ‘Aedes duae Iovi eo anno (192 B.C.) in Capitolio dedicatae sunt. Voverat L. Furius Purpurio praetor Gallico bello unam: alteram consul…’ All these passages have been emended, deo Iovi to Vediovi, Iovis to Vediovis, and duae Iovi to Vediovi, and accepted by many scholars. See Platner-Ashby, Top. Dict. s.v. ‘Veiovis Aedes’ (3), and reference there given.
77 Fasti, i, 293–294:
Iupiter in parte est: cepit locus unus utrumque
Iunctaque sunt magno templa nepotis avo,
does not, however, prove that the cult of Aesculapius was the earlier.
78 Warde Fowler, Aeneas at the Site of Rome, 174.
79 A fragment of a terracotta antefix, found in 1880 in the bed of the Tiber near the Island, has been attributed to the fifth century B.C. and taken as evidence for an early temple, possibly of Vediovis. See E. Van Buren, J.R.S. 1914, p. 18, and Fictile Terracotta Revetments, 24. Not. Scavi, 1880, 54 and 229; 1896, 30 and fig. 13. Helbig., Führer, ii (1913), 206Google Scholar. But as nothing of a similar character or of so early a date has been found on the Island itself it seems somewhat bold to postulate a complete temple from a single fragmentary antefix, which may even have dropped from a passing boat-load.
80 Frazer, , Fasti, iii, 102Google Scholar, reverses this argument, making Vediovis a primitive policeman. ‘If we accept the view of the sinister character of Vediovis we can perhaps better understand why he was specially chosen to preside over the Asylum … it might be thought desirable to curb by superstitious terrors the ruffians who had no fear of the law.’
81 Livy, xxxiii, 42. 10; xxxiv, 53. 14; Ovid, , Fasti, ii, 193Google Scholar.
82 The word ‘taboo’ is also used by Tamborini, F. in an article (‘La vita economica nella Roma degli ultimi Re,’ Athenaeum, N.S. VIII (1930), 299–328, 452–487Google Scholar), to which my attention was called after this paper was written. She accepts the existence of an archaic temple with Tiberinus as its deity, and suggests, as a reason for the absence of the Island from the history of Rome between 509 and 291 B.C., that the sanctuary of the river-god may have been protected (‘difesa da un tabu’) from any approach except by boat. She does not suggest any date or reason for the lifting of the taboo, although the arrival of the serpent would be as appropriate a moment in her theory as in mine.
83 Bericht. A. Sächs. Ges. d. Wiss. 1850, Epigraphische Analekten, 322.