This comes from my own published work called "The Once and Future Forum: Approaching Virtual Reconstructions as an Archaeological Tool"

The prostyle temple that began with Titus and was completed by Domitian was called the Templum Vespasiani et Titi. Initially, it must have only been made for Vespasian since his name is the only one appearing on the architrave (CIL 6.938). With Titus’ early death, Domitian added his brother to the official title. Septimius Severus and Caracalla added another line around 202 AD commemorating a restoration. The inscription still existed in the eighth century and was copied in the Einsiedeln Itinerary but it is now reduced to the last few letters of ‘restituter‘. The temple stands against the base of the Tabularium at the northwest end of the Forum Romanum, above the Clivus Capitolinus between the Temple of Concord and the Portico of the Gods (see figure 3.1, Building 1).

The temple was hexastyle, 33 m. deep by 22 m. wide, and carried a Corinthian order.⁵⁹ Nearly all of the temple’s marble is thought to have come from Luni.⁶⁰ The concrete core of the temple’s pronaos survives, which blocks the entrance to the stair of the Tabularium’s base that once led from the forum to the Capitoline hill. The pronaos maintains some of its peperino lining and travertine surface. The stairs are very narrow because of the structure’s arrangement between the Tabularium in the back and the Clivus Capitolinus in the front. There are poor fragments of the cella wall in travertine and the base for the cult statues at the cella’s rear. Inside and out, the temple was riveted with marble.

Podium of the Temple of Vespasian Corinthian Capitals

Remains of the entablature are now kept in the Tabularium (see figure 7.3). The notably attractive frieze displays sacrificial implements and apparatus between bucrania and the resolution of classical moldings into floral ornament of various sorts. The frieze is decorated with the instruments of sacrifice: the sacrificial helmet, the whetting stone, the jug, the knife, the saucer from which the libation was poured, and the axe. The cornice has a remarkable detail for the tiny rings interposed to the dentals.

Architrave

Up until the late 1800s, the temple was thought to be Jupiter Tonans (hence the probable reason the columns were probably restored).⁶³ The cella’s walls are in ruins with the exception of a few fragments. The cella was rectangular, but broader than deep, and the stair of approach continued between the columns because the space available was very limited. Some scholars believed that there were columns in the oriental marble interior of the cella, but no evidence proves this. The pedestal for the statues of the deified Vespasian and Titus is still preserved in the center of the rear wall that leans against the Tabularium.⁶⁴

UCLA’s Cultural VR Lab built the Temple of Vespasian in 3D Studio Max. The author finds its work one of the most appealing reconstructions of how the temple may have looked (see figure 7.4). It shows the appropriate rostra platform above the steps, and columns that carry the proportion that archaeological measurements suggest. The CVRlab insisted upon excluding the relief within the tympanum. Either the reconstruction is to show the viewer that the CVRlab did not think there was any relief there or it wanted to insure that the viewer saw a neutral face. In this case it is the viewer’s imagination that is better than any conjecture that could have been provided. The inaccurate portrayal of the Corinthian capitals also causes problems. In Figure 7.2, the capitals are long and the tall acanthi only project slightly while the capital in Figure 7.4 is stout and the acanthi extend out. Removing the structure from its surrounding buildings can alter the cultural significance for the viewer. If it is presented within the Roman Forum, the proportion between height and width may be understood easier because of the limited space it was constructed within.

CVRLab's Temple of Vespasian MRSH's Temple of Vespasian

The MRSH (Maison de la Recherche en Sciences Humaine) from Universit de Caen Basse-Normandie first became renowned when they inherited Paul Bigot’s model of Rome in 1995. By 2001, the organization started reconstructing several Roman buildings with the 3D Studio Max. Though it is appealing work, the author has found too many errors in the reconstruction. The Temple of Vespasian carries no rostra at the steps even though it was there (see figure 7.5). The Corinthian capital is disproportionate, stout, and looks nothing like the real capitals. What is more problematic is that the building fails to show the Clivus Capitolinus’ effect on the disproportionate height of the temple’s base because of road’s rising from the temple’s steps to the Capitoline Hill. Adding to these faults, they placed dentils across the pediment’s ceiling. Though dentils along the raking cornice were appropriate for temples using the Corinthian order, the fragments for the Temple of Vespasian strongly suggests that there were none. CVRlab’s temple reconstruction showing the raking cornice is correct. The MRSH version also fails to provide the frieze along the side.

The area around the temple tested the author’s reconstruction. The incline of the Clivus Capitolinus going from the Capitoline Hill to the Forum scrapes across the stair proper of the temple. The stair required constricted steps because of the Temple of Saturn and Temple of Concord hosting the area. To save space, the stairs were driven into the temple base producing a very slender area on the outer section from where the base molding existed.

Using VRML, the author rebuilt the temple based upon the measurements provided from the documents already mentioned (see figure 7.6). Jones reports that the six front columns have intercolumniation of 1.55 column diameters between each column. This means that the intercolumniation between the columns is 2.17775 meters. Logic dictates that if Jones was measuring from the column bases and the builder puts the furthest front right column at an X-Y of 0, 0 then the next column to the left would be centered at 3.758 meters (2.17775 [intercolumniation] + 1.405 [column diameter] + 0.17525 [bases’ extra extension from the columns]). The third column is 7.517 m. from the center of the first; the fourth is 11.275 m. distant; the fifth is 15.034 m; the sixth is 18.792 m. From the outer edge of the right column to the outer left column is a distance of 20.671 m. Jones gives the intercolumniation 1.31 column diameters (1.84055 m.) from the front columns to the second row. Giving the same kind of formula to these flank columns with the furthest front right column at an X-Y of 0, 0, then the second row column is 3.5968 meters behind (1.84055 [intercolumniation] + column diameter + plinths). The author extended the column plinth out by 0.0802075 m. in proportion to Ware‘s ratio in case the bases that Jones measured were eroded. This puts the flanking intercolumniation at 3.677 m. The third row is set at 7.354 m. from the first row; the fourth row is 11.031 m. from the first; the fifth row is 14.708 m; The sixth row is 18.385 m.; The seventh is 22.062 m.; The eighth is 25.739 m.; and the ninth is 29.416 m. The entire distance from the outer front part of the first row to the outer of the last row brings the entire distance at 31.3326 m.

7.6 VRML Temple of Vespasian reconstructed by the author and rendered in Cortona VRML client.

Platner provides the general floor measurements as 22 by 33 m if the viewer is to trust that an accurate outline of the temple can be measured.⁶⁵ According to Steinby, the temple’s pronaos is 4.2 m. tall.⁶⁶ Measuring the proportion of the pronaos’ plinth lower trim and crown to the entirety of the pronaos’ height, each measurement is approximately 0.9832 m. tall while the plinth’s height is 2.234 m. (see figure 7.8). With proper proportioning from Ware’s American Vignola, the crown and lower trim can be extended appropriately. The entire pronaos comes to 22.0828 m. wide and 32.51665 m. deep if the author’s calculations were correct and the measurements given to him were exact (see figure 7.11). The measurements fall within Platner’s description of 22 by 33 m. wide.

7.7. Cornice of the Temple of Vespasian in VRML reconstructed by author. client.

The author knew the column’s height was 14.135 m. (11.79 [shaft] + 1.64 [capital]) from Jones.⁶⁷ If the author measures the capital’s height in pixels in Figure 7.2, he finds the architrave and frieze have the total height of 1.8944 m (1.0358 for the frieze, and 0.8586 m. for the architrave). D’Espouy’s measurements for the remaining part of the entablature transferred into metrics gives further details of the modillions, ova, raking, and coffers to provide a very good picture of the Temple of Vespasian (see figures 7.7 and 7.12).⁶⁸ Piece by piece, the measurements and the photographs fit together to provide a complete model.

(top left) 7.8 A sketch of the front by G. Foglia. (top right) 7.9 Front of the temple by the author. (bottom left) 7.10 A map of the temple by G. Foglia. (bottom right) 7.11. Plan without roof by the author.

Though the measurements can provide most of the information, there are still faults to the author’s model. First, the viewer may assume that the tympanum has no relief work, even though it is probable that the temple did have something there. The second is that the author’s reconstruction shows no statues along the roof. The use of wainscoting, the proportion of the door and the door’s frame is conjecture and only based upon what scholars know about the period (see figure 7.9). Finally, the viewer must thoroughly know the temple before filtering truth from theory.

In effect, all three aspects of virtual archaeology: simulation, virtual reality, and the use of information, are essential and need to be used in combination as effective tools in some aspect of virtual archaeological research. Similarly, the creation of a large database of artifacts is practically meaningless without advancements among the archaeological ideas of context and other theoretical principles basic to archaeology. It is important that computer use be kept in perspective.

H. D'Espouy's etching for the Temple of Vespasian's cornice

Endnotes

^{^}59 Samuel Ball Platner, Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome, Rev. Thomas Ashby. (London: Oxford UP, 1929), 556.

^{^}60 Lorenzo Lazzarini, Maurizio Mariottini, et al., “Determination of the Provenance of Marbles used in Some Ancient Monuments in Rome,“ Classical Marble: Geochemistry, Technology Trade, ed., Norman Herz, (Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1988), 408

^{^}61 Giuseppe Lugli, I Monumenti Antichi Antichi di Roma e Suburbia, Vol. 1 (Roma: Libreria di Scienze e Lettere), 102

^{^}62 Mark Wilson Jones, Principles of Roman Architecture (New Haven, Connecticut: Yale U P, 1997), 224.

^{^}63 Rodolfo Lanciani, Ruins and Excavations of Ancient Rome (Boston & New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1897), 289, 291.

^{^}64 Christian Huelsen, Forum and the Palatine (NYC: A Bruderhausen, 1928), 20-21.

^{^}65 Samuel Ball Platner, Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome, Rev. Thomas Ashby. (London: Oxford UP, 1929), 556.

^{^}66 Eva Margareta Steinby, Lexicon Topographicum, Vol. 3, (Roma: Quasar, 1993), 124.

^{^}67 Mark Wilson Jones, Principles of Roman Architecture (New Haven, Connecticut: Yale U P, 1997), 224.

^{^}68 H. D’Espouy, Fragments d'architecture antique d'après les relevés & restaurations des anciens pensionnaires de l'académie de France à Rome (Paris: C. Schmid), 93.