Société d'Études Latines de Bruxelles

The "Temple of Augustus" at Tarraco

Author(s): Duncan Fishwick
Source: Latomus, T. 58, Fasc. 1 (JANVIER-MARS 1999), pp. 121-138
Published by: Société d'Études Latines de Bruxelles
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41538599
Accessed: 27-02-2016 15:29 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/41538599?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Société d'Études Latines de Bruxelles is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Latomus.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:29:02 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 The "Temple of Augustus" at Tarraco

Among the eventshe recordsunder A.D. 15 Tacitus mentionsthat an

embassyof Spaniardsreceivedpermissionto constructa templeto Augustus
at the colony of Tarraco: templůmut in colonia Tarraconensistrueretur
Augusto petentibusHispanis permissumdatumque in omnes prouincias
exemplum(Ann. 1, 78). As seemsclear fromthe date, the templewill have
beento Divus Augustusbut otherwise thepassageoffers no clue to thestatus
of the structurebeyond the enigmaticobservationdatumque in omnes
prouinciasexemplum- an editorialcommentby the historian,it should
be noted,not a statementof imperialpolicy.Whetherthe exampleTacitus
applauds is the construction of a templeto Augustusor the sendingof a
legationto ask permission not immediately
is clear, nor is the implication
of in omnesprouincias, thoughthiscould plainlyhave a bearingon whether
the templewas provincialor municipal.Later references to what looks to
be one and the same templeare likewiseunhelpfulin referring simplyto
the"TempleofAugustus".Accordingto theSHA , whenHadrianvisitedSpain
in the winterof A.D. 121-122he repairedthe templeat his own expense:
post haec Hispanias petiit et Tarraconehiemauit,ubi sumpto suo aedem
Augustirestituii(Hadr. 12, 3). Very much the same tale is told later of
SeptimiusSeverus,who afterhis praetorshipin Rome (A.D. 177) was sent
to Spain, wherehe was instructed in a dream to repairthe temple: tunc
ad Hispaniam missussomniauitprimo sibi dici ut templůmTarraconense
Augusto, quod iam labebatur,restitueret (Sept. 3, 4). How much credence
thetextdeservesis a matterfordebate(*).
The successfulembassyof A.D. 15 has usuallybeen broughtintorelation
witha seriesof dupondiiissued by the colony of Tarraco. These show on
theirreversesan octostyletemplewiththe legendAETERNITATIS AVGV-
STAE and C(olonia) Y(rbs) T(riumphalis)Цаггасо), on the obverseeither

(1) D. Fishwick,TheImperialCultin theLatinWest( ICLW), I, 1,Leiden,1987

(EPRO 108),p. 150f.; Id., TheProvincial Centrein ICLW III, 3, forthcoming. See
furtherJ. Gimeno,Plinio,Nat.Hist.III, 3, 21 : reflexiones acercala capitalidad de
HispaniaCiteriorinLatomus53,1994,p. 39-79at 6Iff.; J.Ruizde ArbuloBayona,
El forode Tarracoin Cypsela8, 1990,p. 119-138at 132; Id., Edificios públicos,
poderimperial y evolución de las élitesurbanasen Tarraco(s. II-IVd. C.) in Ciudad
y Comunidad cívicaen Hispania.Siglos//-/// d. C., ColoquioMadrid1990, Madrid,
de la Casa de Velázquez
1993(Collection 40),p. 93-113at98 withп. 20.

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:29:02 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
122 D. FISHWICK

a seatedfigureof Divus AugustuswithDEO AVGVSTO or theradiatehead

of Augustuswith DIVVS AVGVSTVS PATER; the obverseof a similar
issuediffersin showingthelaureatehead ofTiberiuswithTI. CAESAR DIVI
AVG. F. AVGVSTVS (2). Distinctivefeaturesof the templeincludeits eight
columnswithCorinthian(composite?) capitalsrisingabove a stylobatewhich
on some issuesresemblestwo steps,on othersa podium witha stairwayof
fourstepsflankedbyparotids,also a disk- perhapsthecoronaciuica- which
appears at the centreof the pediment,fromwhichjut acroteriain the form
of palms. Of particularinterestis that the pose of the seated figurediffers
fromtypeto type.Whereason one issue Augustussitson a throneholding
in hislefthand a spear,in his righta globeon whichstandsa wingedVictory,
on anotherhe appears seated on a curulechair holdingthepatera. There
is no obvious clue to date but the earlypart of the reignlooks indicated
by thecircumstance thatothercoins of TarracoassociateTiberiuswithLivia
and the YoungerDrusus (dated by his grantof trib.pot. to A.D. 22) or
allude to the adoption of Germanicusand Drusus by Tiberius(so before
A.D. 19) (3). J. Gimeno has recentlydrawn renewedattentionto the fact
thatthefigureon thesella curulisappearsonlyin combination withthereverse
showingthe templeabove a podium (4). He notesthatthe seated figureis
plainlylinkedwitha Roman typeof A.D. 22-23(5),so suggeststhepossibility
of two separateemissionsin A.D. 15-22and 22-23 respectively. In contrast
A. Burnettet al. place the obverseswiththe radiatehead of Augustusor
the seatedfigureholdingVictorybetweenA.D. 15 and 21/22,the restlater.

(2) ICLWl, 1,p. 15If.withn.8 andPL XXVII; TEDA (TallerEscolad'Arqueologia

de Tarragona),El foroprovincial de Tarraco, un complejoarquitectónico de época
flaviain AEspA62, 1989,p. 141-191 at 153f.; X. Aquilué, X. Dupré,J. Massó,
J. Ruiz de Arbulo, Tarraco, Guidearchéologique , Tarragona,1993,p. 20. See now
A. Burnett,M. Amandry, P. Pau Ripollès,RomanProvincial CoinageI, 1,London
andParis,1992,p. 104f.,nos.219,222,224,226(Plate16).
(3) O. Gil Farrés, La MonedaHispánicaen la Edad Antiqua , Madrid,1966,
p. 438,440,449,477; Burnett,RPC [п. 2],nos.232-3(Plate17).
(4) Gimeno,op. cit.[n. 1],p. 61ff.The hypothesis thatthetemples illustrated
on
coinscorrespond to modelsis speculative in theabsenceofdirectevidence fortheir
useat Romanmints.
(5) Mattingly,BMC I, p. 129f., nos.70-73; 74-75(A.D. 22-23); R. A. G. Carson,
PrincipalCoins of the Romans , II, London,1980,nos. 363, 364, takingthe
ofAugustus
representation to reproduce thestatueerected byTiberius andLivianear
thetheatreofMarcellus. Elsewhere in Spainthetypeappearsat Caesaraugusta (RPC
nos. 344,346; Plates24-5)and Turiaso(RPC no. 422; Plate30), also at Italica,
whereLiviais similarly represented(RPC nos.66, 67 ; Plate5). On localcopiesof
imperialtypesseeBurnett,RPC 46.

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:29:02 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE "TEMPLEOF AUGUSTUS"ATTARRACO 123

Boththeliterary and numismatic sourceshave traditionally beenassociated

withtracesof a templethat lay somewhereon the top level of the three
terraceswhichlie to thenorth-east of thecolony.Monumentalvestigesfrom
thisregiongo back to the Middle Ages and have steadilyaccruedover the
intervening centuriesin the form of fragmentary columns and assorted
architectural and iconographiefragmentsnowadays dispersedin various
museumsor even built into the cathedralwalls (6). The preciseascription
of theseremainshas long been complicatedby the inferred proximity of a
of
temple Jupiter, supposedly attested
byclipei with thefaceof Jupiter Ammon
or Medusa, in combinationwitha passage of Florus( V.O.Á.P.2, 9) ; though
the well-knownreconstruction of the "Temple of Augustus"by Puig y
Cadafalch improbablytook the disk at the centreof the pedimentto be
preciselysuch a mask (7). This problemat least has now been removedwith
the realisationthatthe clipeior phalerae will have been hungfromthe attic
of theporticosurrounding thetempletemenosin imitationof theideological
programme at theForum Augustum(8) ; similarreplicasoftheRoman model
are now gainingrecognition elsewherein theWesternprovinces, in theSpains
notably at Emerita and possibly Corduba (9). As a it
result, seems safe to

(6) TED'A,op. cit.[n.2],p. 142-149 withbibl.andfigs.1,2 : cf.Eid., UnAbocador

del Segle V D.C. en el FòrumProvincial de Tàrraco , Tarragona, 1989(Memories
d'Excavació2), p. 25-48withbibl.and fig.7 (35),fig.9 (39); R. Mar, El recinto
de cultoimperial de Tarraco flaviain R. Mar (ed.),Els Monuments
y la arquitectura
provincials de Tarraco.Novesaportacions al seu coneixement , Tarragona,1993
(Documents dArqueologia Clàssica1),p. 107-156 at 107-111.
(7) ICLWI, 1,PlateXXX.
(8) Th. Hauschild, RömischeKonstruktionen auj deroberenStadtterrasse des
antikenTarracoin AEspA 45/47,1972-74, p. 3-44at 38 withAb. 28 ; Mar, op.
cit.[n.6],p. 138ff.
(9) W. Trillmich, ColoniaAugustaEmerita, die HaupStadtvon Lusitanien in
W.TrillmichandP. Zanker,Stadtbild undIdeologie , Munich,1990(Bayer.Akad.
d. Wiss.Phil.-hist.KlasseAbh.n. F. 103),p. 299-318at 310ff ; W. Trillmich,Los
tresforosde AugustaEmerita y el casode CordubainP. Léon (ed.),ColoniaPatricia
Corduba.Unareflexión arqueológica, Cordoba,1993, Seville,1996,p. 175-195 at 183-
185, noting a caryatid also at Santiponce, Seville; Id., GestaltundAusstattung des
' in Mérida.Kenntnisstand undPerspektiven in MDAI(M) 36, 1995,
Marmorforums'
p. 269-291 ; J. L. De la Barrera-W.Trillmich,Eine Wiederholung derAeneas-
Gruppe vomForumAugustum samtihrer Inschrift inMérida(Spanien)in MDAI(R)
103,1996,p. 119-138.For theinteresting suggestion that,likethe"marbleforum"
ofEmerita ortheprecinct ontheupperterrace atTarracoa similar complex, modelled
on theForumAugustum at Rome,mayhaveexistedat CordubaseeW.Trillmich,
Hispanienund Rom aus der SichtRoms und Hispaniensin HispaniaAntiqua.
Denkmäler derRömerzeit , Mainz,1993,p. 41-69at 52, notinga colossaltorsoat
Cordubaapparently copiedfromthestatueofAeneascarrying Anchises at theForum
ofAugustus ; cf.Id., Los tres
foros (above),
p. 185ff.

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:29:02 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
124 D. FISHWICK

say that thereno longerexistsany reason to suppose a templeof Jupiter

arose on the upper terrace,thoughthe presenceof a Capitoliumelsewhere
in the citylooks securelyattestedby a reference in Suetoniusto the uetus
templůmlouis ( Galba 12, 1) supportedby epigraphicalevidenceforthecult
of JupiterOptimusMaximus ( RIT 30-32,cf. 28f.,34) - more particularly
a smallaltarto JupiterOptimusMaximusCapitolinus( RIT 33). All analogy
suggeststhatsuch a templewill have been builton the colonialforumthat
stretchedsouthofwhatis nowknownto be thesubstructure ofthebasilica(10).
Presumablythe Capitoliumstood at thefarend of the southwardextension
oftheforum,so in an area now obliterated bybuildings(n).
That the remainingtempleon the uppermostterracewill have been an
imperialmonument looksconfirmed bysurviving fragments ofitsiconography,
in particulara reliefshowingthe apex of a flamenalong withcult instru-
ments(12),but withno tracesof the structureoccurringin situ its precise
locationremainsverydebatable.Two possibilities have been suggested, either
free-standingin the centreof the tememos , on the sitenow occupiedby the
mediaevalcathedral,or integratedwith the portico on the model of the
TemplůmPacis in the Forum Traianumat Rome or - moreappropriately
for presentpurposes- the imperialtempleat Aventicum(13).No records
have been preservedthat mightconfirmor exclude a Roman structure on
thesiteof thecathedralbut R. Mar has recently advancedstrongarguments
in favourof the second possibility(14). At the centreof the porticoalong
the rear wall of the temenosoccurs a room 27.5 m wide and more than
20 m deep, proportions thatapproximatecloselyto thoseof the cella of the
Aventicumtemple.Traces of the leftwall survivealong witha lateralsocle
and marbleslabs fromtheflooringbut moreimportant is Mar's observation

(10) R. Cortés, Los Forosde Tarraco in Los ForosRomanosde las Provincias

Occidentales, Madrid,1987,p. 9-24at 22f.; R. Mar and J. Ruiz de Arbulo,La
basilicade la coloniaTarraco.Una nuevainterpretación del llamadoForo Bajo de
Tarragona, ibid.p. 31-44at32,37f.withrefs.
(11) For detaileddiscussionsee D. Fishwick,Four Templesat Tarracoin
A. M. Small (ed.),Subjectand Ruler: TheCultof theRulingPowerin Classical
Antiquity, AnnArbor,1996(JRASuppl.17),p. 165-184 ; Id., TheProvincial Centre
inICLWIII, 3,forthcoming.
(12) P. Pensabene,La decorazione architettonicadei monumenti provinciali de
Tarraco inMar (ed.),op. cit.[п. 61,p. 33-105at83f.,no.80.
(13) TEDA, op. cit.[п. 2], p. 155f.; Abocador[n. 6], p. 438f.; X. Dupré I
Raventós, Un grancomplejo provincial de epoca Flaviaen Tarragona : Aspectos
cronologicos inTrillmich-Zanker, Stadtbild[n.9],p. 319-325 at319f.; F. Coarelli,
Roma, Romeand Bari,1983(Guidearcheologiche Laterza),p. 11Off.at 119f.; R.
Etienne,Un complexemonumental du cultimpérial à Avenches in Pro Aventico
29,1985,p. 5-26.
(14) Mar, op. cit.[n.6], p. 120-128withrefs,tracing theoriginsof axialrooms
atthebackofcolonnaded enclosures totheHellenisticperiod.

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:29:02 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE "TEMPLEOF AUGUSTUS"ATTARRACO 125

thatthisaxial room is out of alignmentwiththe porticoand was originally

faced by columnsof greatersize than those of the porticoenclosingthe
precinct.It looks, then,as thoughthis axial room will have been distinct
fromthe plaza and perhapsaccessedby a door. As the total widthof the
facade includingthe end columnsis 29.7 m - almostexactly100 Roman
feet- thereseems a distinctpossibilitythat this could be a templecella,
in whichcase it willhave projectedoutwardsfromtheporticoclose to where
numerousarchitectonic remainswerefoundduringworkthatbegan on the
adjacentseminary in 1883. It remainsforfurther archaeologicalexploration
to determinethe fulldepth of the structure and the presenceor otherwise
of a supportingpodium.
A secondproblemconcernsthedate of thestructure. Untilrecently it had
been supposed that the temple was begun under Tiberius and reached
completionperhapsunder Claudius or Nero. The basis for this view was
primarily potteryexcavatedbyJ. Sánchez Real in thegardenof thecathedral
in 1955 and analyzedby Chr. Rüger; Th. Hauschildin particularput the
beginningof construction beforeA.D. 41, notingthat a coin of this year
was foundin thelowestlevel(15).An obviouscorollaryof thisdatingis that
the representation on the coins mustin that case show a projectedrather
completedtemple, thatthatpresentsanydifficulty
not (16).Comparativedata
fromRome, in particularconstruction of thetemplesof Divus Iulius,Apollo
and Mars UltorunderAugustus,of Divus AugustusunderTiberius,or the
rebuilding of thetempleof JupiterCapitolinusunderVespasian,suggestthat
construction could last anything fromfiveto twenty-five yearsor more(17).
At Tarraco in contrast,wherearchitects, labour and above all moneywill
certainlyhave been in shortersupply than at the capital of the empire,
everything pointsto a slowerpace, especiallywhenthecostshad to be born
by the provincialsthemselves. A date of completionfarlaterthanthe reign
ofTiberiuswouldconsequently lie wellwithintheboundsofpossibility.
That the coins show a projectedtemplelooks furthersupportedby the
differing poses of Divus Augustuson theirreverses(above, p. 122). Here
it would appear that the figureborrowsfromtwo currentrepresentations

(15) J. Sánchez Real, Exploración arqueologiaen al jardínde la catedralde

Tarragona in MDAI(M) 10, 1969,p. 276-295 ; Chr.В. Rüger,Römische Keramik
aus demKreuzgang derKathedrale vonTarragona in MDAI(M) 9, 1968,p. 237-258 ;
Th. Hauschild, Römische Konstruktionen aufderoberenStadtterrasse desantiken
Tarracoin AEspA45/47,1972-74, p. 3-44at 40f.See furtherMar, op. cit.[n. 6],
p. 11Iff.Buta coinin circulationhardlyprovides a firmteminusanteas thiscould
havebeendropped anytime afteritsissue.
(16) Fishwick,ICLWI, 1,p. 152,n. 17.
(17) R Gros,AureaTempla , Rome,1976(BEFAR231),p. 65-67.

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:29:02 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
126 D. FISHWICK

of the emperoras enthronedJupiter(18). In one of thesetheprincepssits

in majesticsemi-nudity, his mantleacross his knees,withextendedrightor
leftleg, usuallyholdinga spear or lance in the rightor lefthand ; in the
other,bestknownfromJosephus'description of thecultstatuein thetemple
of Roma and Augustusat Caesarea {BJ 1, 414), theemperorwillhave been
similarlyseated but holdingVictoryin his outstretched righthand, his left
hand supportedon a globe. The variantdetailsshownon the Tarracocoins
surelysupportthe possibility, then,that,in combinationwiththe templeon
the reverses,the allusionis to thefuturecult statuedestinedto standwithin
thetempleon completion(19).In anyeventitis impossibleto followA. Beltran,
who assignsthecoinsto A.D. 15-16"con absolutaseguridad"on thegrounds
thattheycelebratetheerectionofthetempleauthorizedbyTiberius.G. F. Hill
is morecautiousbut stilltakesthe coins to be struckunderTiberiusat the
timeoftheerectionofthetempleallowedin A.D. 15 (20).
This whole picturehas now been throwninto disarrayby archaeological
explorationof the upper cityof Tarraco undertakenby the Taller Escola
dArqueologicade Tarragona(TEDA). What theirworkhas revealedis that
the threeterracesof thiszone werethe site of a vast enclaveof ca. 11 hec-
tares(21),widelyrecognizedto have beentheprovincialcentreof Tarraco(22).

(18) H. G. Niemeyer, Studien zurstatuarischen Darstellung derrömischen Kaiser ,

Berlin, 1968(Monumenta artisRomanae7),p. 59-61,104-108 ; R Zanker,ThePower
of Imagesin theAge of Augustus , AnnArbor,1990(Jerome Lectures16),p. 21
withfig.17b.
(19) Furtherdiscussionin D. Fishwick, Coinageand Cult: The Provincial
Monuments at Lugdunum, Tarraco andEmerita , inRomanCoinsandRomanSociety
undertheEmpire , Michigan,1998,forthcoming.
(20) A. Beltrán, Los monumentos en las monedasHispano- Romanasin AEspA
26, 1953,p. 39-66at 61-63; G. H. Hill, Noteson theAncient Coinageof Hispania
Citerior, NewYork,1931(NNM50),p. 48.
(21) TEDA, op. cit.[n. 2], p. 151-157 ; Abocador[n. 6], p. 437-440; Dupré I
Raventós,op. cit: [n. 13],p. 319-325 ; Mar, op. cit.[n. 6], p. 113-128. Fordetailed
measurements of theprovincial complexsee R. Cortés, Los Forosde Tarracoin
Los ForosRomanosde las Provincias Occidentales, Madrid,1987,p. 9-24at 10-13.
Fora helpful outlineseenowAquilué etal., op. cit.[n. 2],p. 62-70; J.L. Jiménez
Salvador, El templo romano dela calleClaudioMarceloenCordobaysu importancia
dentrodel programamonumental de Colonia Patriciaduranteel alto imperio ,
Tarragona, 1995(14 Congreso Internacional de Arqueología Classica1993),p. 141-147
at 143.
" und "Foro municipal " in den
(22) ContraW. Trillmich, Foro provincial"
Hauptstädten derdreihispanischen Provinzen : eineFiktionin Ciudady Comunidad
[п. 1], p. 115-124,notingthattheterm"provincial forum"or "forumProvinciae
HispaniaeCiterioris" doesnotexistin theancient sources; Id., Los tresforos [п. 9],
p. 181-183. R Le Roux,L'Évolution du culteimpérial danslesprovinces occidentales
d'Auguste à Domitien in Les AnnéesDomitien, Pallas, 1994,p. 397-411at 402,404,
likewise doubtstheexistence of a specializedplaceforcelebrations oftheprovincial

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:29:02 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE "TEMPLEOF AUGUSTUS"ATTARRACO 127

The two upper levels, some 7.5 hectaresin extent,were occupied by a

rectangulartemenoson the uppermostterrace,fromwhicha stairwayled
downto a largeopen plaza exactlytwiceas large,theentirecomplexenclosed
by tripleporticoes(23). From the middlelevel a huge ornamentalstairway
gave access to a circuslocated on the thirdlevel (24).But the moststriking
innovationis the new date of construction. Furtherexcavationsin 1984 and
1986 at a site in the calle Sant Llorenç,just north-west of the porticoon
theeastsideofthetempletemenos , alongwitha revisedanalysisofthepottery
fromthe cloistergardenhave led the TED'A to concludethat the enclave
shouldratherbe assignedto the yearsA.D. 69-70 (25),a date thatcoincides
withthe earliestepigraphicaltracesfromthe middleterrace(26).The edifice
which dominated the upper terrace will consequentlyhave been built
contemporaneously withthe projectas a whole. As this can hardlybe the
buildingauthorized in A.D 15, thetempleon thecoins mustbe a municipal
structure(27),in which case it was in all probabilitylocated on the lower
forumofthecolony(28),quitepossiblyin thevicinity oftheCapitolium,where

cultand suggests thatmeetings of theprovincial assembly willhavetakenplacein

an amphitheatre or theatrerather thana templeor somebasilica.For a replysee
D. Fishwick,"Provincial " "
forum and municipal forum": fictionorfact? in Anas
1-8,1994/5,p. 169-186, notingthatTrillmich rightlyinsiststhatsuchformulations
aremodern inventions.
(23) Fora detailed picture seeX. Dupré I RaventósandJ.M. Carreté I Nadal,
"Portaeetfenestrae" al fòrumprovincial de Tarragona in Empúriés 48-50,1986-89,
p. 290-299 ; TED'A, op. cit.
[n. 2], p. 167-182 ; 187-191; Abocador[n. 6] p. 435-437,
441-446.A helpful summary is nowprovided byX. Dupré I Raventósand J. M.
Carreté I Nadal et al., La "AntigaAudiência'Madrid,1993,p. 9-11; Aquilué
etal.,op. cit.[п. 2],p. 62-80.
(24) Fora synthesis ofscholarship uptothetimeofpublication seeJ.J.Humphrey,
RomanCircuses , London,1986,p. 339-344. See subsequently X. Dupré,M. J.Massó,
M. LL. Palanques, R A. Verduchi,El CireRomà de Tarragona. I, Les Voltes
de SantErmenegilda Barcelona, 1988(Excavacions Arqueòlogiques a Catalunya 7) ;
Aquiluéetal.,op. cit.[п. 2],p. 71-80.
(25) TEDA, op. cit.[п. 2] p. 157-160 ; Dupré I Raventós[п. 13]p. 322f.,324
withrefs.; Id., Carreté I Nadal et al., AntigaAudiência[п. 23],p. 115.For a
chartofmorerecent archaeological excavations within theprovincial centre seeTEDA,
Abocador[n.6],fig.8 (facing p. 38).
(26) G. Alföldy,FlaminesProvinciae HispaniaeCiterions , Madrid,1973(Anejos
de Archivo Españolde Arqueologia 6), p. 4-10; Id., RE Suppl.15 (1978)col. 570ff.
at 597,604,619 withrefs.s.v. Tarraco,cf.Id., Tarracoin Forum8, 1991,p. 43f.
(27) TEDA, Abocador[n. 6], p. 439f.withrefs.; Aquilué et al., op. cit.[п. 2],
p. 24,58,66 ; Arbulo,op. cit.,1990[п. 1],p. 124,128-132 ; Id., op. cit.,1993[п. 1],
98,n.20.
(28) For a detailedpicture see recently Cortés [п. 21] 13ff. withrefs.; R. Mar
andJ.Ruizde Arbulo,La basilicade la coloniaTarraco.Unanuevainterpretación
delllamadoForoBajo de Tarragona in Los ForosRomanos[n. 21] p. 31-44at 32ff.
withrefs.

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:29:02 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
128 D. FISHWICK

its construction
formedpart of the intensivebuildingprogrammethat can
be documentedin theAugustan/ Julio-Claudian period(29).

II

Revolutionary as it is, thisentirereconstruction raisesa slew of problems.

In thefirstplace construction of thetempleon theuppermostterracecannot
possiblybe assignedto A.D. 68/70. If workdid even not beginbeforethe
Flavian period,the structure will hardlyhave been finishedbeforethe reign
of Domitian at the earliest.But that is a minorpoint comparedwiththe
that accrueif the templein Tacitusand on the coins is takento
difficulties
be municipal.In thefirstplace Tacitus'reference to Hispanicould wellimply
a communaleffort on thepartoftheprovinceratherthanthetownofTarraco:
Quintilian,it maybe recalled,refersto delegatesfromthecityby theformula
nuntiantibusTerraconensibus ( De inst.orat. 6, 3, 77). On the otherhand,
Tacituscan hardlyreferto theconciliumof Hispania Citeriorat a timewhen
a provincialcult had not yet been broughtinto existence(30). An isolated
communaleffortmustratherbe supposedon the linesof the legationfrom
Baetica ten yearslater(below,p. 130). In favourof thisanalysisis a patent
withthe purposeof the legation.If the intentionwas to build a
difficulty
municipaltemple,whyshouldpermission fromRome be requiredat all (31)?
Responsibility forsucha decisionrestedwiththecivicauthorities of Tarraco,
not the Roman Senate as impliedby Tacitus' narrative(32). It is surely
that we know of municipaltemplesat Castulo, Ebora, Emerita,
significant
Saguntumand CarthagoNova, yetin not a singleinstancedo the sources
reportan embassyto Rome (33). It is truethat underthe Julio-Claudians

(29) Aquilué etal, op. cit.[n.2],p. 58 ; Arbulo,op. cit.,1990[n. 1],p. 128-132 ;

op. cit.,1993[n. 1],p. 94f.For a succint reviewoftheprincipal issuesat stakesee
nowR Pensabene,Classidirigenti, programmi decorativi,cultoimperiale : il caso
di Tarraco inR Léon (ed.),ColoniaPatriciaCorduba[n.9],p. 197-219 at 197f.
(30) J. Deininger,Die Provinziallandtage derrömischen Kaiserzeit
vonAugustus
bis zumEnde des dritten Jahrhunderts n. Chr.,Munich,1965(Vestigia 6), p. 28f.
For Taciteanformulations suchas Mauri,Bithyni, Lycii,Afriet al. see Fishwick,
ICLWI, 2, p. 283f.,notingthatsuchterms canreferto citiesorgroupsofindividuals.
(31) Arbulo,op. cit.,1990[n. 1],p. 124seemsto sensethispointin suggesting
thatthecityof Tarracomayhavewantedto use provincial funds: "Se trata... del
temploque la ciudadsolicitólevantara Tiberioutilizando probablemente fondos
provinciales".Presumably thesewouldthenbe fundscontrolled by theprovincial
governor. ButTacitusmakesno mention offunding and can hardlyhaveapproved
sucha request as an exampletoalltheprovinces.
(32) Fishwick,ICLW I, 1,p. 150,n. 3 ; F. Millar, TheEmperor in theRoman
World(31 B.C - A.D. 337),London,1977,p. 345,taking therequest to havecome
fromtheimperial provinceofTarraconensis andto havebeengranted bythesenate.
(33) R. Etienne, Le Culteimpérialdans la Péninsuleibériqued'Auqusteà
Dioctétien,Paris,1958(BEFAR 191),p. 219-222.

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:29:02 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE "TEMPLEOF AUGUSTUS"ATTARRACO 129

we hear of embassiesfromAlexandriaand Arsinoé,forexample,thatcome

to offera templeto the livingemperorClaudius or Nero, but in each case
the cityhad alreadypassed a decreeto thateffectand the formulaicrefusal
the legationreceivedwas so designedas not to rule out eventualacceptance
of the honoursoffered(34).In the same way embassiescame oftenenough
to informthe emperorof isotheoitimaithat a cityhad grantedhim(35)-
thatof Mytilene,forinstance,reachedAugustuswhenhe was convalescing
at Tarracoca. 26 B.C. (36).
A further incongruityis the identification of the octostyletempleon the
coins as a civic structure. The only templewhichsupposedlyconformsin
thisrespectis thatof Roma and Augustusat Lepcis Magna. All otherearly
municipaltemplesof whichthe detailsare knownare eitherhexastyleas at
Emerita,Barcino,Evora,Viennaand Ostia,or tetrastyle as at Pola, Carthago
Nova and on theMagdalensberg, ifthisis in facta local templeoftheimperial
cult (37). Simplyon the basis of this architectonic criterion,therefore, the

(34) Chr.Habicht,Die augusteische Zeitunddas ersteJahrhundert nachChristi

Geburt inW.Den Boer (ed.),Le CultedesSouverains dansl'Empire romain , Geneva,
1973(Entretiens Fondation Hardt19),p. 41-88at 76ff.See in generalD. Fishwick,
Dio and Maecenas: TheEmperor and theRulerCultin Phoenix44, 1990,p. 267-
275at27If.withnn.22-25andrefs.
(35) S. R. F. Price, Ritualsand Power: TheRomanImperial CultinAsiaMinor ,
Cambridge, 1984,p. 66ff.In muchthesamewaythecityof Pisae,following the
lead of theSenatein Rome,first instituteda cultof LuciusCaesarin A.D. 2 and
onlysubsequently senta delegation to Augustus.An inscription ( CIL XI, 1420)
confirms thatbecauseofelections no magistrateswereinplaceonthedaynewsarrived
of thedeathof C. Caesar,a patronof thecity.The varioushonoursdecreedhim
wereconsequently butthisdeficency
illegitimate waslaterrepaired bygeneral agreement
onceduovirihad beenappointed. Clearly,therefore,thecolonywas freeto institute
thecultas itsawfitandthelegatisentlaterto Augustus in practiceannounced what
hadbeendecided- despite theformality ofaskingtheemperor's permission (11.33ff.).
Twoyearslater,whena similar cultofGaiusCaesar,likewise a patronofthecolony,
was instituted ( CIL XI, 1421),no embassy was sentbuttheemperor was informed
ofthecity'sactioninwriting (11.43ff.).
(36) Fishwick,ICLW I, 1, p. 171-179 ; Price, op. cit.[n. 35],p. 250 withrefs.
(37) H. Hänlein-Schäfer,Veneratio Augusti.Eine Studiezu den Tempeln des
erstenrömischen Kaisers, Rome,1985(Archaelogica 39), p. 49ff.,especially 53-55,
59-63.Despitestatements to thecontrary in somesecondary sources, thenumber of
columns thatfronted thetemple ofRomaandAugustus at LepcisMagnais uncertain
as therequisite measurements haveyetto be made.See further R. Etienne,Du
nouveau surlesdébuts duculteimpérial municipal danslapéninsule ibérique inSmall,
Subjectand Ruler[п. И], p. 153-163. The enormous templeat Lugdunum recently
identifiedin thegroundsof theconventof the"VerbeIncarné"is bestleftout of
consideration withtheimperial
as itsaffiliation cultlooksincreasingly uncertain. For
theviewthatthestructure was rathera Capitolium see nowG. Dì Vita-Évrard,
Les inscriptions du cultimpérial à Lyonin Tablerondesurles inscriptions latines
de GauleLyonnaise, ENS, Paris,8 juin 1996, forthcoming. ContraA. Pelletier

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:29:02 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
130 D. FISHWICK

octostyletemple portrayedon the Tarraco coins looks more probably

provincialthanmunicipal.One wonderstoo whya citythatso enthusiastically
promotedthe rulercultwould have waiteduntilafterthedeathof Augustus
beforeproposinga municipaltemple.Elsewherein Spain, a civictempleto
Augustusat Emerita- the so-called"Templeof Diana" - is now thought
to belongto the foundationperiod of the colony (therefore Augustan)(38)
and a templeto Augustuslikewisein his lifetime looks to be solidlyattested
at CarthagoNova by a coin (39). At Tarraco we have no directevidence
fora municipaltemple(see below,p. 136f.) but such an edificewould surely
have been more appropriatein Augustus'lifetimeat the cityfamedforthe
altarit set up on the occasion of the emperor'svisittherein 26/5 B.C. i40).
The reverseside of these argumentspleads stronglyin favour of the
provincialstatusof the temple.Permissionto establisha provincialtemple
was regularly asked of theemperorand the senate(41).The clearestexample
is the templeto Tiberius,Livia and the personified Senate thatthe province
of Asia was allowedto buildin A.D. 23 (Tac., Ann. 4, 15) ; threeyearslater
the senatewiththe tacitassentof Tiberiusagreedto the claims of Smyrna
to serveas the site(Ann. 4, 55-6) (42).Followingthisexample,the province
of Baetica sentambassadorsto thesenatein A.D. 25 witha requestto build
a templeto Tiberiusand Livia : per idem tempusHispania ulteriormissis
ad senatumlegatisorauitut exemploAsiae delubrumTiberiomatriqueeius
extrueret (Tac., Ann. 4, 37, 1 ; cf. 15,4). The requestof FurtherSpain clearly
pertainedto a provincialtempleon the model earlierallowed in Asia, yet
in thiscase therequestwas refused- Tiberiustooktheopportunity to deliver
a speech refusingdivinehonoursfor himself(43)- and the foundationof
a provincialcult of Baetica was deferreduntilthe Flavian era, probablythe
reignof Vespasian Í44).The correspondence withthe embassyof A.D. 15
nevertheless suggestsverystrongly that the earlierlegationwilllikewisehave
concerneda provincialtemple.
Similarly,thefactthatthetempleon thecoinsis shownas octostylepoints
to a provincialratherthanmunicipalstructure. At all eventsan earlyprovincial

andJ.Rossiaud(eds.),Histoire de Lyondesorigines à nosjours.AntiquitéetMoyen-

Âge, Le Coteau,1990,Vol.I, p. 210-211.
(38) Trillmich,ColoniaAuqustaEmerita [n.9)],p. 305ff.
(39) Gimeno, op. cit.[n. 1],p. 65-67withlám.III-IV.
(40) Above,п. 36.
(41) Hänlein-Schäfer,op. cit.[п. 37],p. 13,54.
(42) Millar, op. cit.[п. 321,p. 345; Price, op. cit.[n. 35],p. 64, 66, 185,258.
(43) For theideological background see D. Fishwick,Dio and Maecenas: The
Emperor andtheRulerCultinPhoenix 44,1990,p. 267-275 at270ff.
(44) Fishwick,ICLW I, 2, p. 219-239at 270£f. ContraJ. M. Pailler, Domitien,
la "Loi desNarbonnais" et le culteimpérial
danslesprovinces sénatoriales
dbccident
inRAN22,1989,p. 171-189.

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:29:02 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE "TEMPLEOF AUGUSTUS"ATTARRACO 131

octostyletempleoccurs at Nicomediaand Ancyra- that at Pergamůmis

hexastyle- while on the standardview the Temple of Divus Claudius at
Camulodunumis likewiseoctostyle(45). Attentionmightalso be drawn in
thisconnectionto coins of Eméritaissued underTiberiusand showingon
theirreverses- withor withoutС (oloniä) A(ugusta)E(merita)- a tetrastyle
templeand thelegendAETERNITATI AVGVSTAE f46).Clearlythiscannot
be themunicipaltemple,the"Templeof Diana", whichis hexastyleand now
thoughtto have been begun underAugustus(47).As the legendestablishes
an incontrovertiblelink withthe rulercult,thiscan only be the provincial
temple,in whichcase thecoinsmustsurelyhavebeencopiedfromtheTarraco
dupondii. These issues apart, it should be stressed,a templeof Aeternitas
Augusta/ Augustiseemsunknown(48).The principaldifference, of course,
is that the Emeritatemplehas four columnsin line withthe traditionof
south and south-eastSpain, wheresimilartetrastyle templesoccur in the
Republicanperiod at Abdera, Malaca and Gades. The municipaltemple
illustratedon the coins of CarthagoNova is likewisetetrastyle (49). But if
the Emeritacoins so closelyfollow the Tarraco issues, is it likelythat a

(45) Hänlein-Schäfer,op. cit. [n. 37], p. 54f. with Tafeln31-2, 40-45;

D. FisHwicK, TheProvincial Centre at Camulodunum : Towards an HistoricalContext
inBritannia 28,1997,p. 31-50at41 withfig.6.
(46) ICLW I, 1, p. 156,nn.44f.withrefs.and PlateXXXVI; Farrés, op. cit.
[n. 3],p. 441,446,468,470; cf.Beltran,op. cit.[п. 20],p. 54f.; Id., Las monedas
romanasde Méridain AugustaEmérita. Actasdel SimposioInternacional Conme-
morativo delBimilenario de Mérida, Madrid,1976,p. 93-105at97,102f.
(47) Above,п. 38.
(48) FisHwicK,ICLW I, 1, p. 151f.withnn. 11-13.Thoughtechnically a temple
of Augustan Eternity,thestructure at Tarracocelebrated thedeifiedAugustus, as
thenumismatic evidencemakesperfectly clear(above,p. 121-122).Giventhatthe
coinsbelongto a veryearlyperiod,beforetheterminology of theculthad become
settled,thelegenddoubtless uncertainties
reflects surounding theformula appropriate
to thefirstemperor. Thatthetemple ofAeternitas Augustaandthetemple mentioned
byTacitus(Ann.1, 78) couldbe different structuresseemsmostunlikely. For one
thing, ifthelatteris themunicipal templeand theprovincial templewas builtunder
Vespasian, as currentopinionholds(above,p. 127),thetempleon thecoinswould
be a projected, secondmunicipal structure,an unprecedented andruinously expensive
duplication. Foranother, iftheembassy oftheSpaniards concerned a provincial
temple
(as arguedabove)- whether begununderTiberiusor notuntiltheFlavianperiod
- thetempleon thecoinswouldthenbe municipal. In thatcase we wouldhave
a projected, colonialtempleof Aeternitas
octostyle Augusta,no parallelforwhich
existsanywhere in theRomanEmpire.Theseobjections holdevenifsucha temple
wasneveractually built.It mightbe addedthatthere is notraceofAeternitas Augusta
in theepigraphy of Tarracoand thattheabstraction does nototherwise appearon
coinsbeforethe Flavianperiod: LexiconIconographicum Mythologiae Classicae
,
Zurichand Munich,1981,p. 244-249(Belloni) s.v. Aeternitas (theTarracoand
Emerita issuesareomitted from discussion).
(49) Above,n. 39.

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:29:02 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
132 D. FISHWICK

municipalstructure at Tarracowouldhave beenthemodelforwhatis plainly

a provincialtempleat Emerita? All analogyrequiresthattheTarracotemple
should likewisebe provincialand that Lusitaniafollowedthe example set
by HitherSpain (above,p. 121).
Next,can one pointto any epigraphicalevidencethatmightconfirmthe
provincialstatusof the"Templeof Augustus"? An inscribedpedestalfound
in the zone of the provincialforum,that is the middlelevel of the triple-
tieredenclave,recordsthecursusofC. CalpurniusFlaccus,who on conclusion
of his termof officehas been givena statueby the colony of Tarraco in
accordancewiththe decree of the decurions; the costs of this distinction
Flaccus has waived personally: C(aio) Calpúrnio ' P(ubli) f(ilio) Quir(ina
tribu)Fiacco Iflam(ini)pfrouinciae)H(ispaniae)c(iterioris) ' curatoritempli'
praeffecto)murorum ' col(onia) Tarr(aconensium)ex d(ecreto) d(ecurionum).'
C(aius) CalpurniusFlaccus ' honoremaccepit| impensamremisit( RIT 264).
Thereseemsno reasonto doubtthatthepedestalis in itsproperplace along
withthe numerousotherstatuesto past provincialpriests,some thirty-three
in all withanothersevenor eighton theupperlevelto whichtheymayhave
been removedfromthe middleterrace(50).In particularthereis no reason
to suppose it can have been removedfromthe colonial forumin the way
J. Ruiz de Arbulohas persuasively arguedwithregardto RIT 349, 353-4-
none of whichrefersto a provincialpriest(51).Whilethebulk of thestatues
on the middleterracewere erectedto provincialpriestsby the provinceas
a sortof satisfecit
, the provincialcouncilsimilarly honouredotherdeserving
individuals,but it seems clear that outsidersalso werefreeto erectstatues
to provincialpriestsor otherpersonsof distinction(priestesses, prominent
provincials)in whatwas evidently a "representation"place appropriateto the
provincialaristocracy(52).This could be withor (so it would appear) even
withoutthe permissionof the provincialcouncil; at least permissionis not
explicitlyrecordedin somecases.
Beforeholdingthe priesthoodFlaccus had servedas curatortempliand
praefectusmurorum,both extraordinary posts whichmighteven have been
held contemporaneously. The prefectureof the town walls goes far to
explainingwhythe colony of Tarraco honouredthisprovincialpriestwith
a statuein the provincialenclosurebut the curatorshipof the templeraises
an issuecentralto thepresentdiscussion.Giventhefactthatthestatuelooks
to have been originallyerectedon the middleterraceand not moved there
fromelsewhere, thecircumstance thatthebuildingis notnamedsurelyimplies
that its identitywas obvious. In that case Flaccus can only have been in

(50) Fora detailed

picture seeAlföldy,op. cit.[n.26],p. 4-10.
(51) Arbulo,op. cit.,1990[n. 1],p. 135.
(52) Fishwick,op. cit.[n.22],p. 172ff.

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:29:02 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE "TEMPLEOF AUGUSTUS"ATTARRACO 133

chargeof repairsand upkeepof the enormoustempleloomingimmediately

above the "representation" plaza on the uppermostlevelof the precinct(53).
For ifsome otherstructure weremeant,thebuildingwould surelyhave been
identified
to avoid confusion, just as the Capitoliumis mentionedin thecase
of a similarcura ( RIT 922 : curator'C'apitolî). That thisinferenceis correct
looks furthersupportedby theroughdate of Flaccus' office.On G. Alföldy's
analysis(ad RIT 264) the curatormay be none otherthan the Calpurnius
Flaccusmentioned by Pliny(Ep. 5, 2), thefatheroftheC. CalpurniusFlaccus
who was proconsulargovernorof Cyprusin 123 and suffect consul ca. 124.
His fiammate, beforewhichhe was curatortempliand praefectusmurorum ,
can therefore be placed in thefirstquarterof the secondcenturyA.D. More
particularly,both posts, each concernedwithrenovations,can be brought
intorelationwiththevisitof Hadrianto Tarracoin thewinterofA.D. 121-122,
whenthe emperorreportedly financedwork on the "Temple of Augustus"
(above, p. 121). Verypossibly,then,Hadrian supportedthe costs of repairs
thatwerein progressor had recentlybeen caried out by Flaccus, in which
case he will have been acting in line with similarprojectshe supported
elsewherein his travels,notablythe construction of the provincialtempleof
Tres Galliae(54). Alföldysuggeststhat the priesthoodmighthave actually
coincidedwithHadrian's visit,thoughshortlyafterwards would be equally
possible.Whatevertheprecisedate,everything suggeststhatthetemplewhich
Flaccus oversawwas the aedes Augustimentionedin the HA. Comparison
withTacitus'reference in Ann. 1, 78 shows,however,thatthe templewhich
Hadrianrenovatedmustbe thesame structure as thatforwhichtheembassy
of the Spaniardsreceivedpermissionin A.D. 15. Otherwiseone would have
to supposetheexistenceof two "Templesof Augustus",whichno-onewould
imagine.It followsthatthe templeto whichthe literarysourcesrefermust
be thatwithinthe temenoson the upper level of the provincialsanctuary,
thereforea provincialstructure.

Ill

How, then,can thispicturebe reconciledwiththeconclusionsoftheTED'A

based primarilyon the archaeologicalevidence? In the firstplace it is
that,afteraskingand receiving
inconceivable to builda provincial
permission
templeso soon afterAugustus'death,theSpaniardswouldhave delayedover
yearsbeforestarting
fifty workon theprojectat thebeginning of Vespasian's
reign.Permissionlooksto havebeengivenbythesenate,perhapswithTiberius

(53) For thecuratorship

ofa templesee Fishwick,ICLW I, 2, p. 247,suggesting
Flaccuswillhavebeenappointed bytheprovincial
council.
(54) Fishwick,ICLWI, 2, p. 312-316.

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:29:02 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
134 D. FISHWICK

present(55),and we knowfromthe exampleof the Asian templeat Smyrna

that the senate could followup its own authorizationby ensuringthat a
buildingwas in factconstructed as agreed(56).Is itthenpossibleto harmonize
the archaeologicalfindingsas theypresentlystand withthe presenceof a
temple,construction of whichbegan,say,underTiberius? Onlyexcavations
in the cella of the templecould yielda positivedate, howeverapproximate,
forcommencement of construction, just as soundingsin the fillof the cella
foundationhave now assignedthe beginningsof the templein the Calle
Claudio Marcelo at Corduba to the reignof Claudius(57).At Tarraco this
is presently impossibleas thesiteof thetemplehas not yetbeen determined.
For the momentthe key point to be stressedis that the two zones which
have been excavatedrelatenot to thetempleitselfbut to thetemenos , which
on the findingsof the TEDA cannotbe earlierthan A.D. 69/70.The basis
forthisview is stratigraphie data, in particularpotteryfromthe fillof the
area sacra and thelowerlevelsof theearthmovedin theprocessof levelling.
As we have seen, this was recoveredby excavationsin the cloistergarden
(1955) and the calle Sant Llorenç(1984, 1986) at a sitejust outsidethe cult
precinct(58).But thishardlyexcludesthepossibility thatthetempleitselfhad
been underway forsome timeor thatthe temenoswas levelledand paved
at some stage subsequentto - perhapswell after- the initiationof work
on thetempleitself.In thisconnectionitshouldbe notedthattheiconography
of the reconstructed entablatureof the capitals,in particularthe detailsof
thefrieze,havebeendatedon stylistic groundsto A.D. 50-75,withone section
showingvolutesof acanthusattributed to theJulio-Claudianera ratherthan
later. Furthermore at least one large Corinthiancapital,now conservedat
the Museo di Tarragona,has been placed withsome assurancein the late
Augustan / Tiberian period (A.D. 10-30),thoughthe provenanceof this
remnantis uncertain.The bulk of the remainingcapitals are taken to be
Flavianwiththreecapitalsof Hadrianicdate,presumably a relicof Hadrian's

(55) Above,n. 32.

(56) Above,n.42.
(57) J. L. JiménezSalvador, El temploromanode la calleClaudioMarceloen
Cordoba: aspectoscronológicos, urbanísticosyfuncionales in P. Léon (ed.),Colonia
PatriciaCorduba[n.9],p. 129-153 at 141-143.
(58) Above,nn. 15,25. See further Mar, op. cit.[п. 6], p. 113,emphasizing the
restrictednature ofthisevidence
: "En realidadlosestratosasociablesa la construcción
de los conjuntos monumentales de la partealtade Tárracoraramente hanaportado
materiales estratigráficosparaproponer unadataciónparasu realización. En relación
al recinto
deCultoImperial podríamos citarúnicamentecomopublicados losmateriales
identificados porAquiluéenla excavación delsolardelColegiodeArquitectos. Existem
ademáslos materiales halladosen las excavacionesde Sanchez-Real y Hauschild en
el claustrode la catedralaúnnopublicados".

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:29:02 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE "TEMPLEOF AUGUSTUS"ATTARRACO 135

restoration(59). There are also conflictingviews on the date of the clipei,

some of whichhave been placed by one commentator in theJulio-Claudian
periodratherthanlateri60).
What all this illustratesis the difficultyof datingiconographievestiges
outsidea securearchaeologicalcontext.Even so therebeginto be sufficient
indicationsto supportthe idea of long-term construction of the temple(and
part of the portico?), to whichwas added at a late stage,presumablyearly
in the Flavian period,a temenoson the upper level and a large area on
the centralterracegivenover to administrative purposes.The beginningof
epigraphicalevidencewould coincidewiththis date because at Tarraco as
elsewherethe custom now became prevalentof erectingstatues to past
provincialpriestsin line withregulationscomparableto those of the Lex
Narbonensis(61).The analysislooks easierto accommodateifthetemplewas
integratedwith the porticoat the back of the top terrace(62) but is not
impossibleifthetemplewas free-standing in thecentreof thetemenos , below
the presentcathedral.In any eventthereseems good reason to rehabilitate
the traditionalview thatthe octostyletempleon the coins is provincialand
to be identified withthe structureof whichvestigeshave survivedon the
top terrace.The lengthyperiod of construction is presumablyattributable
at least in part to financialexigencieswhichmighteven have imposedone
or more periods when work on an over-ambitiousdesign was actually
stalled(63).
It mightbe notedin conclusionthatprecisely suchan evolutionas envisioned
can draw on sound historicalprecedent.At Rome the temple of Venus
Genetrixwas dedicatedon 26 September, 46 B.C., at a timewhenconstruction
was not quite finished,yet the Forum Iulium of whichit was an organic

(59) Pensabene,op. cit.[n. 12],p. 33-37,10If. For a helpful summary see now
Id., op. cit. [n.29], p. 199-201.On the Corinthian capitalof Tiberiandate see
Pensabene,ibid.,p. 198,200,citing M. Recasensi Carreras, Los capiteles romanos
delMuseuNacionalArqueològic de Tarragonain BATarragona 5, 1979,n. 35,fig.32.
(60) E. M. Koppel,Relieves de Tarragona
arquitectónicos inTrillmich-Zanker,
op. cit.[n. 9], p. 327-340at 336ff.withn. 52. Pensabene,op. cit.[n. 12],p. 95
attributesthetwoheadsofJupiter Ammonto thethirdquarterofthefirst century,
ifnotspecifically to thebeginningoftheFlavianera,yettakesthefragments ofthe
headofMedusatobe generally Julio-Claudian.
(61) Fishwick,ICLWI, 2,p. 277,cf.219-221, 257-262,notingthatsimilar provisions
evidently appliedin Baeticaand AfricaProconsularis ; cf.Id., FlavianRegulations
at theSanctuary oftheThreeGardsinZPE, 1998,forthcoming.
(62) Above,n. 13.
(63) For costly,long-term buildingschemesthatwerestillunfinished, eventually
abandoned, orevendemolished seePliny,Ep. 10,nos37,38,39,40.Provincial funding
fora project at Tarracomayhaveposedproblems beforeconstructionentered a new
phaseatthebeginning ofVespasian'sreign.

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:29:02 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
136 D. FISHWICK

partwas not completeduntilthe reignof Augustus( RG 20, 3) (M). Similarly

at Camulodunumthe templeof Divus Claudius looks to have been begun
afterthe death of Claudius and repairedsubsequentto the rebellionof
Boudicca in A.D. 60, with completionperhapsby the Flavian period. In
contrastthetemenos,at thecentreofwhichthetemplearose,was notdefined,
levelled and equipped with the firsttemporarybuildingsuntil the post-
Boudiccanperiod,its firstmasonrystructures datingfromA.D. 80-100(65).
then,
Initially, the templewill have stood alone, much as on the suggested
development at Tarraco.

IV

Where,lastly,does all this leave the municipaltemplei66).It should be

noted in the firstplace that,if the literaryand numismaticevidencerelate
to the provincialtemple,directtestimony to the presenceof a civic temple
at the colonyno longerexists.Even so, the presenceof such a local temple
is likelyenoughin itself.Certainlyothercitiesthathouseda provincialtemple
also boasteda municipalimperialtemple- Emeritaand Narbo in particular ;
whetherCorduba can be added is stillsub iudice (67),but thereis no sign
yet of a similarstructure at Camulodunum.If such is the case, the temple
of the colony would surelyhave been originallydedicatedto Roma and
Augustusas theciviccultrequires,thoughat presenttheresurvivesonlyone
inscription that mightdate fromthe lifetimeof Augustus; othertracesof
the cult of Roma and Augustusare Flavian or later(68).That the temple
would thenhave been constructed in Augustus'lifetime
looks likelyenough.
In its devotionto the firstRoman emperorTarraco comparesmostclosely
perhapswithPompeii,wheretheforumwas largelygivenoverto theimperial
cultand certainlyhad an imperialtempledatingfromthereignofAugustus(69).
Whereasthe visitof Augustusto Tarraco was the occasion forestablishing
the famousaltar of Augustus,clearlyto be located in the civic forum,it

(64) See recently

R. B. Ulrich,Julius CaesarandtheCreation oftheForumIulium
in AJA97, 1993,p. 49-80withlistof Republican temples(p. 69), someof which
maylikewise havenothavebeenfully completed whendedicated.
(65) R J. Drury,TheTemple of Claudiusat Colchesterreconsideredin Britannia
15,1984,p. 7-50at 8,25-29; Fishwick,op. cit.[n.45],p. 34,36withfig.3..
(66) See Fishwick,op. cit.[n. 11],1996,p. 172-174.
(67) Fishwick,op. cit.[n.22],pp. 182£f.
(68) Etienne,op. cit.[n. 33],p. 205ff.
; D. Fishwick,TheAltarofAugustus and
theMunicipal CultofTarraco inMDAI(M) 23,1982,p. 222-233 at228f.
(69) D. Fishwick,TheInscription ofMamiaagain: TheCultoftheGenius Augusti
and theTempleof theImperialCulton theForumof Pompeiiin Epigraphica 57,
1995,p. 17-38at 17,36.

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:29:02 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE "TEMPLEOF AUGUSTUS"ATTARRACO 137

is possiblethatthevisitof the Mytileneanenvoysbearingtidingsof a temple

at Mytilene- of Roma and Augustusas it turnsout - may have inspired
a similarprojecton the part of the Tarraconians(70).At all eventsthe wall
of a municipaltemplewould have been the appropriateplace on which
eventually to posttheMytilenean decree.
As for any tangibletrace of the civic temple,the only possibilityis an
inscription fromthe zone of the lower forumpossibilyreferring to golden
statuesofDivus Verus: Diuo V[ero'| Diui Pii[fil(ioJ]' 'au'rçisadorn[ato...] |
[...]//Philetns[...] I [...0]uinii£s ( RIT 79). If these were to be carried
in processionon imperialholidays,theymay well have been kept in the
pronaos of the colonial temple(71). Whateverthe meritsof that idea, the
site of a municipaltemple,conceivablyclose to the Altarof Augustus,will
surelyhave been on thecivicforum,perhapsby the Capitoliumat the south
end, oppositewhat have now provedto be vestigesof the basilica. Such a
locationis supportedby a wealthof iconographieand epigraphicremains
fromthelowerforum(72).In thateventthe remainsof thecolonialimperial
templeawaitdiscovery beneathwhatis nowadaysan area ofdensehabitation.
The "Temple of Augustus"in contraststood on the uppermostterraceof
the provincialenclave,wherefragments of its disiectamembracontinueto
emerge.

ofAlberta.
University Duncan Fishwick.

(70) Fishwick,op. cit.[n. 68],loc. cit.withrefs.,n. 45 ; Price, op. cit.[n. 35],

p. 55,66,74,127f., 243,245.
217-19,
(71) Fishwick,ICLW II, 1 (1991),p. 558f.Arbulo,op. cit.1990[n. 1],p. 133,
n. 102,suggests thatthestatuesneednotnecessarily havestoodin thepronaosof
the"Templeof Augustus" (whichhe takesto be themunicipal temple).It is true
thatan imperial canbe placedinthetemples
likeness ofGreco-Roman orotherdeities
(Fishwick,op. cit.,p. 54Iff.)but,ifthegoldstatues(?) of thedeified Veruswere
intended to be carriedin procession, theywouldcertainly havebeenkeptin the
municipal templeof theimperial cult.Whether in factwe havea tracehereof the
municipal versionofa ritedocumented cult(cf.RIT 294; CIL II, 5264)
in provincial
is inanyeventspeculative inlightofthedefective textofRIT 79.T. Pékarysuggests
supplying to thegoldenclothesofthestatue: Das römische
a reference Kaiserbildnis
im Staat,Kultund Gesellschaft, Berlin,1985(Das römische Herrscherbild, Abt.3,
Bd. 5), p. 118.See further D. Fishwick,A SacredEdict(?) at Mactarin ZPE 73,
1988,p. 113-115.
(72) Arbulo,op. cit.,1990[n. 1], p. 32-134; Id., op. cit.,1993[n. 1], p. 94f.;
Aquiluéetal.,op. cit.[n.2],p. 52-59.

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:29:02 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
138 D. FISHWICK

APPENDIX

According to Tacitus(Ann. 1, 78), therequestof theSpanishembassyin A.D.

15 was to erecta templeto Augustus - in practice to DivusAugustus, therefore
(above,p. 121).Butifthe temple was notcompleted (on anyview)untiltheFlavian
period,it musthavebeenultimately dedicated to Roma,thelivingemperor andthe
deified
Augusti. Thisconclusion is imposed bythetitlesofprovincial priests recorded
on thebasesoftheirhonorificstatues, whichbeginsuddenly ca. A.D. 70(73).Despite
thefactthatvariants of theformula occasionallydropkeyelements, it is clearthat
fromits inception the fullversionof the titleranflamenRomae,Divorumet
Augustorum provinciae Hispaniaeciterioris(74).A templethatserveda composite cult
of thisnaturemusthavebeendedicatedaccordingly, verymuchas theHadrianic
templeof TresGalliaeis attested in priestly
inscriptionsat Lugdunum as templům
RomaeetAugustorum velsim.( CIL 13,1706,cf.1714,11174,1691)(75).

(73) Alföldy [П.26],p. 1-4,14-19.

(74) Alföldy,o.e.,p. 46-49; Fishwick,ICLWI, 2,p. 269-277.
(75) Fishwick,ICLW I, 2, p. 308-316.WhileTacitusmayaccurately reportthe
original
request oftheSpanishembassy, thetwoallusionsintheHA areplainlyinexact
inreferring
to a templeofAugustus (Hadr.12,3) orto Augustus
(Sept.3,4).

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Sat, 27 Feb 2016 15:29:02 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions