Pantheon Mini-Post: Inscription In Absentia

This is a mini-post. Not a true post in nature but an excuse to make a short point about the Pantheon that pertains to the themes of this Blog.

Readers will remember that the Pantheon, as we see it today, was built by Hadrian around 125 CE. Nevertheless, it bears the inscription that was placed onto the original structure and that names Agrippa as the builder. This was not the only time Hadrian refused to monumentalize his name either. The Imperial Lives states:

“In Rome, Hadrian rebuilt the Pantheon, the Saepta, the Basilica of Neptune, many temples, the Forum of Augustus, and the Baths of Agrippa. He dedicated all of these buildings in the names of their original builders.”

The question presents itself: why would Hadrian not monumentalize his name on these structures as the re-builder? Surely, since we find inscriptions naming re-builders all around Rome, this would have been the expectation.

Herein lies what I think is the solution to this problem.

The Pantheon. Photo by Jack Hase.

As this blog has discussed, public writing 'did things' in Rome. It was a vehicle for power; it contextualized spaces; it functioned as social contracts. The presence of inscriptions in the urban setting made the use of inscriptions an expectation. Therefore, the refusal to use inscriptions to monumentalize one's name was also a statement. Inscriptions on monuments 'did things'; they served functions. So, then, what does it say about an emperor when they do not do this?

If the use of an inscription with one's own name is an action that performs a function, then the refusal to use an inscription is the opposite of an action. It is continuity.

This is what I think the purpose of Hadrian's non-action was: the emphasis of continuity of his own reign with that of previous imperial powers. If Hadrian would have replaced Agrippa's name (a name closely tied to Augustus' imperial rule) he would have presented the public with a schism between earlier power and his own. Instead he chose to emphasize continuity. Since he was expected to place his name on the buildings he repaired, this non-action would have rang loud and clear throughout the city. Hadrian, thus, made himself a part of the institution of the Emperor.

Bibliography:

Aicher, Peter J. Rome Alive: A Source-Guide to the Ancient City. Vol. 1. Mundelein: Bolchazy-Carducci, 2004.

Claridge, Amanda. Rome: An Oxford Archaeological Guide. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Comments

Writing a Family: The Temple of Isis and Numerius Popidius Celsinus

72 CE: a massive earthquake shakes Pompeii. A temple to an exotic goddess crumbles to its foundations. But from the rubble a new temple is built. It is above the doorway that the name of this benevolent civic patron is written for all to see: Numerius Popidius Celsinus, now the only six-year-old boy given a place in the local senate. Scale model of the rebuilt Temple of Isis in Pompeii in the Museo Archiologioco Nazionale di Napoli. Photo by Jack Hase. Let's rewind. Under the empire in the 1st century CE the Popidius family was active in local Pompeiian politics. This was a leading family in the community that participated in common aspects of Roman aristocratic life, including the owning and freeing of slaves. One of these freedman slaves was named Numerius Popidius Ampliatus; the fact that he bared the name of his previous master's family was a sign of his freedman status while 'Ampliatus' is related to the Latin word denoting increasing wealth. This name was a

Writing an Audience, Part 1: Capitals, Repetition, and Formulas

This blog has already touched on different ways public writing functioned in the Roman world. It could be a vehicle of power, it could contextualize spaces, and it could record and solidify social agreements. However, one question still needs to be addressed: how could inscriptions be so important in a world where most people were not fully 'literate'? The answer is surprisingly simple. Romans made inscriptions as easy to read as possible. They achieved this by using a number of different approaches which all acted to lessen the gap between the written Latin carved in stone and the spoken Latin the general public could understand. These approaches include: 1) The use of CAPITAL LETTERS. Have you ever noticed how you never see lower case letters in Roman inscriptions? We know Romans had cursive letters from various graffiti and some rare letters, but on monuments constantly use the same font of capital letters. This is because a consistent and clear font made reading eas

Writing an Audience, Part 3: The Pantheon

I want you to just look at the following picture for a few seconds. This is the Pantheon. What you see was built around 125 CE by the emperor Hadrian after fire destroyed the previous iteration. In its day the building was in the heart of a high traffic area; porticoes, basilicas, baths and other temples surrounded it. While its own function as a atypical temple is up for debate, its grandeur tells us it was an important site. Look up at the inscription. The letters are the same height as the people walking below. These words were meant to be read. The Pantheon in Rome. Photo by Jack Hase. Here, in part 3 of this series, we will look at the the readability of the inscription adorning the front of the Pantheon. As with the previous post, three aspects of this inscription made it easily readable to a broad 'less-literate' audience. The inscription reads: M. AGRIPPA. L. F. COS. TERTIVM. FECIT (Marcus Agrippa, Son of Lucius, Built This in his Third Consulship) [Transl

Ab Urbe Adspecta

Search This Blog