Pompeii, Its Life and Art. August 1840-1909 Mau
hall as the first. Its front, the remains of which have for the most part been recovered, was divided off by half-columns corresponding in number and arrangement with the columns of the first story, but each half-column was flanked by narrow pilasters, while a parapet of moderate height occupied the intervening spaces. It was built apparently with a view to architectural effect rather than practical use (Fig. 27).
At the right and the left of the tribunal are places for stairways. Each of these contains a landing on the same level with the floor of the tribunal, from which it was cut off by a door; the steps connecting with these landings, being of wood, have disappeared. In both stair rooms, however, flights of stone steps lead down to the vaulted chamber below, so that this could not have been accessible if there were wooden steps on both sides connecting the tribunal with the floor of the Basilica. Probably on one side the wooden steps led from the tribunal down to the floor, but on the other ascended from the corresponding landing to the second story, thus leaving the stairway to the lower room unobstructed on that side. At some later time the door at the left between the tribunal and the landing was walled up, perhaps because the gallery was no longer used; if still in use it could to all appearances have been reached only by a ladder.
The two open rooms at the rear on either side of the tribunal agree in their decoration with the entrance court except that the base with its border is higher, and the white surface above is moulded in stucco so as to give the appearance of slabs of white marble. They were no higher than the first division of the wall; the windows seen in Fig. 27 above the broad entrances opened into the outer air. Perhaps they were used as waiting rooms for litigants.
Opposite the north entrance between two columns stood a curb like those over the mouths of cisterns; only the foundation stone with a circular opening is preserved. The remains of a lead pipe, which brought the water to it, show that it must have been connected with an aqueduct. At the further end of the main hall was an equestrian statue of which no trace has been found.
The arrangement of the roof is a problem of much difficulty. Without wearying the reader by presenting various possibilities, it will be sufficient for our purposes to suggest the explanation which, on the whole, has the most in its favor. As assumed in our restoration, the roof of the main hall was carried by the entablature of the twenty-eight large columns. Thus in general the arrangement corresponded fairly well with that of other basilicas except that, owing to the lack of a clerestory, the roof of the main hall was not much if any higher than that of the corridor. From the flat roof of the corridor, at least on the south side, the rain water flowed into the cistern near the front part of the building.
The five entrances opening from the Forum into the narrow court could be closed by latticed doors. Similar doors hung also on the wooden jambs of the north and south entrances. With such doors a complete safeguarding could not have been contemplated. Tradespeople using the Basilica must either have removed their wares at the close of business hours or have made the stalls sufficiently secure for protection. We can hardly doubt that ordinarily a night watchman was on duty about the building.
CHAPTER X
THE TEMPLE OF APOLLO
In some respects the study of the large temple on the west side of the Forum is especially satisfactory. The building had been completely restored after the earthquake of 63, and was in good order at the time of its destruction. Though ancient excavators removed many objects of value, including the statue of the divinity of the temple, much was left undisturbed, as the interesting series of statues in the court; in addition, a number of inscriptions have been recovered. On the whole, more complete information is at hand regarding this sanctuary than in reference to any other in Pompeii.
Fig. 28.—Corner of mosaic floor, cella of the temple of Apollo.
The identification of this as the temple of Apollo is certain. The accompanying illustration shows a corner of the floor laid over the greater part of the cella (3 on the plan); the parts along the inner walls were of white mosaic. This floor was composed of small, lozenge-shaped pieces of green and white marble and slate; of the two narrow stripes between the lozenge pattern and the bright mosaic fret along the border one is of slate, the other of red marble. In the slate stripe was an inscription. The letters were outlined by means of small holes filled with metal, every seven holes forming a vertical line, every four a horizontal. The inscription, which was in Oscan, stated that the quaestor O[ppius] Camp[anius], by order of the council and with money belonging to Apollo, had caused something to be made;[3] what this was cannot be determined, as the important word is missing, but apparently it was the floor. In the cella, moreover, stands a block of tufa, having the shape of half an egg; this is the Omphalos, the familiar symbol of Apollo. In the court on the first pilaster at the right as you enter a tripod is painted, too large for mere decoration, and explicable only as a symbol of the god. Lastly, in the design of the stucco ornamentation with which the entablature of the peristyle was adorned after the earthquake, the principal figures are griffins. The griffin was sacred to Apollo, and though it was often used as a purely decorative theme, in this case a reference to the divinity of the temple is unmistakable (Fig. 31).
Fig. 29.—Plan of the temple of Apollo.
View larger image
1. Colonnade.
2. Podium.
3. Cella.
4. Altar.
5. Sundial.
6. Sacristan's room.
As previously stated (p. 49), the deviation of the axis of this building from that of the Forum is undoubtedly due to the fact that it followed the direction of a street which bordered it on the east side before the colonnade of Popidius was built; this is therefore an evidence of the antiquity of the temple. The style of architecture, however, is in no essential particular different from that of the colonnade and of other buildings of the Tufa Period, and gives no indication of great age. The most probable explanation is that the temple was rebuilt in the Tufa Period on the site of an earlier structure, the orientation of which was preserved. The difference in direction is concealed by the increasing thickness, from south to north, of the pillars between the Forum and the court of the temple. The spaces between the pillars were originally left open. Later, at what time it is impossible to determine, they were all walled up except the three opposite the side of the temple; since the temple was excavated these also have been closed. In comparison with the entrances from the Forum, at first ten in number, the one on the south side, opening on the street leading from the Porta Marina, must have been considered unimportant. Otherwise pains would have been taken to give to the colonnade on that side an even number of columns, so that the door of the temple should face an intercolumniation; as it is the number is uneven and the entrance to the court had to be put a little to one side that it might not open upon a column.
The court is of oblong shape. The continuous colonnade about the sides, the peristyle, was originally in two stories. At the rear of the peristyle on the north side stood the small colonnade of the Doric order already mentioned (p. 62); one of the rooms into which in later times this was divided (6) was connected with the court of the temple, and was probably occupied by the sacristan (aedituus).
The temple stood upon a high podium, in front of which is a broad flight of steps. The small cella was evidently intended for but one statue. The columns