hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position (current method)
As the entities appear in the document.

You are currently sorting in ascending order. Sort in descending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
300 AD - 399 AD 90 90 Browse Search
1500 AD - 1599 AD 58 58 Browse Search
100 AD - 199 AD 31 31 Browse Search
500 AD - 599 AD 30 30 Browse Search
200 AD - 299 AD 24 24 Browse Search
179 BC 20 20 Browse Search
1400 AD - 1499 AD 19 19 Browse Search
400 AD - 499 AD 19 19 Browse Search
1100 AD - 1199 AD 17 17 Browse Search
700 AD - 799 AD 15 15 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Samuel Ball Platner, Thomas Ashby, A Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome. Search the whole document.

Found 5 total hits in 4 results.

31 BC (search for this): entry ianus-aedes
, 1903; for divergent views see ZA 238-248; TF 126-130). It may be remarked, in regard to the latter's theory, that the order of the last two temples should be reversed, and that, while it may require some explanation that the temple of Janus was not also damaged by the fire of 213, it is even more difficult to suppose that the central temple was fitted in the space between two smaller temples already in existence. In pursuance of this theory, Frank assigns the southern temple in its present form to a restoration of 31 B.C. The central temple he dates about 90 B.C. See Gott. Gel. Anz. 1903, 556; 1904, 56 ; Delbrick, Hellenistische Bauten, ii. 43; RE Suppl. iii. 1183; and cf. PORTA CARMENTALIS. For restorations, see D'Esp. Mon. ii. 128-129. It should be noted that the name of the church (in Carcere) was only changed to in Carcere Tulliano in the fourteenth century, owing to an erroneous identification. The career was really that of Byzantine times (LPD i. 515, n. 13; ii. 295, n. 12).
17 AD (search for this): entry ianus-aedes
est belli portas, Numa Pompilius fecit circa imum Argiletum iuxta theatrum Marcelli ' (cf. Liv. i. 19. 2). This is the second of the alternatives suggested by Wissowa in Gott. Gel. Anz. 1904, 562. and extra portam Carmentalem (Fest. 285). The day of dedication was the Portunalia, 17th August (see Fast. Allif. et Vallens.; and for the significance of the fact, Pais, Fasti Triumphales Capitolini, ii. 474-478). The restoration of this temple was begun by Augustus and completed by Tiberius in 17 A.D. (Tac. loc. cit.), but the dedication day of the restored structure was 8th October (Fast. Amit.). According to Pliny (NH xxxvi. 28) Augustus dedicated in this temple a statue to Janus which was brought from Egypt, the work either of Scopas or Praxiteles. It was probably the(*ermh=s dike/falosof the former (WR 106; Jahr. d. Inst. 1890, 148-149). The statement is made (Fest. 285) that the senate was forbidden to meet in this temple because their decree that the Fabii should go forth to the si
90 BC (search for this): entry ianus-aedes
republic. The central and largest is Ionic, that on the north is next in size and also Ionic, while that on the south is smallest and Doric. The second, on the north, is generally assumed to be the temple of Janus. It is dated by Frank to about 90 B.C. It is hexastyle, peripteral except at the back, and six of its columns, 0.70 metre in diameter, are still standing, built into the wall of the church. The temple in the middle is assigned to Spes, and the smallest to Iuno Sospita (HJ 507-514; Mise that the central temple was fitted in the space between two smaller temples already in existence. In pursuance of this theory, Frank assigns the southern temple in its present form to a restoration of 31 B.C. The central temple he dates about 90 B.C. See Gott. Gel. Anz. 1903, 556; 1904, 56 ; Delbrick, Hellenistische Bauten, ii. 43; RE Suppl. iii. 1183; and cf. PORTA CARMENTALIS. For restorations, see D'Esp. Mon. ii. 128-129. It should be noted that the name of the church (in Carcere) was onl
1400 AD - 1499 AD (search for this): entry ianus-aedes
e, 1903; for divergent views see ZA 238-248; TF 126-130). It may be remarked, in regard to the latter's theory, that the order of the last two temples should be reversed, and that, while it may require some explanation that the temple of Janus was not also damaged by the fire of 213, it is even more difficult to suppose that the central temple was fitted in the space between two smaller temples already in existence. In pursuance of this theory, Frank assigns the southern temple in its present form to a restoration of 31 B.C. The central temple he dates about 90 B.C. See Gott. Gel. Anz. 1903, 556; 1904, 56 ; Delbrick, Hellenistische Bauten, ii. 43; RE Suppl. iii. 1183; and cf. PORTA CARMENTALIS. For restorations, see D'Esp. Mon. ii. 128-129. It should be noted that the name of the church (in Carcere) was only changed to in Carcere Tulliano in the fourteenth century, owing to an erroneous identification. The career was really that of Byzantine times (LPD i. 515, n. 13; ii. 295, n. 12).