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 3 total hits in 3 results.

ands, but most of this decoration has disappeared. For a theory, for which there is no evidence, that this stucco decoration belongs to the Renaissance period, see Gnomon i. (1925), 367. The temple faced toward the street leading up from the pons Aemilius, and not toward the forum Boarium proper. This has sometimes been identified with the temple of Fortuna, but it is more probable that it is that of Mater Matuta. If this is correct, the temple must have been restored about the middle of the first century B.C., to which period the construction seems to point. For this identification, see Huilsen, DAP 2. vi. 270; and for a complete description of the existing structure, Fiechter, Mitt. 1906, 220-279; also Rosch. ii. 2462-2463; D'Esp. Fr. i. 50; ZA 251-253; TF 134-136; YW 1924-5, 85; Mufioz, Tempio della Fortuna Virile, Rome 1925; ASA 20, 21, 77; Mitt. 1925, 321-350, for an identification of this temple with that of PORTUNUS (q.v.), the attribution of the round temple being treated a
MATER MATUTA, AEDES (templum, Liv. xxiv. 47, Ovid): a temple in the forum Boarium (Liv. xxxiii. 27. 4; Ov. Fast. vi. 477-479), just inside the porta Carmentalis (Liv. xxv. 7. 6), ascribed by tradition to Servius Tullius (Liv. v. 19. 6; Ov. Fast. vi. 480), restored and dedicated by Camillus in 395 B.C. (Liv. v. 19. 6, 23. 7; Plut. Cam. 5); it was burned in 213 (Liv. xxiv. 47. 15), and restored the next year by triumvirs appointed for the purpose, together with the temple of Fortuna (Liv. xxv. 7. 6; for a possible later restoration, see below). In 196 B.C. two arches (fornices) with gilded statues were set up by L. Stertinius in front of the temples of Mater Matuta and Fortuna (Liv. xxxiii. 27. 4), and if, as is probable, these arches were part of a colonnade surrounding them both, the temples must have been near together and perhaps had the same orientation. In the temple of Matuta Ti. Sempronius Gracchus placed a bronze tablet Urlichs, Malerei vor Caesar, interprets 'tabula' as 'pi
mple in the forum Boarium (Liv. xxxiii. 27. 4; Ov. Fast. vi. 477-479), just inside the porta Carmentalis (Liv. xxv. 7. 6), ascribed by tradition to Servius Tullius (Liv. v. 19. 6; Ov. Fast. vi. 480), restored and dedicated by Camillus in 395 B.C. (Liv. v. 19. 6, 23. 7; Plut. Cam. 5); it was burned in 213 (Liv. xxiv. 47. 15), and restored the next year by triumvirs appointed for the purpose, together with the temple of Fortuna (Liv. xxv. 7. 6; for a possible later restoration, see below). In 196 B.C. two arches (fornices) with gilded statues were set up by L. Stertinius in front of the temples of Mater Matuta and Fortuna (Liv. xxxiii. 27. 4), and if, as is probable, these arches were part of a colonnade surrounding them both, the temples must have been near together and perhaps had the same orientation. In the temple of Matuta Ti. Sempronius Gracchus placed a bronze tablet Urlichs, Malerei vor Caesar, interprets 'tabula' as 'picture,' and probably rightly. There is no word of its being