SATURNUS, AEDES
(fanum also in Varro and Macrobius, templum also in
Macrobius and Not.):
the temple erected close to the original ara at
the foot of the Capitoline and edge of the forum (
Varro v. 42:
in faucibus
(Capitolii);
Liv. xli. 21. 12:
in foro Romano;
Macrob. i. 8. 1:
ad Forum;
Fest. 322:
in imo clivo Capitolino; Serv.
Aen. viii. 319, Auct. Orig. 3. 6:
sub clivo Capitolino; Serv.
Aen. ii. 116, Hygin. Fab. 261:
ante clivum
Capitolinum;
Dionys. i. 34.4; vi. I. 4). It was the oldest temple of which
the erection was recorded in the pontifical archives, but there was marked
disagreement as to the exact date. One tradition ascribed its dedication
to Tullus Hostilius; according to another it was begun by the last
Tarquin (Varro ap.
Macrob. i. 8. I; Dionys. vi. i. 4). Elsewhere,
however, its actual dedication is assigned to the magistrates of the first
years of the republic, either to Titus Larcius in his dictatorship in 50o
(Macrob. loc. cit.), who also is said to have commenced building the temple
in his second consulship in 498 (Dionys. vi. I. 4); or to Aulus Sempronius
and M. Mamercus, the consuls of 497 (
Liv. ii. 21. ; Dionys. loc. cit);
or to Postumus Cominius, consul in 501 and 493, by vote of the senate
(Dionys. loc. cit.). A different tradition seems to be preserved by
Gellius (ap.
Macrob. i. 8. I:
nec me fugit Gellium scribere senatum
decresse ut aedes Saturni fieret eique rei L. Furium tribunum militum
praefuisse). Which Furius is referred to is not known (
RE vii. 316,
354-356; Peter, Hist. Rom. Reliq. is. 155), and this form of the tradition
is probably valueless.
1 The dedication of the temple may safely be
assigned to the beginning of the republic.
In 174 B.C. a porticus was built along the clivus Capitolinus from
the temple to the Capitolium (
Liv. xli. 27. 7). In 42 B.C. the temple was
rebuilt by L. Munatius Plancus (Suet. Aug. 29;
CIL vi. 1316;
x. 6087).
It is mentioned incidentally in 16 A.D. (Tac.
Ann. ii. 41), and at some
time in the fourth century it was injured by fire and restored by vote
of the senate, as recorded in the inscription on the architrave (
CIL vi. 937).
It is represented on three fragments of the Marble Plan (22, 23, 30), and
is mentioned in Reg. (Not. Reg. VIII).
Throughout the republic this temple contained the state treasury,
the aerarium populi Romani or Saturni, in charge of the quaestors
(Fest. 2;
Solin. i. 12;
Macrob. i. 8. 3; Plut. Tib. Gracchus 10; App.
BC
i. 31;
RE i. 667, 671), and in it was a pair of scales to signify this function
(Varro,
LL v. 183). Under the empire the same arrangement continued,
but the aerarium Saturni now contained only that part of the public
funds that was under the direction of the senate as distinguished from
the fiscus of the emperors, and was administered by praefecti generally
instead of quaestors (Plin.
Ep. x. 3. 1; for the inscriptions relating to
the aerarium, see
DE i. 300; and for occurrences of aerarium populi
romani or Saturni, Thes. ling.
Lat. i. 1055-1058). It is probable that
only the money itself was kept in the temple, and that the offices of
the treasury adjoined it, perhaps at the rear in the
AREA SATURNI (q.v.),
until the building of the Tabularium in 78 B.C., when some at least of
the records were probably transferred thither. Other public documents
were affixed to the outer walls of the temple and adjacent columns
(Cass.
Dio xlv. 17. 3; CIL ia. 587, col. 2, 1. 40; Varro,
LL v. 42).
On the gable of the temple were statues of Tritons with horses (
Macrob.
i. 8. 4), and in the cella was a statue of Saturn, filled with oil and bound
in wool (Plin.
NH xv. 32;
Macrob. i. 8. 5;
Rosch. iv. 431), which was
carried in triumphal processions (
Dionys. vii. 72. 13). The day of dedication was the Saturnalia, 17th December (Fast. Amit. ad xvi Kal. Ian., CIL
is. p. 245, 337; Liv. xxii. I. 19). There are a few blocks of the podium
of the original temple still remaining, and a drain below and in front
is probably as early, in which case it and some similar drains close by
are the earliest examples of the stone arch in Italy (TF 51-54 attributes
the drain to the fourth century B.C., but his suggestion as to its object
is unacceptable). There is no trace of any construction of an intermediate
period, and the existing podium belongs to the temple of Plancus. It is
constructed of walls of travertine and peperino, with concrete filling,
and was covered with marble facing. It is 22.50 metres wide, about
40 long, and its front and east side rise very high above the forum because
of the slope of the Capitoline hill. The temple was Ionic, hexastyle
prostyle, with two columns on each side, not counting those at the
angles. Of the superstructure eight columns of the pronaos remain,
six in front and one on each side, together with the entablature, hitherto
attributed to the period of the final restoration. It seems more likely
that Fiechter (
Toeb. i. 5 sqq.) is right in attributing the cornice to the
Augustan period, on the analogy of several other cornices (T. Divi Iuli,
Magnae Matris, Regia, etc.). The architrave blocks with the palmette
frieze belowthem belong to the forum of Trajan,whence theywere removed
for the fourth century restoration (ibid. 62-66). The front columns are
of grey and those on the sides of red granite, while the entablature is
of white marble. The columns are 11 metres in height and 1.43 in diameter at the base; but in some of them the drums that form the shaft
have been wrongly placed, so that the shaft does not taper regularly
toward the top. The bases also are of three different kinds-Attic,
and Corinthian with and without a plinth.
The steps of this temple were of peculiar form, on account of the closeness
of the clivus Capitolinus and the sharp angle which it made in front of
the temple, the main flight being only about one-third the width of the
pronaos. (For the latest excavations round the temple, see
NS 1899, 49;
AA 1899, 7;
CR 1899, 234;
BC 1902, 26;
Mitt. 1902, 9; for the later
tradition of the site,
BC 1914, 87-88, 102; for the temple in general,
Jord. i. 2.360-363;
Gilb. iii. 401-403;
Rosch. iv. 429-432; WR 205-206;
HC 77-79; Thedenat 113-115, 227-229; RE ii. A. 219,
Suppl. iv. 463-
466; DR 151-160; ASA 3, 44, 45; HFP 18-20; Mem. Am.
Acad. ii.
1918, 58.) It may be represented in a relief of the time of M. Aurelius
(Cons. 25) and is certainly seen in one of those of the
ROSTRA AUGUSTI
(q.v.). Considerably more of the temple was existing when Poggio
first visited Rome in 1402 than was left in 1447, as we learn from his
De varietate fortunae (Urlichs, 238):
' superest porticus aedis Concordiae
(sic), quam, cum primum ad urbem accessi, vidi fere integram, opere
marmoreo admodum specioso; Romani postmodum, ad calcem aedem
totam et porticus partem, disiectis columnis, sunt demoliti. In porticu
adhuc literae sunt S.P.Q.R. incendio consumptam restituisse.'