SEPTIZONIUM
a building erected by Septimius Severus at the extreme south-
east corner of the Palatine hill (Hist. Aug. Sev. 19:
opera publica praecipua
eius extant Septizonium et thermae Severianae; 24: cum Septizonium
facerit nihil aliud cogitavit quam ut ex Africa venientibus suum opus
occurreret: nisi absente eo per praefectum urbis medium simulacrum eius
esset locatum, aditum Palatinis aedibus, id est regium atrium, ab ea parte
facere voluisse perhibetur. quod etiam post Alexander cum vellet facere,
ab haruspicibus dicitur esse prohibitus, cum hoc sciscitans non litasset;
cf. Hist. Aug. Geta 7; Chron. 147; Hieron. ad a. Abr. 2216:
Severo
imperante thermae Severianae apud Antiochiam et Romam factae et
Septizonium exstructum; Cassiod.:
Septizodium instructum est;
Not. Reg. X:
Septizonium divi Severi). The inscription (
CIL vi. 1032,
31229) records the dedication in 203 A.D.; and the building is undoubtedly
referred to by Amm. Marc. in 355 (15. 7. 3:
cum plebs excita calore
quo consuevit. . ad Septemzodium convenisset celebrum locum ubi
operis ambitiosi nymfaeum Marcus condidit imperator) when the
mention of Marcus instead of Severus is due to the fact that the name
Marcus appears first in the dedicatory inscription. According to the
Vita, therefore, Severus intended this building to serve as a monumental
faSade at this corner of the hill, visible to all who approached by the via
Appia, and also as an entrance to the imperial precinct. The latter
purpose could not be carried out because the prefect of the city set up
the statue of the emperor in the central niche. Ammianus (loc. cit.)
implies that the building was in fact a nymphaeum of imposing size and
appearance; and a septizonium at Lambaesis had an 'aqueductus et
nymphaei opus' attached to it (
CIL viii. 2657).
The whole of the latter part of the passage in Hist. Aug. Sev. 24:
nisi absente eo per praefectum urbis medium simulacrum cius esset
locatum, aditum Palatinis aedibus, id est regium atrium, ab ea parte
facere voluisse perhibetur, has recently been taken by v. Domaszewski
(
SHA 1916, 7. A, 5-7;
1918, 13. A, 48), like that in id. Get. 7 (cf.
SEPULCRUM SEVERI) to be an interpolation; and this is why Hulsen in
his latest restoration (published by Rushforth in the Legacy of Rome,
fig. 35, opp. p. 399) has omitted the statue of Severus which had previously
been inserted in the central niche. The very existence of a main approach
to the Palatine on this side at this period seems highly doubtful.
Dombart, however, retains it in his restoration, and inclines to refer
to it the second colossus named in Not. Brev. He differs from Hulsen
mainly (a) in placing the columns in the niches closer to their back walls,
(b) in giving half domes to the niches.
1 The design of the front (an
ornamental facade with three large niches, and three orders of columns)
owed much to the type of permanent stage decoration (scaenae frons)
which is seen in the back walls of the stages of various provincial theatres
of the Roman period; and it is not without parallels, of which the
nymphaea (expressly so called in inscriptions) of Miletus and Side are
the most striking. There appears indeed to be no doubt that it was
actually decorated with fountains; and it also seems clear that the
interior, which would have served no useful purpose, was not originally
accessible except by means of ladders. There is no evidence for an
external staircase at the back. Dombart (p. 96) has misquoted Demontosius, Gallus Romae Hospes, 25.
A very difficult problem is presented by the name and its meaning.
The form septizodium is first found in the Pseudo-Dositheus (about
207 A.D.) and in an inscription, CIL viii. (Suppl.) 14372 (about 210 A.D.),
but is probably to be treated as incorrect and may therefore be disregarded
(Schtirer, Zeitschr. f. d. neutestamentliche Wissenschaft vi.
(1905),
29ff., 63 ff.). Unsuccessful attempts have been made to interpret
septizonium in a literal sense, and to see in it a building which is capable
of division, whether horizontally or vertically, into seven sections or belts.
There is no doubt, however, that the building only had three stories.
The reference to the seven planets (Maass, Tagesgbtter 106-117) may,
however, be accepted even so, if the meaning of [
ζώνη and
ἑπτάζωνος be
kept in mind (Dombart in RE ii. A. 1582, who is inclined to suppose
that the building was actually decorated with emblems representing the
seven planetary divinities of the seven days of the week, and who also
emphasises the importance of the number seven in connection with the
Ziggurats of Babylonia; cf. his article in Jahrb. d. Inst. xxxiv.
(1919),
40-64).
The mediaeval corruptions of the name are many- septem viae,
2
septem solia (divided into maius and minus, referring to the east and
west ends), while the name scuola di Vergilio came from the fact that
mediaeval scholars found in the septodium the trivium et quadrivium
liberalium artium. The church of S. Lucia de Septem solio is first
mentioned in Eins. (11.5; 13.28; HCh 305); another church, S. Leone
de Septem Soliis stood opposite to it, on the slopes of the Caelian
(HCh 297-298). The mediaeval history of the building, which served as
a fortress, is interesting (Stevenson,
BC 1888, 292-298; Bartoli,
BA
1909, 253-269;
LS iv. 137-139). Its destruction was completed by
14th September, 1588 (
ASRSP 1910, 305).
The east angle of the building itself was preserved until the pontificate
of Sixtus V who ordered its destruction, and the use of its materials for
his own buildings. We learn from the records of its demolition that
many columns, etc., of rare marbles had been employed in its construction, which probably came from various different sources. The columns
of the three orders were all composite. We are therefore thrown back
on the Forma Urbis (fr. 34) and the numerous Renaissance representations
of the building for information about it; and hence there has been
much discussion about its details, though its general form may be taken
as certain (cf. the restorations of Dombart and Hulsen cited).
An interesting confirmation of Hulsen's reconstruction (here he is
followed by Dombart) at the posterior angles (a wall instead of a fourth
column) is given by a picture by Macrino d'Alba
(dated 1496). See
AA 1923-24,41.
See Hulsen, Das Septizonium des Severus
(46 Berlin. Winckelmanns-
programm 1886); id. Zeitschr. Gesch.
Archit. 1911, 1-24;
LS ii.
51-54;
RL 1909, 540-551;
Mitt. 1910, 56-73; DuP 110-113; Dombart,
Palatinische Septizonium zu Rom, Munich 1922; RE ii. A. 1578-1586;
FUR, frgt. 38-No. 34 does not belong (see DAP 2. xi. 107); HFP
75, 76.
