File:The destruction of ancient Rome - a sketch of the history of the monuments (1901) (14777432891).jpg

Identifier: destructionofan00lanc (find matches)
Title: The destruction of ancient Rome : a sketch of the history of the monuments
Year: 1901 (1900s)
Authors: Lanciani, Rodolfo Amedeo, 1847-1929
Subjects:
Publisher: London : Macmillan
Contributing Library: PIMS - University of Toronto
Digitizing Sponsor: University of Toronto

View Book Page: Book Viewer
About This Book: Catalog Entry
View All Images: All Images From Book
Click here to view book online to see this illustration in context in a browseable online version of this book.

Text Appearing Before Image:
larger monuments, such as temples, theatres, and baths, were not much damaged by the fire. The columns of Trajan and of Marcus Aurelius did not suffer at all, being in the middle of open squares. The collection of works of art in bronze at the Lateran, and that of marble statues on the Quirinal, also went safely through the ordeal. Hildebert, Archbishop of Tours, who visited Rome in 1106 or 1107, speaks of great remains which struck him with admiration, and also of the beautiful statues in which the City still abounded. We know one of the reasons, at least, why the two massive columns of Trajan and of Marcus Aurelius were spared in these centuries of wholesale destruction. They brought a respectable income to their respective owners,namely, to the public treasury for the first, and to the monks of SS. Dionysius and Sylvester for the second.An inscription in the vestibule of the present church of S. Silvestro in Capite, dated 1119, states that both the column of Marcus Aurelius and the little church
Text Appearing After Image:
Fig 28. View of the forum in 1821, partly excavate, showing the difference between the ancient and modern level - THE SACK OF 1084 169 of St. Nicholas which stood at the foot of it were leased to the highest bidder, probably from year to year, on account of the fees which could be collected from the tourist or pilgrim that wished to behold the wonders of Rome from a lofty point of observation. The obelisks were less fortunate than the commemorative columns just referred to, and the overthrowing of the obelisk set up by Augustus as a sun-dial in the Campus Martins is commonly attributed to the Normans. This shaft was undoubtedly erect on its pedestal in the time of Charlemagne, when the Einsiedlen Itinerary was compiled; but we are not sure whether, after all, the Normans are to be held responsible for its destruction. Were we in possession of precise records of the discovery of the different obelisks, indicating the way in which they lay on their bed of rubbish, the depth at which the various fragments were found, the injuries that they had received before,d

Note About Images