Arch of Constantine co-opting an \'Arch of Hadrian\"

[richsc]

OK, this is the first I've heard of this. Was the Arch of Constatine built over an earlier Arch of Hadrian?

[caiusbeerquitius]

No, using parts of it. Nothing new, though.

[Nathan Ross]

There was also once an idea it was originally built by Domitian... The Hadrianic theory dates from an archeological survey of the foundations, in about 2000 I think. A subsequent architectural study of the monument claimed that it was entirely constructed of spolia though.

The most recent book on the arch (Ferris, 2013) rejects the Hadrianic theory - Ferris says that the similarites to the Arch of Severus suggests a later date for the entire construction. He believes the only debate is whether the arch was originally built by Maxentius, or was an original project of Constantine's (and leans towards the latter).

The column bases (shown as Constantinian on the attached image in the original post) are very probably also spolia, from an earlier Tetrarchic monument.

[Hasdrubal]

Arch of Constantine should be called arch of Maximinius.

[caiusbeerquitius]

Paul Zanker has several good reasons for his argument that the arch was in fact built by the Senate for Constantine, re-using several parts of older architecture, but also implementing pieces especially made for this arch (such as the frieze)

[Caratacus]

Some of the decoration on the Constantine arch is supposed to have come from an earlier building - and unknown - due to Marcus Aurelius. I think that some of this is to be found in the medallions on both faces of the arch and which includes representations of soldiers wearing lorica segmentata armour (see Bishop, M. Lorica Segmentata I: A handbook of Roman articulated plate armour, Fig.2.4).

Mike Thomas
(Caratacus)

[Nathan Ross]

Some of the decoration on the Constantine arch is supposed to have come from an earlier building

Most of it does, and quite possibly the main structure of the arch is made of bits and pieces too. Spolia comes from monuments of Trajan, Hadrian and Marcus Aurelius. This page has a full break-down of the known origin of the various sculptural reliefs.

Ian Ferris suggests that much of the spolia might have come from some architectural storage area where bits of older monuments were collected. One of the (Trajanic) Dacian statues has the note ad arcum ('to the arch') carved into the base.

Arch of Constantine should be called arch of Maximinius.

Do you mean Maximianus, or Maximinus Daza (or Daia)?

[Hasdrubal]

Do you mean Maximianus, or Maximinus Daza (or Daia)?

Neither. I got my spelling wrong. Maxentius. He was in Rome and had that built due to his triumph over Severus, and then I believe Galerius. Then Constantine came along.....

[Nathan Ross]

Maxentius. He was in Rome and had that built due to his triumph over Severus, and then I believe Galerius. Then Constantine came along.....

So many people believe, although there's no real evidence for it. The inscription to Maxentius found recently in several pieces built into the attic of the arch more likely relates to a rededication of the Colossus (the huge statue of the sun god next to the Amphitheatre) to Maxentius's son Valerius Romulus. The fact that the inscription was broken and reused in the arch construction suggests that the arch itself was built after the fall of Maxentius.

[Hasdrubal]

Maxentius. He was in Rome and had that built due to his triumph over Severus, and then I believe Galerius. Then Constantine came along.....

So many people believe, although there's no real evidence for it. The inscription to Maxentius found recently in several pieces built into the attic of the arch more likely relates to a rededication of the Colossus (the huge statue of the sun god next to the Amphitheatre) to Maxentius's son Valerius Romulus. The fact that the inscription was broken and reused in the arch construction suggests that the arch itself was built after the fall of Maxentius.

Interesting. When did this start coming about. I believe the books I read about the ending of the Western Roman Empire/Rise of Christianity was published in 2011. I don't remember it saying anything about that (Not saying it isn't true, because new discoveries every day happen) I'm just curious.

[Nathan Ross]

When did this start coming about.

I've read about it a couple of times, most recently in Ian Ferris The Arch of Constantine (2013), which I mentioned above. The Maxentian inscription was originally found by Adriano le Regina in the 1980s during a conservation campaign.

It's not certain proof, and there are still scholars who believe the arch to be a Maxentian foundation, but the inscription suggests that it (or at least the attic section) was built after his demise.

For more about Maxentius and his works in Rome, and what Constantine may have done with them, this essay (actually a chapter from Ewald and Noreñais (eds) The Emperor and Rome: Space, Representation, and Ritual, CUP 2010) is worth a read:

Marlowe - Liberator Urbis Suae

As is the book Conservator Urbis Suae by Mats Cullhed, which covers the reign of Maxentius in more detail, but is harder to get hold of.

[Hasdrubal]

thank you Nathan. I'll take a look at that.