« PreviousContinue »
It cannot escape the notice of the most superficial observer, that, from the 21st of December until the 21st of June, the arc in the heavens described by the sun gradually enlarges; that luminary rising earlier and setting later in proportion as the space it occupies above the horizon increases. Arrived at its extreme northern boundary, the sun, from day to day, rises more towards the south, and on the 21st of December its return to the north recommences.
A fact we must not omit here to mention, will be required for the illustration of succeeding parts of our subject. We allude to the periods of the highest and lowest temperatures; which do not occur just when the sun has reached its respective southern and northern limits; but in both cases about four or five weeks afterwards. Thus, the warmest weather generally happens in July or August, and the coldest in January or February. - w
It will be understood that in speaking as we have done of the sun, we have been describing appearances only. The earth is the body actually in motion, whilst the sum is stationary; and the apparent advance and retirement of the sun through a certain portion of the heavens is occasioned by the earth's motion in the contrary direction.
small oblong mahogany box, with the side removed to show the internal arrangement; a smaller box, E F, slides easily in and out at one end. In the end of this box, at G, a convex lens is placed, whose focus is rather greater than the length of the larger box. His a looking-glass placed at an angle of forty-five degrees with respect to the bottom of the box: that is, if a perpendicular line were drawn from 1 to k, D, B, K, 1, would form a square: on the top of the box at L, a square piece of ground glass is placed. The cover M, which
works on a hinge, is intended to exclude as much light as possible from the surface of the ground-glass; and when the instrument is in use it is brought down halfway to B. The rays of light from an object placed at N, pass through the lens G, and reaching the looking-glass H are reflected upwards on the ground-glass L., and an image of the object is seen on its upper surface. This image may be traced with a black-lead pencil, but it is almost impossible to transfer it from the glass. To obviate this inconvenience, Sir D. Brewster recommends the employment of a partially opaque varnish to the surface of a piece of smooth glass. This varnish can be marked with the finest lines of a pencil, and an impression of the sketch conveyed to paper, by slightly pressing it on the drawing with the hand: one of the simplest and the best of the varnishes he used was that of skimmed milk, perfectly freed of all remains of cream. Another form is the following:—the frame-work of this Camera Obscura is made of thin mahogany,
and so contrived as to fold up; the inside of this, and of all these instruments, must be painted black. A is the mirror, B the lens, ca white surface on which the image is received; the draughtsman passes his head through an opening on one side, and his hand with the pencil through another, a green curtain surrounding him to exclude the light.
When a Camera Obscura is intended to allow several persons to see the picture at the same time, it is made on a large scale, and great care is taken in preparing the table on which the picture is to be received. The outer portion of the image transmitted by the lens when thrown upon a flat surface, is always distorted, especially when the table is large. To remedy this in some degree, the table is hollowed out like a saucer, the curve being decided by that of the lens itself: thus, A being the Fig. 4. centre of the circle which forms B the outline of the lens, B will form also the centre of the intended curve of the table; according to this rule, therefore, the curve c D would represent a section of a table adapted to receive the picture through a lens C in of the same curvature as B.
There is a very excellent table of this description in the Camera Obscura in the Observatory at Clifton, near Bristol.
John WILLIAM PARKER, WEST STRAND.
Publish on 1N WEEKLY NUMarrs, PRick ONz PENNY, AND IN Monthly PAars,
O N9 363. SUPPLEMENT,
FEBRUARY, 1838. oo::...
THE BATHIS OF TITUS.
“THIs name,” says Dr. Burton, “by no means answers to the immensity of the building which once covered great part of the Esquiline Hill, and should more properly be styled the Palace of Titus. This is, in fact, the name which Pliny gives to it." The present ruins extend from the base of the Esquiline Hill near the Coliseum, to one of its summits at the Church of SS. Martino e Silvestro, and to another at S. Pietro in Vincoli. The site is, to a great extent, occupied by gardens, in various parts of which are to be seen fragments, all once belonging to the same great edifice. The house of Mecanas had previously stood on the same spot, to which, indeed, the Golden House of Nero had extended from the Palatine Hill. Titus employed the materials of both of these edifices, and even of Vol. XII.
some entire parts, in constructing his baths; this fact is abundantly shown by certain irregularities which the present ruins display. A number of apartments belonging to the baths, were discovered in the sixteenth century; they had lain hidden for centuries under a mass of ruins. It is said that Raffael studied their fresco ornaments, and imitated them in painting the ceiling of the Vatican; and he is accused of having had the rooms filled up again that his thefts might not be discovered. It is certain that they were open in his time, and that they were subsequently filled up; and appearances seem to justify the supposition that they were filled up purposely, and not by the gradual accumulation of soil. But there are other modes of accounting for the filling up, without charging it upon Raffael; the owners of the land, may have wished to clear it for the purposes of cultivation, and these subterranean chambers
would afford most convenient receptacles for the superincumbent rubbish. According to one account, they were filied up to prevent their becoming the hiding-places of banditti. If the fact be true, it furnishes an impressive comment upon the state of the modern, as well as of the ancient city, at that period. In the year 1777 a new excavation was made; but the chief merit of clearing away the rubbish which concealed the chambers is due to the French, who carried on the work with great spirit during their occupation of Rome. The building seems to have originally consisted of two stories: of the upper one but little remains: of the lower there are more than thirty rooms perfectly accessible. -“We passed,” says the author of Rome in the Nineteenth Century, describing a visit to the Baths,-" the mouths of nine long corridors, converging together like the radii of the segment of a circle, divided from each other by dead walls, covered at the top and closed at the end. They must always have been dark. They are supposed to have been entrances to the baths, and they are supposed to have served for substructions to the theatre above, which is supposed to have formed a part of the upper story, of which not a trace remains; and the whole of these suppositions have their source in the inslammable imaginations of Roman antiquaries. Nothing is certain about them, excepting that they are not worth looking at. In one of them are piled up pieces of broken amphorae, marbles of various kinds, and other heterogeneous fragments found in the excavations by the French, among which are some pots of colours. They were analyzed, but nothing new discovered. “Having passed these corridors, we entered the portal of what is called the House of Mecacnas. It is known that the house and gardens of Mecacnas stood in this part of the Esquiline Hill, which, before it was given him by Augustus, was the charnel-ground of the common people. The conflagration in Nero's reign did not reach to them ; and it is believed, that a part of them was taken by Nero into his buildings, and by Titus into his baths. Antiquaries think they can trace a difference in the brick-work and style of building, between what they consider as the erection of Augustus's and that of Titus's age; and on these grounds, the parts they point out as vestiges of the House of Mecanas are, the entrance, which leads into a range of square and roofless chambers, (called, on supposition, the Public Baths,) and the wall on the right in passing through them, which is partially formed of reticulated building in patches. From these real or imaginary classic remains, we entered a damp and dark corridor, the ceiling of which is still adorned with some of the most beautiful specimens that now remain of the paintings of antiquity. Their colouring is fast fading away, and their very outline, I should fear, must be obliterated at no very distant period; so extreme is the humidity of the place, and so incessantly does the water-drop fall". By the light of a few trembling tapers elevated on the top of a long bending cane, we saw at least twenty feet above our heads, paintings in arabesque, executed with a grace, a freedom, a correctness of design, and a masterly command of pencil, that awakened our highest admiration, in spite of all the disadvantages under which they were viewed. . . . . Leaving the painted corridor, which is adorned with these beautiful specimens of ancient art, we entered halls, which, like it, must always have been dark, but are still magnificent. The bright colouring of the crimson stucco, the alcove still adorned with gilding, and the ceilings beautifully painted with fantastic designs, still remain in many parts of them; but how chill, how damp, how desolate are now these gloomy halls of imperial luxury | No sound is to be heard through them, but that of the slow water-drop. In one of these splendid dungeons, we saw the remains of a bath supposed to have been for the private use of the emperor. In another we were shown the crimson-painted alcove where the Laocoon was found in the reign of Leo the Tenth. The French, who cleared out a great many of these chambers, found nothing but the Pluto and Cerberus, now in the Capitol, a work of very indifferent sculpture.” The height of the rooms in the Baths of Titus is very great, or as Dr. Burton expressed it, prodigious; and they are comparatively very narrow. Mr. Williams assigns them
* Dr. Burton's account is, on this head, very different. He says that, “Notwithstanding the depth of soil which has accumulated on the top of the building, and which serves for gardens, there are paintings on the ceiling which may be called extremely perfect. The damp seems to have had little or no effect upon them, which is probably owing to the excellence of the Roman brickwork.”
a height of thirty feet, which must, of course, make them appear still narrower than they are. Many of them are without any trace of windows, as is the case with the most perfect remains of chambers in the Baths of Caracalla. As the ancients were acquainted with the use of glass even for windows, it is presumed that the object of omitting windows here was to render the rooms as cool as possible by excluding the external air.
“In such rooms as these,” says Dr. Burton, “in the Baths of Titus, lamps must always have been used; and it may be observed, that there is scarcely a passage in an ancient author, where mention is made of a banquet, but ‘the golden lamps, hanging from the roofs, are always added. According to the hours which the ancients observed for their meals, (the carna, or last meal, being at about three o'clock,) there would have been no need of lights had there been windows to the rooms; which affords another proof that they were frequently constructed without them. Indeed, Grecian architecture seems to derive a peculiar character from the absence of such apertures; if any objection is to be made to the chaste and simple models which ancient Greece has left us, it is that there is a heaviness and a want of relief in the vast masses of solid masonry. The modern Italian architects have gone into the contrary extreme; their aim seems to have been to break every portion of the building into as many parts as possible; and in the pediments of their windows they have been particularly profuse of ornament. The difference is probably to be traced to the fact of the ancients having had few windows in their buildings, and the moderns having many. In such structures as the Palace of Titus, where many ornaments, both in painting and sculpture, were assembled, it might be thought that much of the effect would be lost by their being never seen except by the light of lamps. With respect to sculpture, however, it is well known that there is no greater test of the excellence of the work, than to view it by torchlight; the rising of the muscles, and all those delicate touches of the chisel, which are scarcely observed on the smooth surface of the white marble, are thrown into a much stronger light and shade in this manner. It is not uncommon for parties to visit the Vatican at night, and view the statues by torch-light. The effect is certainly very good; and some pretend to discover that the modern productions appear greatly inferior to the ancient on such occasions. We know that there were formerly some of the finest specimens of sculpture in the Baths of Titus, and the paintings on the walls still remain.”
These paintings on the walls consist chiefly of what we now call arabesques; the figures are all very small, and arranged in patterns and borders. They consist of birds, beasts, &c., among which some green parrots may be seen very distinctly; the ground is generally a rich dark red. At the end of one of the rooms is a large painting of some building, in which the perspective is said to be correctly given; this seems to disprove the charge which has been brought against the ancient painters of not understanding the rules of perspective. None of these paintings can, however, be justly regarded as specimens of ancient art; they were intended solely as decorations to the apartments, and were doubtless the work of ordinary house-painters. To judge of the proficiency of the ancient painters from such remains as these, would be as unfair, to use Dr. Burton's remark, as to estimate the state of the arts in England from the sign-posts. Where the walls of the rooms are bare, the brickwork has a most singular appearance of freshness; the stucco also is very perfect in many parts; but the marble, of which there are evident traces on the walls and floors, is gone.
TIIE SEVEN HALLS OF WESPASIAN.
IN one of the gardens forming a portion of the large tract of ground over which the ruins of the Baths of Titus are spread, is a building supposed to have been connected with these baths, and commonly called the Sette Sale di Vespasiano,-" the Seven Halls of Vespasian,”—though for what reason it would be dislicult even to conjecture. The name was given to it when only seven halls had been opened; there are nine now, and as they form an upper story, it is supposed that there are nine others below them in the lower story which is buried. These halls communicate with each other by means of arches in the partition walls; and the arches are not placed opposite to one another so as to afford a straight view through the whole building in the direction of its length, but are so arranged as to afford a diagonal view through it. The general figure of the building is that of an oblong, which has a curve in the place of one of the longer sides. The partition walls run from this curve across the breadth of the figure. The longest of them has a length of 137 feet; the width of all is the same—174 feet. There is no doubt that this building was an immense reservoir. The walls are coated with a very hard plaster, on which are seen three distinct deposits, one above the other, formed by a sediment from the water. These deposits are now so extremely hard that it is difficult to separate a small portion from the wall. Dr. Burton accounts for the three distinct coatings in a very ingenious manner. “Of the five great aqueducts which brought water into Rome, the Aqua Julia supplied the Esquiline and Palatine Hills. Consequently the Baths of Titus were fed from this stream, and the Sette Sale may have formed the reservoir. Now it is known that the Aqua Julia was a union of three streams: the Aqua Martia brought to Rome, U.C. (in the year of the city,) 608 or 640, by Q. Martius Rex; the Aqua Tepula, which was brought U.C. 627; and the Aqua Julia, properly so called, which was introduced U. C. 721, by M. Agrippa. Each stream originally entered the city by itself; but, as the others were brought, they were successively turned into the same aqueduct, and came on one course of arches into Rome. Now it seems not improbable, that the Aqua Martia or Tepula, (whichever was the earliest,) formed the first deposit. It would seem also by another stream being brought in, that the first must have proved deficient; or while the second work was going on, the water might have been withdrawn, and thus we have the first deposit. Then, when the two streams were let in, another deposit began to be formed, which would not incorporate with the first, but lie over it. Lastly, when the Aqua Julia was being introduced, (after an interval of nearly a century,) the same temporary withdrawing of the water might have taken place, and thus the second deposit would have hardened. After this, the third was formed by the three streams united. To allow this, we must assume that the Sette Sale were not bufilt as a reservoir for the Baths of Titus, but long antecedent, which is not at all contrary to the appearance of the building. It is, indeed, natural to suppose, that when Agrippa brought the aqueduct to the Esquiline Hill, there was a reservoir constructed for it. It seems to have been the custom with most of the aqueducts. The remains of a reservoir for the Claudian Aqueduct, are still to be seen, near the temple of Minerva Medica; and what is called the Castello dell Acqua Giulia, is always allowed to have been a reservoir, though it is disputed for what water. The Piscina Mirabile, near Baiao, and the Labyrinth near Pozzuoli, are also instances of this custom prevailing.” nongoing in page 80 exhibits a view in the “Seven allS.
“I Do not know anything more striking,” says Simond, “than these endless arches of Roman aqueducts, pursuing with great strides their irregular course over the desert:they suggest the idea of immensity, of durability, of simplicity, of boundless power, reckless of cost and labour, all for a useful purpose and regardless of beauty. A river in mid-air, which had been flowing on ceaselessly for fifteen, for eighteen hundred, or two thousand years, poured its cataracts into the streets and public squares of Rome when she was mistress, and also when she was the slave of nations; and quenched the thirst of Attila and of Genseric as it had before quenched that of Brutus and Caesar, and as it has since quenched that of beggars and of popes. During those ages of desolation and darkness, when Rome had almost ceased to be a city, this artificial river ran to waste among the ruins, but now fills again the numerous and magnificent fountains of the modern city. Only three out cf eleven of these ancient aqueducts remain entire, and in a state to conduct water;—what then must have been the profusion of the supply in ancient Rome !” The term aqueduct, or more correctly aquaeduct, composed of two Latin words, signifies in its literal and more extended sense, a duct, or conduit of water; and in this sense the pipes which carry the water under our streets are aqueducts. But the application of the word has been restricted by usage to a peculiar kind of conduits, those raised partly, if not entirely, above the surface of the ground, for the purpose of conveying water in a slightly descending stream over valleys and plains, from one comparatively high
point, to another. These aqueducts were very extensively
used by the Romans, not only at Rome itself but at many
of their great cities in the three divisions of the globe with which they were acquainted. “The boldness of the enterprise, the solidity of the execution, and the uses to which they were subservient, rank the aqueducts among the noblest monuments of Roman genius and power. The aqueducts of the capital claim a just pre-eminence; but . curious traveller, who, without the light of history, should examine those of Spoleto, of Metz, or of Segovia, would very naturally conclude, that those provincial towns had formerly been the residence of some potent monarch. The solitudes of Asia and Africa were once covered with flourishing cities, whose populousness, and even whose existence, was derived from such artificial supplies of a perennial stream of fresh water.” Both within and without the walls of Rome, fragments of aqueducts may still be seen. The first was constructed in the year 441 of Rome, when Appius Claudius the Censor brought a stream from a distance of seven miles, which was called from him, Aqua Appia. We have a detailed account of the state of the aqueducts of Rome in the reign of Nerva, written by Frontinus his engineer. He tells us that nine different “waters” came into Rome then. A writer of the age of Diocletian makes the number nineteen, and another of the sixth century reduces it to fourteen. The Gothic chieftain Vitiges broke down parts of them without the walls, in order to deprive the city of water when he besieged it. Of the fragments yet remaining, “ some,” says Mr. Woods, “are of stone, others of brickwork, but the former cannot be traced for any continuance; and while two or three are sometimes supported on one range of arches, in other places almost every one seems to have a range to itself. It is curious to trace these repairs, executed perhaps fifteen centuries ago; the execution of the brickwork, in most instances, or, perhaps, in all, shows them to be decidedly prior to the age of Constantine, and the principal restorations, in all probability, took place when the upper water-courses were added. They generally consist of brick arches, built within the ancient stone ones, sometimes resting on the old piers, but more often carried down to the ground, and in some cases the whole arch has been filled up, or only a mere doorway left at the bottom. Sometimes this internal work has been wholly or partially destroyed; and sometimes the original stone-work has disappeared as the owner of the ground happened to want bricks or squared stones. In one place the ancient piers have been entirely buried in the more recent brick-work; but the brick-work i. been broken, and the original stone-work taken away, presenting a very singular, and at first sight, wholly unaccountable, appearance ; in other parts, the whole has fallen apparently without having had these brick additions, for a range of parallel mounds mark the situation of the prostrate piers.” Three of the aqueducts of ancient Rome have been repaired and restored so as to afford the modern city an abundant supply of water. These are, first, the Aqua Wirgo, which was formed by Agrippa, (the minister of Augustus,) and which entered Rome on the north, at the Porta Pinciana, after a course of twelve miles, subterraneous for about eleven, and on arches above ground for the remaining one mile; second, the Aqua Alsietina, called also Sabatina, Augusta, and Trajana, which was brought by Augustus from the Lake Sabatinus (now Bracciano) on the west of Rome, and which entered the city at the Porta Janiculensis, (now Porta S. Pancrazio) after a course, nearly all subterraneous, of twenty-two miles; and third, the Aqua Claudia, which was begun by Caligula and finished by Claudius, being brought from the mountains near Subiaco, on the south-east of Rome, and entering the city at the Porta Prenestina, (now P. Maggiore,) after a course of forty-six miles, for more than ten of which it was raised upon arches". The Aqua Virgo was restored by Pope Nicholas the Fifth; it now supplies the Fountain of Trevi, and is called Acqua Vergine. The Aqua Alsietina was restored by
* For the last 6) miles of its course the arches of this aqueduct were continuous, and supported the channel of the Anio Novus, besides that of the Aqua Claudia, both of which streams come from the country near Subiaco. The Anio Novus had a course of more than sixty miles; for the first twelve miles it was carried on arches; it then went under ground, and emerging, when it came within six miles and a half of Rome, was carried to the city on the same range of arches as supported the Aqua Claudia, but in a channel above that. At the Porta Maggiore the two channels of this aqueduct inay
Paul the Fifth in 1610, and is now called Acqua Paola; it supplies the fountains of St. Peter's. The Aqua Claudia was partially restored in 1587 by Sixtus the Fifth, from whose conventual name of Fra Felice (or Brother Felix) it is now called the Acqua Felice; it supplies the fountain of Termini. Of the oldest aqueduct of ancient Rome, the Aqua Appia, only a mi portion close to the city was raised upon arches; and of these arches no remains exist. The Aqua Martia (which we have already mentioned in describing the “Seven Halls of Vespasian,”) had a course of sixty miles, for the last seven of which it was raised upon arches; and of these arches considerable remains exist. Near the gate of S. Lorenzo may be seen a fragment of this aqueduct with its three water-courses; and at some distance from the walls, the line of arches may be traced for nearly two miles. “Some,” says Forsyth, “have proposed the restitution of this aqueduct: ‘but Rome,' say the Romans, “has more water than it wants.”—“Give it then to the Campagna.’—‘The Campagna has no inhabitants to drink water.'—“And why has it no inhabitants 2 but for want of good water as well as good air.'" Again, he asks, “Why do these aqueducts cross the Campagna in courses so unnecessarily uneven, long, and indirect? Several motives have been alleged, all of which may have influenced the ancients; but their chief motive, in my opinion, was to distribute part of their water to the Campagna itself, and to diffuse it there like the veins in a vine-leaf. Besides this general circuit, the Romans bent their aqueducts, into frequent angles like a screen; not so much to break the force of their currents as to give stability to the arcades.” The constant use of aqueducts by the Romans has been cited as a proof that they were ignorant of the principle in hydrostatics, that water will always rise to the level of its source; and their patient industry has been ridiculed, in taking so much trouble to convey upon arches of brick or stone, what might have been brought in pipes underground. “How far,” says Dr. Burton, “or how long, the Romans were really ignorant of this principle, I cannot pretend to say; perhaps, when they first erected arches for this purpose, they were not aware that the labour might have been saved; but it is difficult to deny that many Roman aqueducts were constructed in this manner after the principle was known. The Meta Sudans, a fragment of which still exists near the Coliseum, is said to have been a fountain; and it is evident that the water which supplied it was not raised by mere mechanical means. Pliny mentions one hundred and five fountains (salientes) in Rome; and, from the Latin term for a fountain, it appears certain that they resembled those of modern times, and that the water was thrown up merely by its own pressure. But another passage of Pliny is more decisive, and ought to set the question at rest as to the science of his days; he says, “The water, which is wanted to rise to any height, should come out of lead. It rises to the height of its source. In another place he observes, “ the ancients carried their streams in a lower course, either because they were not yet acquainted with the exact principle of keeping a level, or because they purposely sunk them underground, that they might not easily be interrupted by the enemy.' " Although it is thus evident that the hydrostatical principle was not wholly unknown to the Romans, still it is doubted whether they so far understood it as to believe aqueducts unnecessary, and, consequently, whether they constructed their aqueducts rather from reasons of policy than from ignorance. The aqueducts of ancient Rome discharged their streams into reservoirs, called castella, from which the water was distributed throughout the different districts of the city in leaden pipes. The remains of some of these castella, or at least ruins which the antiquaries take to be such, are still to be seen.
THE FORUM OF TRAJAN.
THE Forum of Trajan is often spoken of as having been the most wonderful of all the wonders of Ancient Rome, It was the work of the celebrated architect Apollodorous, of whom Mr. Woods says, that “ every morsel which we see of his works, makes us regret that we do not see more of them.” . It occupied the space between the Capitoline and Quirinal Hills; and within its circuit were a palace, a gymnasium, a library, triumphal arch, porticoes, &c., many of which were ornamented with equestrian statues and military ensigns gilt—some of them spoils of the Dacian
wars. Its principal ornament was the magnificent pillar or column which still remains erect and nearly perfect; but another very famous one was an equestrian statue of Trajan in gilt bronze. Its whole length is supposed to have been about 1150 feet, and its general width 470 feet. Alon the sides were rows of columns; at one extremity st the temple of Trajan, and on the opposite one, a triumphal arch. About the centre stood the large and splendid “Ulpian Basilica." The whole of its area—even that part exposed to the open air—was paved with marble. This Forum served, amongst other purposes, to use the language of Sir J. Hobhouse, to perpetuate the memory of the good and great—or of such as in the declining ages could pretend to that distinction. We know that Marcus Aurelius erected statues in this Forum to all those who fell in the German war, and that Alexander Severus transferred thither those of other celebrated personages from other sites. “The same place was devoted to the labours of artists and literary heroes; here the poets and others recited their compositions, perhaps in the Ulpian library; and here their images were allowed a place amongst conquerors and monarchs. The sight of this Forum would furnish a singular supplement to ancient history, and rescue from oblivion many who were as much the delight and admiration of their contemporaries, as Cicero and Virgil." Ammianus Marcellinus tells us, that when the Emperor Constans entered Rome, A.D. 356, “and came to the Forum of Trajan, a structure which I conceive to be unique in the world, and deserving the admiration even of celestial beings, he was struck with astonishment, casting his thoughts over its gigantic edifices which it is impossible to describe, or for any mortals to imitate. Giving up, therefore, all hopes of attempting anything similar, he said that the only thing which he would or could imitate, was the horse on which the emperor sat. Upon which Hormisdas, of the royal family of Persia, who was near him, said, “First order a stable to be built similar to this if you have the means: may the horse which you purpose forming, be as successful as that which we are looking at.'” At what period the destruction of this beautiful Forum took place, we are not informed; this, however, we learn, that it was not occasioned by either Alaric or Genseric; for Cassiodorus, who wrote about the year 500, says, when speaking of the most remarkable objects to be seen in the city, that “The Forum of Trajan is a perfect miracle, if we inspect it even with the utmost minuteness.” Pausanias mentions among its richest ornaments two statues, one of Nicomedes, king of Bithynia, in ivory, and another of Augustus, executed in natural electrum, a substance apparently of a metallic nature, found, although rarely, on the banks of the Po. At an early period, however, in the destruction of Rome, the Forum of Trajan—the noblest structure as it is called in the ancient city—had partaken of the general desolation; and “we may fairly pronounce that long previously to the twelfth century, the base of the Quirinai had begun to assume its ancient form, ere it had been cleared by the subjects of Trajan.” In 1480, this Forum was completely choked up by 200 houses, three towers, and three churches. Paul the Third opened the base of the column, and in the time of Flaminius Vacca, an arch was dug from under ground, perhaps in the pontificate of the same pope, and the flooring of the Forum was discovered, but immediately shut up again. “The late excavation enables us at last to tread the floor of ancient Rome. . The replacing the fragments of the columns on their bases, and the judicious arrangement of the other marbles, has created an effect little inferior to the wonders of Pompeii. The stranger must be much struck with the massive Greek dimensions of the fragments when compared with the space in which so many buildings were raised. Here we have a Forum with its porticoes, and statues, and tribunals; a basilica with a double internal portico on every side; a quadrangular court or atrium also adorned with enormous columns; two libraries, a triumphal arch, the great column, and the portion of a temple, crowded into a space not so considerable as one of our smallest London squares." The site of the Forum of Trajan is fortunately identified by the magnificent pillar still erect; and recent excavations have led to some interesting discoveries. “Marble pave. ment in its original situation, steps, foundations of walls, numerous fragments of granite columns, and four of the Corinthian bases belonging to them, remain in their places; and these, with the help of several pieces of travertine also unmoved, and evidently intended to receive similar bases, have enabled the directors to put the fragments in proper