Navigation – Plan du site
Varia

The small temples in the forum of Pollentia (Mallorca, Balearic Islands)

Bartomeu Vallori Márquez, Miguel Ángel Cau Ontiveros et Margarita Orfila Pons

Résumés

Après la conquête romaine des Îles Baléares en 123 av. J.-C., les cités de Palma et Pollentia furent respectivement fondées au sud-ouest et nord-est de l’île de Majorque. Les structures les plus anciennes documentées archéologiquement à Pollentia datent du 70/60 av. J.-C. La cité a eu son développement maximal entre le Ier siècle av. J.-C. et le IIIe siècle ap. J.-C., et a atteint une superficie de 30 hectares. Les fouilles archéologiques ont mis à jour les restes du forum avec un temple toscan, une insula de tabernae et des petits temples et monuments, des quartiers résidentiels, un théâtre et des nécropoles. À la fin du IIIe siècle ap. J.-C. (270/280 ap. J.-C.), un incendie a détruit une grande part de la cité. Après cet épisode, Pollentia a encore été occupée, mais beaucoup de zones n’ont jamais été réhabitées et l’activité de construction a décru. L’objectif de cet article est d’analyser les restes de deux petits temples de la zone nord du forum, qui ont été découverts dans les années 80. Une première approche de l’architecture de ces temples et des monuments mineurs qui leurs sont proches consistera en une vision détaillée de leurs caractéristiques formelles, techniques de construction, décorations et autres restes. Les édifices seront contextualisés dans la Méditerranée occidentale à travers leur comparaison avec des édifices similaires d’Espagne et d’Italie. Nous proposerons également des reconstructions comme un résultat de la recherche, mais aussi comme un moyen en soi pour étudier les élévations que pouvaient avoir ces constructions. Pour finir, nous présenterons des réflexions sur les fonctions de chaque élément, et nous soumettrons une nouvelle interprétation de la zone des petits temples comme zone transitionnelle, affectant ainsi le dessin urbain et la topographie de la cité.

Haut de page

Notes de l’auteur

We would like to thank Georgina Pinder for the English correction, Marc Mayer for letting us read a forthcoming paper, Francesc Tuset for his observations on architecture and Catalina Mas Florit for the maps in figure 1. The 3D models shown in figures 6 and 9 were partially built thanks to a research stage of B. Vallori in the Computing Archaeology Research Group of the University of Southampton; we especially thank Professor Graeme Earl for his support, and Costas Papadopoulos for his advice. The work of Bartomeu Vallori was possible thanks to the Comissionat per a Universitats i Recerca del Departament d’Innovació, Universitats i Empresa (DIUE) de la Generalitat de Catalunya (Commision for Universities and Research of the Department for Innovation, Universities and Business of the Catalan Government) and the European Social Fund. This paper has been written as part of the work of the Archaeological and Archaeometric Research Group of the University of Barcelona (ERAAUB) (2014 SGR 845), thanks to the Comissionat per a Universitats i Recerca del DIUE de la Generalitat de Catalunya. It is also part of the Roman city of Pollentia excavation project, lead by M.Á. Cau (ICREA/Universitat de Barcelona) and M.ª Esther Chávez (Universidad de La Laguna), with finantial support from the Consorci de la ciutat romana de Pol·lèntia. It contribute also to the Plan Nacional de I+D+I, Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación, HAR2009-11824, and the Archaeology of the classical period and Late Antiquity in Eastern Andalusia research group (HUM296). Finally, we are also grateful to the anonymous referees that have certainly helped to improve the final version of this paper.

Texte intégral

  • 1 Morgan 1969 ; Zucca 1998, p. 91-96, 135-139 and Puig Palerm 2005.

1The Balearic Islands (Mallorca and Menorca) (fig. 1) were conquered by Rome in 123 BC. This military action, led by the consul Quintus Caecilius Metellus, was a response to pirate raids in the area (Strab. 3.5.1; Flor. 1.43; Oros. 5.13.1), and it brought the archipelago into the Roman political structure1.

  • 2 Coll – Mazaira – Riutort 1984, p. 126-127 ; Orfila – Arribas 1997, p. 63 ; Orfila - Arribas 2000, (...)
  • 3 López Mullor – Estarellas – Merino 2008, p. 135-136.
  • 4 Mattingly 1983, p. 145 ; Sanmartí et al. 1996, p. 67-68 ; Orfila 2005, p. 132, 133-134, 135, 137 ; (...)

2The founding of the cities (fig. 1) of Palma (probably modern Palma, on the south-western bay of Mallorca), and Pollentia (beside modern Alcúdia), between two bays in the NE (Strab. 3.5.1) was a direct consequence of the conquest. Previous studies have suggested that these cities had coastal control purposes2. The oldest Roman structures found at these sites date back to 50/40 BC in Palma3 and to 70/60 BC in Pollentia4.

Fig. 1 - Map of the island of Mallorca and the two Roman cities of Palma and Pollentia.

Fig. 1 - Map of the island of Mallorca and the two Roman cities of Palma and Pollentia.

3In Pollentia, from the first century BC onwards, the forum square (fig. 2) was defined by the great Tuscan temple (or Capitolium) on the N side, and the Insula 1 of tabernæ with a front portico to the W. The eastern and southern areas remain unknown as they have not been excavated. Some observations will be made in this text concerning the configuration of this main forum square.

Fig. 2 - Plan of the forum area of Pollentia.

Fig. 2 - Plan of the forum area of Pollentia.

Fig. 3 - Plan of the area of the small Temples, or Transitional area.

Fig. 3 - Plan of the area of the small Temples, or Transitional area.
  • 5 Arribas – Tarradell 1987, p. 127 ; Equip Pollentia 1994, p. 217 ; Orfila – Arribas – Cau 1999, p. (...)

4Two small temple-like buildings (Temple I and Temple II) were raised in the early Empire5, to preside over the area immediately to the E of the Tuscan temple. Some other features, such as pedestals, bases, a portico and remains of mortar, that belong to a series of small monuments, were gathered together in this confined area, which suggests that it was an area of civic and religious importance. All these elements and their surrounding area will be analysed here.

Previous work

  • 6 Equip Pollentia 1994, p. 127, commented in Orfila – Arribas – Cau 1999, p. 110-111 and Orfila – Ar (...)

5The area of temples I and II was discovered in the early 1980s. Temple I was first excavated between 1982 and 1988. The building had been extensively plundered, and the remains of its podium were preserved to a maximum height of 0.92 m. While the rear (N) and W façades had almost disappeared, the lower moulding and parts from the dado of the podium were found in the S and E sides. The construction of the building was then dated to the first century AD6.

  • 7 Arribas – Tarradell 1987, p. 127 and 131, and Sanz 1990, p. 33 = HEp 1990, 62.

6Two notable elements were found near the temple. The first was discovered in front of the building : an incomplete monumental dedicatory inscription (54 x 127 cm) mentioning two Imperial charges7 :

[---]Aug(usti) leg(atus) pro pr(aetore) f(aciendum) c(urauit)
[---]ro leg(ato) dedicauit

  • 8 Sanz 1990, p. 33 = HEp 1990, 62.
  • 9 García Riaza – Sánchez León 2000, p. 90-91 and Cau – Chávez 2003, p. 34.
  • 10 Equip Pollentia 1994, p. 217 and Orfila – Arribas – Cau 1999, p. 110.
  • 11 Arribas – Tarradell 1987, p. 127.
  • 12 Vallori – Cau – Orfila 2015, p. 303.

7A Flavian (AD 69-96) or later chronology of the inscription has been proposed8 that is not compatible with the provided chronology of Temple I9, which seems to have already been in disrepair by the end of the first century AD10. The second element found was a pediment crowning lenght made of sandstone11. It was interpreted as the crowning of Temple I, but due to its large dimensions – 0.55 m tall – we believe that it rather belonged to the Tuscan temple12.

  • 13 Arribas – Tarradell 1987, p. 131.
  • 14 Zucca 1998, p. 199 ; Orfila 2004, p. 172 and Orfila – Chávez – Cau 2008, p. 326.
  • 15 Moreno Pérez 2007, p. 92-93.
  • 16 Zucca 1998 and Mayer 2005.

8The building was initially interpreted as a small temple in antis13. A hypothesis regarding its dedication arose following this interpretation. The inscription naming Imperial charges, and the dating in the early Imperial period, would suggest that the temple was dedicated to the Imperial cult14. Moreover, some remains of Imperial sculptures15 and other inscriptions suggest that the Imperial cult did certainly exist in Pollentia16.

  • 17 Parment 1995, p. 33-34 and Doenges 2005, p. 17.
  • 18 Pozo 1989, p. 78-82 and Rodà 2006.
  • 19 Merino 1999, p. 45-46.
  • 20 Vallori – Orfila – Cau 2011, p. 291-292.

9An alternative interpretation of the building was provided by the American team working on the site17. They proposed that it was a base for an equestrian sculpture that had been found in old excavations. The sculpture18 was found in 192319 in an area as far as 130 m S of this building20, and it is unlikely that it had any relation with this structure. On the other hand, the features of the building and the parallels found in Hispania and Italy tip the balance in favour of the temple hypothesis, as we will see later on in the text.

  • 21 Arribas – Tarradell 1987, p. 127-129.

10Temple II was excavated between 1982 and 199121. As in the case of Temple I, the remains had been plundered and were also altered by several tombs. Only the base and lower moulding are preserved, with a transversal (N-S) wall dividing it into two square spaces.

  • 22 Doenges 2005, p. 17.
  • 23 Orfila 2000.
  • 24 Cau – Chávez 2003, p. 34 ; Orfila 2004, p. 173 and Orfila – Chávez – Cau 2006, p. 137.

11The chronology of Temple II has always been problematic as only part of the foundation trenches have been excavated, and no dating materials appeared. In an initial phase of research, it seemed to be clear that the temple was built after Augustus22, dating to the first century AD23, but a date of the third century AD has also been suggested24.

  • 25 Equip Pollentia 1994, p. 127 ; Orfila – Arribas 1997, p. 64 and Orfila – Arribas – Cau 1999, p. 11 (...)
  • 26 Cau – Chávez 2003, p. 35 ; Orfila 2004, p. 173 and Orfila – Chávez – Cau 2006, p. 137.

12The elevation proposal of this building has normally been as a tetrastyle or distyle temple in antis with a 1 m pronaos and a 3 m cella25. An interpretation as a nymphaeum has been suggested due to the presence of the stone channel and a hypothetical relationship of the building with water26. All these issues will be discussed later on in this paper.

The Temple I

  • 27 Subías 1994, p. 222-223 and Orfila – Moranta 2001, p. 216-217.
  • 28 Orfila – Moranta 2001 and Orfila 2009.

13The remains of Temple I consist of the lower remains of a podium (fig. 4), with a maximum height of 0.92 m preserved. The podium measures 19 x 25 Roman feet (5.62 x 7.37 m), which approaches a proportion of 3:4. A plan of the building based on a Pythagorean triangle 3:4:5 can be proposed, as it has also been proposed for the Tuscan temple27 and for other buildings in the city28.

Fig. 4 - Photo of Temple I and its S features (view from S).

Fig. 4 - Photo of Temple I and its S features (view from S).

Dating

  • 29 Rivas et al. unpublished-c.
  • 30 Rivas et al. unpublished-c.
  • 31 Orfila 2000, p. 144.

14There are certain features that enable us to date the construction of Temple I. A layer covering its eastern foundation trench contained amphorae fragments (Pascual I), dated between 40 BC and AD 6029. In addition, a pavement to the S was built jointly with Temple I, to unify the monuments in the area. It has been dated between the end of the first century BC and AD 60 (African cooking ware Ostia II and an amphora Pascual I)30. The dating for the construction at the beginning of the first century AD that was previously proposed31 seems feasible in the light of this new evidence.

Architectural features

Podium

15The infill of the podium is a combination of square blocks and opus caementicium, made with mortar and small pieces of sandstone. It constitutes a strong base that indicates the presence of a corresponding upper structure. As we will see shortly, the parallels for this building correspond to podia with upper structures, identified as temples.

  • 32 La Regina 1976, p. 237-238 and Asensio 2003, p. 107-108.

16We have enough elements to deduce the total height of the podium when it was first built. The bottom of the podium is a row of rusticated ashlars, still buried in the foundation trenches up to half their height. On this row lays a moulding in cyma reversa (fig. 5.3 and 5.5) upon which part of the dado still stands. This composition can be found in the sanctuary of San Giovanni in Galdo (Samnium, Italy)32, where the lower and upper mouldings were of the same height, and the dado between them was as tall as both. If we follow this example as a guide, therefore, with a one Roman foot tall (0.30 m) bottom moulding, we can propose a total height of the podium of 1.20 m.

Mouldings

  • 33 Shoe Meritt 1965 and Shoe Meritt – Edlund-Berry 2000.
  • 34 Shoe Meritt 1965, p. 32-33.
  • 35 Shoe Meritt 1965, p. 185 ; Jiménez 1975, p. 289-290 ; Gros 1996, p. 134-135 and Asensio 2003, p. 1 (...)

17The lower moulding (fig. 5.3 and 5.5) is, as seen before, a cyma reversa, a type related to the Tuscan torus. It was widely used in the mid and late Republican periods in the entire Italian peninsula, but also in the rest of the Roman area of influence33. In the second and first centuries BC, the cyma reversa coexisted with the more Greek cyma recta34 which finally replaced it in the mid first century BC in Italy35. The cyma reversa was still in use until the Augustan era in the West, particularly in Hispania, Africa and Gallia, the last examples being found in Hispania.

Fig. 5 - Sections of the mouldings mentioned in the text. 1 and 2) Temple II; 3 and 5) Temple I; 4) Ædicula.

Fig. 5 - Sections of the mouldings mentioned in the text. 1 and 2) Temple II; 3 and 5) Temple I; 4) Ædicula.
  • 36 Jiménez 1975, p. 289-290 and Gutiérrez Behemerid 1991, p. 97. The most remarkable examples come fr (...)
  • 37 Shoe Meritt 1966.
  • 38 Bonneville et al. 2000, p. 214.
  • 39 Sillières 1994-1995, p. 296-298.
  • 40 Gros 2006, p. 87-88, 90-91.
  • 41 Some cabled fluted column drums and attic bases that have been found in the building E of the foru (...)

18Considering the chronologies in the western and central Mediterranean, the cyma reversa was relatively common in Hispania even during the early Empire36, as the examples of Barcino, Emerita,and the present Temple I show, but it was already an old fashioned feature in that period. The use of archaic mouldings has been proposed as a way to bestow embellishment and prestige on buildings in other places such as Athens in the fourth century BC37. In the case of Baelo Claudia, a similar problem has been found, with examples built in the second half of the first century AD, with an architetural style datable to the period of Augustus38. A reuse of previous materials and architectural decoration after an earthquake in the mid first century AD has been proposed39. However, more recently, it has been argued that the local elite chose a workshop with a solid tradition and non influenced by new fashions for the rebuilding of the city40. A similar attitude on the part of the elite pollentina would be suitable both in this particular case and in general terms, as very few cases of architectural orders other than Tuscan have been found in the entire city so far41.

Stairs

  • 42 La Regina 1976, p. 237-241 and Zaccardi 2005.
  • 43 La Regina 1976, p. 238.

19The front façade of the podium is defined by the cyma reversa moulding. It is preserved for 3.5 m, including the central part, and it would have originally run across its entire width. Therefore, this building did not have front stairs, as they are incompatible with the existence of this moulding. The lack of access to a podium is not very common, but we can find some examples, such as the sanctuary of San Giovanni in Galdo (Samnium), built between 104 and 91 BC42 where wooden temporary steps would have been necessary to reach it. This lack of a permanent access facilitates its interpretation as a thesauros where valuable objects were stored43.

Lesenes

20Another feature of the front façade is a lesene on its right side. It is a projection of the moulding 10 cm to the front, 1 m wide. This feature is normally a complement for upper structures, especially columns. The lesene probably had a symmetrical twin on the left side of the façade, although that side has been completely plundered; together they would have enhanced a front colonnade standing on the podium, close to its front edge.

Elevation

  • 44 It is possible that some materials from this building were reused in the late Antique fortificatio (...)
  • 45 Vitruvius 1931, Vitruve 1992 and Vitruvius 1999.

21Any proposal for the upstanding architecture of this building is risky. Leaving aside the inscription already mentioned, not a single architectural element of the elevation has been preserved or identified, at least until now44. We will use the remains of the podium already analysed, together with some parallels from the western Mediterranean and Vitruvius work De architectura45, to make a proposal for the elevation as a tetrastyle in antis temple.

22The massive structure of the podium itself indicates an upstanding structure; any other use would make this effort on its foundations completely unnecessary.

23Another feature that indicates an upper structure is the lesene in the front already mentioned, which presumably had a symmetrical one to the left. Two columns or semicolumns attached to antae would stand above these lesenes. The distance between the corner columns, more than 5 m, would be too long for a single architrave supporting an entablature and pediment, and two more columns were needed to support it. As no elements from these columns have been identified, we need to turn to the Vitruvian rules to get an idea of their proportions. To do so, we will use the Tuscan-Doric style, as it is the best documented order in the city, and Temple I has archaic elements that fit with it, as we have seen with mouldings.

24Following Vitruvius as a guideline for the Doric style (De arch. 4.3), the module of the building is 1/27 the width of the temple. The resulting height for Temple I (fig. 6) is 3.9 m (5.1 m adding the podium height calculated). The external shape (fig. 6) would be similar to other examples that we can find across the western Mediterranean.

Fig. 6 - 3D model of the Transitional area with Temples I and II (view from S).

Fig. 6 - 3D model of the Transitional area with Temples I and II (view from S).

Fig. 7 - Comparison between different small temples.

Fig. 7 - Comparison between different small temples.
  • 46 Puig i Cadafalch – Brugués i Escudér 1892, p. 23 and Cancela 1982, p. 174-175.

25Regarding architectural remains, the best preserved parallel for this type of building is the Mausoleum of Fabara (second century AD) (Zaragoza, Spain), which reproduces the architecture of Roman small temples in a funerary context46. Despite of being built more than a century after Temple I in Pollentia, the example of Fabara illustrates well the proportions and height that this kind of building had, with a podium enhancing the proper temple, or rather shrine. Pictorial examples come from Pompeii and they represent small shrines with front stairs (IX,VII,7).

  • 47 Mayer 2013, p. 160-161.
  • 48 Arribas – Tarradell 1987.
  • 49 Mayer 2013, p. 159-160.

26The inscription found very close to Temple I would have originally been placed either in its epistyle (fig. 6) or on its lintel47. It is made of local sandstone, measuring 54 cm tall and 127 cm wide preserved, with two rows of letters, and the left part is missing48. The entire width would be much longer than the fragment preserved, in order to house the complete names of the two imperial charges, approaching to 2.5 m49. It has a Lesbian cyma reversa with tulips between arches. We will come back to this inscription when discussing the dedication of the temple.

  • 50 di Mario 2007, p. 65.
  • 51 Asensio 2003, p. 94-95.

27No internal divisions can be seen in the podium indicating upright structures. The parallels identified do not really help in establishing an accurate approach to the internal divisions that this building may have had, but they support a main distribution of the space between a pronaos at the front, and a back room or cella. We find the division between pronaos and cella right behind the front colonnade in Temple A in Ardea (Latium, Italy) (end of third century-first half of second century BC)50 ; and almost in the geometric centre in the Sacellum of Huesca (Spain) (first half or third quarter of the first century BC)51. In the sanctuary of San Giovanni in Galdo the internal divisions are not clear. The elevation proposed here for Temple I (fig. 6) has a wall dividing pronaos and cella roughly in the middle of its length.

  • 52 Equip Pollentia 1994, 217.

28When exactly Temple I fell into decay is unclear. The first publications on the excavations suggest that, being built in the first century AD, it was partially plundered by the end of the same century52, but this issue is under revision.

Small monuments related to Temple I

  • 53 Rivas et al. unpublished-c.

29The area immediately S of Temple I (fig. 3, 4 and 6) is defined by a pavement of flagstones, the construction of which is dated with a terminus post quem at the end of the first century BC53. It does not currently cover the whole square, as it has been eroded and underwent many alterations. Three small monuments, that we identify as two pedestals (fig. 3.F and G), and the marks and some remains of a probable altar (fig. 3.H) are connected to this pavement. We interpret all these features and Temple I as a single project that was executed at the same time, probably by the early first century AD.

  • 54 Roldán 1992, p. 90 and Roldán et al. 2006, p. 390.
  • 55 Martinelli – Donati 2004, p. 35.
  • 56 Coarelli 1995, p. 270.

30A structure attached to the temple that we identify as a pedestal (fig. 3.F and 4), is a narrow wall 1.7 m N-S and 1 m W-E, coinciding with the lesene in the front of the podium already mentioned. Its two faces are shaped with a moulding in cyma reversa reproducing and linked to the one in the podium (fig. 5.3 and 5.5). This reflects a desire for unity within the group, and the direct relationship between this small structure and the temple. We consider that it also had a dado and an upper moulding, probably of the same height as the podium (fig. 6). It is rather unlikely that it had a symmetrical one on the left side of the front, because another structure (fig. 3.G) does not leave room for it. Similar features are found in front areas of temples, attached to podia, like a small structure in the main temple of Carteia (San Roque, Cádiz, Spain)54, or the Roman phase of the temple of Fiesole in Italy (after 90 BC)55. This was not an uncommon element of Roman temples, as these examples show, but their real purpose is only noticeable in two structures in temple B of Largo di Torre Argentina (Rome), where some statues were placed (Plin. XXXIV,54) in two oblong structures still standing56. Hence, the pedestal of Temple I could have supported some form of decoration such as a sculpture.

31Next to this pedestal, S of the Temple, a very poorly preserved structure stood directly upon the pavement (fig. 3.H and 4). Some mortar, with straight edges to the N and S, remains on the same axis as the temple and a medium block stands in the NW corner of the mortar. They possibly belonged to the altar of the temple (fig. 6), but unfortunately there is no architectural element or decoration to help us understand these remains.

  • 57 Doenges 2005, p. 17.
  • 58 Höcker 2002-2011.
  • 59 Hauschild 1991, p. 141-142.
  • 60 Richardson 1992, p. 43 and Coarelli 2003, p. 105.

32The third element to be analysed stands next to the SW corner of Temple I. It consists of a N-S 1.87 x 0.95 m base attached to the E wall of the Tuscan temple (fig. 3.G and 4)57, upon which we find the corner of a moulding in cyma reversa and the bottom part of the dado. The geometrical proportions of this wide pedestal, 1:2.06, and the fact that it is attached to a wall, make it a distinct element. Following this analysis, a feasible hypothesis for the elevation of this monument is an aedicula (fig. 6), a wide pedestal upon which a small shrine stood, with a distyle façade supporting an entablature and pediment58. More than one representation was usually placed inside, whether in sculpture or painted. We find parallels in an aedicula from Munigua (Spain) that was dedicated to Mercurius59, and also in the aedicula in the House of the Vestals in Rome (Hadrian period, AD 117-138), consecrated to the Lares Praestites60.

Temple II

  • 61 Doenges 2005, p. 17.

33Temple II (fig. 3 and 8) stands at the S limit of the area, measuring 30 x 16.5 Roman feet (8.80 x 4.90 m). Only the lower part of the walls remains, but we can see the main features of the building, which belong to a single constructive phase. The building has a cyma reversa moulding on the W, S and E sides (fig. 5.1 and 5.2), and an internal wall dividing it into two halves (fig. 3)61. A stone channel that collected water from the roof runs along the E and S sides. To the N there are two small platforms, (fig. 3.J and 3.K). To the E of this feature stands a N-S portico line with an ending pillar attached to the N wall of Temple II.

Fig. 8 - Photo of Temple II (view from W).

Fig. 8 - Photo of Temple II (view from W).

Dating

  • 62 Orfila et al. 2004, p. 10-11.
  • 63 de la Barrera 2000, p. nº 47, 48.
  • 64 Cau – Chávez 2003, p. 34 ; Orfila 2004, p. 173 and Orfila – Chávez – Cau 2006, p. 137.

34As we have seen, the dating for Temple II is not clear. We think that the termini post quem (t.p.q.) and ante quem (t.a.q.) can be addressed if we analyse some features. The S and middle walls were built in a foundation trench filled with hand-made indigenous pottery, which usually suggest early dates. The stone channel that is clearly related to the building of Temple II was placed over a structure dated to the first century BC62. As we have seen previously, the mouldings in cyma reversa were used in Hispania during the reign of Augustus at the latest. The mouldings of Temple II could have been reused, as they only cover three of the four sides of the temple. Some reused materials can be found consisting of column drums, architraves and cornices, some of them with mouldings. The parallels found suggest a dating at the beginning of the early Empire (Augustus-Tiberius)63. Based on this evidence, we can define a t.p.q. at the first half of the first century AD. On the other hand, a pavement was built in the beginning of the fourth century attached to the temple, which gives us a t.a.q.64.

  • 65 Orfila 2000, p. 144.
  • 66 Cau – Chávez 2003, p. 34 ; Orfila 2004, p. 173 and Orfila – Chávez – Cau 2006, p. 137.

35Given these observations, Temple II was built between the first half of the first century AD and the beginning of the fourth century AD. Stratigraphically speaking, either proposed dating for its construction – the first century AD65 or the third century66 – is possible. In the light of parallels, we propose a dating in the first century AD, but with the building still in use when the fourth century pavement was built.

Architectural features

36Temple II (fig. 8) does not have any remains of a standing podium. However, a podium probably existed in order to maintain a unitary composition between the temple and a portico that existed at some point attached to it.

  • 67 Shoe Meritt 1965, p. 159, LI.1.
  • 68 Shoe Meritt 1965, p. 160, L.12 and Pensabene 2007, p. 120-121.
  • 69 Pensabene 2007, p. 125.

37The mouldings of Temple II run across the W, S and E sides. As they are in cyma reversa, like the ones analysed in Temple I, they must have been made during the early Empire. However, their shape is slightly different, their proportions being much lower than in Temple I (fig. 5.1 and 5.2), resembling that from the temple A in Largo Argentina in Rome67, the temple of the Decumanus in Ostia (80-50 BC)68 and the minor temple of the Augustan forum in Ostia69.

38There is a problem with stairs as in Temple I. The mouldings cover the short sides of the building, which makes the presence of stairs unlikely, but in this case they could have been placed in the N side as will be seen below.

Elevation

  • 70 Aquilué et al. 1984, p. 109, 132-133, 141.
  • 71 Aquilué et al. 1984, p. 105-106.

39The closest and clearest parallels for Temple II come from Emporiae, and stand in the N side of the forum square (temples 1, 2, 5 and 6). They are proposed to be tetrastyle temples in antis, and they are dated in the first century AD, some of them being dedicated to Roma and Augustus, and to the goddess Tutela70. The plan of Temple 271 is very similar to Temple II in Pollentia.

40As in the case of Temple I of Pollentia, no architectural elements from the elevation have been found for Temple II. Thus, the proposed elevation for the Temple II façade will also rely heavily on Vitruvius’ description of Tuscan-Doric temples (De arch. 4.3). Using the same proportions already described, with a façade 4.3 m (14.5 Roman feet) wide, Temple II would be around 3.23 m (11 Roman feet) high. We propose a tetrastyle façade rather than the previously proposed distyle one, as a distance of 4.3 m would be too wide for a single architrave leaning only on two columns (fig. 8 and 9).

Fig. 9 - 3D model of Temple II and its surrounding features (view from NW).

Fig. 9 - 3D model of Temple II and its surrounding features (view from NW).
  • 72 Equip Pollentia 1994, p. 217 and Orfila – Arribas – Cau 1999, p. 111.

41Regarding the plan of the temple (fig. 3), the W half can be interpreted as a pronaos behind the front colonnade and in front of the cella. It could be flanked by antae, as it has been already suggested72, but it could be also open on its sides, with two columns between the cella and the front colonnade (fig. 9). In the middle of the building, a N-S wall corresponding to the N-S foundations mentioned divided the pronaos from the cella. This room measured 10 x 12 Roman feet (2.9 x 3.5 m).

Elements around Temple II

42Some other elements were part of the Temple II group. A stone channel (fig. 3) runs beside the S and E façades, where only a narrow 0.5 m corridor divides the temple from surrounding structures (fig. 2.D and 3.D). The channel was intended here to collect the water from the temple roof, to avoid problems with water drainage and humidity in such a narrow area. The N and W façades, as they are in an open area, do not need any specific draining system. The channel seems completely functional this way, and there appears insufficient evidence to interpret the temple as a nymphaeum.

  • 73 Brown 1980, p. 41-42 ; Brown – Richardson – Richardson 1993, p. 128, especially 132, figure 51 and (...)

43Attached to the N of Temple II (fig. 8) there are two small platforms, the W one measuring 1.4 x 2.1 m (fig. 3.J), and the E one 1 x 2 m (fig. 3.K). The former is built with square blocks, and at least three holes with a diameter of 15 cm were carved into them, probably with a fourth now missing, forming a rectangle. A smaller hole is carved between two of them. The purpose of these holes was probably to hold some wooden structure such as a rail to protect some decoration or sculpture. This platform could have supported different decorations or public texts such as news, laws, prices or weights (fig. 9). Similar features discovered in Cosa are interpreted this way73. The E platform could have had the same function, but it could also have been a lateral flight of stairs oriented E-W, leading to the podium (fig. 9).

  • 74 Ruiz 2002, p. 46-50.

44To the E of these elements, a portico can be found (fig. 3.I), of which two column bases and one pillar base have been discovered. Attached to a commercial building to the E, this portico was bounding the transitional area on the E side and it reached the N wall of Temple II, where two lesenes on a pillar indicate that the portico finished. The column bases have an uncommon shape consisting of a bottom block 15 cm tall and a narrower one 25 cm tall, upon which the first column drum is placed. A similar composition can be found in the N portico of the forum in Tusculum, dated to the end of the first century AD74. This does not follow any classical order, and it is probably a local solution to create very simple columns that did not require the same technical skills as classical orders. This structure was embellished with a rendering, some remains of which are still preserved.

Which god was worshipped ?

  • 75 Zucca 1998, p. 199 and Orfila – Chávez – Cau 2008, p. 226.
  • 76 Arribas – Tarradell 1987, p. 127.
  • 77 Fishwick 1978, p. 1208-1209 and Lozano – Alvar 2009, p. 431. We prefer to use the concept of loyal (...)
  • 78 Lozano – Alvar 2009, p. 432.

45The dedication of Temple I has been a matter of some debate between scholars75. The main source for the dedication is the inscription found just in front of the building, already commented on76. It names two Imperial charges, but there is no indication of the worshipped deity. Imperial charges, especially the governor of a province (legatus Augusti), could be involved in promoting the Imperial cult, though the initiative normally arose from local communities, as happened in Tarraco and Emerita. The emperor and his governors only promoted the Imperial cult personally in areas where loyalty to the new state was weak77. This is especially true for the eastern provinces of the Empire, but there are also some examples in Hispania78.

  • 79 García Riaza – Sánchez León 2000, p. 90-91.
  • 80 Sanz 1990, p. 33.
  • 81 Mayer 2013.
  • 82 García Riaza – Sánchez León 2000, p. 90-91.
  • 83 Despite being from the second century AD, it could even be naming the first promoters of the templ (...)

46The inscription has been dated, with palaeographical criteria, as Flavian (AD 69-96)79 or later80, and also specifically in the Antonine era, probably in Hadrian’s reign81. Taking into account that the building of the temple is dated in the first century AD, and that its dismantling has been suggested to have started in the end of the same century, the date of the inscription seems to conflict82. We propose that the signs of alterations at the end of the first century AD could rather correspond to a refurbishment, and the inscription may refer to its promoters83.

47Temple I was built in a secondary position of the forum, very close to the main Tuscan, or Capitolian, temple, forming part of the architectural background in the noble side of the forum. This kind of satellite position in relation to a main – and older – temple was very common in the early Empire for small religious structures related to the Imperial cult. Small structures were added representing the new Imperial order, but always respecting the old Republican faith.

  • 84 D’Andria 1973, p. 643.
  • 85 Rossignani 1995, p. 449.
  • 86 Gros 1987, p. 115.
  • 87 Johnson 1935, p. 61-65.
  • 88 Johnson 1935 and D’Andria 1973, p. 643-644.
  • 89 Gros 1987, p. 114 and Sinobad 2007, p. 236.
  • 90 D’Andria 1973, p. 644 and Sinobad 2007, p. 235-237.
  • 91 Aquilué et al. 1984, p. 132-133.
  • 92 Aquilué et al. 1984, p. 104-109, 141.
  • 93 Gros 1987, p. 114 and Blutstein-Latrémolière 1991, p. 49.
  • 94 Bianchi 1950, p. 411-412 ; Castagnoli 1958-1966, p. 328 and Radke 1973, p. 246-250.
  • 95 Bianchi 1973, p. 72-73 and Simonelli 1990.
  • 96 Bianchi 1950, p. 411-412.
  • 97 Lozano – Alvar 2009, p. 427-429.

48Examples for this phenomenon are found in the cities of Minturnae (Italy), Lunae (Italy), Pula (Croatia) and Emporiae (Spain). In both places, Republican temples dominated the forum square from the second century BC, and smaller temples or shrines were built at their flanks in the early Empire. Two shrines in antis (a and b) were added to the sides of the Lunae temple84, one of them being definitely dedicated to Roma and Augustus85. In Minturnae, a temple also dedicated to Roma and Augustus86 was raised beside the Capitolium87, flanked by two fountains88. In Croatia, in the city of Pula, two twin temples that may have been related to the Imperial cult89 were built flanking the main temple90. In Emporiae (Catalonia), in the early Empire, two twin shrines linked to the Imperial cult (1 and 6) were built at the flanks of the temenos of the main temple91. Later, six more temples were added during the first century AD, until a complete façade of shrines covered this side of the forum92. In all the previous examples and also in Temple I in Pollentia, the new shrines, normally related to the Imperial cult (Roma et Augustus), complemented a main Republican temple93. The coexistence of both cults in the same space is a response to the political changes that Rome was experiencing. On the one hand, a previous Republican cult, especially the Capitolian cult that was national94, related to the Roman character of the city almost from an ethnic point of view95. On the other hand, the Imperial cult was a state cult related to loyalty to the current emperor, and it was organized by provinces, not by cities as the Capitolian cult96. It embraced all the different ethnic groups within the Empire under a single political unity based on the power of the emperor97. From this point of view, the two cults do not overlap.

A transitional area on the edge of the forum

  • 98 Mar – Roca 1998, p. 114-115.
  • 99 Orfila et al. 2004, p. 255-256 and Orfila 2009, p. 211-221.

49The forum of Pollentia is dominated on its N side by the great Tuscan temple, or Capitolium. This building had been previously interpreted as the axis of symmetry for the forum,98 but the finds on both sides are not symmetric. This forced an interpretation of the forum having an asymmetrical layout in order to house the two temples and a portico analysed in this paper99. The area, however, may be interpreted as a transitional area or pathway between the forum square limited to the south of the Capitolium and some surrounding streets and buildings (fig. 2). If seen this way, the main forum square to the south of the Capitolium could still be symmetric.

  • 100 Orfila et al. 2004, p. 254-255.
  • 101 Cau et al. 2013, p. 156.

50The transitional area connected this main forum square to the N with one of the decumani of the city (fig. 2 and 3), and probably to a cardo. This area (fig. 3) was delimited to the W by the Tuscan temple (fig. 2 and 3), by a first century BC ashlar wall100 (fig. 2.D) to the S and by a building, possibly dedicated to commerce, to the E. This transitional area measures 44 by 85 Roman feet (12.9 by 25.3 m) which corresponds to a proportion of 1:2. To the E of the forum square, the ongoing excavations have uncovered the remains of a large building, with cabled fluted columns and an opus sectile pavement. Its location and size may indicate a possible basilica101 that would limit the forum square to the E, leaving the transitional area to the N. Further research on this edifice will be essential to understand the evolution of the forum.

  • 102 Rivas et al. unpublished-a and Rivas et al. unpublished-b.

51The area had a flagstone pavement, which was built together with the Temple I group, indicating the importance of this pathway. The thin flagstones with which it was built were not suitable for heavy traffic, and so the pathway was probably for pedestrian use. The area seems to have still been frequented at least until the end of the fourth century. Some repairs of the previous slab pavement, and a levelling and new pavements were built in this area attached to both temples102. This refurbishment may correspond to the introduction of heavy traffic, which damaged the previous thin slab pavement. The latter was first repaired, and finally the area was levelled and paved again.

  • 103 Hauschild 1991, p. 133-141 ; Coarelli 1987, p. 91-94.
  • 104 Brown 1980, p. 34-35.
  • 105 Mavrojannis 1995, p. 107, 115, Pisani Sartorio 1998 and Stek 2008.
  • 106 Pisani Sartorio 1998, p. 66 and Scholz 2002-2011, p. 676.
  • 107 Coarelli 2003, p. 105.
  • 108 Mavrojannis 1995, p. 115-119.
  • 109 Colini 1961-1962, p. 150, 155 and Richardson 1992, p. 98.

52Similar open spaces can be found in other Roman cities close to forum main squares, and they function as distributors. We find an example in Munigua (Sevilla, Spain), where a small square leads to both a sanctuary and the forum103. In that case, the urban grid is conditioned by the irregular topography of the site. In the forum of Cosa an open space in the SW side of the square was found104. Interpreting this area in Pollentia as a transitional area, we can propose a possible function of the aedicula. One popular feature in Rome were the aediculæ devoted to the Lares Compitales, also known as Compita105. They were placed in or near the crossroads (compita) protected by these lares106. The transitional area can function as a crossroad linking the main forum square to some adjacent streets and buildings. This position is similar to that of the Compitum to the Lares Praestites in the House of the Vestals (Roman forum)107, near the via Sacra and the vicus Vestae, the Compitum in the agora of the Hermaistai in Delos108, and the Compitum Acili in Rome109.

  • 110 La Rocca 2011, p. 19-22, Id. 2013.

53This configuration may result in a forum with satellite open spaces separated from the main square, like the transitional area. This distribution of public spaces in enclosed divided units is a common feature in Roman urbanism. Squares and great monuments were not conceived to be perceived as a whole in a linear perspective system, but as closed entities unconnected to their surroundings110.

Conclusions

54Temples I and II (fig. 3, 6 and 9) were placed in a transitional area linking the main forum square with important features of the city. Given its situation, the area was heavily used, as shown by the fact that the first pavement with flagstones was repaired repeatedly.

  • 111 Mar – Roca 1998 ; Orfila – Moranta 2001 ; Moranta – Orfila 2002 ; Moranta 2004 ; Orfila et al. 200 (...)
  • 112 Orfila et al. 2004, p. 254-256 and Orfila 2009, p. 212.

55This interpretation of the area E of the Tuscan temple sheds some light on the earliest arrangement of the forum and its square. One of the issues of urban studies in Pollentia111 has been to define the E side of the forum square, while the W side was already defined by Cardo 1 and the Insula 1. In the lack of a symmetric façade to the E, it had been proposed112 that the forum was not symmetrical with the Tuscan temple, in order to house Temples I and II. Since we have interpreted the area of the temples as a transitional area, the main forum square could still be symmetrical in relation to the Tuscan temple.

56Temple I was part of a first century AD monument building project that included a flagstone pavement, and some elements that we have identified as a pedestal, an aedicula, and a probable altar. All these elements contributed to the prestige of this area, which had Temples I and II as its main features.

  • 113 Zucca 1998, p. 199 ; Orfila 2004, p. 172 and Orfila – Chávez – Cau 2008, p. 326.

57The Imperial cult spread throughout the Roman Empire in the first century AD, especially after Augustus’ death in AD 14. The inscription found close to Temple I, which refers to provincial and local governors, indicates that the dedication of the temple was related to some official cult. Some scholars have previously suggested a dedication to the Imperial cult, specifically as an aedes Augusti or to some of the Imperial attributes113. Along with the inscription, the dating of Temple I in the first half of the first century AD and Temple II in the early Empire, their satellite location in relation to an older Republican temple, and their resemblance to other Imperial cult shrines and temples, support the hypothesis that these temples were possibly related to the Imperial cult.


58The coexistence of a possible Capitolium and the Imperial cult fits with the Augustan conception of the state. After the last Civil wars, the old Republican principles were being restored, while at the same time a new order was arising. This is exactly what we can see in the architectural landscape that was created in Pollentia. The Imperial cult shrines were built in a secondary position around an old Republican temple.

59On the other hand, the architectural style of the remains of Temple I finds its most similar parallels in older buildings (second to first centuries BC) in Italy and Spain. This old fashioned shape could be to reinforce the prestige of these buildings, but it could also correspond to the presence of workshops with a solid old fashioned tradition in Pollentia, as other finds in the city may suggest.

60This set of monuments reveals the nature of the new order arising after the crisis of the Republic. The new regime nevertheless showed respect for the old Republican principles of which it was – theoretically – a restoration, a renewal of good morals – of the mos maiorum. That is why new Imperial cult temples were built alongside Republican ones, respecting their prominence. This was the Imperial syntax of the urban landscape.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Álvarez Martínez 1991 = J. M. Álvarez Martínez, El templo de Diana, in Templos romanos de Hispania, 1991 (Cuadernos de arquitectura romana, 1), 1991, p. 83-93.

Aquilué et al. 1984 = J. Aquilué, R. Mar, J. M. Nolla, J. Ruiz de Arbulo, E. Sanmartí, El fòrum romà d’Empúries (Excavacions de l’any 1982). Una aproximació arqueològica al procés històric de la romanització al nord-est de la Península Ibèrica, Barcelona, 1984 (Monografies emporitanes, IV).

Arribas – Tarradell 1987 = A. Arribas, M. Tarradell, El foro de Pollentia. Noticias de las primeras investigaciones, in Los foros romanos de las provincias occidentales, Madrid, 1987, p. 121-136.

Asensio 2003 = J.Á. Asensio, El sacellum in antis del « Círculo católico » de Huesca (Osca, Hispania Citerior), un ejemplo precoz de arquitectura templaria romana en el Valle del Ebro, in Saldvie. Estudios de prehistoria y arqueología, 3, 2003, p. 93-127.

Bassegoda Nonell 1974 = J. Bassegoda Nonell, El templo romano de Barcelona, Barcelona, 1974.

Bianchi 1950 = U. Bianchi, Disegno storico del culto capitolino nell’Italia romana e nelle province dell’impero, in Atti della Accademia nazionale dei lincei. Memorie. Classe di scienze morali, storiche e filologiche, VIII.II, 1950, p. 349-415.

Bianchi 1973 = U. Bianchi, I Capitolia, in Atti del Convegno internazionale per il XIX centenario della dedicazione del « Capitolium » e per il 150º anniversario della sua scoperta, Brescia, 1973, p. 145-149.

Blutstein-Latrémolière 1991 = É. Blutstein-Latrémolière, Les places capitolines d’Espagne, in Mélanges de la Casa de Velázquez. Antiquité et Moyen Âge, XXVII.1, 1991, p. 43-64.

Bonneville et al. 2000 = J.-N. Bonneville, M. Fincker, P. Sillières, S. Dardaine, J.-M. Labarthe, Belo VII. Le capitole, Madrid, 2000 (Colección de la Casa de Velázquez, 67).

Brown 1980 = F. E. Brown, Cosa. The making of a Roman town, Ann Arbor, 1980.

Brown – Richardson – Richardson = F. E. Brown, E. H. Richardson, L. Richardson, Jr., Cosa III. The Buildings of the Forum. Colony, Municipium, and Village, University Park, Pennsylvania, 1993 (Memoirs of the american academy in Rome, XXXVII).

Cancela 1982 = M. L. Cancela, Fabara : avance de una excavación, in Museo de Zaragoza. Boletín, 1, 1982, p. 173-176.

Castagnoli 1958-1966 = F. Castagnoli, Capitolium, in R. Bianchi Bandinelli, G. Becatti (ed.), Enciclopedia dell’arte antica classica e orientale, II, Rome, 1958-1966, p. 326-330.

Cau – Chávez 2003 = M.Á. Cau, M.E. Chávez, El fenómeno urbano en Mallorca en época romana : los ejemplos de Pollentia y Palma, in Mayurqa. Revista del Departament de ciències històriques i teoria de les arts, 29, 2003, p. 29-49.

Cau – Mas Florit – Lladó 2005 = M.Á. Cau, C. Mas Florit, J.C. Lladó, Fortificaciones de la Antigüedad Tardía en Baleares, in M.L. Sánchez León, M. Barceló (ed.), XXIII Jornades d’estudis històrics locals. L’Antiguitat clàssica i la seva pervivència a les illes Balears. Palma, del 17 al 19 de novembre de 2004, Palma, 2005, p. 217-229.

Cau et al. 2013 = M.Á. Cau, C. Mas Florit, B. Vallori, M.E. Chávez, M. Orfila, Nuevo pavimento de opus sectile hallado en Pollentia (Alcudia, Mallorca), in Archivo español de arqueología, 86, 2013, p. 149-160.

Coarelli 1987 = F. Coarelli, Munigua, Praeneste e Tibur. I modelli laziali di un municipio della Baetica, in Lucentum : Anales de la universidad de Alicante. Prehistoria, arqueología e historia antigua, 6, 1987, p. 91-100.

Coarelli 1993-2000 = F. Coarelli, Fortuna Huiusce Diei, aedes, in E.M. Steinby (ed.), Lexicon topographicum urbis Romae, Rome, 1993-2000, p. 269-271.

Coarelli 2003 = F. Coarelli, Roma, Rome-Bari, 2003 (Guide archeologiche Laterza, 6).

Colini 1961-1962 = A.M. Colini, Compitum Acili, in Bullettino della Commissione archeologica comunale di Roma, 78, 1961-1962, p. 147-157.

Coll – Mazaira – Riutort 1984 = J. Coll, L. Mazaira, S. Riutort, Evolución del hábitat durante la Prehistoria y la Antigüedad en el término municipal de Alcudia (Mallorca), in Arqueología Espacial. Coloquio sobre distribución y relaciones entre los asentamientos, 2, 1984, p. 111-127.

D’Andria 1973 = F. D’Andria, La zona nord del foro. Conclusioni, in A. Frova (ed.), Scavi di Luni. Relazione preliminare delle campagne di scavo 1970-1971, Rome, 1973 p. 638-646.

de la Barrera 2000 = J. L. de la Barrera, La decoración arquitectónica de los foros de Augusta Emerita, Rome, 2000 (Bibliotheca archaeologica, 25).

di Mario 2007 = F. di Mario (ed.), Ardea. La terra dei Rutuli tra mito e archeologia : alle radici della romanità. Nuovi dati dai recenti scavi archeologici, 2007.

di Stefano Manzella 1987 = I. Di Stefano Manzella, Mestiere di epigrafista : guida alla schedatura del materiale epigrafico lapideo, Rome, 1987.

Doenges 2005 = N. A. Doenges, Pollentia. A Roman Colony on the Island of Mallorca, Oxford, 2005 (British archaeological reports, International series, 1404).

Equip Pollentia 1994 = Equip Pollentia, Resultats dels treballs d’excavació a l’àrea central de la ciutat romana de Pollentia (Alcúdia, Mallorca) : avanç preliminar, in Pyrenae. Revista de prehistòria i antiguitat de la Mediterrània occidental, 25, 1994, p. 215-224.

Etxebarria 2008 = A. Etxebarria, Los foros romanos republicanos en la Italia centro-meridional tirrena. Origen y evolución formal, Madrid, 2008 (Serie arqueológica, 10).

Fishwick 1978 = D. Fishwick, The Development of Provincial Ruler Worship in the Western Roman Empire, in W. Haase (ed.), Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der Neueren Forschung, Berlin-New York, 1978, p. 1201-1253.

García Riaza 2002 = E. García Riaza, El carácter militar de los primeros asentaminetos romanos en Baleares : los casos de Palma y Pollentia, in A. Morillo Cerdán (ed.), Arqueología militar romana en Hispania, Madrid, 2002 (Anejos de Gladius, 5), p. 511-518.

García Riaza – Sánchez León 2000 = E. García Riaza, M.L. Sánchez León, Roma y la municipalización de las Baleares, Palma, 2000.

Gros 1987 = P. Gros, Sanctuaires traditionels, capitoles et temples dynastiques : ruptures et continuités dans le fonctionnement et l’aménagement des centres religieux urbains, in Los asentamientos ibéricos ante la romanización. 27-28 Febrero 1986, Madrid, 1987, p. 111-120.

Gros 1996 = P. Gros, L’architecture romaine du début du IIIe siècle av. J.-C. à la fin du Haut-Empire, Paris, 1996 (Les manuels d’art et d’archéologie antiques).

Gros 2006 = P. Gros, Le centre monumental de Baelo Claudia : bricolage archaïsant ou actualisation d’un modèle ancien ?, in Actas de las I Jornadas Internacionales de Baelo Claudia: Balance y perspectiva (1966-2004). 25, 26 y 27 de octubre de 2004. Cádiz, Sevilla, 2006 p. 79-92.

Gutiérrez Behemerid 1991 = M. Á. Gutiérrez Behemerid, El templo romano de Barcino. Análisis de la decoración arquitectónica, in Templos romanos de Hispania, 1991 (Cuadernos de arquitectura romana, 1), p. 95-105.

Hauschild 1991 = T. Hauschild, Los templos romanos de Munigua (Sevilla), in Templos romanos de Hispania, 1991 (Cuadernos de arquitectura romana, 1), p. 133-143.

Höcker 2002-2011 = C. Höcker, Aedicula, in H. Cancik, H. Schneider (ed.), Brill’s encyclopaedia of the ancient world. New Pauly, Leiden-Boston, 2002-2011, p. 168.

Jiménez 1975 = A. Jiménez, De Vitruvio a Vignola : autoridad de la tradición, in Habis, 6, 1975, p. 253-293.

Jiménez 1989 = A. Jiménez, La Puerta de Sevilla en Carmona, Sevilla, 1989.

Johnson 1935 = J. Johnson, Excavations at Minturnae, Philadelphia, 1935.

La Regina 1976 = A. La Regina, Il Sannio, in P. Zanker (ed.), Hellenismus in Mittelitalien : Kolloquium in Göttingen vom 5. bis 9. Juni 1974, Göttingen, 1976. p. 219-250.

La Rocca 2011 = E. La Rocca, La forza della tradizione : l’architettura sacra a Roma tra II e I secolo a.C., in E. La Rocca and A. D’Alessio (ed.), Tradizione e innovazione. L’elaborazione del linguaggio ellenistico nell’architettura romana e italica di età tardo-repubblicana, Rome, 2011 (Studi Miscellanei, 35), p. 1-24.

La Rocca 2013 = E. La Rocca, La percezione dello spazio nella Roma antica, in N. Barrero, M.J. Pérez del Castillo (ed.), Preactas. XVIII Congreso internacional de arqueología clásica. Centro y periferia en el mundo clásico. Mérida, 13-17 Mayo, 2013, 2013, p. 225-226.

López Mullor – Estarellas – Merino 2008 = A. López Mullor, M.M. Estarellas, J. Merino, Tres conjuntos cerámicos del final de la República y del Alto Imperio hallados en Can Muntanyans, Palma (Mallorca), in L. Rivet (ed.), Société française d’étude de la céramique antique en Gaule. Actes du congrès de l’Escala-Empúries. 1er- 4 Mai 2008, Marseille, 2008, p. 129-152.

Lozano – Alvar 2009 = F. Lozano, J. Alvar, El culto imperial y su proyección en Hispania, in J. Andreu, J. Cabrero, I. Rodà (ed.), Hispaniae. Las provincias hispanas en el mundo romano, Tarragona, 2009 (Documenta, 11), p. 425-434.

Mar – Roca 1998 = R. Mar, M. Roca, Pollentia y Tárraco. Dos etapas en la formación de los foros de la Hispania Romana, in Empúries, 51, 1998, p. 105-124.

Mar – Ruiz de Arbulo 1993 = R. Mar, J. Ruiz de Arbulo, Ampurias Romana. Historia, Arquitectura y Arqueología, Sabadell, 1993.

Martinelli – Donati 2004 = M. Martinelli, L. Donati, Dallo scavo alla ricostruzione virtuale. Architetture etrusche civili e sacre, in Arkos, 6, 2004, p. 31-45.

Mattingly 1983 = H. B. Mattingly, Roman Pollentia : Coinage and History, in A. Arribas (ed.), Pollentia. Estudio de los materiales, Palma, 1983 (The William L. Bryant Foundation, 3), p. 242-299.

Mavrojannis 1995 = T. Mavrojannis, L’aedicula dei Lares Compitales nel compitum degli Hermaistai a Delo, in Bulletin de correspondance hellénique, 119.1, 1995, p. 89-123.

Mayer 2005 = M. Mayer, Les Illes Balears i llur reflex a les fonts literàries i epigràfiques. Revisió d’alguns aspectes, in M.L. Sánchez León, M. Barceló Crespí (ed.), XXIII Jornades d’Estudis Històrics Locals. L’Antiguitat clàssica i la seva pervivència a les illes Balears. Palma, del 17 al 19 de novembre de 2004, Palma, 2005 p. 39-60.

Mayer 2013 = M. Mayer, Contribución al estudio de la epigrafía de Pollentia (Alcúdia, Mallorca). Sobre HEp 2, 1990, 62, in W. Eck, B. Fehér, P. Kovács (ed.), Studia epigraphica in memoriam Géza Alföldy, Bonn, 2013 (Antiquitas. Abhandlungen zur alten Geschichte, 61), p. 155-162.

Merino 1999 = J. Merino, Les excavacions arqueològiques de Gabriel Llabrés Quintana a Pol.lèntia (1923, 1926 i 1927), in I Jornades d’estudis locals d’Alcúdia. 13 i 14 de novembre de 1998, Alcúdia, 1999, p. 39-50.

Moranta 2004 = L. Moranta, L’estructuració urbana de Pollentia (ss. I aC-I dC), in M. Orfila and M.Á. Cau (ed.), Les ciutats romanes del llevant peninsular i les Illes Balears, Barcelona, 2004 (Els juliols. Biblioteca universitària, 11), p. 137-159.

Moranta – Orfila 2002 = L. Moranta, M. Orfila, El traçat regulador del fòrum de Pollèntia, in II Jornades d’estudis locals d’Alcúdia, Alcúdia, 2002, p. 129-154.

Moreno Pérez 2007 = S. Moreno Pérez, Contexto y funcionalidad de las representaciones escultóricas pétreas de Pollentia, in Arqueología y territorio, 4, 2007, p. 87-106.

Morgan 1969 = M. G. Morgan, The Roman Conquest of the Balearic Isles, in California studies in Classical antiquity, 2, 1969, p. 217-231.

Orfila 2000 = M. Orfila, Conclusions generals referents a l’estat actual de les investigacions arqueològiques en el fòrum de Pollentia, in M. Orfila (ed.), El fòrum de Pollentia. Memòria de les campanyes d’excavacions realitzades ente els anys 1996 i 1999, Alcúdia, 2000, p. 131-159.

Orfila 2004 = M. Orfila, Estat actual de les investigacions arqueològiques a Pollentia, in M. Orfila and M.Á. Cau (ed.), Les ciutats romanes del llevant peninsular i les Illes Balears, Barcelona, 2004 (Els juliols. Biblioteca universitària, 11), p. 161-189.

Orfila 2005 = M. Orfila, La vajilla de barniz negro y la ciudad romana de Pollentia (Alcudia, Mallorca), in Verdolay. Revista del Museo arqueológico de Murcia, 9, 2005, p. 127-140.

Orfila 2008 = M. Orfila, La intervención de Q. Cecilio Metelo sobre las Baleares (123 - 121 a.C.). Condiciones previas y sus consecuencias, in Pyrenae. Revista de prehistòria i antiguitat de la Mediterrània occidental, 39.2, 2008, p. 7-45.

Orfila 2009 = M. Orfila, Diseño del trazado urbano del foro de Pollentia, in J.M. Noguera (ed.), Fora Hispaniae. Paisaje urbano, arquitectura, programas decorativos y culto imperial en los foros de las ciudades hispanorromanas, Murcia, 2009 (Monografías, 3), p. 203-216.

Orfila – Arribas 1997 = M. Orfila, A. Arribas, La ciudad romana de Pollentia (Alcudia, Mallorca) en la actualidad, in A. Navareño, P. Mateos, F. Lavado (ed.), Congreso ciudades históricas vivas. Ciudades del pasado: pervivencia y desarrollo, Mérida, 1997, p. 63-67.

Orfila – Arribas 2000 = M. Orfila, A. Arribas, Pollentia a través de l’arqueologia, in M. Orfila (ed.), El fòrum de Pollentia. Memòria de les campanyes d’excavacions realitzades ente els anys 1996 i 1999, Alcúdia, 2000, p. 33-50.

Orfila – Arribas – Cau 1999 = M. Orfila, A. Arribas, M.Á. Cau, La ciudad romana de Pollentia : el foro, in Archivo español de arqueología, 72, 1999, p. 99-118.

Orfila – Arribas – Doenges 2000 = M. Orfila, A. Arribas, N.A. Doenges, Resultat de les investigacions arqueològiques realitzades sobre el forum entre 1980 i 1995, in M. Orfila (ed.), El fòrum de Pollentia. Memòria de les campanyes d’excavacions realitzades ente els anys 1996 i 1999, Alcúdia, 2000, p. 51-64.

Orfila – Chávez – Cau 2006 = M. Orfila, M. E. Chávez, M.Á. Cau, Pollentia and the cities of the Balearic Islands, in L. Abad, S. Keay, S. Ramallo (ed.), Early Roman towns in Hispania Tarraconensis, Portsmouth, Rhode Island, 2006 (Journal of roman archaeology, Supplementary Series, 62), p. 133-145.

Orfila – Chávez – Cau 2008 = M. Orfila, M. E. Chávez, M.Á. Cau, El programa figurativo de la ciudad romana de Pollentia (Alcudia, Mallorca, España), in E. La Rocca, P. León, C. Parisi Presicce (ed.), Le due patrie acquisite. Studi di archeologia dedicati a Walter Trillmich, Rome, 2008 (Bullettino della Commissione archeologica comunale di Roma. Supplementi, 18), p. 325-332.

Orfila – Moranta 2001 = M. Orfila, L. Moranta, Estudio del trazado regulador del foro de Pollentia (Alcudia, Mallorca), in Archivo español de arqueología, 74, 2001, p. 209-232.

Orfila et al. 2000 = M. Orfila, M. Riera, M.Á. Cau, A. Arribas, Aproximación a la topografia urbana tardía de Pollentia (Mallorca) : construcciones defensivas, in J.M. Gurt and N. Tena (ed.), V Reunió d’arqueologia cristiana hispànica. Cartagena, 16-19 d’abril de 1998, Cartagena, 2000 (Monografies de la secció històrico-arqueològica, VII), p. 229-235.

Orfila et al. 2004 = M. Orfila, L. Moranta, M.E. Chávez, M. Cau, Disseny del traçat del fòrum de Pollentia (Alcúdia, Mallorca), in III Jornades d’estudis locals d’Alcúdia, Alcúdia, 2004, p. 247-258.

Pensabene 2007 = P. Pensabene, Ostiensium marmorum decus et decor. Studi architettonici, decorativi e archeometrici, Rome, 2007 (Studi Miscelanei, 33).

Pisani Sartorio 1998 = G. Pisani Sartorio, Compita Larum : edicole sacre di Roma Antica, in L. Cardilli (ed.), Edicole sacre romane. Un segno urbano da recuperare. Palazzo Braschi. Catalogo della mostra, Rome, 1998, p. 65-71.

Pozo 1989 = S. F. Pozo, Bronces romanos de Pollentia conservados en el M.A.N. de Madrid, in Boletín del Museo arqueológico nacional, VII,1-2, 1989, p. 67-83.

Puig i Cadafalch – Brugués i Escudér 1892 = J. Puig i Cadafalch, C. Brugués i Escudér, Estudi de arqueología arquitectónica sobre’l sepulcre romá de Fabara anomenat « La casa dels moros », Barcelona, 1892.

Puig Palerm 2005 = A. Puig Palerm, L’entrada de Mallorca en l’esfera imperialista de la República romana. Una contextualització històrica de l’evidència arqueològica anterior a la conquesta romana del 123 aC, in M.L. Sánchez León and M. Barceló Crespí (ed.), XXIII Jornades d’Estudis Històrics Locals. L’Antiguitat clàssica i la seva pervivència a les illes Balears. Palma, del 17 al 19 de novembre de 2004, Palma, 2005, p. 247-259.

Radke 1973 = G. Radke, Il valore religioso e politico delle divinità del Campidoglio, in Atti del Convegno internazionale per il XIX Centenario della dedicazione del « Capitolium » e per il 150º anniversario della sua scoperta, Brescia, 1973, p. 245-250.

Richardson 1992 = L. J. Richardson, A new topographical dictionary of Ancient Rome, Baltimore, 1992.

Riera – Cau – Orfila 1999 = M. Riera, M.Á. Cau, M. Orfila, Els últims segles de Pollentia, in Bolletí de la societat arqueològica lulliana, 55, 1999, p. 335-346.

Rivas et al. unpublished-a = M. J. Rivas, M.Á. Cau, E. Chávez, M. Orfila, Memoria del tramo sur de la pared este del capitolio, cuadros H-12-11/F-12/11, in M. Orfila, M.Á. Cau, E. Chávez (ed.), Excavaciones arqueológicas en Pollentia (Alcudia, Mallorca). Campaña 2005, unpublished.

Rivas et al. unpublished-b = M. J. Rivas, M. Orfila, M.Á. Cau, M.E. Chávez, Memoria de la intervención realizada al este del Capitolio, cuadros H9, I9, in M.Á. Cau, M.E. Chávez, M. Orfila (ed.), Excavaciones arqueológicas en Pollentia (Alcudia, Mallorca). Campaña 2009, unpublished-b, p. 7-60.

Rivas et al. unpublished-c = M. J. Rivas, M. Orfila, M.Á. Cau, M.E. Chávez, Memoria preliminar de la intervención realizada al este del foro de la ciudad romana de Pollentia, Cata Tramo sur al este del Capitolio, in M. Orfila, M.Á. Cau, M.E. Chávez (ed.), Excavaciones arqueológicas en Pollentia (Alcudia, Mallorca). Campaña 2010, unpublished-c.

Rodà 2006 = I. Rodà, La escultura ecuestre de Pollentia, in Historia de las Islas Baleares. Patrimonio histórico y artístico. Prehistoria e historia antigua, 16, Palma de Mallorca, 2006, p. 234-235.

Roldán 1992 = L. Roldán, Técnicas constructivas romanas en Carteia (San Roque, Cádiz), Madrid, 1992 (Monografías de arquitectura romana, 1).

Roldán et al. 2006 = L. Roldán, M. Bendala, J. Blánquez, S. Martínez (ed.), Estudio histórico-arqueológico de la ciudad de Carteia (San Roque, Cádiz) 1994-1999, 2006 (Arqueología monografías, 24).

Rossignani 1995 = M. P. Rossignani, Foro e basilica a Luni, in M.M. Roberti (ed.), « Forum et basilica » in Aquileia e nella Cisalpina romana, Udine, 1995 (Antichità altoadriatiche, XLII) p. 443-466.

Ruiz 2002 = E. Ruiz, Área norte, in X. Dupré, S. Gutiérrez, J. Núñez, E. Ruiz y J.A. Santos (eds.), Excavaciones Arqueológicas en Tusculum. Informe de las campañas de 2000 y 2001, Roma, p. 35-54.

Sanmartí et al. 1996 = J. Sanmartí, J. Principal, M.G. Trías, M. Orfila, Les ceràmiques de vernís negre de Pollentia (excavacions 1949-1992), Barcelona, 1996 (The William LBryant foundation, 5).

Sanz 1990 = R. Sanz, Baleares. L’Alcudia. 62, in Hispania epigraphica, 2, 1990, p. 33.

Scholz 2002-2011 = U. W. Scholz, Compitalia, in H. Cancik, H. Schneider (ed.), Brill’s encyclopaedia of the Ancient world. New Pauly, Leiden-Boston, 2002-2011, p. 675-677.

Shoe Meritt 1965 = L. T. Shoe Meritt, Etruscan and Republican Roman mouldings, Rome, 1965 (Memoirs of the American academy in Rome, 28).

Shoe Meritt 1966 = L. T. Shoe Meritt, An imitation of the antique in architectural mouldings, in Hesperia. Journal of the American school of Classical studies at Athens, XXXV.2, 1966, p. 141-149.

Shoe Meritt – Edlund-Berry 2000 = L. T. Shoe Meritt, I.E.M. Edlund-Berry, Etruscan and Republican Roman mouldings. A reissue of the Memoirs of the American academy in Rome XXVIII, 1965 by Lucy T. Shoe, Rome, 2000 (University museum monograph, 107).

Sillières 1994-1995 = P. Sillières, Le capitole de Baelo Claudia : un cas d’incohérence de datations archéologique et stylistique et un exemple de solution, in Anas, 7-8, 1994-1995, p. 285-298.

Simonelli 1990 = A. Simonelli, La tradizione classica e l’origine del Capitolium, in Atene e Roma. Rassegna trimestrale dell’Associazione italiana di cultura classica, XXXV.2-3, 1990, p. 71-77.

Sinobad 2007 = M. Sinobad, Kapitolijski hramovi u Hrvatskoj. Capitoline temples in Croatia, in Opvscvla archaeologica, 31, 2007, p. 221–263.

Stek 2008 = T. D. Stek, A Roman cult in the Italian countryside ? The Compitalia and the shrines to the Lares Compitales, in Babesch. Annual papers on Mediterranean archaeology, 83, 2008, p. 111-132.

Subías 1994 = E. Subías, Anàlisi metrològica del capitoli, in Equip Pollentia, Resultats dels treballs d’excavació a l’àrea central de la ciutat romana de Pollentia (Alcúdia, Mallorca) : avanç preliminar, in Pyrenae. Revista de prehistòria i antiguitat de la Mediterrània occidental, 25, 1994, p. 220-224.

Vallori – Cau – Orfila 2015 = B. Vallori, M.Á. Cau, M. Orfila, The Tuscan temple of Pollentia (Mallorca, Balearic islands), in Archeologia classica, 66, 2015, p. 289-317.

Vallori – Orfila -–Cau 2011 = B. Vallori, M. Orfila, M.Á. Cau, Las excavaciones de Gabriel Llabrés, Rafael Isasi y Juan Llabrés en la ciudad romana de Pollentia (Alcudia, Mallorca) (1923-1946), in Archivo español de arqueología, 84, 2011, p. 283-303.

Vitruve 1992 = Vitruve, De l’architecture IV, transl. P. Gros, Paris, 1992 (Collection des universités de France).

Vitruvius 1931 = Vitruvius, On architecture. Books I-V, transl. F. Granger, Cambridge Mass.-London, 1931 (The Loeb Classical library, 251).

Vitruvius 1999 = Vitruvius, Ten books on architecture, transl. I.D. Rowland, Cambridge, 1999.

Zaccardi 2005 = A. Zaccardi, Il santuario di S. Giovanni in Galdo : nuove proposte interpretative e ipotesi ricostruttive, in Conoscenze. Rivista semestrale della Direzione regionale per i beni culturali e paesaggistici del Molise, 1-2, 2005, p. 63-96.

Zucca 1998 = R. Zucca, Insulae Baliares. Le isole Baleari sotto il dominio romano, Rome, 1998.

Haut de page

Notes

1 Morgan 1969 ; Zucca 1998, p. 91-96, 135-139 and Puig Palerm 2005.

2 Coll – Mazaira – Riutort 1984, p. 126-127 ; Orfila – Arribas 1997, p. 63 ; Orfila - Arribas 2000, p. 34 ; García Riaza 2002, p. 516 and Orfila 2008, p. 26, 27-28.

3 López Mullor – Estarellas – Merino 2008, p. 135-136.

4 Mattingly 1983, p. 145 ; Sanmartí et al. 1996, p. 67-68 ; Orfila 2005, p. 132, 133-134, 135, 137 ; Orfila – Chávez – Cau 2006, p. 135 and Orfila 2008, p. 30-32.

5 Arribas – Tarradell 1987, p. 127 ; Equip Pollentia 1994, p. 217 ; Orfila – Arribas – Cau 1999, p. 110-111 and Doenges 2005, p. 16-17.

6 Equip Pollentia 1994, p. 127, commented in Orfila – Arribas – Cau 1999, p. 110-111 and Orfila – Arribas – Doenges 2000, p. 56.

7 Arribas – Tarradell 1987, p. 127 and 131, and Sanz 1990, p. 33 = HEp 1990, 62.

8 Sanz 1990, p. 33 = HEp 1990, 62.

9 García Riaza – Sánchez León 2000, p. 90-91 and Cau – Chávez 2003, p. 34.

10 Equip Pollentia 1994, p. 217 and Orfila – Arribas – Cau 1999, p. 110.

11 Arribas – Tarradell 1987, p. 127.

12 Vallori – Cau – Orfila 2015, p. 303.

13 Arribas – Tarradell 1987, p. 131.

14 Zucca 1998, p. 199 ; Orfila 2004, p. 172 and Orfila – Chávez – Cau 2008, p. 326.

15 Moreno Pérez 2007, p. 92-93.

16 Zucca 1998 and Mayer 2005.

17 Parment 1995, p. 33-34 and Doenges 2005, p. 17.

18 Pozo 1989, p. 78-82 and Rodà 2006.

19 Merino 1999, p. 45-46.

20 Vallori – Orfila – Cau 2011, p. 291-292.

21 Arribas – Tarradell 1987, p. 127-129.

22 Doenges 2005, p. 17.

23 Orfila 2000.

24 Cau – Chávez 2003, p. 34 ; Orfila 2004, p. 173 and Orfila – Chávez – Cau 2006, p. 137.

25 Equip Pollentia 1994, p. 127 ; Orfila – Arribas 1997, p. 64 and Orfila – Arribas – Cau 1999, p. 111.

26 Cau – Chávez 2003, p. 35 ; Orfila 2004, p. 173 and Orfila – Chávez – Cau 2006, p. 137.

27 Subías 1994, p. 222-223 and Orfila – Moranta 2001, p. 216-217.

28 Orfila – Moranta 2001 and Orfila 2009.

29 Rivas et al. unpublished-c.

30 Rivas et al. unpublished-c.

31 Orfila 2000, p. 144.

32 La Regina 1976, p. 237-238 and Asensio 2003, p. 107-108.

33 Shoe Meritt 1965 and Shoe Meritt – Edlund-Berry 2000.

34 Shoe Meritt 1965, p. 32-33.

35 Shoe Meritt 1965, p. 185 ; Jiménez 1975, p. 289-290 ; Gros 1996, p. 134-135 and Asensio 2003, p. 102.

36 Jiménez 1975, p. 289-290 and Gutiérrez Behemerid 1991, p. 97. The most remarkable examples come from the temple of Carteia (San Roque, Cádiz) (second half of second century BC) (Roldán et al. 2006, p. 380, 382, 389-390.), the main temple of the forum of Emporiae (Empúries, Catalonia) (end of second-beginning of first century BC) (Aquilué et al. 1984, p. 55, Mar – Ruiz de Arbulo 1993, p. 220, 226), the Sacellum of the «Círculo Católico» in Huesca (first half or mid first century BC) (Asensio 2003, p. 94, 102-103), the temple in the Puerta de Sevilla in Carmona (40-30 BC) (Jiménez 1989, p. 194), the Augustan temple of Barcino (Barcelona) (Bassegoda Nonell 1974, p. 121 ; Gutiérrez Behemerid 1991, p. 97), and the « temple of Diana » in Emerita (Mérida, Extremadura) (end of the Augustan era) (Álvarez Martínez 1991, p. 85-86 ; de la Barrera 2000, p. 24, catalogue 4 and 5).

37 Shoe Meritt 1966.

38 Bonneville et al. 2000, p. 214.

39 Sillières 1994-1995, p. 296-298.

40 Gros 2006, p. 87-88, 90-91.

41 Some cabled fluted column drums and attic bases that have been found in the building E of the forum square are the only architectural elements that can not correspond to Tuscan order. Cau et al. 2013, p. 156.

42 La Regina 1976, p. 237-241 and Zaccardi 2005.

43 La Regina 1976, p. 238.

44 It is possible that some materials from this building were reused in the late Antique fortification running W-E just N of it. The construction of this fortification is posterior to the third quarter of the fifth century AD. Riera – Cau – Orfila 1999, p. 339-342 ; Orfila et al. 2000, p. 231-233 and Cau – Mas Florit – Lladó 2005, p. 219-223.

45 Vitruvius 1931, Vitruve 1992 and Vitruvius 1999.

46 Puig i Cadafalch – Brugués i Escudér 1892, p. 23 and Cancela 1982, p. 174-175.

47 Mayer 2013, p. 160-161.

48 Arribas – Tarradell 1987.

49 Mayer 2013, p. 159-160.

50 di Mario 2007, p. 65.

51 Asensio 2003, p. 94-95.

52 Equip Pollentia 1994, 217.

53 Rivas et al. unpublished-c.

54 Roldán 1992, p. 90 and Roldán et al. 2006, p. 390.

55 Martinelli – Donati 2004, p. 35.

56 Coarelli 1995, p. 270.

57 Doenges 2005, p. 17.

58 Höcker 2002-2011.

59 Hauschild 1991, p. 141-142.

60 Richardson 1992, p. 43 and Coarelli 2003, p. 105.

61 Doenges 2005, p. 17.

62 Orfila et al. 2004, p. 10-11.

63 de la Barrera 2000, p. nº 47, 48.

64 Cau – Chávez 2003, p. 34 ; Orfila 2004, p. 173 and Orfila – Chávez – Cau 2006, p. 137.

65 Orfila 2000, p. 144.

66 Cau – Chávez 2003, p. 34 ; Orfila 2004, p. 173 and Orfila – Chávez – Cau 2006, p. 137.

67 Shoe Meritt 1965, p. 159, LI.1.

68 Shoe Meritt 1965, p. 160, L.12 and Pensabene 2007, p. 120-121.

69 Pensabene 2007, p. 125.

70 Aquilué et al. 1984, p. 109, 132-133, 141.

71 Aquilué et al. 1984, p. 105-106.

72 Equip Pollentia 1994, p. 217 and Orfila – Arribas – Cau 1999, p. 111.

73 Brown 1980, p. 41-42 ; Brown – Richardson – Richardson 1993, p. 128, especially 132, figure 51 and Etxebarria 2008, p. 121-122.

74 Ruiz 2002, p. 46-50.

75 Zucca 1998, p. 199 and Orfila – Chávez – Cau 2008, p. 226.

76 Arribas – Tarradell 1987, p. 127.

77 Fishwick 1978, p. 1208-1209 and Lozano – Alvar 2009, p. 431. We prefer to use the concept of loyalty to the state, rather than Romanisation, because this is a modern concept unrelated to the Ancient Roman mind, and the Imperial cult was a political cult that reinforced the power of the state. At the same time, the Capitolian cult, which may also have been present in Pollentia, was a national cult.

78 Lozano – Alvar 2009, p. 432.

79 García Riaza – Sánchez León 2000, p. 90-91.

80 Sanz 1990, p. 33.

81 Mayer 2013.

82 García Riaza – Sánchez León 2000, p. 90-91.

83 Despite being from the second century AD, it could even be naming the first promoters of the temple, as happened with the dedicatory inscripction of the Pantheon in Rome. Di Stefano Manzella 1987, p. 188, n. 453.

84 D’Andria 1973, p. 643.

85 Rossignani 1995, p. 449.

86 Gros 1987, p. 115.

87 Johnson 1935, p. 61-65.

88 Johnson 1935 and D’Andria 1973, p. 643-644.

89 Gros 1987, p. 114 and Sinobad 2007, p. 236.

90 D’Andria 1973, p. 644 and Sinobad 2007, p. 235-237.

91 Aquilué et al. 1984, p. 132-133.

92 Aquilué et al. 1984, p. 104-109, 141.

93 Gros 1987, p. 114 and Blutstein-Latrémolière 1991, p. 49.

94 Bianchi 1950, p. 411-412 ; Castagnoli 1958-1966, p. 328 and Radke 1973, p. 246-250.

95 Bianchi 1973, p. 72-73 and Simonelli 1990.

96 Bianchi 1950, p. 411-412.

97 Lozano – Alvar 2009, p. 427-429.

98 Mar – Roca 1998, p. 114-115.

99 Orfila et al. 2004, p. 255-256 and Orfila 2009, p. 211-221.

100 Orfila et al. 2004, p. 254-255.

101 Cau et al. 2013, p. 156.

102 Rivas et al. unpublished-a and Rivas et al. unpublished-b.

103 Hauschild 1991, p. 133-141 ; Coarelli 1987, p. 91-94.

104 Brown 1980, p. 34-35.

105 Mavrojannis 1995, p. 107, 115, Pisani Sartorio 1998 and Stek 2008.

106 Pisani Sartorio 1998, p. 66 and Scholz 2002-2011, p. 676.

107 Coarelli 2003, p. 105.

108 Mavrojannis 1995, p. 115-119.

109 Colini 1961-1962, p. 150, 155 and Richardson 1992, p. 98.

110 La Rocca 2011, p. 19-22, Id. 2013.

111 Mar – Roca 1998 ; Orfila – Moranta 2001 ; Moranta – Orfila 2002 ; Moranta 2004 ; Orfila et al. 2004 and Orfila 2009, p. 211-212.

112 Orfila et al. 2004, p. 254-256 and Orfila 2009, p. 212.

113 Zucca 1998, p. 199 ; Orfila 2004, p. 172 and Orfila – Chávez – Cau 2008, p. 326.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Fig. 1 - Map of the island of Mallorca and the two Roman cities of Palma and Pollentia.
Titre Fig. 2 - Plan of the forum area of Pollentia.
Titre Fig. 3 - Plan of the area of the small Temples, or Transitional area.
Titre Fig. 4 - Photo of Temple I and its S features (view from S).
Titre Fig. 5 - Sections of the mouldings mentioned in the text. 1 and 2) Temple II; 3 and 5) Temple I; 4) Ædicula.
Titre Fig. 6 - 3D model of the Transitional area with Temples I and II (view from S).
Titre Fig. 7 - Comparison between different small temples.
Titre Fig. 8 - Photo of Temple II (view from W).
Titre Fig. 9 - 3D model of Temple II and its surrounding features (view from NW).
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Bartomeu Vallori Márquez, Miguel Ángel Cau Ontiveros et Margarita Orfila Pons, « The small temples in the forum of Pollentia (Mallorca, Balearic Islands) », Mélanges de l'École française de Rome - Antiquité [En ligne], 128-1 | 2016, mis en ligne le 21 mars 2016, consulté le 20 août 2017. URL : http://mefra.revues.org/3428

Haut de page

Auteurs

Bartomeu Vallori Márquez

Universitat de Barcelona (ERAAUB) - bartomeu.vallori@gmail.com

Miguel Ángel Cau Ontiveros

Corresponding author, Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats (ICREA) - Universitat de Barcelona - macau@ub.edu.

Margarita Orfila Pons

Departamento de Prehistoria y Arqueología - Universidad de Granada - orfila@ugr.es

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

© École française de Rome

Haut de page
  • Logo École française de Rome
  • Revues.org