Herculaneum, past, present & future . sly wrong. There is perhaps moreto be said for the theory that it was a Forum. This theoryis attributed to La Vega by Ruggiero, though with somehesitation ; but it seems far more likely, and indeed almostcertain from his map, that La Vegas Forum was a differentbuilding farther to the north-west. In any case the buildingwhich we have described seems hardly large enough for aForum ; the length of the central space (on Alcubierrescalculation of lo palmi for each of the 15 intercolumniations)can barely have been 40 metres. We have already indicatedthe untrustw
Herculaneum, past, present & future . sly wrong. There is perhaps moreto be said for the theory that it was a Forum. This theoryis attributed to La Vega by Ruggiero, though with somehesitation ; but it seems far more likely, and indeed almostcertain from his map, that La Vegas Forum was a differentbuilding farther to the north-west. In any case the buildingwhich we have described seems hardly large enough for aForum ; the length of the central space (on Alcubierrescalculation of lo palmi for each of the 15 intercolumniations)can barely have been 40 metres. We have already indicatedthe untrustworthiness of Belochs calculations, which giveconsiderably larger measurements. On the other hand, it does not seem likely that any otherbuilding discovered can have been the Forum, and theexploration of the central street, into which it may well haveopened, seems to have been fairly complete. DalF Osso ^indeed maintains, as we have said above, that the central Ruggiero, Scat!, etc., p. xxxvi. - ik. p. li. ^ Tribunn, January 29, PLAN OF THE BASILICA. After Cochin and Belicard. Plate 14. CHAP. I TOPOGRAPHY 11 street itself took the place of a Forum. We have alreadypointed out his error in the matter of its width. But apartfrom this, an important piece of evidence in his argumentsseems to us to rest on a misunderstanding. He dwells at greatlength upon the wall-painting, or series of paintings, figuredin the Antkhita di Ercolano, tom. iii. (1762), Plates XLI.,XLII., XLin., which he takes to represent the central streetof Herculaneum. He even identifies two equestrian statuesthere depicted with those of the Balhi. Unfortunately,although published in the Antichita di Ercolano, thepaintings in question were undoubtedly found at Pompeii( Civita) ; this fact is stated even in the Antichita, andthe full records of their discovery have been printed byFiorelli.^ Overbeck and Mau,- Mau and Kelsey,^ andHelbig,^ are no doubt right in explaining it as a picture ofthe Forum at Pompeii, w
Size: 1298px × 1926px
Photo credit: © The Reading Room / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1900, bookdecade1900, bookpu, booksubjectartgrecoroman
