788 ROMA. struction of the career would have adapted it. That the Lautumiae was of considerable size may also be inferred from the circumstance that when the consul Q. Jletellus Celer was imprisoned there by the tribune L. Fl.ivius, Jletellus attempted to assemble the senate in it. (Dion Cass, xxxvii. 50.) Its distinctness from the Career Mamertinus is also shown by Seneca (Controv. 27, p. 303, Bipont). An important alteration in the arrangement of the foi-um, to which we have before alluded, was the removal of the iRiituNAL Puaetouis from the comitium to the eastern end of the forum by the tribune L. Scribonius Libo, apparently in B.C. 149. It now stood near the Puteal, a place so called from its being open at the top like a well, and consecrated in ancient times either from the whetstone of the augur Navius having been buried there, or from its having been struck by lightning. It was repaired and re-dedicated by Libo; whence it was afterwards called Puteal Libonis, and Pu- teal ScRiBONiAKUM. After this periotl, its vicinity to the judgment-seat rendered it a noted object at Rome, and we find it frequently alluded to in the classics. (Hor. Ep. i. 19. 8, Sat. ii. 6. 35 ; Cic.p. rUTEAL LIBONIS OK SCKIBOXIANUM. Sest. 8, &c.) The tribunal of the praetor urbanus seems, however, to have remained on the comitium. Besides these we also find a Tribunal Aurelium mentioned on the forum, which seems to have stood near the temple of Castor (Cic. p. Sest. 15, in Pis. 5, p. Cluent. 34), and which, it is conjectured, was erected by the consul JI. Aurelius Cotta b. c. 74. These tribunals were prubably constructed of wood, and in such a manner that they might be removed on occasion, as for instance, when the whole area of the forum was required for gladiatorial .shows or other purposes of the like kind; at least it appears that the tribunals were used for the purpose of making the fire in the curia when the body of Clo- dius was burnt in it. (Ascon. ad Cic. Mil. Arg. p. 34.) In the year b. c. 12 1 the Temple of Concord was built by the consul L. Opimius on the Clivus Capi- tolinus just above the senaculum (Varr. L. L. v. § 156, Miill.); but, as we have already had occasion to discuss the history of this temple when treating of the Capitol and of the senaculum, we need not revert to it here. At the same time, or a little afterwards, he also erected the Basilica Opi.mlv. which is mentioned by Varro in clote connection with the temple of Concord, and must therefore have stood on its northern side, since on no other would there have been space for it. Of this basilica we hear but very little, and it seems not improbable ROMA. that its name may have been afterwards changed to that of " Basilica Argentaria," perhaps on account of the silversmiths' and bankers' shops having been removed thither from the tabernae on the forum. That a Basilica Argentaria, about the origin of which nobody can give any account, existed just at this spot is certain, since it is mentioned by the Notitia, in the 8th Regio, when proceeding from the forum of Trajan, as follows: " Cohortem sextam Vigilum, Basilicam Argentariam, Templum Concordiae, Um- bilicum Romae," &c. The present Salita di Mar- forio, which runs close to this spot, was called in the middle ages " Clivus Argentarius;" and a whole plot of buildings in this quarter, terminating, ac- cording to the MiraUlia (Montf. Diar. Ital. p. 293), with the temple of Vespasian, which, as we shall see in the sequel, stood next to the temple of Concord, bore the name of " Insula Argentaria " (Becker, Handb. p. 413, seq.). In the same year the forum was adorned with the triumphal arch called Fornix Fabius or Fabianus, erected by Q. Fabius AUobrogicus in commemora- tion of his triumph over the Allobroges. This was one of the earliest, though not precisely the first, of this species of monuments at Rome, it having been preceded by the three arches erected by L. Stertiiiius after his Spanish victories, of which two were situated in the Forum Boarium and one in the Circus Maximus. (Liv. xxxiii. 27.) We may here remark that fornix is the classical name for such arches ; and that the term arcus, which, how- ever, is used by Seneca of this very arch (Cotist. Saj). 1), did not come into general use till a late period. The situation of this arch is indicated by several passages in Roman authors. We have already cited one from Cicero (/). Plane. 7), and in another he says that Memmius, when coming down to the forum (that is, of course, down the Sacra Via), was accustomed to bow his head when passing through it (" Ita sibi ipsum magnum videri Mem- mium, ut in forum descendens caput ad fornicem Fabii demitteret," de Orat. ii. 66). Its site is still more clearly marked by the Pseudo-Asconius {^cid Cic. Verr. i. 7) as being close to the Regia, and by Porphyrio {ad Hor. Epist. i. 19. 8) as near the Puteal Libonis. The few other works about the forum during the remainder of the Republican period were merely restorations or alterations. Sulla when dictator seems to have made some changes in the curia (Plin. xxxiv. 12), and in B.C. 51, after its destruc- tion in the Clodian riots, it was rebuilt by his son Faustus. (Dion Cass. xl. 50.) Caesar, however, caused it to be pulled down in B.C. 45, under pre- tence of having vowed a temple to Felicitas, but in reality to efface the name of Sulla. (Id. xliv. 5.) The reconstruction of the Basilica Fulvia, or rather the superseding of it by the Basilica Paulli, has been already mentioned. It now only remains to notice two other objects connected with the Republican Forum, the origin of which cannot be assigned to any definite period. These were the Schola Xantha and the Jani. The former, which lay back considerably behind the temple of Saturn and near the top of the Clivus Capi- tolinus, consisted of a row of arched chambers, of which three are still visible. They ajjpear from inscrip- tions to have been the offices of the scribes, copyi^is, AnA praecones of the aediles,and seem to be alluded to by Cicero. {Philipp. ii. 7, p. Sest. 12.) Another n-w . Was discovered m 1835, at the side of the temple of
