ROMA. longest and most lofty of all the aqueducts, being 58,700 jiassus, or nearly 59 miles. Ion?, and its arches were occasionally 109 feet hijih. (Front. 15.) This also was completed by the emperor Claudius, as appears from the inscription still extant upon its remains over the Porta Maggiore ; where both enter the city on the same arch, the Anio Novus flnwinn; over the Claudia. Hence it was conducted over the Caelian hill on the Arcus Xeroniani or Caeumontani, which temiinated, as we have already said, near the temple of Claudius. As Procoiiius mentions fourteen aqueducts, five new ones must have been added between the time of Frontiiius and of that historian; but respecting only two have we any certain information. Tiie first of these is probably the Aqua Trajana, which we find recorded upon qoins of Trajan, and which is also mentioned in the Acta Martyr. S. Anton. The water was taken from the neighbourhood of the Lacus Sabatinus {Logo di Bi-acciano), and, being conducted to the height of the Janiculum, served to turn tiie mills under that hill. (Procop. B. G. i. 19.) Tiiis duct still serves to convey the Acqua Paola, which, however, has been spoilt by water taken from the lake. It was also called CmiNiA. The Aqua Alexandrina was constructed by the emperor Alexander Severus for the use of his baths. (Lamprid. Alex. 25.) Originally it was the same as that now called Acqua Felice, but con- ducted at a lower level. The Aqua Severi^j*a is supposed to have been made by the emperor Septimius Severus for the use of bis baths in the 1st Region; but there is no evidence to establish its execution. 'Ilie Aqua Antoniniana was probably executed by Caracalla for the service of his great baths in the 12th Region ; but this also is unsupported by any satisfactory proofs. (Canina, Indie, p. 620.) The names and history of a few other aqueducts which we sometimes find mentioned are too obscure to require notice here. It does not belong to this subject to notice the Roman Viae, an account of which will be found under that head. Sources and Literature of Roman Topo- graphy. With the exception of existing monuments, the chief and most authentic sources for the topography of Rome are the passages of ancient authors in which different localities are alluded to or described. In- scriptions also are a valuable source of information. By ar the most important of these is the Monumentum NCYRANUiM, or copy of the record left by Augustus t his actions; an account of which is given else- licre. [Vdl. I. p. 1.34.] To what is there said we ' i-d only add that the best and most useful edition of
- liis document is that published at Berlin with the
emendations of Franz, and a commentary by A. W. Zunipt (1845, 4to. pp. 120). Another valuable inscription, though nut nearly so important as the one ju.st mentioned, is that called the Basis Capi- touna (Gruter, ccl.), containing the names of the Vici of 5 Regions (the 1st, 10th, 12tli, 13th, and 14tli), whose curatores and vicomagistri erected a ninnmnent to Hadrian. It will be found at the end of Becker's Ilandbuch, vol. i. We may also mention among sources of this description the fragments of Calendars which have been found in various places, and which are frequently useful by marking the sites of temples where certain sacrifices ROMA. 851 were performed. For the most part the original marbles of these fragments have disappeared, and the inscriptions on them are consequently only ex- tant in JIS. copies. One of the most ancient monu- ments of this kind is the Fasti Maffeoruji or Calendarium JIaffeaxum, so called from its having been preserved in the Palazzo Maffei. With a few lacunae, it contains all the twelve months; but what little information that is to be found in it, be- sides the principal festivals, relates chiefly to Au- gustus. The next in importance is the Fasti pRAENESTixi, discovered at Praeneste (^Palestriiia) in 1774. Verrius Flaccus, the celebrated gram- marian, arranged and annotated it, caused it to be cut in marble, and erected it in the forum at Prae- neste. (Suet. III. Gramm. c. 17.) Only four or five months are extant, and those in an imperfect state. The Calendarium Amiterninum was discovered at Amiternum in 1703, and contains the months from May to December, but not entire. The calendar called Fasti Capranicorum, so nanjed from its having formerly been preserved in the Pa- lazzo Capranica, contains August and September complete. Other calendars of the same sort are the Antiatinum, Venusinum, &c. Another lapidary document, but unfortunately in so imperfect a state that it often serves rather to puzzle than to instruct, is the Capitdline Plan. This is a large plan of Rome cut upon marble tablets, and appaiently of the age of Septimius Severus, though with subse- quent additions. It was discovered by the architect Giovanni Antonio Dosi, in the pontificate of Pius IV., under the church of SS. Cosmo e Daniiano; where, broken into many pieces, it was used as a covering of the walls. It came into the possession of Cardinal Farnese, but was put away in a lumber rooin and forgotten for more than a century. Being rediscovered, it was published in 1673, in 20 plates, by Giovanni Pietro Bellori, librarian to Queen Chris- tina; and subsequently at the end of tiie 4th vo- lume of the Thesaurus of Graevius. The original fragments were carried to Naples with the other property of the Farnese family, and were subse- quently given by the king of Naples to Pope Benedict XIV. In 1742 Benedict presented them to the Capitoline Museum at Rome, where they now appear on the wall of the staircase; but several of the pieces had been lost, for which copies, after the designs of Bellori and marked with a star, were substituted. On these fragments the plans of some ancient buildings may be made out, but it is very seldom that their topographical connection can be traced. Amongst the literary records relating to Roman topography, the first place must be assigned to the Notitia. The full title of this work is: Notitia Dignitatum utriusque Imperii, or in Partibus Ori- entis et Occidentis ; and it is a statistical view of the Roman empire, of which the description of Rome forms only a small portion or appendix. It cannot be later than the reign of Constantine, since no Christian chunh is mentioned in it, and indeed no building later than that emperor; nor, on tiic other hand, can it be earlier, since numerous buildings of the 3rd century, and even some of Constant ine's, are named in it. The design of it seems to have been, to name the principal buildings or other objects which m'lrked the boundaries of the difl'erent Re- gions; but we are not to assume that these objects are always named in the order in wb.ich they oc- curred, which is far from being the case. This 3i 2
