II. WELL KNOWN FACTS CONCERNING THE SUBJECTS DISCUSSED HERE AND SOME NEW OBSERVATIONS
Are the Meridian line<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]> with its Obelisk and the Ara Pacis really related in the way that E. Buchner was first to suggest?<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]>
Why are the Obelisk and the Ara Pacis oriented in the unusual way they are?
The second question provides an answer to the first. Both buildings were oriented in approximately the same, somewhat peculiar way<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]>. In addition the erection of the Obelisk, dedicated by Augustus<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]>, and the erection of the Ara Pacis, commissioned by the senate<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]>, occurred almost simultaneously<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]>. Only because of
this combination of facts, does it actually make sense, in my opinion, that both are discussed under the assumption that there was from the beginning some sort of common iconographic scheme for both.
Frischer observes in this context: The "decisive role [of the Ara Pacis] in the Augustan project is revealed by the telltale sign that the obelisk is aligned not to the meridian and cardinal points, as one might well have expected, but to the altar [Ara Pacis] 90 meters away, which is itself oriented to the Via Flaminia. At a minimum, this is telling us that the designers encouraged the ancient viewer to see the two monuments as closely related"<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]>.
Giambattista (G.B.) Nolli's Rome map and the original location of the Montecitorio Obelisk
The problem here, as is well known, are the facts that neither the Montecitorio Obelisk, nor the Ara Pacis can still be studied in situ. We must therefore rely on those who have documented their original settings. Whereas the original position and size of the ground-plan of the Ara Pacis and its enclosure are well documented<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]>, Giambattista (G.B.) Nolli, whose large Rome map (1748), which was drawn to the scale ca. 1: 2910<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]>, and is normally regarded as being extremely accurate<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]>, had actually indicated in the first phase of his map the findspot of the Montecitorio Obelisk at a wrong location (see here Fig. 3.1a. For the second, in this detail corrected phase of his map, cf. Fig. 3.1b).
On the other hand it is likewise well known that Nolli, by very precisely drawing the ground-plan of the Palazzo Fiano-Almagià, especially its south-east corner, which is today located at the north-west corner of the junction of the roads Via in Lucina and Via del Giardino Theodoli (cf. Figs. 3.2; 3.6, label: former Palazzo Fiano-Almagià), had thus unconsciously documented the precise location and orientation (!) of the Ara Pacis and its enclosure - facts which were only understood when those were excavated<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]>.
Fig. 3.1a Fig. 3.1b
Figs. 3.1a; 3.1b; 3.3; 3.4. Details from G.B. Nolli's large Rome map (1748). Fig. 3.1a shows a detail of the first phase of the map, with wrong representation of the lying shaft of the Montecitorio Obelisk in situ. After F. Ehrle 1932. Fig. 3.1b shows Nolli's corrected second version of this detail of his Rome map (1748, "secondo stato". See for both phases infra, n. 53). After M. Bevilacqua 1998, 15. Fig. 3.3 shows the detail with the incised corner of the former Palazzo Fiano-Almagià. After F. Ehrle 1932 (the red arrows point at the walls that were built on top of the Ara Pacis Augustae). Fig. 3.4 shows the area of S. Giovanni in Laterano with the Lateran obelisk (index no. 10. Cf. here Fig. 5.1 and ns. 64, 214, Appendix 5, Appendix 10) and the lying shaft of the Horti Sallustiani obelisk (index no. 14. Cf. here Fig. 4 and ns. 9, 63, Appendix 10; and the Contribution by Vincent Jolivet in this volume). After F. Ehrle 1932.
Fig. 3.2. The north-west corner of the junction of the roads Via in Lucina and Via del Giardino Theodoli, looking from south towards the incised corner of the former Palazzo Fiano-Almagià. Photo: F.X. Schütz (29-V-2016).
Interestingly, the position, where in 1752 should be erected the Montecitorio Obelisk, is also on Nolli's map occupied by a monument. He gave it the index number 338: "Piazza di Monte Citorio, e Piedestallo della Colonna Antonina", which has a square ground-plan, and there is also the index number "340 Colonna Antonina giacente", although the map does not show the lying column of Antoninus Pius. Cf. for both, Ehrle 1932, 11. Erika Simon (erroneously) wrote: "Auf dem Marsfeld auf der heutigen Piazza di Montecitorio 1703 gefunden, zusammen mit der Säule, einem Monolith von 14,75 m Höhe [i.e., 50 Roman feet] aus rotem Granit. Diese zerbrach bei den Hebungsarbeiten und durch Brandeinwirkung. Ihre Reste wurden zur Ausbesserung des augusteischen [!] Gnomon-Obelisken verwendet, den man an der Stelle der Säule errichtete ..." (cf. ead.: "Sockel der Säule des Antoninus Pius", in: Helbig4 I  378, no. 480).
Whereas Nolli was right, because the monument was at his time temporarily kept there, Simon was wrong, because the column had not been excavated at this site, but instead in its vicinity. The whole procedure has been described by Sonia Maffei ("Columna Antonini Pii", in: LTUR I  298-300, Fig. 175, a coin representing the monument). On p. 299, she writes: "Per tutto il mediovo e fino all'inizio del XVIII sec.[olo] il fusto era rimasto visibile, per una altezza di quasi sei metri, su quello che allora era chiamato Mons Citatorius o Acceptorius. La colonna, nota con il nome di Columna Citatoria era ritenuta il sostegno usato in antico per affigere citazioni giudiziarie e bandi di magistrati in relazione all'attività dei comizi. Nel 1703 per ordine di Papa Clemente XI fu dato inizio agli scavi del monumento che terminarono portando alla luce l'intero fusto della colonna e la base scolpita con i rilievi. Il luogo esatto di rinvenimento della base fu identificato da Ch.
Hülsen ad O [vest] dell'attuale Parlamento [i.e., Palazzo di Montecitorio] (ex Curia Innocenziana) a 39 metri da Via della Missione. Nel 1705 il monumento fu trasportato nella Piazza Montecitorio, dove rimase, dopo i primi interventi di restauro sui rilievi del piedestallo (1706-1708), fino al 1759, quando un incendio scoppiato dietro la Curia Innocenziana, tra le strutture di protezione del monolite, dannegiò gravemente il fusto della colonna ...".
The Columns of Marcus Aurelius and Antoninus Pius belonged to the "Arae Consecrationis", that had been erected in this area (for those, cf. Eugenio La Rocca 1984, 101-114; Alberto Danti: "Arae Consecrationis", in: LTUR I  75-76, "Fig. 41. Arae consecrationis. Pianta generale di L. Messa [da La Rocca ... , fig. 11. For the Column of Marcus Aurelius, cf. Sonia Maffei: "Columna Marci Aurelii Antonini", in: LTUR I  302-305, Fig. 178; Häuber 2014, 727 with ns. 61-65).
See also Eugenio la Rocca's map of the Campus Martius, labelled: COLUMNA ANTONINI PII (cf. id. 2012, Fig. 8, index no. 40; and index no. 39: Arae consecrationis; id. 2014, 133, Fig. 11, index nos. 39; 40; id. 2015a, 60, Fig. 40, index nos. 39; 40); Katharina Friedl (2012); and Markus Wolf (2015). - Or, as Heinz-Jürgen Beste and Henner von Hesberg (2015, 290), have aptly called this impressive ensemble of monuments and buildings, the "paesaggio delle apoteosi sul Campo Marzo". Since most of these huge buildings were erected on top of the artificial mound currently called Monte Citorio (for that, cf. infra, pp. 232-233, 275-276), it would be interesting to reconstruct this ensemble in its topographic setting in order to better understand its impact on its surroundings.
For the just-mentioned toponyms, cf. here Figs. 3.5; 3.7, labels: Palazzo Montecitorio; Piazza di Montecitorio; Montecitorio Obelisk; COLUMNA: MARCUS AURELIUS; COLUMNA: ANTONINUS PIUS; "ARAE CONSECRATIONIS"; so-called Ustrina; Via degli Uffici del Vicario; Via della Missione.
It is of interest to ask in this context, when exactly the artificial mound called Monte Citorio was created. Katharina Friedl (2012, 374-375) suggests the following: "Im Zuge der von 1907 bis 1910 laufenden Bauarbeiten für einen neuen Gebäudeflügel des Palazzo Montecitorio stieß man in der durch die Via dell'Impresa und die Via della Missione gebildeten Ecke, unter dem heutigen Sitzungssaal, auf Reste eines antiken Monuments [i.e., the so-called ustrinum or ara consecrationis of Marcus Aurelius], das in Folge größtenteils freigelegt werden konnte (Abb. 7) [with n. 109]. In der Typologie und Dimension von etwa 30 m x 30 m wies es große Ähnlichkeiten zum sog. Ustrinum des Antoninus Pius auf. Topographisch gab es allerdings einen entscheidenden Unterschied: Das Bauwerk unter dem Parlament wurde mitten auf einer Erhöhung, dem Montecitorio, gebaut und war vom Weiten [!] sichtbar. Das sog. Ustrinum des Antoninus Pius lag dagegen in der Ebene westlich unterhalb des Hügels und hatte somit einen weniger exponierten Platz (Abb. 4 [= detail of R. Lanciani, FUR, fol. 15]) [with n. 110]".
In her n. 109, K. Friedl (2012, 374) provides references, in her n. 110 on p. 375, she writes: "Beim Montecitorio handelt es sich um eine künstliche Aufschüttung unbekannter Zeit ([providing references]). m.[eines] E.[rachtens] muss der Hügel zum Zeitpunkt der Erbauung des sog. Ustrinum des Marc Aurel bereits existiert haben. Danti 1984, 144 zufolge wurden die heute noch in situ liegenden Fundamentblöcke 3,90 m unterhalb der Via della Missione entdeckt. Das wäre in etwa die Höhe, in der das Bodenniveau seit der Antike angestiegen ist (vgl. dazu den Sockel der Markussäule ... [with reference]). Somit könnte die Topographie für die frühere Entstehung des sog. Ustrinum des Marc Aurel sprechen, da sich ansonsten die Frage stellt, wieso nicht bereits für das sog. Ustrinum des Antoninus Pius der repräsentativere Platz gewählt wurde. Doch ist eine Aufschüttung speziell für das sog. Ustrinum des Marc Aurel nicht auszuschließen".
As we shall see below (cf. infra, pp. 233, 275-276), the Monte Citorio is much larger than indicated on Lanciani's FUR (fol. 15), and, in my opinion, much older than suggested by K. Friedl (op.cit.).
Our maps that accompany this text and the cartographic sources on which they are based
Our maps, which are based on the official photogrammetric data of Roma Capitale, are published on Figs. 3.5-3.10. Into these maps were integrated cartographic data from the following plans and maps: LTUR I (1993) 372 Fig. 30 "Apollo in Circo, Bellona ...", p. 425 Fig. 119 "Campus Martius centrale e la zona del Circus Flaminius. Rilievo base di G. Gatti (da Coarelli, Guida , 237)", p. 426 "Fig. 120. Campus Martius occidentale. Rilievo di L. Messa (da La Rocca, Riva [i.e., La Rocca 1984] fuori testo)", p. 427 "Fig. 121. Campus Martius meridionale: circus Flaminius e forum Holitorium. Disegno di L. Messa (da E. La Rocca, in L'Urbs [i.e., La Rocca 1987], fig. 3); LTUR II (1995) 465-467, Figs. 126a-128 "Forum Holitorium ...". For the section of the `Via Triumphalis´ of the Imperial period, that replaced the Forum Holitorium, we consulted S. Le Pera and L. Sasso D'Elia (1995).
For the approximate location of the former Arco di Portogallo, cf. Friedrich Rakob (1987, 699 Fig. 5, label: ARCUS); Giovanni Battista Nolli's map (1748; cf. here Fig. 3.3), index no. 353 (for that, cf. infra, n. 56); and the inscription here Fig. 3.5.1, which was inserted into the façade of the Palazzo on the Via del Corso, where this arch once stood (cf. Fig. 3.6, labels: Via del Corso; Approximate location of the Arco di Portogallo). Cf. Filippo Coarelli, (1997, 16, Fig. 2 "Pianta del Campo Marzio intorno al 100 a. C. (a tratteggio le situazioni più tarde ..."; p. 364 Fig. 74 "Area del Circo Flaminio e del Campo Marzio centrale: schema recostruttivo (intorno al 65 a.C.). Più in scuro è indicata la topografia più tarda desumibile dalla pianta marmorea severiana"; p. 552 Fig. 140 "Il Campo Marzio in età augustea"). Cf. Eugenio La Rocca (2012, 57 Fig. 8, "Pianta del Campo Marzio" (drawing: Paolo Mazzei)); Portico d'Ottavia/ S. Ambrogio della Massima 2014, 316, Fig. 10. For S. Ambrogio della Massima, cf. also Mayeul de Dreuille (1996); and Hubert Wolf (2013), both passim. Cf. LTUR I (1993) 454 Fig. 156 "Circus Flaminius", with the Aedes: Hercules Musarum; Aedes: Iuno Regina and Aedes: Iuppiter Stator ..."). For the Aedes Hercules Musarum, cf. also Chrystina Häuber (2014, 281-282, 286, 811). For the Circus Flaminius, cf. also Giorgio Filippi, Paolo Liverani (2014-2015); and Luca Sasso D'Elia 2016 forthcoming.
Many buildings and ancient structures in the central and northern Campus Martius were drawn after Fedora Filippi (2015, Tavola II: drawing: Alessandro Blanco, Daniele Nepi, Alessandro Vella). The Arco di Camilliano and the cosiddetto Arco di Giano alla Minerva were drawn after Alessandra Ten (2015, 57, Fig. 27, p. 67 Fig. 42; cf. passim). For the Giano alla Minerva, cf. also Luigia Attilia (2015). For the "Arae Consecrationis"/ the so-called ustrina of the Campus Martius, cf. E. La Rocca (1984, 101-114; Alberto Danti ("Arae Consecrationis", in: LTUR I  75-76, "Fig. 41. Arae consecrationis. Pianta generale di L. Messa [da La Rocca ... , fig. 11). After the latter plan, I have also drawn the location of the Column of Antoninus Pius). See also Eugenio la Rocca's map of the Campus Martius, labelled: COLUMNA ANTONINI PII (cf. id. 2012, Fig. 8, index no. 40; and index no. 39: Arae consecrationis; id. 2014, 133, Fig. 11, index nos. 39; 40; id. 2015a, 60, Fig. 40, index nos. 39; 40); Katharina Friedl (2012); Markus Wolf (2015); and the Contribution by Vincent Jolivet in this volume.
The course of the Tiber, the ground-plans of post-antique buildings and of current city-blocks, as well as the following ancient buildings and structures were drawn after the photogrammetric data: the so-called Syrian sanctuary on the Janiculum, the base of the Column of Marcus Aurelius, the Republican Temples at the Largo Torre Argentina, the Theatre of Marcellus, the Temples of Apollo and Bellona (for the latter three I have also consulted the already mentioned plans by E. La Rocca 1987, Fig. 3 [= LTUR I (1993) Fig. 121], and id. 2012, Fig. 8; as well as LTUR I , 372 "Fig. 30. Apollo in Circo, Bellona e perirrhanterion. Pianta della fase augustea e delle fasi posteriori (ADCRXRip, 1957; da BCom 90.2 (1985), 364 fig. 84a)", the Republican Temples at the Forum Holitorium, the Mausoleum Augusti, the column of Marcus Aurelius, the ancient wall immediately adjacent to the Pantheon that has been attributed to the Porticus Argonautarum within the Saepta [Iulia], the Pantheon, the `Exhedra?´ within Palazzo Capranica, and (my) "Tempio di Siepe".
<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]> Compare for the term `timepiece´, applied by many scholars to the meridian discussed here, Heslin 2014, 42 , who criticizes Haselberger 2014c, 36 , with the comments by Haselberger 2014d, 171-173.
<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]> cf. Frischer 2017, 20-22.
<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]> Cf. Buchner 1982, 45 (= id. 1976, 355), who asserted that they were almost identically oriented. Contra: M. Schütz 1990, 449-450, who refuted this and provided reliable information concerning their very similar orientations (cf. below). Cf. La Rocca 1983, 55, all of whom are quoted verbatim in Appendix 2, infra, p. 388ff. Cf. Claridge 1998, 190-194, Map Fig. 77: 22 and Figs. 85-88; p. 190; ead. 2010, pp. 214-217, Map Fig. 77: 22 and Figs. 85-88; p. 214: "In 10 BC, the twentieth anniversary of the conquest of Egypt, on axis with the altar of Peace which was under construction at the same time (in its original location, Fig. 85: 1), Augustus erected an Egyptian obelisk and at its foot installed a solar meridian designed by the mathematician Facundus Novius" (for the latter, cf. infra, n. 216).
Heslin 2014, 41 , writes: "... the indisputable observation that there was a meaningful alignment between the two monuments [the Meridian and the Ara Pacis]".
M. Schütz 2014a, 47, fig. 1  writes: "When the socle of the [Montecitorio] obelisk [here Fig. 1.1] was unearthed in 1748, J. Stuart was highly surprised to find ... that this socle was not aligned in a parallel direction to the meridian line (as one would expect for a sundial). Rather, he found that the socle is turned by 15o toward the west". Cf. James Stuart 1750, pp. LXXIII-LXXIV.
Haselberger 2014d, 171 with n. 12, writes: "In 1940 ... G. Gatti interpreted the obelisk's c.[irca] 15o deviation from the cardinal directions (as measured by Stuart) to indicate intentional, direct, axial alignment between the two monuments [i.e., Montecitorio Obelisk and Ara Pacis] (Fig. 4)"; p. 177 with n. 32: ""he [Buchner] also stressed that the parallel dedicatory inscriptions on opposite sides of the obelisk's socle were "not set up on the N [north] or S [south] side of the obelisk base ... [as in the case of the re-erected obelisk in front of Palazzo Montecitorio, here Fig. 1.1] but on the E [east] and W [west] side: the inscriptions were therefore to be read looking toward, and from the Ara Pacis"" (!); cf. p. 198.
So already Carta Archeologica II, 163 at "84 - HOROLOGIUM ... la base [of the obelisk], che aveva l'iscrizione sul lato E[st] e sul lato O[ovest]", and map. Cf. La Rocca 2014, 122-123 with n. 6; Frischer 2017, 19, 79; Pollini 2017, 53, 54-55.
<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]> For the Montecitorio Obelisk, cf. ns. 21, 26, Domitian's Obelisk, the Obeliscus Pamphilius, Appendix 1, Appendix 2, Appendix 4, Appendix 6, Appendix 11, infra, pp. 158ff.; 388ff.; 424ff.; 429ff.; 563ff.
<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]> cf. Pollini 2017, 54: ""But victory was only one of the two principal pillars of Augustus' verbal and visual ideolgy; the other was peace. The Roman concept of "peace through victory" was, in fact, one of the fundamental ideological messages of Augustus' great urban projects, or as Augustus himself expressed it more fully in his Res Gestae (13): per totum imperium populi Romani terra marique ... parta victoriis pax ("throughout the entire empire of the Roman people, both on land and sea peace [was] brought forth by victories"). For this reason, the base of Augustus' obelisk was set in direct axial alignment with the Ara Pacis Augustae ("Altar of Augustan Peace"), a pendant monument voted by the Senate in 13 BC" (my italics). And on p. 55, he writes: "It is also noteworthy that Augustus' 50th birthday fell in the year 13 BC, when the Ara Pacis was constituted (constitutio) by the Roman Senate". J.C. Anderson 1998, 32, writes that the Ara Pacis is "... an altar built expressly to celebrate the arrival of the pax Augusta". And on p. 35, Anderson 1998, remarks: "... it should be noted that in fact the oft-repeated motif that the golden age had returned with an end to world-wide warfare (and the establishment of the Pax Augusta) had first been publicly proclaimed by the celebration of the ludi Saeculares in 17 B.C., the very event for which Horace's poem was commissioned (CIL 6.32323) [with n. 28, providing references]" (my emphasis).
<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]> cf. Coarelli 1980, 304: "L'ara [Pacis], votata il 4 luglio del 13, fu dedicata il 30 gennaio del 9 a. C.". La Rocca 2014, 144 with n. 93, writes: "One of the obelisks [the Montecitorio Obelisk] was moved to the Campus Martius, where it became the gnomon of a meridian. We may assume a unitary program that included also the erection of an altar to the Pax Augusta". Pollini 2017, 55, writes: "The Ara Pacis ... was dedicated on January 30 in 9 BC, the 50th birthday of Augustus' wife Livia. As for the obelisk, the inscription on its base indicating offices held by Augustus makes it clear that the obelisk was dedicated around the same time, between June of 10 and June of 9 BC. In my view, the specific date is likely to have been the birthday (dies natalis) of Augustus, on September 23 in 10 BC. This year marked the vicennalia (20th anniversary) of Augustus' great military success over Cleopatra". If Augustus actually celebrated his vicennalia, as is also suggested by other scholars discussed here, this would prove his interest in Egyptian rituals; cf. Häuber 2014, 686 with n. 151 (for Septimius Severus' decennalia).
La Rocca 2014, p. 121 n. 3, is of a different opinion than Pollini, op.cit.: "The date [of the dedication of the Ara Pacis] is often connected with Livia's birthday [cf. infra, n. 279], who, however, between 13 and 9 B.C. had not yet achieved a prominent place in Augustus' complex succession plan, in which Julia, mother of Gaius and Lucius, still occupied the most prominent spot. According to the feriale Cumanum, the supplicationes took place on January 30. These were not for Livia's birthday but for Augustus' imperium, as a guarantor of the empire, cf. La Rocca 2010, 220: "Another possibility, not to be ruled out, is that the obelisk had been dedicated on August 1, 10 B.C., on the occasion of the 20-year celebration for the conquest of Alexandria"; cf. p. 145 with n. 100, quoted verbatim in Appendix 5, infra, p. 427ff.
<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]> Frischer 2017, 79; cf. Pollini with Cipolla 2014, 54; La Rocca 2015a, 49, n. 122, quoted verbatim in Appendix 2; Discussion of E. Buchner's hypotheses; I. E. La Rocca 1983; 2015a, infra, pp. 389ff.
<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]> cf. Carta Archeologica II, 164-165, at "85 - ARA PACIS AUGUSTAE (Fig. 4)", and map (cf. the comment by Haselberger 2014c, 20 n. 7 : "First detailed topographic placement of Ara Pacis").
Cf. Filippo Coarelli 1980, 30, 205, 241, 269, 304-309; p. 304: "Nel 1879, il von Duhn identificò per primo il monumento con l'Ara Pacis. Furono così intrapresi, nel 1903, i primi scavi regolari, che portarono al ritrovamento delle strutture dell'ara, e al recupero di altri rilievi. Infine, nel 1937-1938, in occasione del bimillenario augusteo, gli scavi furono definitamente conclusi. Furono così scoperte, tra l'altro, le due fiancate dell'altare, una delle quali quasi intatta. Si passò quindi alla ricomposizione dell'ara (orientamento non più est-ovest, ma nord-sud [my emphasis]) nel padiglione costruito appositamente presso il Mausoleo di Augusto, in prossimità del Tevere. L'inaugurazione ebbe luogo il 23 settembre del 1938"; cf. id. 2015, 32, 240, 305, 348, 394-399, 40: p. 396: "In occasione del bimillenario augusteo l'ara venne ricostruita nel padiglione allestito da Vittorio Morpurgo (1938). Recentemente (2005) è stato inaugurato il nuovo edificio dovuto a Richard Meier [cf. here Fig. 1.9]". For the location of the latter building, cf. here Figs. 3.7; 3.8, labels: MAUSOLEUM AUGUSTI; Via di Ripetta; Museo dell' ARA PACIS.
1. Cf. Torelli 1992, 108 with n. 13, Fig. 1; id. 1999; Haselberger 2014c, 16 n. 3, p. 20 n. 7 ; Pollini with Cipolla 2014, 54-55 with n. 7; Frischer and Fillwalk 2014, 79 with n. 8; Frischer 2017, 22 with n. 8.
<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]> so Bevilacqua 1998, 13.
<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]> cf. Bevilacqua 1998; Brienza 1998; Le Pera 2014, 76-77, pl. 21; Häuber 2014, 12, 16-17, 19, and passim.
<![if !supportFootnotes]><![endif]> cf. Ehrle 1932, who published in facsimile the first phase of Nolli's map, for the wrong location of the Montecitorio Obelisk (cf. here Fig. 3.1a); on p. 11 in the accompanying text, he published Nolli's own index to this map: "344 Palaz.[zo] Conti con Obelisco Solare giacente", today: Piazza del Parlamento no. 3. Bevilacqua 1998, 13 writes: "... i due stati [of Nolli's large map of 1748, cf. here Figs. 3.1a; 3.1b] si differenziano inoltre per la correzione dell'orientamento e dimensioni dell'obelisco di Montecitorio". See the relevant details of the two phases of Nolli's map reproduced on his p. 15 (= here Figs. 3.1a; 3.1b); cf. Haselberger 2014c, 19, Fig. 4  (he refers to the corrected second version of Nolli's map and adds further references). For the Palazzo Fiano Almagià, Via in Lucina, 17, cf. Ferruccio Lombardi 1992, 129, Rione III COLONNA n. 32. For a plan that shows the findspot of the Ara Pacis underneath the Palazzo Fiano-Almagià, cf. Torelli 1992, 108 with n. 13, Fig. 1; id. 1999, 71; Haselberger 2014d, 171, Fig. 4. For the current situation, cf. Atlante di Roma 1996, Tav. 49.