South wall Ara Pacis

ara pacis: processional frieze showing members of imperial household (south face).

the south wall has seen great deal of scholarship , greatest number of academic debates. unlike north wall, of heads new (not authentic ancient heads, modern creations), heads of figures on south wall original. half dozen figures recognizable looking @ other surviving statues of members of imperial family. nevertheless, debate has taken place on many of these figures, including augustus, agrippa, tiberius, julia, , antonia.

the figure of augustus not discovered until 1903 excavation, , head damaged cornerstone of renaissance palazzo built on top of original ara pacis site. although identified correctly in 1903, petersen, strong, , stuart-jones saw figure rex sacrorum. today augustus better recognized hair style face.

in absence of augustus panel, scholars debated whether figure augustus or agrippa or lepidus. in 1907, sieveking proposed figure lepidus, pontifex maximus @ time. sieveking later reversed position series of peculiar suggestions. in 1926, loewy compared louvre agrippa of agrippa in copenhagen (and elsewhere) ara pacis in order demonstrate iconographical similarity. aside small minority of scholars (most vehemently defensive of lepidus in rom. mitt in 1930s ludwig curtius), rest of academy concluded figure agrippa. ryberg s 1949 article gave further weight conclusion.

many scholars continue see julia figure livia, having reasoned livia has on ara pacis. indeed, livia appear somewhere (her exclusion unlikely), 13 bc julia had politically eclipsed livia, has been understood , explained many scholars. identification dates milani in 1891. furthermore, livia has no bond agrippa, whereas julia wife , expected unofficial empress of rome decades, during , beyond augustus lifetime. julia better personified augustus new pro-natalism program, having given birth 4 surviving children. nevertheless, majority of scholars in 2000 preferred see figure livia.

the tiberius figure identified such milani, identification questioned until 1940s. moretti, in making glass museum ara pacis @ mussolini s command, guessed 2 consuls (tiberius , varus) of 13 flank augustus, saw figure m. valerius messalla. v.h. von poulsen , toynbee proposed iullus antonius. has been established, augustus flanked priests, , figure tiberius. boschung , bonanno have both matched face period tiberius statuary.

in relation antonia, drusus, , germanicus, h. dütschke proposed in 1880 correct identity antonia , drusus, incorrectly saw toddler claudius. a. von domaszewski amended family identification , correctly saw child germanicus. suggested ara pacis arranged in family groups. correctly determined two-year-old child germancius, exact birth on 24 may 15 bc known. helps prove ceremony event in 13, although few scholars continued argue ceremony of 9 bc (until definitive proof in favor of 13 came out in 1939).

in relation domitii ahenobarbi, von domaszewski proposed in same 1903 article last family on south wall of father of emperor nero (born lucius domitius ahenobarbus). identification remains widespread today. pollini provides best summary of viewpoint in article, ahenobarbi, appuleii , others on ara pacis, points out writer suetonius mentions nero s father went east on staff of young gaius caesar . campaign known have begun in 2 bc, means gnaeus must have been of mature age time, therefore requiring birth year of @ least 17 bc, would, in turn, make him sufficiently old boy on ara pacis. pollini reasons delay in gnaeus career (only reaching consulship in 32 ad) resulted documented unpleasant character , points out careers of other members of family undesirable traits suffered similar delays, notably augustus youngest grandson, agrippa postumus, had no career, , germanicus brother, later emperor, claudius, career started late. however, there dissenters theory. stern claims these figures cannot possibly domitii ahenobarbi, on basis of belief gnaeus domitius ahenobarbus, whom von domaszewski saw boy of family, born after monument s completion. syme had argued gnaeus born after monument s completion, accepted identification of ahenobarbus family, preferring identify boy otherwise unknown elder brother , girl figure otherwise unknown elder sister of gnaeus—both of whom died young. syme proved unintentionally, based on inscription ils 6095 lucius domitius ahenobarbus governor of africa in 13 bc , not in rome ara pacis ceremony.

starting in 1894, eugen petersen suggested lucius caesar appears agrippa, dressed in trojan costume equestrian event called troy game, held in 13 bc dedication of theater of marcellus. theory won universal acceptance many decades, though evidence overwhelmingly against. challenge slight: several scholars, noting size , age of boy beside agrippa, preferred identify him gaius, opinion prevailed 1935. boy not roman, given clothing, lack of bulla, , hair. ingrained petersen s theory, however, when distinguished scholar erika simon (1968, 18) suggested boy barbarian, subjected intense criticism until retreated (e.g. mario torelli (1982, 60 n. 72), once called opinion perfect nonsense ). subsequently, led charles brian rose, scholars have realized petersen wrong: boy foreign prince. stern adds costume wrong trojan (no phrygian hat) , no bulla – worn roman boys protection evil eye. many others have contributed disprove petersen s theory.