Matidia Minor and Suessa Aurunca

Matidia Minor and Suessa Aurunca | 73

IntroductionThis study aims to illustrate briefly the true significance of Matidia Minor, a relatively little discussed member of the imperial family in the time of Hadrian and his immediate successors. Matidia Minor’s patronage of the Roman theatre at Suessa Aurunca provides compelling arguments for such a reassessment, as will be shown below.

Suessa Aurunca’s theatre was first explored in the 19th century,1 and finally excavated between 1999 and 2006.2 These excavations brought to light some 35,000 marble fragments and the study of these, together with evidence gleaned from the building’s stratigraphy and its associated levels of use and abandonment, has allowed the first reconstruction of the theatre’s appearance in its most splendid state. This corresponds to the period when Matidia Minor promoted and financed its complete renovation. By using marble from the imperial quarries in this monument, Matidia Minor was able to show her personal and political power, which challenge previous conceptions of her marginal role within the imperial family.

Suessa Aurunca: a city in Campania felixSessa Aurunca (the ancient Suessa), a town in Campania, is situated 60km north of Naples (Pl. 1) on the north-west slope of the extinct Roccamonfina volcano. Set on a tufa rock by the Tyrrhenian Sea, the town overlooks a vast territory intersected by the River Garigliano, the ancient Liris. Offering fertile volcanic soil and an abundance of water, the region was inhabited between the 8th and 4th centuries bc by Italic tribes, whom the ancient literary sources identified with the mythical people of the Ausoni-Aurunci. The existence of military strongholds guarding the territory and of an extensive necropolis suggest that, during the 6th and 5th centuries bc, Suessa became the principal city of the Aurunci, who, in this period, had close cultural links with the Greek and Etruscan cities of southern Campania. This can be seen, for example, in a votive statuette representing a worshipper known as the ‘Aphrodite of Sessa’,3 now in the British Museum (BM 1864,0316.1). This bronze sculpture of exceptional quality from the late Archaic period was discovered among the remains of a sanctuary situated in the territory between Suessa and Cales, although it was probably made in Capua.

Suessa’s strategic location and its resources soon attracted the attention of Rome and a clash between Rome and the Aurunci was inevitable. In 313 bc4 it ended with the destruction of the town and the subsequent foundation of a Latin colony that had the same name as the previous settlement. The simultaneous construction of the Via Appia allowed military control of the area and stimulated the economic development of the city, as shown by the silver and bronze coins minted in Suessa from 270 bc.5

In the 2nd century bc, Cato described Suessa as one of the most prosperous agricultural markets in Italy, particularly for olives and grapes.6 The famous Falernum wine was produced from these grapes in numerous villae rusticae scattered throughout the territory. In 90 bc, L. Cornelius Sulla transformed Suessa into a municipium, while in 28 bc Augustus raised it to the status of colonia under the name of Colonia Iulia Felix Classica Suessa.7 As a result of its new status,

Chapter 6Matidia Minor and Suessa AuruncaSergio Cascella

74 | Hadrian: Art, Politics and Economy

Plate 1 Map of Campania, showing the position of Suessa Aurunca (reworked version of Map III in Frederiksen 1984)

Plate 2 Aerial view from 2001 of the Roman theatre, cryptoporticus and forum at Suessa Aurunca (photo: author)


belongs to the Kiel/Salus type, dating to the Claudian period.15 The portrait, carved from a single piece of marble, has the hair separated by a central parting and divided into broad wavy locks above the ears and gathered behind in a bun. The hieratic and idealized attitude of the face is highlighted by thin lips, a straight nose and large eyes without pupils.

The head of the second statue represents a high-ranking female of the Julio-Claudian dynasty, and was first interpreted as a portrait of Agrippina Major, then as Agrippina Minor.16 Recently, however, following a close study by Susan Wood,17 it has been identified as a portrait of Caligula’s sister, Julia Drusilla (Pl. 4b). The head is characterized by hair divided by a central parting, with soft wavy locks ending behind the neck in spiral curls.18 Small curls surround the oval face: there is also a diadem, separated from the hair by an infula, a beaded band that encircles the head. This attribute is common to portraits of Caligula’s three sisters19 and is also visible in a statue identified as Julia Drusilla from the Roman theatre at Caere.20 According to Wood, the infula is an emblem of the rank of priestess of the imperial cult, but it was also used in female portraits to signify their sanctity. In summary, Wood believes that the infula indicates Julia Drusilla’s status as Diva which she acquired after her death.21 Since it is very likely that after the deification of Julia the statue from Caere was reworked to add the infula, it is clear that the portrait from Suessa, which shows no signs of alteration, is dated after the death and deification of Julia Drusilla, so the whole sacellum or at least part of its sculptural decoration may be dated to after ad 38. Three other portraits were found during excavations carried out in 1926 by Amedeo Maiuri within the Republican cryptoporticus and the crypt of the summa cavea.22 These three heads, identifiable as Germanicus, Drusus Minor and Tiberius, were looted during the military occupation of the Second World War. However, one of them, that of Tiberius, at present appears to be in an American private collection, as is evident from a photograph in a recent publication by John Pollini.23 However, Polllini was unaware of the previous literature24 and the real place of discovery, and has erroneously argued that the head came from North Africa.

the city received a number of public facilities and monumental buildings, including the theatre.

The Augustan theatreSuessa’s Roman theatre was originally built in the time of Augustus near the boundary walls of the town.8 Its large cavea, which had a diameter of 90m, rested on the south-western slope of the rock on which the Latin colony had been founded. In later times, the theatre’s location remained obvious, as its ruins formed a wide semi-circle that made it instantly recognizable. Its location (Pl. 2) downhill from the forum and the Republican-era cryptoporticus9 recalls the town plans of Hellenistic terraced urban centres and the visual appearance of the late Republican sanctuaries in Campania and Lazio.10 It also adheres to the principles of Augustan town planning, which tended to link the forum with the theatre.11 It is widely acknowledged that the imposing marble architecture of theatres and other public buildings in Roman towns was a key element in the celebration of imperial power. The walls of Suessa’s theatre were made of a combination of opus reticulatum brickwork and ashlar-style opus quadratum tufa blocks. The cavea could seat 8,000 spectators and was divided into four sections by stairs made from blocks of limestone and marble. The use of coloured marble for the columns and architectural decoration is characteristic of Campanian architecture of the Augustan age and puts the theatre firmly within this cultural context, even though the evidence from the Augustan phase of the theatre is somewhat limited.

Unfortunately, no statues from the Augustan scaenae frons have survived. The only group of sculptures from this period includes two colossal statues about 3.5m high (Pl. 3), in white marble, probably Greek, recovered in the sacellum in summa cavea, added at the time of Caligula or Claudius and dedicated to the imperial cult.12 Of this, only the 10m long base and some fragments of Africano marble (marmor Luculleum)13 columns, originally 6m high, from the city of Teos near Izmir in Turkey, remain.

The fragments of the two colossal statues in the Sessa Aurunca Museum seated on a throne portray Diva Livia Augusta (inv. no. 287037) and Julia Drusilla Panthea (inv. no. 297939). The portrait of Livia Augusta (Pl. 4a)14

Plate 3 The colossal female statue from the sacellum in summa cavea in the Roman theatre at Suessa Aurunca (Sessa Aurunca Museum inv. no. 297027) (photo: author)

Plate 4a–b a: portrait of Livia Augusta, Sessa Aurunca Museum (inv. no. 287037); b: portrait of Julia Drusilla, Sessa Aurunca Museum (inv. no. 297939). Both from the Julio-Claudian period (photo: author)


family tie between the new princeps and the established domus Augusta.

The public munificence displayed by Mindia Matidia in Suessa was possible because she owned vast estates in Campania that were well managed by her procuratores.30 In addition to Suessa, Mindia Matidia was also held in high regard in the towns of Minturnae and Sinuessa,31 where she financially supported the construction and renovation of several public buildings which provided these towns with the character (urbanitas) typical of great Roman cities. Therefore Mindia Matidia, perhaps in contrast to the limits imposed on her in Rome, demonstrated her power and influence through her personal involvement in the urban transformation of Suessa and the surrounding area.

Mindia Matidia’s properties in Campania32 were partly inherited from her mother, the Elder Matidia, demonstrated by an inscription by one of Matidia Major’s procuratores found at Allifae,33 and in part from her father as suggested by the discovery of an inscription at Suessa that mentions a libertus L. Mindius Thelymorphus.34 Unfortunately, Mindia Matidia’s death brought an end to this period of prosperity for Suessa. Thereafter, her properties became part of the inheritance of the new emperor Marcus Aurelius and his daughter, Vibia Aurelia Sabina,35 who had no active involvement in the town.

Imperial benefactions and public monuments in Suessa AuruncaMindia Matidia’s prominent role in Suessa is attested by numerous inscriptions found in the city and the surrounding countryside, some of which concern her interventions in the cura aquarum and cura viarum of Suessa. Evidence of an extensive renovation programme that covered the entire water system of the city comes from the discovery made

Matidia Minor in Suessa Aurunca: the changing role of a female member of the imperial familyIn the 2nd century ad Suessa underwent a new period of urban and economic development, stimulated by the interests of the emperor Hadrian and Matidia Minor, both of whom financed the restoration and construction of many public monuments.

Before considering in more detail Matidia’s close involvement with Suessa, it is worth outlining the main biographical details of her life (Table 1). Matidia Minor25 was born in Rome in around ad 80. Matidia’s mother was Salonia Matidia and her father was either the senator L. Mindius Pollio or L. Mindius Balbus, both proconsuls of the province of Bithynia during the reign of Claudius.26 Matidia should therefore be properly referred to as Mindia Matidia, not Vibia Matidia (as is sometimes the case). Even though she had been introduced at the imperial court as a child, Mindia Matidia spent most of her life in the shadows of her half-sister Sabina, the daughter of her mother’s second husband, the consul Lucius Vibius Sabinus. Mindia Matidia served as her sister’s lady-in-waiting, a task she performed until Sabina’s death in ad 137.27 At this point, it should be considered why a lady such as Mindia Matidia played such a seemingly marginal role in the imperial family.

The fact that all the archaeological and epigraphical evidence concerning her postdates the deaths of Sabina and Hadrian (a year later in ad 138) clearly suggests that Mindia Matidia was deliberately excluded from exercising any sort of power. This can only be partly explained by the fact that Sabina and Mindia Matidia had different fathers. It is more likely that there were underlying political reasons perhaps related to Mindia Matidia’s alleged marriage in ad 100 to one of the four consuls executed at the beginning of Hadrian’s reign.28 In any case, after Hadrian’s death Mindia Matidia achieved prominence as the maternal aunt (matertera) to the new emperor Antoninus Pius, Hadrian’s adopted successor. This finally afforded her considerable prestige, which lasted up to her death during the reign of Marcus Aurelius in ad 165. Yet Mindia Matidia was still not publicly honoured as a privileged member of the imperial family because, unlike her mother and sister, she was never proclaimed Augusta.29 However, Mindia Matidia’s low profile in the official sources of the period has been balanced in recent years by the evidence derived from excavations and surveys carried out in Suessa Aurunca.

This archaeological research has revealed Mindia Matidia’s true significance as a woman who had an important role in public life. Antoninus Pius encouraged her activities and allowed Mindia Matidia’s name to appear prominently in official inscriptions. This attitude was certainly not just influenced by the new emperor’s general benevolence, but for evident political reasons. For Antoninus Pius, Mindia Matidia became a key individual proclaiming the legitimacy of his personal power, as she was the only surviving member of the previous generation of the imperial family. This is attested by the fact that in inscriptions, Mindia Matidia is referred to as the daughter of ‘Diva Matidia Augusta’, grandaughter of ‘Diva Marciana Augusta’, sister of ‘Diva Sabina Augusta’, and most especially as aunt of the emperor Antoninus Pius, establishing a clear

Plate 5 Fistula water pipe from the theatre at Suessa Aurunca, stamped with the name of Matidiae Aug(ustae) Fil(ilae), Sessa Aurunca Museum (inv. no. 297032) (photo: author)

Table 1 Genealogy of Mindia Matidia


still in use. Along the edges of the road are the remains of a necropolis consisting of monumental tombs and mausoleums, which extend to a Roman bridge known as Ponte Ronaco,44 one of the most impressive remains of Roman architecture in Campania.

The construction of this bridge, which is 176m long and 20m high, was almost certainly the result of measures financed by Mindia Matidia in the first half of the 2nd century ad (Pl. 7). The perfectly formed brick walls of the bridge are very close in appearance to those used in the restoration of the theatre, works also overseen by Mindia Matidia. The vaults of the 21 arches, by which the bridge crosses the Rio Travata, support a Roman street that preserves its old Roman surface, repaired in some places with cobble stones during the Renaissance.

Mindia Matidia’s benefactions also extended the forum, the political and commercial centre of the city. Unfortunately, the archaeological exploration of the forum is almost entirely limited to the excavation of the great cryptoporticus from the Republican period by Amedeo Maiuri in 1926.45 We therefore know very little about the appearance of the square in the imperial period. However, from what can be seen today, the forum, which was located at the intersection of the decumanus maximus and the cardo maximus, was 100m long and 60m wide and was paved with rectangular slabs of white limestone. These slabs contained a monumental inscription in bronze letters, recording that M. Maecius. Q. F. Aemilianus who held the office of [II] Vir, restored the paving at his own expense.46

The square was surrounded by marble porticoes and several other monuments including the aforementioned cryptoporticus (Pl. 8) and a large public building from the 2nd century ad. An inscription dating to ad 19347 refers to a Bibliotheca Matidiana, which also served as the meeting place of the city’s senate. This building, dedicated to Mindia Matidia and most probably built by her, can perhaps be identified with the remains of a large structure located at street level by the forum that has been incorporated into later medieval structures. Concealed underground are three large rectangular rooms with barrel vaulted ceilings, which have been tentatively identified as the tabularium and the aerarium (Pl. 9).48

during the excavation of the Roman theatre of six lead pipes (Pl. 5).36 These contain an imperial seal with the inscription Matidiae Aug(ustae) Fil(iae). We know that from the time of Augustus, Suessa was supplied by at least two aqueducts, the remains of which are still visible in most parts of the surrounding countryside.37

One of the aqueducts was certainly restored by Matidia and has recently been partially explored. The aqueduct captured water from the springs located at the foot of the Roccamonfina volcano and carried it to the city, where it was used to supply public and private buildings. The aqueduct, examined in 2005 over a length of 200m, includes an underground structure with massive walls coated in waterproof mortar that in places is still in partial working order today.

A Roman milestone38 that was reused in the medieval city and is still visible today, mentions Mindia Matidia by name,39 which probably indicates that she financed the reconstruction of this important road. This is of great significance because it appears to be the only known case of a milestone that does not mention the emperor’s name, but one of his relatives. The road linked Suessa and the Ager Vescinus and can still be seen today. It is known that in the countryide surrounding the modern town of Suio, not far from Suessa Aurunca, there were famous baths known as the thermae Aquae Vescinae, which in the second half of the 2nd century ad belonged to the emperor. This is demonstrated by inscriptions40 that mention restoration measures funded by Septimius Severus who repaired the road connecting these baths to the town of Minturnae.

It is therefore possible that these baths were originally part of Mindia Matidia’s estate, which after her death, was passed down within the imperial family to the Severans.41 It is also feasible that Mindia Matidia’s involvement with the cura viarum of the city was not limited to this project but also extended to the reconstruction of structures related to the restoration of Via Suessanis, which had initially been funded by Hadrian (Pl. 6). Hadrian’s intervention at Suessa is attested by a monumental inscription42 that mentions the restoration of this road, which linked Suessa with the Via Appia.43 The road, made of still perfectly preserved paving slabs of lava rock, is 4m wide and 7 Roman miles long, and is

Plate 6 General view of the paving of the Via Suessanis from the Hadrianic period at Suessa Aurunca (photo: author)

Plate 7 View of the arches of the Roman bridge known as Ponte Ronaco at Suessa Aurunca (photo: author)


basilicae, the porticus post scaenam, the paving of the orchestra, the cladding of the entire theatre in marble and its decoration with an unknown number of sculptures and portrait statues (including those of the imperial family) and finally the construction of an access road to the theatre (Pl. 11). The summa cavea was surrounded at the front by a large wall. Here, Mindia Matidia restored the corridor that originally housed the velarium, which still retains the holes for support poles. Moreover, the restoration included the construction of a portico containing some 80 columns, each of which was 4m high. Seven of these columns are preserved, all made from grey granite imported from Mysia52 in Asia Minor. The excavators also found 15 Ionic capitals that surmounted these columns, carved from Proconnesian marble. Mindia Matidia’s personal involvement with the project is also evident from the beautiful coloured marble floor that was laid down in the orchestra (15m in diameter). The careful exposure during excavation of the imprints left by these slabs, as well as the number of fragments still in situ, have allowed the reconstruction of the original decorative scheme and the identification of the marble used.

The floor’s design consisted of a grid of rectangular slabs made from Cipollino marble53 (marmor Carystium) from Euboea, Greece, whose intersections were highlighted by crustae squares in Portasanta marble54 (marmor Chium) from Chios in the eastern Aegean. This produced a sequence of squares, each 1.2m wide (4 Roman feet) made from Giallo Antico55 (marmor Numdicum) and Lunense marble (from Numidia, corresponding to the present-day Tunisia and Liguria in northern Italy respectively) filled with roundels (90cm in diameter) of green porphyry (ieracites)56 and squares (90cm wide) of Egyptian red porphyry (porphyrites).57 The general pattern and use of the square unit of 4 Roman feet,58 indicates that the floor’s design was based on examples such as the Forum of Augustus and most specifically on the floor pattern of the Basilica Ulpia in Trajan’s Forum in Rome.59

Mindia Matidia’s power and influence was stressed symbolically through the architectural setting. This point is

The proposed location of these spaces in the underground section of the Bibliotheca Matidiana is supported not only by the grandeur of the architectural remains and the dating of its walls, but also because it is known that Roman libraries were used for a variety of purposes, including the housing of official state archives.49

Architecture and imperial power: the restoration of the Augustan theatreAn inscription dated to ad 139,50 as well as other archaeological evidence, shows that Suessa was struck by an earthquake in the early 2nd century ad. This caused significant damage to many buildings in the city, including the Augustan theatre. Mindia Matidia took this opportunity to follow a tradition, initiated by Augustus, whereby members of the domus Augusta supported the construction of civil and religious buildings, and so she financed the complete renovation of Suessa’s theatre. This is confirmed by the recent discovery of a further monumental marble inscription (Pl. 10) dated to between ad 139 and 150:

Matidia daughter of deified Matidia Augusta, granddaughter of deified Marciana Augusta, sister of deified Sabina Augusta, aunt of Emperor Antoninus Pius, Father of the Fatherland, reconstructed at her own expense the theatre and linked porticus 51 damaged by an earthquake.

Matidia’s renovations included the rebuilding of the porticus in summa cavea, the scaenae frons, the two lateral

Plate 8 View of the Republican cryptoporticus at Suessa Aurunca (photo: author)

Plate 9 View of the aerarium at Suessa Aurunca (photo: author)

Plate 10 Graphic reconstruction of the dedication inscription to Mindia Matidia discovered in the southern basilica of the Roman theatre at Suessa Aurunca (Chausson 2006)


Plate 11 Reconstruction of the Roman theatre at Suessa Aurunca. 1. porticus post scaenam; 2. scaenae frons; 3. hyposcaenium; 4. auleum; 5. proscaenium / frons pulpiti; 6. control room; 7. versurae; 8. parodos; 9. orchestra; 10. poedria; 11. euripus; 12. ima cavea; 13. media cavea; 14. summa cavea; 15. sacellum in summa cavea; 16. velarium; 17. southern basilica; 18. northern basilica; 19. access ramps; 20. northern crypt; 21. Republican cryptoporticus; 22. nymphaeum; 23. public fountain; 24. tribunal; 25. porticus in summa cavea; 26. imperial box; 27. latrina; 28. cloaca; 29. sewer (plan by Sergio Cascella and Giuseppe Bruno)


southern basilica, a room that also functioned as a foyer.62 Once again Mindia Matidia exploited the full potential provided by the architecture of the imperial age by creating a monument that celebrated her power through its grandeur. This was a large square building with sides in excess of 30m, which looked more like a civil basilica equipped with two lateral aisles that flanked a large central room, from which one could enter the theatre through the southern parodos (entrance). The walls, over 2m thick and covered with slabs of Cipollino and Pavonazetto marble (marmor Phrygium),63 from Docimium in Phrygia (Turkey), supported barrel vaulted ceilings and groin vaults, about 20m high, which contained a rich polychrome stucco decoration.

On the left of the entrance there was a large fountain adorned with marble and statues. This nymphaeum, 10m long and 6m high, received its water supply from the public

highlighted by the discovery of a base, located in the centre of the proedria (first row of seats), which would originally have been covered in marble. This formed the platform of a throne (cathedra),60 of which some fragments in white marble have been found. Isolated and centrally positioned, this throne was very different from the marble seats that were usually reserved for local magistrates.61 Indeed, it was located along a highly symbolic axis that linked the two major representations of imperial power: the sacellum in summa cavea in the north-east of the theatre and a niche in the centre of the scaenae frons which contained a statue of Mindia Matidia as a goddess in the south-west.

On each side of the scaenae frons, Mindia Matidia built two large anterooms (basilicae). The function of these rooms was to facilitate the flow of spectators into the theatre by means of a large marble staircase that connected the city streets with the

Plate 12 Reconstruction of the scaenae frons (plan by Sergio Cascella and Giuseppe Bruno)

Plate 13 Fragment of column made of Breccia di Settebassi marble (marmor Scyrium) from the Roman theatre at Suessa Aurunca (photo: author)

Plate 14 Fragment of column made of Giallo Antico marble (marmor Numidicum) from the Roman theatre at Suessa Aurunca (photo: author)


eight columns in polished, unfluted Cipollino marble. While the imperial door was framed by two fluted columns in Giallo Antico marble (Pl. 14), the lateral fronts had four unfluted columns, two in Pavonazzetto marble and two in Portasanta marble. We have no reliable data on the distribution of the 28 columns of the second order, although it is likely that the 14 columns in Portasanta marble (Pl. 15) with smooth shafts were placed on the podia that flanked the openings corresponding to the valves hospitales of the first order. Meanwhile the unfluted columns carved from Cipollino or Fior di Pesco marble (marmor Chalcidicum)70 and granite from the Troad region in Anatolia (marmor Troadense)71 were arranged on the side fronts of the central niche of the scaenae frons, where two columns in Pavonazzetto marble with spiral grooves had certainly been placed. In addition, the centre of the second order contained an aedicula, flanked by two columns in Giallo Antico marble with spiral grooves, which contained a statue of Mindia Matidia. Of the third order only some sections of columns in Fior di Pesco and Greco Scritto marble have been found. Finally, all of the bases, capitals and lintels were carved from Proconnesian marble.

The high quality of the architectural decoration would suggest that Mindia Matidia had employed a workshop of first-class masons who worked for the imperial family in Rome.72 However, it is more likely that this workshop (or group of workshops) was based in Campania itself.73 Recent studies have shown that in this period the high standards of their work meant that many of these local workshops were regularly involved in the construction of some of the most impressive public monuments in the region. It is believed that this particular workshop may have had its headquarters in Puteoli,74 which was one of the largest ports of the empire and among the largest and wealthiest Italian cities at this time.

These workshops were probably formed following the collaboration with stonemasons from Rome itself on Campanian monuments such as the Arch of Trajan in Beneventum,75 which commemorated the rebuilding of the Via Appia. This broke a long stylistic tradition that had characterized the architectural decoration of all public

aqueduct rebuilt by Mindia Matidia. The structure consisted of a marble basin crowned by three niches, semicircular in the middle and rectangular on the side. The walls were clad in marble slabs while the vaults were decorated with a mosaic of blue glass tiles. Above, there was a monumental inscription. Unfortunately, the few remaining fragments do not allow a reconstruction of the original text, but it most probably referred to Mindia Matidia’s financing of the aqueduct’s restoration. The nymphaeum was clad in coloured marble, of which very little remains, although the fragments of its sculptural decoration are plentiful.64

In the side niches there were two statues that can be identified as Venus Marina, both of which have been recovered almost intact, while in the central niche there was a beautiful sculpture of a river god, the head of which is now missing. This statue, which also functioned as a fountain, depicted an old man reclining on the left side with a cornucopia and a number of other attributes that has led to its identification as the god of the River Nile.

The basilica located on the northern side of the scaenae frons 65 was smaller (15m long, 9m wide), but was also rich in precious marble decorations. The hall, open to the east onto the northern parodos, shows a rectangular plan with walls preserved up to 5m high and contained a fresco depicting the Genius Theatri 66 that was found in good condition. The holes along the walls and some of the marble fragments still in situ suggest that the walls were lined with slabs of Pavonazzetto marble up to 2m high. Above this marble-clad zone were seven niches of alternating rectangular and semicircular layout which contained Greek marble statues. Many fragments of satyrs have been found, suggesting that these were a series of sculptures representing the thiasos of Dionysios.

At the western end of the building, the theatre was completed by a porticus post scaenam in the form of a 60m long stoà. This was also reconstructed by Mindia Matidia and consisted of two parallel aisles, supported by brick pillars covered with slabs of Pavonazzetto and Greco Scritto marble.67

The scaenae frons and its decoration The restoration of the scaenae frons provided Mindia Matidia with an opportunity to demonstrate her personal and political power through its architectural grandeur. It was 40m long and at least 25m high, and comprised three superimposed orders of 84 columns in total, all carved from a variety of coloured marbles (Pl. 14). Most of the columns from the Augustan period were restored with pins and brackets, but the columns that had been irreparably damaged by the earthquake were completely replaced along with all the bases, capitals and marble lintels. In the centre of the scaenae frons, there was a large rectangular niche that served as the royal door (valva regia).68

On the sides of this door there were podia and fronts, elements of an architecture that produced strong effects of light and shade, further enhanced by the combination of columns in different varieties of coloured marbles. The first order of the scaenae frons had 14 composite columns (Pl. 13) of Breccia di Settebassi marble (marmor Scyrium), from the island of Skyros, Greece,69 placed on the podia on either side of the valves hospitales, which in turn were flanked by

Plate 15 Fragment of column made of Portasanta marble (marmor Chium) from the Roman theatre at Suessa Aurunca (photo: author)


scaenae frons77 belong to the Hadrianic and Antonine periods. The capitals (Pl. 16) may have been made by yet another workshop, possibly the one that produced the capitals in the great amphitheatre at Capua, as there are many similarities between them.78 These capitals have a very low inlay and their decorative elements, such as the shape of the lobes of the acanthus leaves, the way in which they have been superimposed and the flower that decorates the abacus, are very typical of the Antonine period.79 It is also possible that the same sculptors carved the frieze of the architrave of the lowest order of the scaenae frons.80 This consisted of a series of highly refined bas-reliefs which evoked the world of the theatre through symbols such as two tragic masks on the sides of each lintel and alluded to the mythological world of Apollo and Dionysus through opposing panthers. The decorative style also expressed the idea of prosperity and felicitas associated with imperial power through the elegant spirals that arose from a kantharos placed at the centre of each epistyle (Pl. 17).

A comparative analysis of marble elements from monuments in other cities such as Puteoli, Teanum, Capua and Beneventum81 suggests that this workshop was possibly still in existence until the reign of Gordian III. Indeed, it is very likely that the next generation of masons in the Severan age contributed to the architectural decoration of the theatre at Teanum82 which appears to have been modelled on the theatre at Suessa. Regarding the marble’s origin, Pensabene argued that the blocks reached Suessa directly from the statio marmorum in Rome or from the town of Portus.83 However, it could be argued that the building work in Suessa was no different from other towns in Campania and that it would have been difficult to justify the additional cost of transporting marble from Rome. Suessa was, after all, located in Regio I of the empire, which contained a number of cities of primary importance, such as Neapolis, Puteoli and Capua. Both the emperor and the Roman nobility owned property in this area and they frequently commissioned sumptuous private and public buildings there.

Despite the destruction and widespread spoliation that occurred during the Middle Ages, the extant remains demonstrate, as we have seen, that there was a strong

monuments in Campania since the Flavian era. The decorative elements of the architraves and cornices used in Suessa’s theatre help explain this transformation: the lesbian cyma of the architrave, the anthemion, the cyma of acanthus leaves and the square shape of the dentil of the cornice are all decorative details typical of the late Flavian period.76

However, the ovules of the cornice, the Ionic capitals of the porticus in summa cavea and the Corinthian capitals of the

Plate 16 Corinthian capital carved from Proconnesian marble, Antonine period, from the second section of the scaenae frons. Sessa Aurunca Museum (inv. no. 296995) (photo: author)

Plate 17 Lintel with theatrical masks and vegetal decoration in Proconnesian marble, Antonine period, reused in the Cathedral of Sessa Aurunca (photo: author)

Plate 18 Bust of Sabina, Antonine period. Sessa Aurunca Museum (inv. no. 297043) (photo: author)


Plate 19 Head of Salonia Matidia, Antonine period. Sessa Aurunca Museum (inv. no. 297045) (photo: author)

Plate 20 Fragment of colossal statue of an emperor, possibly Trajan, Antonine period. Sessa Aurunca Museum (inv. no. 297046) (photo: author)

demand for precious marble in these cities during the Roman period. It might be that this demand was met by a local statio marmorum, a Campanian branch of the statio in Rome, located perhaps in Puteoli. Interestingly, although archaeological evidence from Sinuessa and Minturnae clearly shows the devotion of their inhabitants to Mindia Matidia, the remains of the theatre at Minturnae rebuilt at the same time as its counterpart in Suessa seems to indicate the activity of a different workshop, probably also from Campania, but inspired by models from Asia Minor rather than Rome.84

The sculptural decoration of the theatre: new discoveriesThe excavation of Suessa’s theatre led to the discovery of more than 150 fragments of statues, most of which were found in the area of the scaenae frons. In Roman times there may have been more than 100 marble sculptures in the theatre. In addition, there would have been numerous statues and other fittings in bronze, as the example of the smaller theatre in Herculaneum demonstrates. The sculptural decoration of the theatre at Suessa consists of two chronologically distinct groups: the first one is smaller and can be attributed to the Augustan building phase, the second to the Antonine era.

The fragments discovered in the scaenae frons were found in two distinct superimposed layers. The top level, which corresponds to the medieval spoliation layer, contained a large number of architectural fragments and broken statues. These sculptural fragments were of both male and female gods as well as unidentified local figures of authority, and would most probably have been placed between the columns of the second and third order. In contrast, the sculptures that were recovered almost entirely intact were buried in the deepest layer where the marble structure of the scaenae frons was still in its original position of collapse, just as it had been left by the earthquake of ad 346 that severely damaged the building.85 In general, the sculptures were all made of white Greek marble, although there were certainly also statues of

coloured marble, as shown by a fragment of drapery in Pavonazzetto marble, a female foot in Giallo Antico marble and, most importantly, the famous statue of Mindia Matidia discussed below. It is also clear that the white marble sculptures were originally coloured as is evidenced by the traces of various pigments seen on many of them when they were excavated.

As for the complete sculptures, we can make a number of observations: first of all, these statues were all placed between the columns of the first order and represented members of the imperial family. Among them can be identified Vibia Sabina, Salonia Matidia, Hadrian and most probably Trajan. To these we must add three other female statues, of which unfortunately only the headless bodies remain, as well as a further two heads, one male and one female, which cannot be identified.

The portrait of Sabina (inv. no. 297043),86 which belongs to one of the empress’s later portrait types dating to after ad 134, shows a draped torso and head turned to the left with her hair parted in the middle of the forehead and collected in the nape of her neck in a bun. The facial features are marked by a serene classical beauty inspired by the canons of Praxiteles, suggesting that the portrait is posthumous (Pl. 18).

The second portrait, which is dated to the same period as the previous one, has a heavily corroded marble surface, but is clearly identifiable as Salonia Matidia (inv. no. 297045). Matidia Major (Pl. 19) is represented with her head veiled and crowned with a tiara that frames a proud and idealized face that underlines her status of Diva.87

Two statues of emperors are preserved, both in armour but with different cuirass types: of the first, only a colossal trunk of Pavonazzetto marble remains, with a short mantle and a cuirass decorated with two antithetic griffins above an imperial eagle holding a rod of lightning in its claws.88 The decorative scheme of this statue (Pl. 20), according to Stemmer most likely a portrait of Trajan, is reminiscent of oriental models. In fact, both the high quality of the workmanship evident in the cingulum, pteryges and


Plate 21 The colossal statue of Hadrian, Antonine period. Sessa Aurunca Museum (inv. no. 297047) (photo: author)

Plate 22 Portrait of Mindia Matidia from the Roman theatre at Suessa Aurunca, Antonine period. Sessa Aurunca Museum (inv. no. 297048) (photo: author)

Plate 23 The colossal statue of Mindia Matidia from the theatre at Suessa Aurunca, Antonine period. Sessa Aurunca Museum (inv. no. 297048) (photo: author)

Plate 24 Statue in grey marble from Minturnae, 2nd century BC.Naples Archaeological National Museum (inv. no. 0685) (photo: author)


identified among the large number of sculptural fragments kept in the storerooms at the National Archaeological Museum of Naples. If indeed a portrait of Mindia Matidia, this would provide further evidence of her prominent role in the Aurunca area. Mario Pagano, through analysis of archival documents, believed that the sculpture found at Minturnae by Venuti could be identified with a statue in grey marble (Pl. 24), now in the Farnese collection in the National Archaeological Museum of Naples (inv. no. 0685).96 Unfortunately, there is an engraving by Ulisse Aldovrandi from 1585,97 which unmistakably reproduces the ‘Bigio morato’ torso on display in Naples alongside material from the Farnese collection. Therefore, it is not possible that the statue conserved in Naples is the one discovered later at Minturnae by Venuti.

Notes1 De Masi 2000, 53; 193.2 Cascella 2002; 2005; Pensabene 2005; Cascella 2007, 45–54;

Cascella 2009, 21–43. 3 Walters 1899, n. 447. Galestin 1986.4 Liv., IX, 28, 7; Vell, I, 14, 4.5 Sambon 1903, 345–52; Vitale 2009.6 Cato, De Agr., 22, 3. Cato, moreover, remembers that Suessa was a

good source of fiscinae, small wicker baskets used during the harvesting of olives and grapes (see Cato, De Agr., 135, 2).

7 CIL X 4832.8 On ancient fortifications of Suessa, cf. Valletrisco 1978; Sommella

1991; Villucci 1995, 11; Colletta 1996, 44.9 Johannowsky 1973.10 Coarelli 1983; Calio 2005.11 Ciancio Rossetto and Pisani Sartorio 1994; Bejor 1979; Frézouls

1982; Torelli 1983; Gros 1987.12 Cascella 2002, 46–50.13 Gnoli 1988, 174; Lazzarini 2002, 250.14 Cascella 2002, 48–50, figs 10–11.15 Bartman 1999, 145, fig. 116.16 This is a demonstration of the vexed question of distinguishing

between the portraits of Agrippina Major and those of Caligula’s three sisters: Drusilla, Agrippina and Livilla. Cf. Cascella 2002, 48; Valeri and Zevi 2004, 128.

17 Wood 1995, 457–82.18 Wood 1995, 467.19 Wood 1995, 463.20 Wood 1995, 471, figs 15–17.21 Wood (1995), 479.22 De Franciscis 1979, 19.23 Pollini 2005, 55–7.24 De Franciscis 1979, 19.25 It should be recalled that the cognomen Matidia derives from her

grandfather C. Salonius Matidius Patruinus, husband of Marciana, sister of Trajan and mother of Matidia Major. For the ancestors of Matidia Minor, see Chausson 2006, 79, 85.

26 Hemelrijk 1999, 301, n. 100; Mari 2004, 27–8; Reggiani 2007, 25.27 Hadrian rarely granted the honours of the public spotlight as

happened in ad 128 when Matidia had the honour to accompany the emperor to Greece and Asia Minor. See Mari 2004, 28.

28 Chausson 2006, 67; 68 n. 245.29 For the women of the Antonine family, see Mari 2004, 15–29;

Chausson 2006.30 CIL X 4746; CIL X 4747. 31 CIL X 4745; CIL X 4744; CIL X 3833.32 It is very likely that Matidia Minor had a residence worthy of her

rank in Suessa Aurunca. On this subject see Pagano and Villucci 1991, 287; Cascella 2002, 89–90. For the villa of Matidia near Rome see Iorio 2004, 143. In addition to her possessions in Campania, it is likely Matidia Minor had many business interests in the province of Asia where she was honoured with two statues, one at Alexandria Troas and another at Ephesus. Matidia Minor’s Asian properties were probably inherited from her father and were administered by procuratores and freedmen whose children, from the

paludamentum and the use of precious Asiatic marble are typical of this period. The second statue, which is missing its right arm, represents Hadrian wearing Hellenistic-type body armour and a mantle that descends along the left shoulder (Pl. 21). The armour is decorated with an Arimaspian, a mythical tribesman from northern Scythia, holding at bay two griffins, similar to the cuirass of the statue of Hadrian preserved in the Museum of Villa Albani.89

Undoubtedly, among the commemorative gallery of the imperial family, the statue of Mindia Matidia (inv. no. 297048) immediately captured the admiration of spectators, both for the use of coloured marble and its prominent position. The statue was emphatically placed in the aedicula in the middle of the ornate scaenae frons, supported by columns of Pavonazzetto and Giallo Antico marble. The head (Pl. 22) and the rest of the body were carved from white Parian marble, whilst grey marble from the quarries of Göktepe90 in Turkey was used for the drapery. The Göktepe quarries were situated about 40km from Aphrodisias and provided high quality marble for sculptures and buildings. The iconography of Mindia Matidia, clarified by recent studies,91 is well suited to the concepts that Mindia Matidia intended to communicate. Mindia Matidia (Pl. 23) is depicted as a feminine divinity (Aura) leaning forwards, with the drapery clinging closely to her body, revealing the contours of her body (Aura velificans). Mindia Matidia is therefore represented in the guise of a goddess of abundance, emphasising her generosity and desire for political and personal recognition.

Fragments of a new two-coloured statue from the theatreIn one area of the collapsed level of the scaenae frons, which had been disturbed by medieval looting, seven fragments of a female statue of grey marble were discovered, including a right leg and remains of drapery. The statue wore a long chiton that clung closely to the body. The leg fragment shows a groove for the insertion of a worked foot that, like the other bare parts of the body, was carved from white marble. Like the more famous statue of Mindia Matidia, the drapery of this sculpture also used grey marble from the quarries of Göktepe in Turkey.92 It is therefore very likely that these fragments belong to a replica of the Mindia Matidia statue,93 probably made by the same sculptors, although given the smaller size, the proportions of this sculpture were closer to the natural size. It is possible that a second portrait head of Mindia Matidia,94 recovered in the same layer, belongs to this statue.

A statue of Mindia Matidia from MinturnaeIn the late 18th century, the King of Naples commissioned Domenico Venuti to carry out excavations in the amphitheatre at Minturnae. There Venuti found ‘a statue of a draped woman of Bigio Morato [marble] with a head of white marble, without one hand, and without the tips of the feet, by some believed to be the nymph Marica, and by others a most beautiful Faustina Major’.95 In light of Mindia Matidia’s activities at Minturnae, it is extremely likely this statue portrayed her. Unfortunately, the head subsequently became separated from the statue. Perhaps it could still be


66 Cascella 2002, 91; Cascella 2005, 95.67 Cascella 2007, 45. On this type of marble see Pensabene 1976;

Gnoli 1988, 261; Marchei 1992, 237.68 Cascella 2005, 87.69 Gnoli 1988, 232–5; Marchei 1992, 192–3; Lazzarini 2002, 258.70 Gnoli 1988, 184–6; Marchei 1992, 212; Lazzarini 2002, 260ff.71 Gnoli 1988, 152–3; Marchei 1992, 236–7; Lazzarini 2002, 246;

Ponti 2002.72 On this subject cf. Cascella 2002, 67; Valeri and Zevi 2004, 128;

Pensabene 2005, 97.73 Cascella 2002, 58.74 Demma 2007, 341.75 Demma 2007, 218.76 Cascella 2009, 30–2.77 Cascella 2009, 25, 35–6.78 Demma 2007, 209.79 Cascella 2009, 35, n. 1.80 Cascella 2009, 33, nn. 6–7.81 Demma 2007, 341.82 Pensabene 2005, 97.83 Pensabene 2005, 97.84 Mesolella 2004.85 Cascella 2007, 51.86 Cascella 2002, 71; Valeri and Zevi 2004.87 Valeri and Zevi 2004.88 Cascella 2002, 67–8, nn. 1–2. The elements that make up the

decoration of this sculpture appear identical to those that are visible on the cuirass of two statues of Hadrian in the Antalya Museum. Cf. Ojeda Nogales 2011, 58, nn. 36–7.

89 Rome, Villa Albani (no. 82). See, Stemmer 1990. For similar decoration on the cuirass of a headless statue of a Roman emperor from Side, most likely of Hadrian, see Ojeda Nogales 2011, 56, n. 33, and a statue of Lucius Verus, in the Museum of Antakya (see Meischner 2003, no. 29, 328, figs 34–5, 1–3). More difficult is the identification of the specific portrait type used for the head due to poor conservation conditions. It is possible that it may be identified with the type defined by Wegner as Typus Panzer-Paludamentumbüste Baiae (Wegner 1956, 17). However, it should be stressed that the head was carved separately from the body, so the latter could have been carved earlier than the former.

90 Attanasio et al. 2008, 216; Yavuz et al. 2009, 93ff.91 Valeri and Zevi 2004, 128.92 Attanasio et al. 2008.93 Cascella 2002, 71; Valeri and Zevi 2004, 130.94 Cascella 2002, 70; Valeri and Zevi 2004.95 ‘una statua di donna panneggiata di bigio morato con testa di

marmo bianco senza una mano, e senza l’estremità de’ piedi, da alcuni creduta la ninfa Marica, e da altri una Faustina Maggiore bellissima’.

96 Ruesch 1911, 685 (Sn); Pagano 1995; Pagano and Pisciandaro 2006, IV.56; 262, n. 24.

97 De Cavalieri 1585, tav, 36, n. cat. 74.2.

AbbreviationsAE L’Année EpigraphiqueANRW Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt: Geschichte

und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren ForschungAntK Antike Kunst (Published by The Association of Friends of

Classical Art)Atta Atlante Tematico di Topografia Antica BABesch Bulletin Antieke BeschavingCIL Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum EFR Ècole Française de RomeJDI Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen InstitutsMarmora Marmora (An International Journal for Archaeolog y,

History and Archaeometry of Marble and Stones)MGR Miscellanea greca e romana. Studi pubblicati dall’Istituto italiano per

la storia antica, RomaPBSR Papers of the British School at RomeRANap Rendiconti dell’Accademia di Archeologia, Lettere e Belle Arti di

NapoliRE Pauly-Wissowa, Realencyclopädie der classischen

Altertumswissenschaft

time of Commodus held prominent public positions, as in the case of M. Aurelius Mindius Matidianus Pollio, Àrchōn and contractor of Quadragesima Portus Asiae. Cf. Barresi 2003, 335; Chausson 2006, 75; Hirschfeld 2009, 28.

33 CIL IX 6083–4.34 On the contrary some scholars think that this individual is not a

freedman of Matidia Minor: see Granino Cecere 2007, 43, n. 20. EPH.EP.VIII 566; Chausson 2006, 120.

35 CIL X 4763.36 Cascella 2002, 89; Cascella 2005, 103. The mark is associated with

that of two plumbarii: Q. Classicus Primus and M. Ennius Evaristus.37 Pagano 1996, 107; Gasperetti 1997, 249.38 Pagano and Villucci 1991, 287.39 [Mati]dia. Avg.(ustae) / [Fi]l(ia) [Divae. S]abinae. Avg.(ustae) [So]ror.

[Imp(eratoris) Anto]nini. Avg.(usti) Pii. [P(atris) P(atriae) Ma]tertera. / VII40 AE 1982 153=AE 1989 144; AE 1982 153=AE 1989 145.41 In ad 211–12, an ex voto dedicated to the Genius Aquarum Vescinarum

was placed by two accountants (dispensatores), in the thermae, to propitiate the return of Caracalla and Geta committed in Britain at the time. Cf. AE 1914 217.

42 CIL X 4756, ad 122. [Imp. Caes. Div]I. Tr[aiani. Pa]rthici. fil.(ii) / Divi. Nervae. nep.(otis) / Traiani. Hadriani. / Avg.(usti) Pontif.(icis) Max.(imi) / Trib.(unicia) Pot.(estate) VI. Co(n)s.(ulis) III. / Viam. Svessanis. Mvnicipibvs. / sva. pec.(unia) fec.(it).

43 Johannowsky 1981; Arthur 1991, 48.44 For a general overview on this monument, Cf. Johnson 1940;

Radke 1981, 136; Arthur 1991, 52; Rocco 1996, 29.45 Maiuri 1961, 55; Johannowsky 1973.46 The slabs were stolen during the Middle Ages for use on the facade

of the Romanesque cathedral, Aceto 1983, 44.47 i X 4760.48 This identification is based on the recent excavations carried out in

the forum area of the city. The archaeological exploration has fully brought to light this monument by clarifying the function and dating.

49 The dual functionality of Roman libraries is also reflected in the ambiguity of the Latin word, which indicated both the state archive and the library. In fact, the library connected with the Atrium Libertatis attached to Caesar’s Forum in Rome was certainly used as tabularium of the Censors, Gros 2001, 404.

50 The inscription refers to the reconstruction of an arcade by Antoninus Pius. De Masi 2000, 188; Tommasino 1925, 330.

51 With regard to the terms for theatrical architecture used in literary sources and epigraphy there is still a lot of confusion between what the Romans meant and the terminology used by modern scholars. In fact, we still have a long way to go to unravel some of these terms. An example of this is the word porticum in the inscription discovered in the theatre of Suessa Aurunca. It could refer to the porticus post scaenam even though reconstruction of the Antonine part of the theatre had become rather a ambulatio tecta, a type of rectilinear crypta. On the use of the term crypta see Coarelli 1973, 9–10. The word porticum would fit better at the porticus in summa cavea which in reality was entirely rebuilt by Matidia in the form of colonnade porch. Finally, it is rather unlikely that this term would refer to the restoration of scaenae frons. On this last point and on the terminology used in the inscriptions when referring to the scaenae frons see Caputo 1987, 131, n. 30.

52 De Vecchi et al. 2000; Lazzarini 1998.53 Gnoli 1988, 181–3; Marchei 1992, 202–3. 54 Gnoli 1988, 172–3; Marchei 1992, 285–7; Lazzarini 2002, 262–3. 55 Gnoli 1988,166–8; Marchei 1992, 214–15: Lazzarini 2002, 243–4;

Mackensen 2005; Di Gregorio 2007. 56 Gnoli 1988, 133–5; Marchei 1992, 278; Lazzarini 2002, 235.57 Gnoli 1988, 122–3; Marchei 1992, 274.58 Guiglia Guidobaldi 1984; Guidobaldi 1985, 176–83.59 Vitti 2002, 139–41; Packer 2001, 179.60 La Rocca 2007, 75.61 De Bernardi Ferrero 1970, 13; Sear 2006, 341.62 Remember that the term basilica used to indicate the two parascenia

is based on the inscription from the Gubbio Theatre where the two foyers are named basilicae. Cf. CIL IX 5820; Frézouls 1982, 343; Gros 2003, 191.

63 Gnoli 1988, 160–71; Marchei 1992, 264–5; Lazzarini et al. 1985.64 Cascella 2002, 84–5.65 Cascella 2005, 96.


Granino Cecere, M.G. 2007, ‘Legittimazione e partecipazione al potere. Le donne della domus imperiale durante il principato adottivo’, in Vibia Sabina da Augusta a Diva, edited by B. Adembri and R.M. Nicolai, Milan, 39–49.

Gros, P. 1987, ‘La fonction symbolique des édifices théâtraux dans le paysage urban de la Rome augustéenne’, in AA.VV., L’Urbs, Espace urbain et histoire (I sc. Av. J.C. – III sc. ap. J.C.), Collection de L’École Francaise de Rome 98, Rome, 319–46.

Gros, P. 2001, L’architettura romana − Dagli inizi del III secolo a.C. alla fine dell’alto Impero − I monumenti pubblici I, Milan.

Gros, P. 2003, ‘Basilica sous le haut-empire. Ambiguïtés du mot, du type et de la fonction’, BABesch 78, 191–204.

Guidobaldi, F. 1985, ‘Pavimenti in opus sectile di Roma e dell’area romana: proposte per una classificazione e criteri di datazione’, in Pensabene 1985, 171–233.

Guiglia Guidobaldi, A. 1984, ‘I pavimenti in opus sectile delle tabernae della Basilica Emilia: Testimonianze Bizantine a Roma nel VI secolo’, in Atti del III Colloquio Internazionale sul Mosaico Antico, Ravenna 1980, Ravenna, 505–13.

Hemelrijk, E. A. 1999, Matrona Docta: Educated Women in the Roman Élite from Cornelia to Julia Domna, London and New York.

Hirschfeld, O. 2009, In Die Kaiserlichen Verwaltungsbeamten Bis Auf Diocletian, Berlin.

Iorio, V. 2004 ‘Gli interventi di scavo alla villa Matidiae di Monte Porzio Catone negli anni 1999−2000: L’impianto Termale’, in Lazio & Sabina 3, Atti Convegno Roma 18–20 novembre 2004, ed. G. Ghini, Rome, 143–50.

Johannowsky, W. 1973, ‘Note sui criptoportici pubblici in Campania’, in Les Cryptoportiques dans l’architecture romaine (EFR, 143–65).

Johannowsky, W. 1981, ‘Individuazione degli itinerari antichi campani’, in Studi di civiltà romana e schiavizzazione I, 3.

Johnson, J. 1940, Minturno, in RE VII, 465. La Rocca, E. 2007, ‘I troni dei nuovi dei’, in Culto Imperial: Politíca y

Poder,eds T. Nogales and J. González, Actas del Congreso Internacional, Mérida 2006, Rome, 75−104.

Lazzarini, L. 1998, ‘Sul Marmo Misio, uno dei graniti più usati anticamente’, in Marmi Antichi II: cave e tecnica di lavorazione, provenienze e distribuzione (Studi Miscellanei 31), ed. P. Pensabene, Rome, 111–17.

Lazzarini, L. 2002, ‘La determinazione della provenienza delle pietre decorative usate dai Romani’, in De Nuccio and Ungaro (eds) 2002, 223–5.

Lazzarini, L., Moschini, G., Waelkens, M. and Xusheng, H. 1985, ‘New light on some Phrygian marble quarries through a petrological study and the evaluation of Ca/Sr ratio’, in Pensabene 1985, 47–55.

Mackensen, M. 2005, Militärlager oder Marmorwerkstätten. Neue Untersuchungen im Ostbereich des Arbeits- und Steinbruchlagers von Simitthus/Chemtou (Simitthus III), Mainz, 47–55.

Maiuri, A. 1961, ‘Il criptoportico di Sessa Aurunca’, RANap XXXVI, 55–62.

Marchei, M.C. 1992, ‘Cipollino (Marmor Caristium)’, in Borghini 1997.

Mari, Z. 2004 ‘Donne e potere al tempo di Adriano’, in Adriano. Le memorie al femminile, ed. A.M. Reggiani, Milan, 15−29.

Meischner, J. 2003, ‘Skulpturen Die des Museums von Hatay Antakya’, JDI 118, 2003.

Mesolella, G. 2004, ‘La decorazione architettonica del teatro romano di Minturnae: un contributo alla conoscenza dell’edificio’, Scienze dell’Antichità storia Archeologia Antropologia 12, Rome, 635–46.

Ojeda Nogales, D. 2011. Trajano y Adriano. Tipología estatuaria, Sevilla 2011.

Packer, J. 2001, Il Foro Di Traiano a Roma Breve Studio dei Monumenti (also in English), Rome.

Pagano, M. 1995, ‘Nuove osservazioni sulle colonie di Minturnae e Sinuessa’, in RANap LXV, 65.

Pagano, M. 1996, ‘Note su alcuni acquedotti romani in Campania’, in Cura Aquarum in Campania, eds N. de Haan and G.C.M. Jansen, Leiden, 101–8.

Pagano, M. and Pisciandaro, R. 2006, Studio sulle provenienze degli oggetti rinvenuti negli scavi borbonici del regno di Napoli. Una lettura integrata, coordinata e commentata della documentazione, Studi e ricerche della Soprintendenza ai Beni Archeologici del Molise, Parte quarta − Antico Regno Di Napoli, Naples.

BibliographyAceto, F. 1983, La cattedrale di Sessa Aurunca: dal medioevo ai giorni nostri,

Sessa Aurunca.Arthur, P. 1991, Romans in Northern Campania: Settlement and Land-use

around the Massico and the Garigliano Basin (Archaeological Monographs of the British School at Rome, 1), London.

Attanasio, D., Bruno, M., Yavuz, A.B. and Elci, H. 2008, ‘Aphrodisias and the newly discovered quarries at Göktepe’, in Roman Portraits from Aphrodisias (exhib. cat.) eds R.R.R. Smith and J.L. Lenaghan, 217–27.

Barresi, P. 2003, Province dell’Asia minore: Costo dei marmi, architettura pubblica e committenza, Rome.

Bartman, E. 1999, Portraits of Livia: Imaging the Imperial Woman in Augustan Rome. Cambridge.

Bejor, G. 1979, ‘L’edificio teatrale nell’urbanizzazione augustea’, in Athenaeum, I–II, 126–38.

Borghini, G. 1997 (ed.), Marmi antichi, Rome.Calio, L.M. 2005, ‘Theatri curvaturae similis note sull’urbanistica

delle città a forma di teatro’, Arch. Class. 56, 49–130.Caputo, G. 1987, Il Teatro Augusteo di Leptis Magna: Scavo e Restauro,

1937–1951 (Monografie de Archeologia Libica, 3), Rome.Cascella, S. 2002, Il Teatro Romano di Sessa Aurunca, Marina di

Minturno.Cascella, S. 2005, ‘Il Teatro Romano e la topografia di Sessa

Aurunca’, in, La forma della città e del territorio-3, eds L. Quilici and St Quilici Gigli)(Atta 15), Rome, 79–105.

Cascella, S. 2007, ‘Nota preliminare sullo scavo della porticus post scaenam e della latrina pubblica del Teatro Romano di Sessa Aurunca’, in In Itinere − Ricerche di Archeologica in Campania, ed. F. Sirano, Naples, 45–54.

Cascella, S. 2009, ‘Uso del marmo nella decorazione architettonica del Teatro Romano di Sessa Aurunca (Ce)’, Marmora 5, 21−43.

Chausson, F. 2006, ‘Princesses Antonines, affranchis impériaux, briqueteries. Une enquête dynastique’, Paris. Unpublished thesis.

Ciancio Rossetto, P. and Pisani Sartorio, G. 1994, ‘Rapporto tra struttura teatrale e tessuto urbano nella città romana’, in La ciutat en el Mundo Romano, XIV Congreso Internacional d’Arqueologia Clásica, Tarragono 5–11/9/1993. Tarragona: Institut d’Estudis Catalans, 2, 101–5.

Coarelli, F. 1973, ‘Crypta, Cryptoporticus’, in Les Cryptoporticus dans l’architecture romaine, Collection de l’École Française de Rome, 9–21.

Coarelli, F. 1983, ‘I santuari del Lazio e della Campania tra i Gracchi e le guerre civili’, in AA. VV., Les ‘Bourgeoisies’ municipales italiannes aux IIème et Ier sieclés av. J.C., Atti del colloquio di Napoli, 1981, Paris and Naples, 217–40.

Colletta, T. 1996, Le cinte murarie della Campania, Teano, Sessa Aurunca, Capua, Naples.

De Bernardi Ferrero, D. 1970, Teatri classici in Asia Minore. Città della Troade e della Pamfilia (Studi di Architettura antica 3), Rome.

De Cavalieri, G. B. 1585, Antiquarum Statuarum Urbis Romae liber primus et secundus. Rome.

De Franciscis, A. 1979, ‘Sculture d’età romana a Suessa Aurunca’, Studia Suessana I, 17–25.

De Masi, T. 2000, Memorie istoriche degli Aurunci: antichissimi popoli dell’Italia e delle loro principali città Aurunca e Sessa, Naples 1761 (reprinted Sessa Aurunca 2000).

De Nuccio, M. and Ungaro, L. 2002, I marmi colorati della Roma Imperiale (exhib. cat., Rome), Rome.

De Vecchi, G.,Lazzarini, L. Lünel, T., Mignucci, A. and Visonà, D. 2000, ‘The genesis and characterisation of “Marmor Mysium” from Kozak (Turkey): a granite used in antiquity’, Journal of Cultural Heritage, 1, 145–53.

Demma, F. 2007, Monumenti pubblici di Puteoli. Per un Archeologia (Monografie della Rivista Archeologica Classica 3), Rome.

Di Gregorio, A. 2007, ‘Le cave romane di marmo giallo antico di Chemtou (Tunisia) come geosito di raro interesse culturale’, in Geologia e turismo. Beni geologici e geodiversità (terzo congresso nazionale) Bologna, 145–56.

Frézouls, E. 1982, ‘Aspects de l’histoire architecturale du théâtre romain’, ANRW II, 12, 1, 343–441.

Galestin, M.C. 1986 ‘The so-called Aphrodite from Suessa’, in Italian Iron Age Artefacts in the British Museum ed. J. Swadling, London, 99–104.

Gnoli, R. 1988, Marmora Romana, Rome.


Forschungen zur Villa Albani. Katalog der Bildwerke II, edited by P. Bol, Berlin, 159−62.

Tommasino, G. 1925, La dominazione degli Ausoni in Campania. Sessa Aurunca ed i suoi avanzi archeologici. S. Maria Capua Vetere.

Torelli, M. 1983, ‘L’edilizia pubblica in Italia centrale tra guerra sociale ed età augustea – ideologia e classi sociali’, in Les bourgeoisies municipales italiennes aux lie et Ier siecles avant. J.-C.

Valeri, C. and Zevi, F. 2004, ‘La statua di Matidia Minore e il teatro di Sessa Aurunca’, in Adriano memorie al femminile, ed. A.M. Reggiani, Milan, 128–33.

Valletrisco, A. 1978, ‘Note sulla topografia di Suessa Aurunca’, RAAN 52, 59–73.

Villucci, A.M. 1995, Sessa Aurunca Storia ed Arte, Marina di Minturno.Vitale, R. 2009, ‘La monetazione di Suessa: alcuni dati e

considerazioni’, in Orizzonti Rassegna di Archeologia X, 51–89.Vitti, M. 2002, ‘L’uso del marmo nelle pavimentazioni dei Fori

Imperiali’, in De Nuccio and Ungaro (eds), 139–41. Walters, H.B. 1899, Catalogue of the Bronzes in the British Museum. Greek,

Roman & Etruscan, I–II, London. Wegner, M. 1956, Hadrian, Plotina, Marciana, Matidia, Sabina. Das

römische Herrscherbild; II. Abt, Bd. 3, Berlin.Wood, S. 1995, ‘Diva Drusilla Panthea and the sisters of Caligula’, AJA

99, no. 3, 457–82.Yavuz, A.B., Attanasio, D., Elci, H.,Brilli, M. and Bruno, M. 2009,

‘Discovery and preliminary investigation of the Goktepe Marble Quarries (Mugla, Turkey): an alternative source of Aphrodisias Marbles’, in Leukos lithos: marbres et autres roches de la Méditerranée antique: études interdisciplinares Actes du VIIIe Colloques International de l’Association for the Study of Marble.

Pagano, M. and Villucci, M. 1991, ‘Un miliario di Matidia da Sessa Aurunca’, in MGR XVI, 287–91.

Pensabene, P. 1976, ‘Sull’impiego del marmo di Cap de Garde’, in Studi Miscellanei in memoria di G. Becatti 22, Rome, 177–90.

Pensabene, P. (ed.) 1985, Marmi Antichi. Problemi d’Impiego, di restauro e d’identificazione, Studi Miscellanei 26, Rome.

Pensabene, P. 2002, ‘Le principali cave di marmo bianco’, in De Nuccio and Ungaro (eds), and, Rome, 203–21.

Pensabene, P. 2005, ‘Marmi e committenza negli edifici di spettacolo in Campania’, Marmora 1, 69−143.

Pollini, J. 2005, ‘A new marble head of Tiberius: portrait typology and ideology’, AntK 48, 55–71.

Ponti, G. 2002, ‘Tecniche di estrazione e di lavorazione delle colonne monolitiche di granito troadense’, in De Nuccio and Ungaro (eds) 291–5.

Radke, G. 1981, Viae Publicae Romanae, Bologna.Reggiani, A. M. 2007, ‘Donne al potere nella famiglia Ulpia’,in

Adembri and Nicolai 2007, 23−9.Rocco, T. 1996, ‘Due ponti della Campania: il ponte Aurunco e il

ponte di Faicchio’, in Strade romane: ponti e viadotti, eds L.Quilici,S. Quilici Gigli and G. CeraRome, 29−40.

Ruesch, A. 1911, Le collezioni del Museo nazionale di Napoli 1–2, Naples.Sambon, A. 1903, Les monnaies antiques de l’Italie, Paris.Sear, F. 2006, Roman Theatres: an Architectural Study, Oxford.Sommella, P. 1991, ‘Città e territorio nella Campania antica’, in Storia e

civiltà della Campania, I, ed. G. Pugliese Carratelli, Naples, 151–91. Stemmer, K. 1978, Untersuchungen zur Typologie, Chronologie und

Ikonographie der Panzerstatuen (Archaologische Forschungen), Berlin.Stemmer, K. 1990, ‘Panzerstatuen mit Kopf des Hadrian’, in

Documents

Matidia Minor and Suessa Aurunca