’Inscriptions and graffiti in San Lorenzo in Lucina’

5

STOCKHOLM 2012

SKRIFTER UTGIVNA AV SVENSKA INSTITUTET ROM, 4°, 61 ACTA INSTITUTI ROMANI REGNI SUECIAE, SERIES IN 4°, 61

San Lorenzo in LucinaThe transformations of a Roman quarter Edited by Olof Brandt

205

Finds

INSCRIPTIONS AND GRAFFITI IN SAN LORENZO IN LUCINA ANNA BLENNOW 207

ANNA BLENNOWWITH CONTRIBUTIONS BY OLOF BRANDT

Inscriptions and graffiti in San Lorenzo in Lucina

Abstract!is article discusses the Early Christian and medieval inscriptions, and the Roman gra"ti preserved in the church of San Lorenzo in Lucina. !e gra"ti, on a plaster wall which antedates the earliest church, are dated to the second century AD, and consist mainly of names and nu-merals. Six early Christian inscriptions which are mostly fragmentary (from the fourth–#$h centuries), located in the portico of the church, were found in 1872 to the east of the church, where an eighth century funerary inscription for the deacon Paulus was also discovered. !ree funerary inscriptions (fourth–#$h centuries) were found in the church in 1993–2001, one for Leo (in the crypt of the church), one for Flavia Hilarina (incorporated into the baptismal font), and one for Martyrius. A fragmentary inscription (dated to 384–399) displaying the words fon-tem and !eodorus was found in 2001 in the sacristy, and it is argued here that the inscription derived from the baptistery of the church. Four inscriptions from the12th century are preserved in the portico, and one on the marble cathedra. !ese inscriptions mention consecrations of an altar in 1112, relic translations by the priest Benedictus and consecra-tions of the church in 1130 by Antipope Anacletus II and in 1196 by Pope Celestine III.

1. Four graffiti on the second century walls beneath San Lorenzo in Lucina(BY ANNA BLENNOW)1

Parts of a building from the second century AD have been uncovered in the excavations beneath San Lorenzo in Luci-na.2 A black and white mosaic %oor is surrounded by walls

1 !e parts of this article that are written by Anna Blennow were com-posed mainly during 2000–2001. !e author would like to express her gratitude to Dr Frederick Whitling for his assistance with language revi-sion—all remaining errors are due to the author. !e edition method used both for the gra"ti and the inscription is based on the Krummrey-Panciera-system, though a simpli#ed variant has been used here. All Latin names have been kept in their Latin form throughout the text for the sake of consistency, also in the cases where English equivalents exist.2 For a discussion on the remains of the second century building, cf. Pasquali and Mols in this volume.

in opus mixtum, covered with rough plaster. !e building to which this room belonged was torn down when it was re-placed by an insula at the beginning of the third century AD.3

On the east and west walls of this room, four groups of frag-mentary gra"ti were found, all of them situated about half a metre above the %oor. Gra"to 2 was detected by Stephan Mols in February 2000, and the others were found by the author of this article during a close examination of the walls shortly therea$er. In this article I will present a description of each of the individual gra"ti, followed by a discussion on the room in which the gra"ti are situated, and the dating of the gra"ti.

GRAFFITO 1 (FIG. 1)!is gra"to, on the north wall of the room, consists of ten vertical strokes, 25–45 mm. !e wall has been demolished immediately to the le$ of the gra"to, which means that the original gra"to may have been more extensive.

GRAFFITO 2 (FIG. 2)!is gra"to, the most extensive of the four examples, is situ-ated on the east wall. !e upper part of the gra"to is inter-rupted where the wall has been torn down. !e height of the letters varies between 10–30 mm. Four lines are discernible, together with traces of a #$h one. !e gra"to has been dam-aged by several small holes as well as long, horizontal scratches.

Edition: [---] V [·] M[a---] a(sses) XXXXV Stren[u---] a(sses) XXX Agatem[eri] a(sses) IX5. Victoris a(sses) [---] II

3 Cf. Boman in this volume.

208 ANNA BLENNOW INSCRIPTIONS AND GRAFFITI IN SAN LORENZO IN LUCINA

Each line ends with a number preceded by a certain sign, which, in comparison with similar gra"ti in Pompeii,4 could be the letter A which was an abbreviation for asses (the Ro-man coins of rather low value). In the last two lines, the names Victor (in the genitive) and Agatemerus (probably also in the genitive) are present. It is easy to suppose that the other lines may also start with names; in line three there is possibly the name Strenuus. !e two last lines are executed somewhat di&erently with regard to the letter forms and the depth of the inscription. Traces of a squared pattern are visible to the immediate right of the text.

GRAFFITO 3 (FIG. 3)On a slightly lower level (ca 15 cm) than the other gra"ti on the east wall, there is a group of apparently disconnected

4 CIL IV, 8561, 8565, 8566, 9197.

Fig. 2. Gra"to on the E wall, the most extensive gra"to.

Fig. 1. Gra"to on the N wall with 10 vertical strokes.


numerals (XV, IX, V, ... I, III, IIIXX). !ese are situated next to one of the large holes in the plaster, and seem to have been interrupted by the hole.

GRAFFITO 4 (FIG. 4)On the same level as nos. 1 and 2, on the east wall, there is a gra"to consisting of four letters: I, S, T, a possible E and two small vertical strokes where the wall is broken. !e height of the letters is 35 mm, and the S extends downwards in a long curve. It is possible that the text could have extended upwards as the wall ends just above the letters.

Edition: Iste[---]

DISCUSSION!e walls of this room are constructed in opus mixtum and are dated to the age of Hadrian.5 It has been suggested by Stephan Mols that the walls were le$ un#nished at the time of their construction.6 !ere are several smaller holes in the plaster; some of them seem to have been repaired. Some are located in the middle of the gra"ti, so they must have appeared later than the text. !ere are also two larger holes which, accord-ing to Mols, seem to derive from sca&olding and, according to Pasquali, from furniture attached to the wall. !ey are situated on the east wall with an interval of about 0.9 m. !e span between the north wall and the #rst hole is about 2 m, and between the second hole and the end of the east wall the span is about 0.55 m. Both holes are located 0.3 m above the mosaic %oor.

!e mosaic %oor, however, is dated to a later, Severan phase.7 So, when should we believe that the gra"ti was made, and under what circumstances?

It is unclear whether the Hadrianic structure was #nished and used as a room, despite the lack of a surface layer on the walls, or if it was abandoned for some reason before it was completed. In any case, a new %oor was constructed in the late second century, and thus there must have been a plan for the decor of the walls at this time as well. !is work was in-terrupted for some reason. !e speci#c stage of completion when the work was interrupted is uncertain. Mols suggests that a change of plan or a destruction of the older structure occurred just a$er the mosaic was made and before the #nal decoration of the walls.

!e gra"ti are all located on the same level on di&er-ent parts of the wall (i.e. about 40–50 cm above the mosaic %oor), which could indicate that this was a natural height for a writer. It could be presumed, then, that the level of the %oor was lower (1–1.5 m) in the room when the gra"ti were made and that the mosaic %oor was constructed later on a higher level, caused perhaps by the frequent inundations of the Tiber. Nevertheless, if the mosaic level was in fact the original %oor level when the gra"ti were made, the placement of the text would, therefore, be on a very low level on the walls. !e reason for this could be that the upper parts of the walls were already covered with a #nishing layer, and thus were not avail-able for scribbling. Another explanation could be that the writers were seated when making the gra"ti, which would then indicate that the room actually had been in use in some way, un#nished or not.

!e large holes in the plaster are also situated at quite a low level in relation to the mosaic %oor. If we postulate that

5 Cf. Pasquali and Mols in this volume.6 Cf. Mols in this volume.7 Cf. Mols in this volume.

Fig. 4. Gra"to on the E wall (iste?).

Fig. 3. Slightly lower on the E wall, numerals.


they are caused by sca&olding, in a room with a %oor level identical with the mosaic level, it seems strange that the scaf-folding would have started almost at %oor level, considering the extra damage to the wall that this would entail. If, on the other hand, the holes derive from sca&olding from a lower %oor level, their location would seem more logical. !is could imply a dating of the visible plaster to a phase earlier than the mosaic, and probably to the same phase as the walls, i. e. the early second century. If a #nal layer was to be added, or part of a #nal layer was actually added when the mosaic was made, it must have used the old plaster as groundwork. !e many small holes in the plaster, several of which seem to have been repaired at some point, could also indicate that the room with the rough plaster had been in use for a while, and then repaired and prepared for a rebuilding which was, for some reason, never completed.

Let us now take a look at the information we can derive from the gra"ti. Obviously, some kind of counting went on in this room, as evidenced by the many numerals written. It appears that money has been distributed, either a salary or some other income, to at least two individuals, but perhaps to as many as #ve or more. !e names indicate slaves or freed-men. If the main gra"to was made at the same time as the construction of a room it could concern calculations by the building workers, and the list could then be their bill. In that case it belongs to a room never completed (unless the room was intended for use despite the lack of decoration). If, on the other hand, the room was completed and used for a while, the writer or writers could also have belonged to the sta& of a household or an institution, and the calculations might then concern their daily business. If so, the function of the room did not demand more elaborate decoration.

!e fact that some of the scattered numerals of gra"to 3 seem to be interrupted by one of the large holes could sup-port the theory that the gra"ti belongs to the construction phase of the walls, regardless of whether the holes were made by sca&olding or furniture.

!e letters are of a clear majuscule script, typical for the so-called early Roman cursive.8 !ey are quite angular in shape, like the style used on wax tablets, where the strokes were drawn downwards or le$ to right and not joined to-gether. !ey lack the longer curved lines of some gra"ti in Pompeii, for example,9 which were inspired by the more %ow-ing style used on papyri.

!e letter E, as seen in line 3 and 4 of gra"to 2, is written with two parallel vertical strokes, a common form in gra"ti. !e E in gra"to 4 cannot be de#nitely identi#ed; if it is an E, it must be a majuscule E without the horizontal mid-stroke. It

8 For the Roman cursive, I have consulted Tjäder 1983.9 Tjäder 1983, 111.

should be added here that the same writer could use both the majuscule E and the “two-stroke” variation in the same text.10

!ese features coincide with what Tjäder calls “phase one” in the development of the Roman script, i. e. before the in%u-ence of papyrus had caused the script to lean towards more %owing letters and minuscule forms. It could also indicate that the writer was not used to writing on papyrus, and pre-ferred the simpler standard-forms of the letters.

If the sign preceding each numeral in the list is an A, then they all lack the horizontal stroke which occurs instead as a short spur descending from the right stroke in the two As of Agatem(eri). In comparison with similar lists found in Pom-peii (see below), both variants of A appear; the two-stroke A seems to be dominant, however, in abbreviations of asses, and the three-stroke A seems to be dominant regarding names or items listed. !e Pompeian gra"ti are all earlier than AD 79, and it is possible that this speci#c abbreviation evolved in the following decades towards a standardized two-stroke variant.

!e letter style in the gra"to varies slightly. !e two last lines of the “salary list” are less deeply inscribed; the letters are larger than those of the upper lines and seem to be made by a less skilled writer. !e strokes in gra"to 4 are thin and shaped in a more elegant way, especially the sweeping S. !is could mean that several persons were involved in the writing process, or that the gra"ti were executed on di&erent occa-sions and with varying degrees of haste. If we postulate that the gra"ti were written very low on the wall, i. e. if the %oor level was identical with that of the mosaic, the more negli-gent style of the last lines of the text could be explained by the more uncomfortable position for the writer when he had to gradually write further and further down on the surface of the wall.

Several examples of this kind of list are found in Pom-peian gra"ti: mainly lists of contents in stock, for example wine and oil; lists of objects purchased in households, such as wine, oil, bread and cheese; lists of payments, price lists and debt lists from tabernae; lists of bets on gladiators and lists of their victories.

On some name lists the same name has been written sev-eral times. !is is then followed by a di&erent numeral. Such gra"ti are found in a Late Antique building beneath Santa Maria Maggiore in Rome.11 P. Castrén suggests that the lists could pertain to a game of some sort; the numerals thus rep-resent points in the game. !e numbers in these gra"ti range from 25–90, and Castrén considers them too high to be sums of salary. Scattered numerals occur on other parts of the wall, in analogy with our gra"ti.

10 Tjäder 1983, 110.11 Castrén 1972, 17, 41.


It is hard to judge whether the gra"ti beneath San Loren-zo in Lucina form part of activities taking place during recre-ation (e.g. games) or during work. !e squared pattern to the right of the list could indicate a game, but then again the asses signs preceding the numbers rather suggest sums of money distributed. !e more probable interpretation would be that of a salary list for work which was done, be it the building of the room or some other activity.

!e gra"ti should be dated somewhere between AD 117 (since the wall is in opus mixtum, dated to Hadrian) and AD 217 (cf. brick-stamps from Caracalla in the insula). Regard-ing the majuscule letter forms, I would suggest a date in the #rst half of the second century, i.e. contemporary with the construction of the walls. I also propose that the plaster de-rives from the same period and not from the later phase of the mosaic %oor.

2. Early Christian inscriptions in San Lorenzo in Lucina(BY ANNA BLENNOW)A collection of Early Christian inscriptions survives in San Lorenzo in Lucina. Most of these were discovered in 1872, when the foundations of the adjacent Palazzo Fiano were re-stored; they are now situated in the portico of the church.

During the restoration work, a series of medieval tombs were discovered east of the church about three metres be-low the present ground-level.12 !e tombs contained two fairly well-preserved recycled marble sarcophagi with pagan motifs, and a broken co"n made of terracotta and marble slabs. Among these were two intact marble slabs with Early Christian inscriptions facing the inside of the tomb. Mixed fragments of an epitaph were found in a fourth spot; this was made for a deacon named Paulus, and can be dated to the year 783 (see below). Fragments from another three Early Chris-tian inscriptions were also found. One of the marble slabs and some inscription fragments are now exhibited in the portico of the church.

As indicated by the inscription of Paulus,13 the tomb area dates from the late eighth century, when Pope Hadrian I (772–795) restored a large number of churches in Rome, including San Lorenzo in Lucina.14 !e fragments of Early Christian inscriptions were probably brought to the church

12 De Rossi 1872–1873, 42. Krautheimer (1959, 178), referring to de Rossi’s article (de Rossi 1872–1873), claims the level of these tombs to be unknown, without further explanation.13 For a description of the Paulus inscription, see below.14 LP ed. Duchesne I, 507: Pariter et titulum beati Laurenti martyris qui appellatur Lucine (...) in omnibus una cum porticibus earum noviter nimio decore renovavit.

from an abandoned cemetery outside the city-walls to serve as building materials. !is was a common phenomenon dur-ing the periods of extensive restorations and new construc-tions taking place in Rome in the eighth century, as well as in the 12th century. In most of the preserved medieval church %oors, fragments of Early Christian inscriptions can be seen to a greater or lesser extent: two such inscriptions have also been found in the baptistery of San Lorenzo in Lucina.15

!ere are no known traces of an eighth century portico in San Lorenzo in Lucina: the structure visible today derives from the 12th century. However, the Liber Ponti#calis states that Hadrian I restored the church together with its portico (see above), which could mean that a portico already exist-ed before Hadrian’s ponti#cate, and that the eighth century burial place seems to have been located in connection with that portico. De Rossi concluded that the inscription of Pau-lus must have been incorporated in a marble %oor covering the tombs. Nothing further is known of the structure of the area between the church and the Via Lata in the eighth cen-tury. According to the Roma Instaurata of the 15th century, vestiges of older structures must have been visible in the area as late as the 13th century, when the cardinal’s palace of San Lorenzo in Lucina was built on magnos fornices et amplissima fundamenta (“large vaults and very extensive fundaments”). !e author thought these vaults and foundations were build-ings from the Domitian era.16 !ese could have been remains of the third century building, parts of which have been dis-covered under the church.

!e damage to the material from the tomb area may have been a result of later plundering. In 1084 Robert Guiscard and his Norman soldiers sacked and set #re to Rome when liberating Pope Gregorius VII during the siege of Henry IV, and the San Lorenzo in Lucina region was almost completely demolished.17

Some of the inscriptions have disappeared since their dis-covery in 1872, namely one of the two larger marble slabs18 and some fragments of inscription S5 and of the inscription of Paulus (see below). According to the descriptions in ICUR,19

15 Brandt 1994, 197–201, and Brandt 1996, 271–274. 16 Valentini & Zucchetti 1953, 292.17 LP ed. Duchesne II, 290: immo ipse cum suis totam regionem illam in qua aecclesiae sancti Silvestri et sancti Laurentii in Lucina site sunt penitus destruxit et fere ad nichilum redegit; Chron. Cas. 741: Robbertus autem dux (...) ex consilio Cencii Romanorum consulis ignem in Urbem immisit.18 ICUR I, 427; de Rossi 1872–1873, 51. Text: Fl(avius) Gaudentius V D P T L D et Honorata coniux d(e)p(ositus) t(ertio) n(onas) sept(embres). 1.91 m ' 0.61 m. !e abbreviations have been read by de Rossi as vir devotissimus protector lateris dominici.19 ICUR I, 427–428: apud Almagià v. cl. servatur; ICUR I, 429: in ae-dium Fiano ... ibi in atrio parieti ad#xum exstat; ICUR I, 423: ibi in atrio parieti ad#xa servatur; ICUR I, 425: in aedium Fiano atrio parieti ad-#xum exstat.


the #nds from 1872 were at #rst preserved in palazzo Fiano by the Almagià family, and were then moved to the portico of the church, perhaps when this was restored in 1927.20

Another Early Christian inscription was discovered in the crypt of the church in January 2001. It had been reused as a lid for one of the tombs from the 17th century. It had prob-ably served as building material in the earlier phases of the church, and was then reused when the older structures were destroyed.

!e inscriptions are described and commented on in the following text. !e abbreviations W and S refer to the west or south wall of the portico, and correspond with those used by Freccero and Franzon (in this volume).21

W2 (FIG. 5)Marble slab, 1.36 m ' 0.62 m. Its original length was 1.90 m, as described by de Rossi. !e slab is now broken into two parts. !e height of the letters is 65–45 mm.De Rossi 1872–1873, 51; ICUR I, 428; Diehl 1961, 3060.

Edition:Hic iacet Rigina que vixit annus pl(us) m(inus) XVII d(e)p(osita) XVII kal(endas) Oct(obres).

20 Terenzio 1930–1931, 46–47.21 See Freccero and Franzon in this volume.

Translation:Here lies Regina who lived more or less for seventeen years and was buried seventeen days before the calends of October (the 15th of September).

Discussion:Diehl reads oue from de Rossi’s photograph, clearly because of an erroneous enhancement of the letters with paint in recent centuries, as de Rossi in his article reads que. !e in-scription shows some common orthographic variations: I for E and annus for annos. !e cross-bars of the A are broken, the cross-bars of the L point downwards, the G has a cursive shape with a very small spur. !e E is narrow, with horizontal bars of equal length. !e legs of the M are slanted, and the right leg projects upwards. Overall, the proportions of the thinly shaped letters are regular, but there is no line modula-tion and the depth of the letters varies slightly. Small serifs are attached to certain letters. A crux monogrammatica is situated just above the Q in the upper line. !ere is a ligature between the P and the L.

Crux monogrammatica symbols which are separated from the text are common from the middle of the fourth century to the late #$h century;22 the formula hic iacet was used dur-ing the same period;23 an A with a broken cross-bar occurs for

22 Testini 1980, 356.23 De Rossi 1872–1873, 51.

Fig. 5. W2 (photo A. Freccero).


the #rst time in a dated Latin inscription in AD 338;24 these features give a rough dating of the inscription.

S1B (FIG. 6)Marble fragment 0.45 m ' 0.21 m. !e height of the letters is 55 mm.ICUR I, 426.

Edition: Feste [---]

Discussion:!is must be the beginning of a line, and possibly a name, perhaps Festus in the vocative. !e stone, the letter forms as well as the only discernible line of the text, could perhaps link attribute this fragment with inscription S6. De Rossi does not mention this fragment in the publication of the #nds from 1872. ICUR refers to an unpublished document of de Rossi, “sch. 3789”.

S5 (FIG. 7)Four fragments of a marble slab which together have a to-tal length of 0.39 m, and a maximum height of 0.25 m. !e height of the letters is 40–60 mm. !ese are the only remain-ing fragments from the original ten fragments described by de Rossi, measuring 0.67 m ' 0.26 m; three of the fragments, S1c (which consists of two fragments) and S1a are errone-ously placed upside down in a di&erent part of the portico.De Rossi 1872–1873, 49; ICUR I, 423.

Edition: [---]lus qui vixit [---] [--- L]eonis [d]ep [---]

Translation:... lus who lived ... buried [during the consulate of L]eo

Discussion:De Rossi reconstructs the text as [consulatu d(omini) n(ostri) L]eonis or [cons / post cons d n L]eonis [iunioris]; Silvagni con-

24 Gordon 1965, 316.

siders the reading of [d]ep as doubtful, but does not suggest an alternative.

!e letters are irregular with no line modulation and in-consistently applied serifs, and have been incised in a pattern rather than following a straight baseline. !e diagonals of the X are emphasized, which is common in Christian inscrip-tions of Late Antiquity. !e cross-bar of the L is pointing downwards. If the reconstruction of [L]eonis [d]ep is correct, the date of the inscription would be either AD 458, AD 474 or AD 475, according to de Rossi.

S6 (FIG. 8)!ree fragments of a marble slab, which together measure total length 0.80 m, maximum height 0.17 m. !e height of the letters is 45 mm. Fragment S6c belongs to this inscription and not to fragment S5, below which it was located, upside down, during the systematization of the inscriptions in the portico.De Rossi 1872–1873, 49; ICUR I, 429; Diehl 1961, 2922.

Edition: [---]nus XXII receptus in pace [---]s

Translation:... twentytwo years, received in peace ...

Discussion:De Rossi reads [vixit annos plus mi]nus. !e fragments indi-cate that the inscription consisted of only one line. !e pro-portions of the letters are similar to capitalis quadrata and are well-cut, but rather heavy and lacking modulation. !e leg of

Fig. 6. S1b (photo A. Freccero). Fig. 7. S5 (photo A. Freccero).


the R has an unusual curl. !e formula receptus in pace was primarily used during the third and fourth centuries AD.25

S7 (FIG. 9)Marble fragment 0.19 m ' 0.16 m. !e height of the letters is 50 mm. De Rossi 1872–1873, 52; Ihm 1895, 54; ICUR I, 425; Ferrua 1942, 56.

Edition: [---] opra [---] resb [---]

Discussion:Some attempts to reconstruct the text of this small fragment have been made previously due to its secure provenience from an inscription executed during the time of Pope Damasus (366–384). He was the author of several magni#cently in-scribed poems concerning martyrs, which were designed and perhaps also incised in an easily recognizable style by a certain Furius Dionysius Filocalus, hence the term “Philocalian” let-terforms.26 His name is known to us because of his frequent habit of signing his inscriptions, sometimes also with the ad-dition Damasi papae cultor atque amator (worshipper and

25 De Rossi 1872–1873, 49.26 Gray 1956.

friend of pope Damasus).27 Most of these inscriptions were originally located at the tombs of the most important martyrs in the catacombs.

!e fragment does not seem to belong to other surviv-ing parts of the inscriptions of Pope Damasus, nor to any other transcription.28 Ihm reconstructs the text as [Christ]o pra[estante] [---] [p]resb[yter], and Ferrua suggests pra[ecepta secutus] [p]resb[yter instans]. !e reading of pra[ecepta] is doubtful, while the spelling could also have been precepta in this period. Ihm refers to the transcriptions of a lost epigram29 where he chooses to read praestante. It should be noted that the transcriptions of the epigram provide evidence of both spellings. !e rather narrow spacing of the letters could in-dicate that the fragment shows the closing parts of two verse-lines.

!e Philocalian letter shapes emerge in unique splendour amongst the deteriorating epigraphy of the fourth century. !e layout, the format and the scale introduce new standards, which were to be imitated and followed, although never equalled, in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages. !e letters are spread in even lines on the rectangular stones; some letters are inscribed in a smaller format into other letters, and some are joined together in ligature. !e proportions of the letters are similar to a very widely extended capitalis quadrata with a remarkable contrast between thick and thin strokes. !e articulated ornamentation of the letters, with the thin, el-egantly curled serifs, contrasts with the regularity of the heavy and deeply cut letter stems. !e stem-endings in the shape of a drop are characteristic of this style.

Ferrua postulates that this inscription could be related to the fact that the election of Pope Damasus, according to the

27 Ferrua 1942, 18.28 De Rossi 1872–1873, 52.29 Ihm 1895, 42, 4.

Fig. 9. S7 (photo A. Freccero).

Fig. 8. S6 (photo A. Freccero).


ancient sources, took place in Lucinis 366.30 !e location in Lucinis has generally been interpreted as the titulus Lucinae, which preceded the earliest church building if this is to be attributed to Sixtus III (432–440). Until now this has been the most widespread scholarly view (for a discussion of the dating of the earliest church, see Brandt in this volume). !e fragment is unfortunately too small to draw any conclusions of that kind; and the possibility that this fragment is reused material from a catacomb cannot be excluded.

THE INSCRIPTION OF LEO (FIG. 10)Another Early Christian inscription was discovered in the crypt of the church in 2001. It had served as a lid for one of the tombs which was excavated beneath the church %oor when the %oor was raised in 1598.

Marble slab 0.83 m ' 0.73 m, thickness 4–5 cm. !e height of the letters is 40–45 mm. !e right-hand part of the inscription has been cut o& in the middle of the text, which shows that the inscribed slab was originally rectangular. An-other theory is that the inscription was originally made on two (or more) marble slabs—none of the letters on the right edge are broken, and they could thus have been inscribed sur-rounding the splice. !e slab is broken vertically, and the up-per le$ corner has fallen o&. !e vertical crack has split again, despite both damages having been repaired long ago. To the le$ of the text there is a symbol, 0.10 m ' 0.22 m, resembling a hut.

Edition: Leo qui vixit ann[---] m(emoriae?) b(onae?)

Translation:Leo who lived [---] years [---] in good memory.

Discussion:!e height of the slab indicates that it could not have derived from a loculus tomb, but rather from a tomb which was incor-porated in the %oor of one of the funerary basilicas built at the martyr sanctuaries outside Rome from the #rst half of the fourth century onwards.

!e abbreviation M B is not a common feature in Early Christian epigraphy. It appears in a funerary inscription from Spain, where the editor suggests the reading m(emoriae)

30 Guenther 1895, 2: coeperunt in basilica Iuli procedere et sibi Ursinum diaconum ponti#cem in loco Liberii ordinari deposcunt; periuri vero in Lucinis Damasum sibi episcopum in loco Felicis expostulant.

b(onae),31 which would #t well in this case as well. !e incised hut could be a symbol for paradise and eternal life.32

!e letters are regular and fairly thin. !ere is no line modulation, and the serifs are well-articulated and slightly curved. !e cross-bar of the A is straight, the le$ leg projects upwards. !e E is narrow, the legs of the M are slanted and the right leg projects upwards. !e M is traversed by a diago-nal line, which resembles an abbreviation line. !e inscrip-tion bears traces of guide-lines.

!e suggested provenience is from a funerary basilica. !e picture and the letter forms point towards a date in the fourth or #$h century. !e serifs, which are vaguely reminiscent of those of the Philocalian letters, together with the letter forms that resemble those in inscription W2, could indicate a date from the late fourth or the beginning of the #$h century.

3. Early Christian inscriptions from the baptistery of San Lorenzo in Lucina(BY OLOF BRANDT)

THE INSCRIPTION OF HILARINAAn Early Christian funerary inscription (Figs. 11–12) was found in October 1993.33 It had been reused in the marble revetment of the font. Most of the text was covered by a later step which was partially demolished. A small part of the slab is still covered by the remains of the step, but it is less likely that there are other incised signs. !e text is incised on a rec-tangular slab of cipollino marble, the right part of which has been broken o&, together with the lower le$ corner. While the preserved length is 70 cm (top) and 40 cm (bottom), trac-es in the mortar seem to indicate an original length of circa 115 cm. !e slab is 32 cm high and 3 cm thick. !e shape of the slab makes it probable that it belonged to a loculus tomb

31 Hübner 1871, 302.32 Bisconti 2000, 241.33 An earlier version of this text was published in Brandt 1994.

Fig. 10. !e inscription of Leo (photo O. Brandt).


in a catacomb. !e inscription has been le$ in situ, so it is im-possible to determine whether there are any incisions on the other side of the slab. !e letters are 4–5 cm high.

Fl(aviae) Hilarinae quae vixit [annos---] d(ies?) VI [---]

!e palaeography of the inscription #ts well in the fourth century. !e broken horizontal line of the A appears for the #rst time in a dated Latin inscription in 338.34 On the other hand, the elegant letters point to a rather early date, perhaps not a$er the middle of the fourth century.

!e female name Hilarina is not rare in inscriptions, and in at least two cases the name belonged to a Christian wom-an.35 !e indication of how many years, months and days Hi-larina had lived is lost.

!e three preserved letters on the last line could be DVI or DVL, which may be d(eposita est) VI, dulci(or dulcissimae. Which one is the correct interpretation depends on if the text #lled the entire length of the slab. !e last line begins with an empty space. !is probably indicates that the words of the last line were inscribed in the centre, with symmetrical empty spaces on both sides. !is implies that the words of the last line were fewer than those in the other lines. !e number of words which can be imagined here depends, however, on

34 Gordon 1965, n. 316.35 Kajanto 1965, 261.

the length of the slab. If the slab was as long as the trace in the mortar beneath it seems to indicate, then there would be enough space for all the chronological indications which usu-ally make up the date of the deposition, and thus D is prob-ably deposita. On the other hand, the text makes perfect sense as it stands: Flaviae Hilarinae quae vixit etc., and the text may have been incised on only the le$ part of the slab. In this case D may be dulci or dulcissimae or refer to the number of days she lived. !is information would usually be contained in the last words in the text of a funerary inscription, which would #t well on a symmetrical, short last line. !e expres-sion depositus/-a usually belongs to Christian inscriptions and would indicate that Hilarina was a Christian woman, but this is probable also because of the shape of the slab, which seems to belong to a catacomb loculus.

Hilarina was probably buried during the #rst half of the fourth century, but she was not allowed to rest in peace for a long time. Accepting the traditional identi#cation of the Early Christian basilica with the basilica santo Laurentio(built by Pope Sixtus III (432–440),36 her tomb was destroyed af-ter a century. If the baptistery had already been built in the fourth century, as has been discussed elsewhere in this vol-ume, her tomb was destroyed a$er an even shorter time. !e probable fourth century date of this inscription forms one of the major di"culties with assigning a fourth century date to the baptistery. In a similar case, another funerary inscription was been found in the medieval reconstruction of the marble revetment of the baptistery of San Marcello al Corso,37 and Aldo Nestori, who excavated the Early Christian baptistery of San Marcello, believed that funerary inscriptions from the catacombs could not have been reused before the #rst transla-tions in the middle of the seventh century. We know, howev-er, that tombs in the catacombs were destroyed much earlier than that. Towards the middle of the fourth century popes made extensive works in the catacombs in order to create crypts around the venerated tombs of the martyrs, beginning with Pope Liberius (352–356) and the tomb of the martyr Agnes by the Via Nomentana,38 followed by the well-known work of Pope Damasus (366–354).39 Many tombs had to be sacri#ced, and these tombs may have been the more recent ones. !e tomb of Hilarina may have been destroyed in one of these reconstructions towards the middle of the fourth century, and the same explanation may apply to the inscrip-

36 LP ed. Duchesne I, 234.37 Nestori 1982, 106.38 LP ed. Duchesne, 208: Hic Liberius ornavit de platomis marmoreis sepulchrum sanctae Agnae martyris.39 Mentioned by the Liber Ponti#calis only with the words Hic multa corpora sanctorum requisivit et invenit, quorum etiam versibus declaravit, LP ed. Duchesne, 212. On the work of Damasus in the catacombs, see Saecularia Damasiana 1986 passim, and also Spera 1998.

Fig. 12. !e inscription of Hilarina (drawing O. Brandt).

Fig. 11. !e inscription of Hilarina (photo O. Brandt).


tion found in San Marcello. !e moving of material from the catacombs to the tituli is reminiscent of the old (but rather fruitless) discussion about a common administration of tituli and cemeteries.40

!e traces in the mortar show that most slabs of the marble revetment were more or less of the same shape. Other slabs in the revetment may also have been reused funerary in-scriptions.

THE INSCRIPTION OF MARTYRIUS (?)In 1995, a funerary inscription (Figs. 13–14) was found in the west part of the 19th century layer (US 25) which cov-ered the entire crypt beneath the Sala dei Canonici before the excavations began in 1982. !e late context does not provide any information about a possible relationship between the inscription and the church, but the probable early date of the funerary inscription makes it unlikely that it covered a tomb in a church inside the walls. It was probably brought to the church from the cemeteries outside the walls sometime dur-ing the Middle Ages.

!e text is incised on a slab of white marble, max. width 38 cm, ca 4 cm thick. !e le$ margin, which is 56 cm long, seems to be intact, while the upper margin is preserved from the le$ end for only 32 cm. !e other margins are not pre-served at all. !e letters are 3.3–4.7 cm high.

[---]tyrius * [---] [---]m * qui * de[positus est] [..k]al(endas) * iulia[s--] [---]duxit * et * [---] [.vi]xit * annu [s--] [---]as * dd(=dominorum) nn (=nostrorum) [---] [---]us * x [---]

!e text was probably written on two slabs, of which this is the one to the right: more text seems to be missing to the le$ of the preserved text (esp. line 4) than to the right. A slab of this shape could not have covered a normal loculus tomb in the catacombs, but rather a tomb in the %oor of one of the great funerary basilicas built in the fourth century. !e slab is thicker towards the middle and thinner in the upper and lower parts, but it is di"cult to understand what this could tell us about the shape of the tomb.

!e letters are very carefully executed, especially the serifs. V and A seem to be made up of two letter Is, each one with its serifs. !e use of the Greek letter Y shows contact with the Greek language or perhaps a certain cultural level of engage-ment. !e diagonal of the Q in qui is long and curved, and

40 Pietri 1989.

continues almost horizontally towards the right. !e A of annu(and of as(in the next line has no horizontal line.

!e words in this fragmen-tary text are separated by punc-tuation, but many of the words are di"cult to reconstruct. !e #rst word may be the name Martyrius: a diagonal line be-fore the M may be part of an R. DE is probably the begin-ning of depositus est, as it is also followed by the indication of a burial date sometime between June 14th and June 30th. Duxit( may indicate the lifestyle of the deceased or perhaps his marriage. Annu(is probably annus (instead of the correct form annos). DD NN is an abbrevation of Dominorum nost-rorum, an expression used from the late third century on to indicate the names of the consuls. !e #rst three letters of the

Fig. 14. !e inscription of Martyrius (drawing O. Brandt).

Fig. 13. !e inscription of Mar-tyrius (photo O. Brandt).


last line may describe a burial date: depositus X (...), but an-other burial date is indicated earlier in the text.

!e mention of the date of burial proves that the tomb was Christian. !e plural abbreviation DD NN was used from the late third century to 541, when the Emperor became the only consul.41 !e inscription should probably be dated to the fourth or early #$h century.

4. Inscription made by Theodorus under Pope Siricius (384–399)(BY OLOF BRANDT)In January 2001 part of an inscription (Figs. 15–16) in so-called semi-Philocalian letters, which were used under Pope Siricus (384–399), was discovered on a marble slab which hade been reused as an upper piece of the west window above the vault of the 15th century sacristy in San Lorenzo in Lu-cina. !e slab measures 48 ' 25 ' 6.5–7.5 cm and the letters are 4.5 cm high. !e back of the slab has a very irregular sur-face, which shows that it was placed in a wall. !e inscription was removed on February 16th and placed in the portico, where it can be seen today. !e preserved text reads:

[---]a est vitae Christi d[---] [-f ]ontem !eodorus p[resbyter]

Line 2: !e word ending in ontem could be a word like mon-tem or pontem, but in a religious context with the expression est vitae Christi in the #rst line, fontem is more probable. !e integration p[resbyter] is based on the probable identi#ca-tion with the priest !eodorus,42 who worked under Siricius and who praised his own works on the tombs of the martyrs Protus and Hyacinthus in a not very elegant semi-Philocalian inscription in the catacomb of Sant’Ermete.43

!e letter shapes point to a date in the late fourth century. !e contrast between thick and thin lines and the curly serifs is reminiscent of the Philocalian letters used in monumental inscriptions made by Pope Damasus (366–384), but because of some important di&erences in letter shapes the inscrip-tion should belong to the semi-Philocalian inscriptions made under his successor Siricius (384–399): the central protu-berance between the serifs is missing, and letters like C and D are too broad.44 Among similar high-quality inscriptions with semi-Philocalian letters without a central protuberance, one may make special mention of three from the cemetery of

41 Testini 1980, 402.42 About the priest !edorus: Pietri 1976, I, 540–541.43 CUR X, 26672.44 About semi-Philocalian inscriptions, see Ferrua 1942, 30–31.

Fig. 15a. !e inscription of !eodorus (photo O. Brandt).

Fig. 15b–c. !e inscription of !eodorus in its original position (photo O. Brandt).


Sant’Ermete by the Via Salaria vetus and one from the cem-etery of San Valentino by the Via Flaminia, all from a rather narrow area north of Rome, and three other inscriptions:

1. A fragment (ICUR X, 26673) with the words [sanc]ti m[artyris], found in the cemetery of Sant’Ermete, belonging to an inscription made by the priest Leopardus, who worked for Siricius (384–399) and Anastasius (399–401).45

2. A block from the cemetery of Sant’Ermete by the Via Sala-ria vetus with the words Herme[ti] on one side and inherens on the other (ICUR X, 26670).46

3. A fragment found recently in Sant’Ermete with the letters [—]ST/GAVA[—].47

4. A fragment (ICUR X, 27273) with the words [---]is ut esse[nt]/[---]q. sepulcr[rum]/[---pr]esb(yter) ins[tans---], found close to the cemetery of San Valentino by the Via Fla-minia and attributed by Marucchi to the same priest !eo-dorus, as the same words occur in his inscription ICUR X, 26672 (see above). !e letters, 4.7 cm high, are particularly similar to those of the !edorous inscription.

5. A fragment found close to the catacomb of San Lorenzo with the words [---s]upple[x---]/[---e]t mea[---], perhaps from the oratory of Sts. Abundius and Irenaeus.48

6. A fragment from Sant’Ippolito all’Isola Sacra inscribed on both sides, with the text [Heracl]ida episc(opus) on one side, Heraclida episc(opus) servus/Dei basilicam Yppolito/[—] on the other. !e letters of this fragment are particularly close to those of the !eodorus inscription and were dated to the #rst years of Siricius.49

45 Photo in Bonavenia 1898, 86.46 But better photo in Josi 1932, #g. 3.47 Fiocchi Nicolai 1993–1994.48 Ferrua 1942, 244.49 Mazzoleni 1983, 145.

7. !e latest, dated inscription with this kind of letters (which I am aware of ) was made in 407: the funerary inscription of Eventius in St. Peters (CIL VI, 8, 3, 41.377).

None of these fragments seems to be part of the same inscrip-tion as the fragment from San Lorenzo in Lucina; based on the measurements of the letters and the marble slabs.

Although similar semi-Philocalian inscriptions have been found in many places in and outside Rome, it is interesting to note a concentration in the area north of Rome, between the Via Flaminia and the Via Salaria vetus. !e connection to the activities of !eodorus and other priests in the cemeter-ies of San Valentino by the Via Flaminia and Sant’Ermete by the Via Salaria vetus is interesting, as these cemeteries were closest to San Lorenzo in Lucina. !is may indicate a com-mon administration of the cemeteries and the basilica. !e inscription may have been brought to San Lorenzo in Lucina from one of these cemeteries, or the other way around, it may have been made for the Early Christian basilica and its priests were engaged in the care of these cemeteries as well. !e priest !eodorus who is known from the cemetery of Sant’Ermete could then be a priest working in the titulus Lucinae.

!e inscription of !eodorus, together with some of the other semi-Philocalian inscriptions found north of Rome, seem to suggest a picture of a situation in the late fourth cen-tury when the titulus Lucinae was united with the cemeteries of San Valentino and Sant’Ermete by a common administra-tion, where the priest !eodorus played an important role both in the cult of the martyrs and in the organization of the titulus. !e relationship between the titulus Lucinae(and the cemetery of San Valentino is also mentioned in a well-known funerary inscription made by a priest of the titulus Lucinae, generically dated to the fourth or #$h century (ICUR X, 27537).

Although Early Christian inscriptions in Roman churches generally come from the catacombs outside the city-walls, in this case several pieces of information may point to a prove-nience from the Early Christian baptistery of San Lorenzo in Lucina: the probable presence of the word fontem makes it less likely that it should come from the catacombs, unless there was a baptistery at Sant’Ermete.50 If it did not come from a catacomb, it is less probable that an inscription was moved from one urban church to another. !e Early Chris-tian baptistery was demolished exactly when the present cha-pel was built in the 15th century; the spot is very close to the Early Christian baptistery.

50 A note by Stevenson, conserved at the Vatican Library mentions a baptistery at Sant’Ermete, but it is not clear what is intended. I wish to thank Gabriele Bartolozzi Casti for this information.

Fig. 16. !e inscription of !eodorus (drawing O. Brandt).


If an inscription was made in the baptistery under Siricius (384–399), this contradicts the #$h century date attributed to the church by most scholars—it has o$en been identi#ed with the church built by Pope Sixtus III (432–440) and dedi-cated to the martyr Laurentius, according to the #$h century Liber Ponti#calis.51 !e inscription makes a fourth century date of the Early Christian basilica more probable. In this context one must also recall that Ferrua, who did not believe in that identi#cation, did not exclude a provenience from San Lorenzo in Lucina for the fragment of a Damasian inscrip-tion, nor a fourth century date of the church. !is fragment is, today, exposed in the portico.52

I propose the following hypothesis: the inscription was made by the priest !edorus under Pope Siricius (384–399) in the baptistery of San Lorenzo in Lucina. It remained in place until the Early Christian baptistery was demolished in the 15th century, when this part of the inscription was reused in the chapel next to the baptistery.

5. The eighth century epitaph of Paulus(BY ANNA BLENNOW)!e funerary inscription for the deacon Paulus (Fig. 17) was discovered in 1872 in connection with the restoration of Palaz zo Fiano (see Early Christian inscriptions in San Loren-zo in Lucina). It can be dated to the year 783 and the reign of Pope Hadrian I, as will be shown in the following text. In 1948, it was described as being located in the portico of the church.53 !e further whereabouts of the inscription are shrouded in mystery until 1992, when some fragments of it were discovered in the sacristy of the church. Other fragments came to light in 1998 in a crypt beneath the second chapel on the right but several pieces that were documented in 1872 are still missing. !e fragments of the inscription are now located on the wall of the corridor leading to the excavations.

Marble fragments, 1.38 m ' 0.60 m. !e height of the letters is 45–35 mm.De Rossi 1872–1873, 42; Marucchi 1902, 408; Silvagni 1943, I, XIV, 2; Gray 1948, 54.

Edition: + Parce praecor Paulo sanct[oru]m maxim[e praesul], alta patere poli fac illi culmina Chr[iste]. Vivat in aetherio felix per secla [senatu], luce $uatur ovans [re]gno laetetur O[lympi].

51 LP ed. Duchesne I, 234.52 Ferrua 1942, 209.53 Gray 1948, 54.

5. Vita sequatur eum mortis sic vincula vincat semper in aeterna caelesti %oreat aula. Pauso sepultus ego Paulus, praesentib(us) exul. Dep(ositus) Id(ibus) Mart(iis) ind(ictione) VI temp(ore) d(omini) n(ostri) Hadriani papae.

Translation:Have mercy upon Paulus, I beg, o foremost among the hal-lowed; open the heights of the sky for him, o Christ; may he live fortunate through the centuries in the ethereal senate; may he enjoy the light, exultant, and rejoice in the kingdom of Olympus; may life follow him, and so may he conquer the chains of death; may he always %ower in the eternal palace of heaven. Here I, Paulus, lie buried, an exile from the present. Buried on the 15th of March, in the sixth indictional year, in the time of our lord Pope Hadrian [AD 783].

Discussion:!e inscription is hexametrical, and the poetic expressions are characteristic for the time. !e simple but regular letter forms and the rectangular arrangement are typical for late eighth century Rome. Nicolete Gray #nds this “both in epigraphy and Latinity [...] one of the most creditable inscriptions of the century”. Characteristic forms are the A with a square top and diagonal cross-bar; the N with the diagonal stroke ema-nating from below the top of the le$ leg and ending above the baseline on the right leg; the R with the leg joined to the bowl, the open G with a short spur, and the Q with two feet, one pointing to the le$ and one to the right, instead of a tail. In this period, several forms of the same letter were o$en used in the same inscription, yet in this case we #nd a consequent uniformity of the letters. !e inscription contains a T and an E in ligature, a hedera and some ornaments. A cross symbol is placed at the beginning of the text.

!e double acrostics, which were a common phenom-enon in the Carolingian era, read Paulus Levita, the identity of whom is not quite certain. De Rossi suggests that it might be Paulus A#arta, an agent for the Lombard king Desider-ius. With regard to the con%ict between A#arta and Pope Hadrian I, and the fact that A#arta did not die in Rome, it is perhaps more probable to suggest that the epitaph was made

Fig. 17. !e inscription of Paulus Levita (photo O. Brandt).


Fig. 18. S10 (photo O. Brandt).


for a Roman deacon named Paulus, who subscribed to the council of 743.54 In that case he must have been a deacon for at least forty years until his death in 783.

6. Five 12th century inscriptions in San Lorenzo in Lucina(BY ANNA BLENNOW)55

Five inscriptions from the 12th century are preserved in the church of San Lorenzo in Lucina. !is is a remarkably high number as so many from that century, and indeed of such im-portance, do not survive in any other single church in Rome. !ey all relate to the events of the period, including restora-tions a$er the Norman sack of Rome in 1084, consecrations and reconsecrations of the church, new altars and an extensive collection of relics. Four of these inscriptions are now located in the portico, and have been since the 17th century at least.56 !ey were probably originally placed indoors, as a part of the decoration of the 12th century church, and then moved to the portico when the baroque interior was constructed.57 !e #$h inscription is located on the marble cathedra, or bishop’s chair, which is located in the apse of the church, but not di-rectly visible today since it was covered by a wooden panel in the 17th century. A small door in the panel can be opened and makes it possible to view the cathedra.

54 Mansi 1766, 367.55 Since this article was written, the author has completed a PhD thesis on the subject of medieval Latin inscriptions, !e latin consecrative in-scriptions in prose of churches and altars in Rome 1046–1263. Edition with translations and a commentary on language and palaeography, Göteborg University 2006, printed in 2011, see Blennow 2011. !e study of the medieval inscriptions in San Lorenzo in Lucina thus constituted the #rst embarkation on a winding and joyous academic journey, and the author would like to thank the Swedish Institute in Rome, its former director Anne-Marie Leander Touati and its current director Barbro Santillo Frizell, and project leader Dr Olof Brandt, for the invitation to partici-pate in the San Lorenzo in Lucina project. Since the article was written, F. Vistoli has published a study on the inscriptions in San Lorenzo in Lucina, “In loco qui dicitur aqua trans versa’. Appunti per una lettura in chiave storico-archeologica del comprensorio”, with an appendix, “Papi e martiri, traslazioni e reliquie. Contributo alla storia medievale di S. Lo-renzo in Lucina alla luce di una ‘nuova’ lettura delle epigra# del portico”, in Emergenze storico archeologiche di un settore del suburbio di Roma: la Tenuta dell&Acqua Traversa, ed. F. Vistoli, Roma 2005, 25–109.56 Guizzardi 1675, 20–25.57 O. Marucchi claims that inscription no. S3 is not the original, but a copy of the now lost inscription. !is is not mentioned by any other author. Marucchi 1902, 410: “Tous ces faits sont rappelés dans les in-scriptions qu’on peut lire sous le portique de l’eglise; celle de Celéstin III, dont l’original est malheuresement égaré, parlait du gril de S. L. (...) comme d’une des reliques que possédait l’église”. Judging from the letter forms and overall execution of the inscription, I see no reasons to believe that it would be a later copy.

!ese inscriptions have previously been published in two large epigraphic corpora, namely the 18th century corpus by P.L. Galletti58 and the corpus by V. Forcella which was pub-lished at the end of the 20th century.59 !ey also appear in monographs treating the history of the churches of Rome, as further shown in the bibliographic notices for each inscrip-tion. Photographic documentation of the inscriptions has been previously presented by some editors. Problems regard-ing the inscription of the cathedra have been discussed by F. Grossi Gondi and F. Gandolfo.60

In the following text, editions and translations of the in-scriptions will be presented together with some formal and palaeographical remarks. I will conclude with a general dis-cussion of some historical aspects and textual problems.

!e abbreviations W and S refer to the west or south wall of the portico, and correspond with those used by Freccero and Franzon (in this volume).61

S10 (FIG. 18)Marble slab 0.68 m ' 1.10 m. !e height of the letters is 25–35 mm.Guizzardi 1675, 21; Galletti 1760, III, DVIII, 103; Forcella 1869–1884, V, 341; Marucchi 1902, 410; Kehr 1906, 84, 1; Diehl 1912, 44 d; Silvagni 1943, XXII, 2.

Edition: ((crux)) Anno D(omi)ni millesimo centesimo XII, indictione V, n(o)n(o) K(a)l(endas) Feb(ruarias), dedicatu(m) est hoc altare p(er) manus Leonis Hos-5. tiensis ep(iscop)i. Reliquie s(an)c(t)orum martiru(m) in hoc venerabi- li loco he recondite sunt: s(an)c(t)i Cornelii p(a)p(e,) s(ancti) Stepha-10. nii p(a)p(e), s(ancti) Dionisii p(a)p(e), Epypha- nii archiep(iscop)i, Paterniani ep(iscop)i, Concordii ep(iscop)i, Stephani p(ro)- tomar(tyris), Leonardi, Sisinnii, Florentii, Diocletiani, Pon-15. tiani, Eusebii, Vincentii, Pe- regrini, Romani, Marci, Mar- celliani, Gervasii, P(ro)tasii, Eustathii, Agathe, Cyriace, Martine, Sophie, Pistis, Elpis,20. Agapes.

58 Galletti 1760.59 Forcella 1869–1884.60 Grossi Gondi 1913; Gandolfo 1974–1975.61 Freccero and Franzon in this volume.


Translation:In the year of the Lord 1112, in the #$h indictional year,62 on the 24th of January, this altar was consecrated by the hands of Leo, bishop of Ostia. !ese relics of holy martyrs were placed in this venerable site: (relics of ) Pope St. Cornelius, Pope St. Stephanus, Pope St. Dionysius, archbishop St. Epyphanius, bishop Paternianus, bishop Concordius, Stephanus the #rst martyr, Leonardus, Sisinnus, Florentius, Diocletianus, Pon-tianus, Eusebius, Vincentius, Romanus, Peregrinus, Marcus, Marcellianus, Gervasius, Protasius, Eustathius, Agatha, Cyri-aca, Martina, Pistis, Elpis, Agape.

Discussion:!e inscription contains characteristic features of medieval orthography, such as e for ae and i for y, as well as an initial H in Hostiensis. !e letters are regular with classic shapes. Occa-sionally, wedge-shaped serifs appear. Common abbreviations, like EPI for episcopi, S for sancti and PP for pape, are used. !e wedge-shaped punctuation marks are rather heavy compared to the thin lines of the letters. !e R, the P and the B with open bowls are typical letter forms, as are the M with a short apex and slanted legs, the A with diagonal cross-bar (one A has a broken cross-bar), and the O that is sometimes almond-shaped, sometimes circular. !e lower leg of the K is attached to the upper leg instead of the stem. !ere are no ornaments except for an initial cross and a large, separate cross at the end with the Greek letters ) and * attached to it.

C1 (FIG. 19)Marble slab shaped like a keyhole, functioning as a seat-back in the marble cathedra, maximum width 0.72 m, height 1.04 m. !e height of the letters is 34–40 mm (except for a small N that is only 12 mm high). Several of the editors of the other 12th century inscriptions of the church have overlooked this inscription, due to it being hidden behind a wooden panel (see above).Guizzardi 1675, 25; Kehr 1906, 84, 1; Armellini 1942, 358; Silvagni 1943, XXIII, 2.

Edition: + Tempo- re dom(i)ni Pas- calis pape, anno eius XIII, millesimo

62 Fossile 2000: From the #$h and sixth centuries AD onwards, inscrip-tions could be dated by the year of the so-called indiction. !is ema-nated originally from a third century Egyptian tax system in periods of 15 years. !e dating mentions the number of the year in the actual indic-tional cycle from 1–15.

5. centesimo XII, indictione V, VI Kalendas Februarii p(er) manus eiusdem ponti#cis craticula super quam pro- cul dubio beatus Laurenti-10. us emisit spiritum de quoda(m) altari veteri educta est cu(m) duab(us) ampullis vitreis me- diis sanguine eiusdem martiris, que cum non-15. nullis dieb(us) videretur a Romano populo coram eius multitudine, p(er) manus Leonis Hostiensis ep(iscop)i sub hoc novo altari nono20. K(a)l(endas) Februarii recondita est.

Translation:In the time of our lord Pope Paschalis II, in the 13th year of his reign, the year 1112, in the #$h indictional year, the 27th of January; the gridiron, on which the holy Laurentius beyond doubt gave up his breath, was taken out from an old altar by the hands of the same pope, together with two medi-um-sized vessels of glass, containing blood of the same mar-tyr, which, for several days was viewed by the Roman people in the presence of a multitude, was put beneath this new altar by the hands of Leo, bishop of Ostia, on the 24th of January.

Discussion:!e month is expressed in the form of a substantive in the genitive, instead of using an adjective such as Februarias. !e letter forms are simple but regular and well-executed. !ere are surprisingly few abbreviations and no ligatures. Parallel to the other inscription from 1112, the year is partly spelled out in letters instead of Roman numerals. !e letters of these two inscriptions are similarly shaped, with Q being an exception. !e wedge-shaped punctuation marks are situated on the baseline. Characteristic letters are the A with diagonal cross-bar (although one A has a broken cross-bar); the R, the P and the B with open bowls; the curled G, the M with a short apex and slanted legs, and an open Q with two “feet” inclining be-low the line. !e O is sometimes circular. !ere are no orna-ments except for the initial cross.

S4 (FIG. 20)Marble slab, 0.67 m ' 1.94 m. !e height of the letters is 30 mm.Guizzardi 1675, 23; Forcella 1869–1884, V, 342; Marucchi 1902, 409; Kehr 1906, 84, 1; Diehl 1912, 45 a; Silvagni 1943, XXII, 3.


Fig. 19. C1 (photo O. Brandt).


Edition: ((crux)) Anno D(omi)ni MCXII, indict(ione) V, m(ense) Octubri d(ie) XV, anno vero XII dop(mi)ni Paschalis II p(a)p(e), quida(m) p(res)b(yte)r huius ecl(esi)e nomine Benedictus, ducens secu(m)5. quosda(m) laicos, adiit aecl(esi)am s(an)c(t)i Ste- phani, que sita est in loco qui dicit(ur) Aqua Transversa, ubi sub altare invenit corpora s(an)c(t)orum martirum Pontiani, Eusebii, Vincentii et Pe-10. regrini, que inde auferens suis cum sociis in hanc aecl(esi)am trans- tulit et d(omi)no pape Paschali sicut res acta fuerat #deliter intima- vit, quo audito venerabilis ponti-15. fex precepit, ut in maiori altari s(an)c(t)i Laurentii in sepulchro sub craticula conderentur, quod et factum est. ((ornament)) In eodem quoq(ue) anno ide(m) p(res)b(yte)r invenit cor-20. pora s(an)c(t)oru(m) in via Ardeatina Gor- diani videlicet mar(tyris) et Felicu- le virginis et martiris et in maiori altari iussu prefati ponti#cis superposuit. ((ornament))25. Te(m)pore Gelasii s(e)cun)di p(a)p(e) inventu(m) est corpus s(an)c(t)i Simpronii martiris in via Latina et translatu(m) est in hanc aecl(esi)am p(er) manus Benedicti p(res)b(yte)ri et sub maiori altari est30. reconditum. ((ornament)) Sub hoc quoq(ue) altari sunt IIII dentes ap(osto)lor(um) Philippi et Iacobi, de ligno crucis D(omi)ni, de petra sepulchri Chri(sti), et vas plenu(m) de crema- ta carne beati Laur(entii), et reliq(ui)e s(an)c(t)or(um)35. Cesarii diac(oni) et m(artyris), Martini p(a)p(e), Adriani p(a)p(e), Iuliani m(artyris), Marcellini et Petri, Mar- ci et Marcelliani, Romani, Epiphanii, Martine, Nemesii, Olimpii, !eodoli, Lucille, Exsuperie, Agrippine. ((ornament)) Et40. octo brachia s(an)c(t)or(um) Ypoliti mar(tyris), Iustini p(res)b(yte)ri, Quirini p(res)b(yte)ri, Felicis et Audacti, Simphorose mar(tyris), Iustini mar(tyris) et Eugenii mar(tyris).

Translation:In the year of the Lord 1112, in the #$h indictional year, on the 15th of October, in the 12th year of the reign of our lord Paschalis II, a certain priest of this church, called Benedictus, bringing with him some laymen, went to the church of St.



Stephanus, which is located in a place called Aqua Transversa, where he found beneath the altar bodies of the holy martyrs Pontianus, Eusebius, Vincentius and Peregrinus, which he brought away from there together with his companions, and transferred to this church; he sincerely told our lord Pope Paschalis how it had happened, and when he had heard about it, the venerable pope prescribed that they should be enclosed in the High Altar of St. Laurentius, in a tomb beneath the gridiron, which was done. In the same year, the same priest found the bodies of the holy martyr Gordianus and the virgin martyr Felicula in via Ardeatina, and he placed them above in the High Altar by the orders of the previously mentioned pope. In the time of our lord Pope Gelasius II, the body of the martyr St. Simpronius was found in Via Latina, and it was transferred to this church by the hands of the priest Benedic-tus and put beneath the High Altar. Beneath this altar are also four teeth of the Apostles Philippus and Iacobus, wood from the Lord’s cross, a piece of the stone from the tomb of Christ, a vessel #lled with the burnt %esh of St. Laurentius, and rel-ics of Sts. Cesarius, deacon and martyr, Pope Martinus, Pope Hadrianus, the martyr Julianus, Marcellinus and Petrus, Mar-cus and Marcellianus, Romanus, Epiphanius, Martina, Neme-sius, Olympius, !eodolus, Lucilla, Exsuperia and Agrippina, and eight bones of the holy martyr Hippolytus, the priests Iustinus and +uirinus, Felix and Audactus, the martyr Sym-phorosa, the martyr Iustinus and the martyr Eugenius.

Discussion:!e inscription contains typical features of medieval ortho-graphy such as ae for e in aeclesiam, u for o in octubri, an extra p in dopmini, and i for y. !e name of the martyr Hippolytus is spelled Ypolitus. !e letters have rather thick lines, and form a somewhat irregular pattern. !e serifs and the punctuation marks are wedge-shaped. Typical abbreviations are used, e.g. PBR for presbyter, ECLE for ecclesie, SCI for sancti, SCORV for sanctorum and MAR for martyris. !e M has slanted legs and a long apex, except for one M in the uncial style in the #rst line. !e P, the R and the B are closed; the G is curled; the cross-bar of the A is slightly diagonally orientated. !e inscription features several standardized ornaments and an initial cross.

S9 (FIG. 21)Marble slab, 0.43 m ' 1.36 m. !e height of the letters is 35 mm.Guizzardi 1675, 22; Galletti 1760, I, XXXVIII, 48; Forcella 1869–1884, V, 343; Marucchi 1902, 411; Kehr 1906, 84, 2; Diehl 1912, 45 b; Armellini 1942, 356; Silvagni 1943, XXIII, 6.



Edition: ((crux)) Anno D(omi)ni MCXXX, anno vero dopmini Anacleti s(e)c(un)di pape primo, indict(ione) VIII,5. mense Madio d(ie) XX q(ui)nta, dedicata est haec ecl(esi)a beati Laur(entii), et in maiori altari per manus eiusdem10. ponti#cis recondita sunt corpora s(an)c(t)or(um) mar(tyrum) Alexandri p(a)p(e), Severine, et vestis s(an)c(t)i Xisti martiris15. atq(ue) ponti#cis, et due ampulle vi- tree cum sanguine et adipe bea- tissimi atque20. gloriosissimi martiris Lau- rentii ((ornament)). + Furcula, crati- cule, ferru(m) cum25. compede iuncta,63

gausape, pingue- do, sunt hoc in domate cuncta.

Translation:In the year of the Lord 1130, in the #rst year of the reign of lord Pope Anacletus II, in the eighth indictional year, on the 25th of May, this church of St. Laurentius was consecrated, and in the High Altar were put by the same pope’s hands the bodies of the holy martyrs Pope Alexander, Severina, and the garment of the martyr Pope St. Xystus, and two vessels of glass with blood and grease of the most holy and glorious martyr St. Laurentius. A piece of the gridiron, a chain with a fetter, a cloth and grease, everything is in this building.

Discussion:!e inscription contains medieval orthography such as dop-mini for domini which corresponds with inscription S4. An extra D in Madio predates the Italian form maggio. !e let-ters are similar to those of inscription S4, with wedge-shaped serifs attached to some letters and the punctuation is simi-

63 Forcella 1874 edits cum compede devincta, and Galletti 1760 cum compede deiuncta.

larly wedge-shaped. Common abbreviations are used, such as SCOR for sanctorum, MAR for martyrum, ECLA for ecclesia, SCI for sancti, are used. !ere is a corrected error at the beginning of the seventh line: hanc has been altered to haec. Uncial H, E and M appear, though not consistently. !e bowls of the P, the B and the R are closed, although the bowl of the R is occasionally open. !e G is curled, and the R has a relatively large bowl. !e inscription features a plain orna-ment and two crosses. !e similarities in execution between this inscription and inscription S4 makes it probable that the two inscriptions derive from the same workshop and from ap-proximately the same period.

S3 (FIG. 22)Marble slab, 1.44 m ' 1.01 m. !e height of the letters is 35 mm.Galletti 1760, I, XLIV, 55; Guizzardi 1675, 20; Bussi 1742, 361; Forcella 1869–1884, V, 344; P%ugk-Harttung 1883–1884, 333, 986; 510, 89; Kehr 1906, 84, 4; Armellini 1942, 355; Silvagni 1943, XXVI, 4.

Edition:((crux)) Anno d(omi)nice i(n)carnatio(n)is mill(esimo) CX

CVI, po(n)ti#cat(us) d(omi)ni Celestini t(er)tii p(a)p(e), anno ei(us) VI, indic(tione) XIIII, m(en)se Madii die XXVI,

dedicata fuit hec ecl(esi)a p(er) man(us) ei(us)dem Celestini, cu(m) quo i(n)t(er)fuerunt archiep(iscop)i Eborace(n)sis, Accer(e)ntin(us), Sipo(n)tin(us), ep(iscop)i

Al(binus) Albanen(sis), Oct(avianus) Hostien(sis), Petrus Portuen(sis), Ioh(ann)es Bit(er)bien(sis), Nicolau(s) Si(n)foroniensi(s), Paulus Ortan(us), Sabarisciu(s)

Batonie(n)sis, Capu(t)aq(ue)nsis, A(denolfus) Reatin(us), B(onifatius) Narniensis, Iacobus Ameliensis, et tota curia cardinaliu(m), p(re)sid(e)nte

5. huic ecl(esia)e Cinthio cardinali. Facta e(st) aut(em) hec dedicatio ad honore(m) D(e)i et beati Laur(e)ntii martiris cu(m)

devotio(n)e toti(us) populi Romani et adiac(e)ntiu(m) pop(u)loru(m) cu(m) ta(n)ta solle(m)pnitate et gl(ori)a qua(n)ta hacten(us) nec reco-

gnita nec visa fuit. ((hedera)) Hee s(unt) rel(iquie), q(ue) s(unt) rec(on)dite i(n) altari maiori: II a(m)pulle cum adipe et sa(n)g(u)ine beati Laur(entii), et vas plenu(m) de

c(r)emata carne beati Laur(entii), gausape q(u)o a(n)gel(u)s t(ex)sit corp(us) ei(us), c(r)atic(u)la s(upe)r q(u)a(m) assat(us) fuit, et corp(or)a b(e)ator(um) m(artyrum) Alexa(n)d(r)i p(a)p(e),


Eve(n)tii, !eodoli, Severine, Po(n)tiani, Eusebii, Vi(n)c(e)ntii et Pereg(r)ini, Gordiani et Felicule vir(ginis) et m(a)r-(tyris), Si(m)p(ro)nii, et vestis s(ancti) Si-

10. sti, et IIII d(e)ntes ap(osto)lor(um) Philippi et Iacobi, de lig(n)o c(r)ucis Ch(rist)i, de pet(r)a sepulc(r)i, et rel(iquie) s(an)c(t)or(um) Cesarii m(a)r(tyris), Martin(us) p(a)p(e), Ad(r)ian(i), Iulian(i) m(a)r(tyris),

Marcell(ini) et Pet(r)i, Marci et Marcellian(i), Ro(m)an(i), Epifanii, Martin(e), Nemesii, Oli(m)pii, !eodol(i), Lu-cille, Etsuperie, Ag(r)ippine, Abdon

et Se(n)nes, et octo brachia s(an)c(t)or(um) Ypoliti, Iustini p(res)b(yte)ri, Q(ui)rini p(res)b(yte)ri, Felici(s) et Audac-ti, Si(m)phorose, Iustini et Eugenii martiru(m).

Translation:In the year 1196 of the incarnation of the Lord, in the ponti-#cate of lord Pope Celestinus III, in the sixth year of his reign, the ninth indictional year, on the 26th of May, this church was consecrated by the hands of the same Celestinus. Pres-ent with him were the archbishops of York, Acerenza and Siponto, the bishops Albinus of Albano, Octavianus of Os-tia, Pet rus of Portus, Iohannes of Viterbo, Nicolaus of Forum Sempronii, Paulus of Orte, Sabariscius of Bath, the arch-bishop of Capaccio, Adenolfus of Rieti, Bonifatius of Narni, Iacobus of Amelia and the whole curia of cardinals with the cardinal Cinthius64 presiding at this church. !e consecration

64 P%ugk-Harttung 1883–1884, 333: Cinthius was cardinal priest in San Lorenzo in Lucina since 1191.

was performed for the glory of God and the martyr St. Lau-rentius with the devotion of the whole Roman people and the neighbouring people with so great a solemnity and honour as never hitherto was seen or acknowledged. !ese are the relics put in the High Altar: two vessels with blood and grease from St. Laurentius, a vessel #lled with the burnt %esh of St. Lau-rentius, the cloth with which the angel covered his body, the gridiron on which he was burnt, and the bodies of the holy martyrs Pope Alexander, Eventius, !eodolus, Severina, Pon-tianus, Eusebius, Vincentius and Peregrinus, Gordianus and the virgin and martyr Felicula, Simpronius, and the garment of St. Sixtus, and four teeth of the Apostles Philippus and Ia-cobus, wood from the Lord’s cross, a piece of the stone from the tomb, and relics of Sts. Cesarius the martyr, Pope Mar-tinus, Hadrianus, Julianus, Marcellinus and Petrus, Marcus and Marcellianus, Romanus, Epifanus, Martina, Nemesius, Olympius, !eodolus, Lucilla, Exsuperia, Agrippina, Abdon and Sennes, and eight bones from the saints Hippolytus, the priests Iustinus and +uirinus, Felix and Audactus, Sympho-rosa, the martyrs Iustinus and Eugenius.

Discussion!e inscription contains medieval orthography such as i for y, t for x in Etsuperiae, an extra s in texsit, B for V in Biterbien-sis. !e letter forms in this inscription are of a rather classic majuscule form, except for the curled lines of the G, the R and the Q; the letters are, however, are beginning to show characteristics of the gothic palaeography with a heavier line-modulation and distinct, vertically sloping serifs (especially



those of the C, the T and the S). !e letters show a greater regularity in comparison with the earlier inscriptions of the 12th century. !e cross-bars of the A are now straight; the bowls of the R, the P and the B are closed, and the leg of the R is attached to the bowl. !e M has straight legs and a long apex. !e inscription features many ligatures, for example be-tween the letters TA, MA, NA, ME, MR and AN. Further-more, this inscription contains a hedera and a cross.

!e selection of inscriptions from the 12th century in San Lorenzo in Lucina is unique, as was stated initially, and the inscriptions are representative of their kind regarding both textual content and visual appearance.

A remarkable urban renaissance took place in Rome at the end of the 11th century. Due to the extensive new con-structions and the exterior and interior church restorations, inscriptions commemorating consecrations of churches and altars are frequently found during the 12th century. !e pope acts as the principal character in most of the inscriptions, o$en surrounded by a group of cardinals. Sometimes the pope consecrates the High Altar and a cardinal a side-altar; in some occasions a cardinal acts on his own, as in inscrip-tion S10. Here one can trace a glimpse of the gradual transfer of power from the pope to the cardinals that was established during this very period. !e curia of cardinals emerged as an independent power towards the end of the 11th century. In theory they constituted the advisory body of the pope, but in practice the pope depended on them completely for every decision.65 Hence, it was most important to account for the cardinals present at a consecration, for example.

Lists of relics extant in an altar or a church were also char-acteristic for medieval inscriptions from this period. !ese lists were o$en connected with a consecration or when new relics were brought to the church from cemeteries outside Rome.

Several obscurities appear when comparing the events re-corded in the inscriptions of San Lorenzo in Lucina. Inscrip-tion S10 describes how Leo, bishop of Ostia, consecrated an altar in the church on the 24th of January 1112, and provides a list of relics deposited in the altar. Inscription S4 relates the hunt for new relics for the church by priest Benedictus. !e relics of Pontianus, Eusebius, Vincentius and Peregrinus are mentioned #rst; these were discovered by Benedictus on the 15th of October 1112. !e relics of these four martyrs were deposited “in the High Altar under the gridiron”; these relics already appear in the list of relics from the consecration of the altar on the 24th of January in the same year. !e gridiron on the other hand does not, in spite of it being an important rel-ic. It is mentioned for the #rst time as being preserved in San

65 Robinson 1990, 101; Barraclough 1968, 96–100.

Lorenzo in Lucina in the seventh century.66 Kehr presumes that Benedictus could have made the discovery of the relics in October 1111, and that the indication of the year in the inscription is erroneous.67

Benedictus discovered further relics in the same year (1112), this time of the martyrs Gordianus and Felicula. !ese are described as being deposited in the High Altar as well. !ese two martyrs do not appear in the list of the 24th of January, however. Finally, relics of the martyr Simpronius were discovered and put beneath the altar during the ponti#-cate of Pope Gelasius (1118–1119), the terminus post quem for the inscription. !e inscription concludes with a list of other relics in the High Altar of the church. Surprisingly, only #ve of the martyrs mentioned in the previous list in inscrip-tion S10 appear in the new list; as many as thirteen of them seem to have disappeared. On the other hand, relics from twenty two other martyrs are mentioned in inscription S4, together with wood from the cross, a piece of stone from the tomb of Christ and a vessel #lled with the burnt %esh of St. Laurentius.

Confusing circumstances also appear in the inscription of the cathedra. !e text describes how Pope Paschalis II extracted the gridiron and two vessels #lled with the blood of St. Laurentius from “an old altar” on the 27th of January 1112. !ese relics, the inscription says, were viewed by the Roman people “for several days”, and were then put beneath “this new altar” by Leo, bishop of Ostia, on the 24th of Janu-ary 1112. !e altar in question is most probably the medieval High Altar, parts of which were found by Grossi Gondi at the beginning of the 20th century inside the High Altar from the Baroque period.68

!e date (24th of January) for the consecration of an al-tar by Bishop Leo corresponds with the information in in-scription S10. It is, however, clearly impossible that the relics would have been brought out from the old altar a$er they had been put into the new one. A clue to the understanding of this problem could be the Roman dating system, according to which the 24th of January is IX kal(endas) Feb(ruarias) (nine days before the kalendae of February) and the 27th of Janu-ary is VI kal(endas) Feb(ruarias) (six days before the kalendae of February). !is “reverse” way of counting could have con-fused the author of the text or the stonemason. F. Gandolfo suggests that the inscription actually refers to “the sixth and the ninth day a$er the Kalendae of February”.69 R. Hüls be-lieves that the 24th of January (a Sunday) is a certain date, and

66 Huelsen 1927, 3: Basilica qui appellatur Sci Laurenti ubi graticula eiusdem habetur Laurenti.67 Kehr 1906, 84.68 Grossi Gondi 1913.69 Gandolfo 1974–1975, 211–218.


that the stonemason could have inscribed VI kal. instead of the correct XI kal., which would mean that the extraction of the relics from the old altar by Pope Paschalis took place on the 19th of January.70 !is theory also #ts with the expression nonnullis diebus, in this case #ve days.

In inscription S10 there is no mention of either the grid-iron or of the blood-vessels, and the only person acting is Leo of Ostia. On the other hand, none of the relics listed in S10 occur in the inscription on the cathedra, in which both Leo and Pope Paschalis II are participating. Grossi Gondi was of the opinion that inscription S10 does not refer to the High Altar, but a side-altar.71

!e expression in inscription S10 is hoc altare (this altar), in the cathedra inscription hoc novo altare (in this new altar). It is possible that inscription S10 could have been situated close to the altar, thus justifying the use of the demonstra-tive pronoun hoc. It is, on the other hand, unclear whether the High Altar was originally su"ciently close to the cathedra to justify the use of hoc. !e inscription on the High Altar of Santa Maria in Cosmedin in Rome can shed some light on the problem, however. !e short inscription, located on the side of the altar mensa, mentions that Pope Calixtus II consecrated what is referred to as hoc altare in 1123.72 An-other surviving inscription from the same occasion, situated in the apse, relates the event in greater detail in conjunction with a long list of relics.73 !e expression in this inscription is also hoc altare, indicating that an immediate proximity to the altar would not have been strictly necessary for the use of the pronoun hoc.

!e dating of the cathedra itself is not very clear, except for the date given in the inscription, but theories have arisen that the inscription might have been added during a later phase. F. Gandolfo has suggested that the inscription could be a later falsi#cation.74 !is should be seen in light of the information provided in inscription S9, which describes how Antipope Anacletus II consecrated the church in 1130. Ac-cording to the inscription, Anacletus placed some relics be-neath the High Altar; these included two vessels containing St. Laurentius’ blood. !e inscription also provides a record of other relics preserved “in the building”; these included the gridiron and a cloth.

!e Lateran Council of 1139, however, annulled all ac-tions performed by the antipope.75 Gandolfo presumes that the cathedra might have been constructed in connection

70 Hüls 1977, 106.71 Grossi Gondi 1913, 53–62.72 Forcella 1869–1884, IV, 306, 745.73 Forcella 1869–1884, IV, 305, 742.74 Gandolfo 1974–1975, 211–218.75 Mansi 1776, 535.

with the consecration performed by Anacletus II in 1130, al-though without the inscription. Gandolfo suggests that the church must have been reconsecrated immediately a$er the decision of the Council in 1139 and that the inscription was made at that time, in order to make it look like the cathedra and the High Altar were consecrated as early as 1112. Ac-cording to Gandolfo the confusing dates would then derive from this. But if the church was reconsecrated in 1139, why was another full-scale consecration necessary in 1196 (see below)? Furthermore, the inscription of the consecration in 1130 still exists—this could easily have been destroyed or re-moved at a later date.

In the church of San Clemente in Rome, which was con-secrated in 1128, there is a cathedra much like the one in San Lorenzo in Lucina, but with a shorter inscription: Anastasius presbiter cardinalis huius tituli hoc opus cepit perfecit (Anas-tasius, cardinal priest of this titular church, began and com-pleted this work). San Maria in Cosmedin, consecrated in 1123, has a cathedra with the inscription Alfanus #eri tibi fecit virgo Maria (Alfanus had this done for you, Virgin Mary). Such expressions were also sometimes used on altars.76 !us, two types of inscriptions appear: #rst, inscriptions recording a work being ordered by someone and second, inscriptions recording a consecration, with or without an accompanying list of relics. !e former inscriptions always appear directly on the item mentioned; the latter can appear on the item as well as in a separate context.

!e varied style of letter forms during the 12th century makes it di"cult to draw any conclusions regarding the au-thenticity of the cathedra inscription. !e inscription cor-responds with inscription S10 in regard to the letter forms. !e line width, as well as a few speci#c shapes—primarily the Q—di&er slightly, while the A, with a %at top and a diagonal cross-bar, the open B and R, the M with slanted legs and a short apex, indicate a date (for both inscriptions) within the second decade of the 12th century.

If the two inscriptions were made at the same time, they might derive from di&erent workshops. !e fact that the pope of that time, Paschalis II, is not mentioned at all in in-scription S10 is notable, not just for the sake of dating (as the current pope is used as a dating feature in almost all other inscriptions of that century). !e time of the consecration, January 1112, precedes the Lateran Council of that year by a few months. !e Council was summoned on account of the concessions of the pope to Emperor Henry V in 1111 during

76 In Sancta Sanctorum, Armellini 1942, 108: + Hoc op(us) fecit / #eri d(omi)n(i) Innocen / tius p(a)p(a) tertius; and in San Lorenzo fuori le Mura, Forcella 1869–1884, XII, 510, 565: + Ann(o) d(omini) MCX-LVIII ego Hugo humilis abb(a)s hoc opus #eri feci.


the investiture controversy.77 One of the harshest critics of the pope in this case was Leo, bishop of Ostia. It is possible that the controversy in%uenced Leo to order an inscription of his own, and that Paschalis II was responsible for ordering the cathedra inscription.

!e church was reconsecrated by Pope Celestinus III in 1196. !is was recorded in inscription S3, together with a list of relics extant in the High Altar at that time. !e relics are ex-actly identical to those in the inscription of Benedictus (with the exception for the addition of two new martyrs, Abdon and Sennes, in 1196), and to the relics deposited in 1130.78 !e earlier inscriptions were presumably consulted for the list made in 1196, which would prove that the inscription from 1130 was not removed from the church despite the condem-nation of Anacletus II in the Lateran Council of 1139.

!ree other inscriptions concerning consecrations made by Celestinus III survive in Rome in the churches of San Giovanni a Porta Latina, San Salvatore delle Coppelle and Sant’Eustachio.79 When comparing them it becomes clear that a remarkably large number of #$een cardinals and bish-ops are mentioned by name in the San Lorenzo in Lucina in-scription, including Cinthius who was the cardinal presbyter of the church, as well as foreign guests such as the archbishop of York and the bishop of Bath. Moreover, the entire curia of cardinals is declared to have been present. However only one altar is mentioned in the San Lorenzo in Lucina-inscription, while the inscription in San Salvatore delle Coppelle men-tions three altars (consecratio istius ecclesiae in qua tria consis-tunt altaria, “the consecration of this church, in which three altars are located”), as does the inscription in Sant’Eustachio (dedicata est ecclesia ista cum tribus altaribus quae sunt in ea, “this church was consecrated together with three altars which exist in it”). It might thus be presumed that San Lorenzo in Lucina only had one altar—the High Altar—which would eliminate the theory regarding the necessity of the existence of side-altars in order to clarify the chronological confusion regarding the events in 1112.

As inscription S3 so magni#cently states, San Lorenzo in Lucina was consecrated with “the devotion of the whole Roman people [...] with so great a solemnity and honour as never hitherto was seen or acknowledged”.

77 Robinson 1990, 102 &.78 When examining the collection of relics extant in San Lorenzo in Lucina in March 2000, as well as the handwritten catalogue of relics (Elenco 1933) kept in the sacristy, it showed that nearly half of the relics listed in the 12th century survive, including the most important ones: the gridiron of St. Laurentius (now situated in the #rst chapel on the right), and the vessels with burnt %esh, blood and grease from the same saint.79 Forcella 1869–1884, XI, 161; VIII, 499; II, 385.

Bibliography

Armellini M. Armellini, Le chiese di Roma dal sec. IV al 1942 XIX, nuova edizione a cura di C. Cecchelli

vol. I, Roma 1942.

Barraclough G. Barraclough, !e Medieval Papacy, Lon-1968 don 1968.

Bisconti F. Bisconti, ‘Paradiso’, in Temi di iconogra#a 2000 paleocristiana (Sussidi allo studio delle

antichità cristiana pubblicata a cura del Pon-ti#cio Istituto di Archeologia Cristiana, 13), ed. F. Bisconti, Città del Vaticano 2000.

Blennow A. Blennow, !e latin consecrative inscriptions2011 in prose of churches and altars in Rome 1046–

1263 (Miscellanea della Società Romana di Storia Patria, LVI), Roma 2011.

Bonavenia G. Bonavenia, ‘Cimitero di Basilla. Osser-1898 vazioni intorno alla cripta e alle iscrizioni

storiche dei SS. Proto e Giacinto’, NuovB 4, 1898, 77–93.

Brandt 1994 O. Brandt, ‘Un’iscrizione riutilizzata da S. Lorenzo in Lucina’, RACrist 70, 1994, 197–201.

Brandt 1996 O. Brandt, ‘La seconda campagna di scavo nel battistero di S. Lorenzo in Lucina a Roma. Rapporto preliminare’, OpRom 20, 1996, 271–274.

Bussi 1742 F. Bussi, Istoria della città di Viterbo, 1742; new edition Bologna 1967.

Castrén P. Castrén, ‘I gra"ti del vano XVI’, in F. 1972 Magi, Il calendario dipinto sotto Santa Maria

Maggiore con appendice sui gra"ti del vano XVI a cura di P. Castrén (MemPontAcc ser. III, 11,1), Città del Vaticano 1972, 69–87.

Chron. Cas. Chronica Monasterii Casinensis (= MGH 34), ed. H. Ho&mann, Hannover 1980.

De Rossi G.B. de Rossi, ‘Sepolcri del secolo ottavo 1872–1873 scoperti presso la chiesa di S. Lorenzo in

Lucina’, BullCom 1872–1873, 42–53.

Diehl 1912 Inscriptiones Latinae, ed. E. Diehl, Bonn 1912.

Diehl 1961 Inscriptiones Latinae Christianae Veteres, ed. E. Diehl, Berlin 1961.

Elenco 1933 Elenco delle Sante Reliquie esistenti in S. Lorenzo in Lucina, 1933.


Ferrua 1942 Epigrammata Damasiana (Sussidi allo studio delle antichità cristiane pubblicati per cura del Ponti#cio Istituto di Archeologia Cris-tiana, 2), ed. A. Ferrua, Città del Vaticano 1942.

Fiocchi V. Fiocchi Nicolai, ‘Un nuovo frammento Nicolai 1993 d’iscrizione damasiana da S. Ermete sulla –1994 via Salaria Vetus (Roma)’, RStLig 59–60,

1993–1994, 149–155.

Forcella V. Forcella, Iscrizioni delle chiese e di altri1869–1884 edi#zi di Roma dal secolo XI #no ai nostri

giorni, Roma 1869–1884.

Fossile 2000 E. Fossile, ‘Le indizioni nell’epigra#a cris-tiana’, RACrist 76, 2000, 589–599.

Galletti 1760 P.L. Galletti, Inscriptiones romanae in#mi aevi Romae extantes, Roma 1760.

Gandolfo F. Gandolfo, ‘Reimpiego di sculture 1974–1975 antichi nei troni papali del XII secolo’, Rend-

PontAcc 47, 1974–1975, 211–218.

Gordon 1965 A.E. Gordon, Album of dated Latin inscrip-tions III. Rome and the neighbourhood, A.D. 200–525, Berkeley & Los Angeles 1965.

Gray 1948 N. Gray, ‘!e palaeography of Latin Inscrip-tions of the Eighth, Ninth and Tenth Centu-ries in Italy’, PBSR XVI, 1948, 38–167.

Gray 1956 N. Gray, ‘!e Filocalian Letter’, PBSR XXIV, 1956, 5–13.

Grossi Gondi F. Grossi Gondi, ‘La confessio dell’altare 1913 maggiore e la cattedra papale a S. Lorenzo in

Lucina’, StRom I, 1913, 53–62.

Guenther ‘+uae gesta sunt inter Liberium et Felicem 1895 episcopos’, in Epistulae Imperatorum Ponti#-

cum Aliorum (CSEL, 35), ed. O. Guenther, Praha, Wien & Leipzig 1895, 1–5.

Guizzardi V. Guizzardi, Breve relazione delle sacre reli-1675 quie de’santi che si conservano nell’antichissima

chiesa di S. Lorenzo in Lucina di Roma, Roma 1675.

Hübner 1871 A. Hübner, Inscriptiones Hispaniae Christi-anae, Berlin 1871.

Huelsen 1927 C. Huelsen, Le chiese di Roma nel medio evo, Firenze 1927.

Huetter & L. Huetter & E. Lavagnino, S. Lorenzo Lavagnino in Lucina (Le chiese di Roma illustrate, 27), 1931 Roma 1931.

Hüls 1977 R. Hüls, Kardinäle, Klerus und Kirchen Roms 1049–1130, Tübingen 1977.

ICUR Inscriptiones Christianae urbis Romae. Nova series, ed. A. Silvagni.

Ihm 1895 Anthologiae Latinae Supplementa: Damasi Epigrammata, ed. M. Ihm, Leipzig 1895.

Josi 1932 E. Josi, ‘Scoperta di due frammenti del carme damasiano in onore di S. Ermete’, RACrist 9, 1932, 147–150.

Kajanto 1965 I. Kajanto, !e Latin cognomina, Helsinki 1965.

Kehr 1906 Italia Ponti#cia I, ed. P.F. Kehr, Berlin 1906.

Krautheimer R. Krautheimer, W. Frankl & S. Corbett, 1959 Corpus basilicarum Christianarum Romae.

!e Early Christian basilicas of Rome (IV–IX cent.) II, Città del Vaticano 1959.

LP ed. Le Liber Ponti#calis. Texte, introduction et Duchesne commentaire par l’abbé L. Duchesne I, Paris

1886, reprint 1955.

Mansi 1766 Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplissima col-lectio vol. XII, ed. G.D. Mansi, Firenze 1766.

Mansi 1776 Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio vol. XXI, ed. G.D. Mansi, Venezia 1776.

Marucchi O. Marucchi, Basiliques et églises de Rome, 1902 Paris & Roma 1902.

Mazzoleni D. Mazzoleni, I reperti epigra#ci (Ricerche 1983 nell’area di S. Ippolito all’Isola Sacra a

cura dell’Istituto di Archeologia Cristiana dell’Università “La Sapienza”– Roma, 1), Roma 1983.

Nestori 1982 A. Nestori, ‘Il battistero paleocristiano di S. Marcello. Nuove scoperte’, RACrist 58, 1982, 81–126.

Pietri 1976 Ch. Pietri, Roma Christiana. Recherches sur l’Eglise de Rome, son organisation, sa politique, son idéologie de Miltiade à Sixte III (311–440) (BÉFAR, 224), Roma 1976.

Pietri 1989 Ch. Pietri, ‘Régions ecclésiastiques et paroiss-es romaines’, in Actes du XIe congrès interna-tional d’archéologie chrétienne. Lyon, Vienne, Grenoble, Genève et Aoste (21–28 septembre 1986), Città del Vaticano 1989, 1035–1062.


P%ugk- J.A.G. von P%ugk-Harttung, Iter Italicum, Harttung Stuttgart 1883–1884. 1883–1884

Robinson I.S. Robinson, !e Papacy 1073–1198 – Con-1990 tinuity and innovation, Cambridge 1990.

Saecularia Saecularia Damasiana. Atti del convegnoDamasiana no internazionale per il XVI centenario della 1986 morte di papa Damaso I (11-12-384 – 10/12-

12-1984) (Studi di antichità cristiana pubbli-cati a cura del Ponti#cio Istituto di Archeolo-gia Cristiana, 39), Città del Vaticano 1986.

Silvagni 1943 Monumenta Epigraphica Christiana saeculo XIII antiquiora quae in Italiae #nibus adhuc extant 1.1. Roma, ed. A. Silvagni, Città del Vaticano 1943.

Spera 1998 L. Spera, ‘Interventi papali nei santuari delle catacombe romane: osservazioni dalla Roma Sotterranea di G.B. de Rossi’, in Acta XIII congressus internationalis archaeologiae Christianae. Split-Porec (25.9–1.10.1994) (Studi di antichità cristiana pubblicati a cura del Ponti#cio Istituto di Archeologia Cris-tiana, 54), Città del Vaticano & Split 1998, 303–320.

Terenzio A. Terenzio, ‘S. Lorenzo in Lucina. 1930–1931 Restauro del portico’, BdA 10, 1930–1931,

46–47.

Testini 1980 P. Testini, Archeologia cristiana. Nozioni generali dalle origini alla #ne del sec. VI. Pro-pedeutica – topogra#a cimiteriale – epigra#a – edi#ci di culto, Bari 19802.

Tjäder 1983 J.-O. Tjäder, ‘Skri$, skrivande och skrivkun-nighet i det romerska världsriket’, Kungl. Hum. Vetenskapssamfundet i Uppsala, årsbok 1981–1982, Uppsala 1983, 83–127.

Valentini & R. Valentini & G. Zucchetti, Codice Zucchetti topogra#co della città di Roma, Roma1953 1953.

’Inscriptions and graffiti in San Lorenzo in Lucina’

Documents

Transcript of ’Inscriptions and graffiti in San Lorenzo in Lucina’