ch01_4416.qxd
4/4/05
11:02 AM
Page 1
The Museum of Alexandria:
Myth and Model
Giovanni di Pasquale
he ancient Greek term mouseion meant a sacred place devoted to the Muses
and their protector Apollo. The Muses were daughters of Zeus and
Mnemousyne, the personifications of memory; Pindar tells us that after the defeat
of the Titans, the gods persuaded Zeus to create the Muses to celebrate their heroic
deeds. Seven of them protected literature and the arts, and two (Clio and Urania)
were the guardians of history and astronomy.
The meaning of the word mouseion changed during the Hellenistic Age, when
monarchies were founded in the kingdoms that arose after the collapse of the empire of Alexander the Great.
The kings of Pergamum, Syria, Macedonia and Egypt ruled over lands largely
populated by non-Greeks, but they loved to be surrounded by typically Greek
buildings such as theaters and gymnasia, and supported cultural institutions that
carried on the tradition of the Athenian schools of philosophy.
In Alexandria, Ptolemy the First (305–283 b.c.) was interested in Greek culture, and following the suggestion of Demetrius of Phalerus he founded a great library, with the innovative plan of gathering together all the writings in the known
world. In other words, Ptolemy the First wished to contain all human knowledge
in one vast library.
Embarking on the ambitious project of gathering books from every known
country, the Ptolemies summoned many translators chosen from among the finest
contemporary scholars such as historians, philosophers, astronomers and mathematicians, and provided them with more than one thousand scribes. These translators were the first to enjoy the extraordinary landmarks of knowledge offered by
this well-stocked library which would captivate the imagination of posterity.
T
1
ch01_4416.qxd
2
4/4/05
11:02 AM
Page 2
From Private to Public
The idea of a universal library as the fruit of a desire for a repository of all
knowledge had many historical roots. In the political strategies of the Ptolemies,
for example, there was a desire to carry on Alexander’s political plan for expanding
the Empire. In Nineveh, Alexander had wanted to build a huge library and ordered
the writings of the Chaldeans to be translated, for he was convinced that in order
to dominate the world it was necessary to understand the thought and language of
other peoples, by studying their texts.
The magnificent project of translation promoted by the Ptolemies in Alexandria was described at length by the Byzantine historian John Tzetzes (De comoedia,
I, 19), who states that “from each country skilled persons were hired, who besides
mastering the language, could speak Greek very well. Each country contributed
with its own texts and thus everything was translated into Greek.”
This enterprise lasted for decades, and its success was largely due to the contributions of kings who shipped part or all of their libraries to Alexandria. Galen
(Galen XVII, 1, ed. Kuhn, p. 601) tells us that Ptolemy III sent letters to all
the sovereigns in the world, asking them to send him their book collections. The
enormous ship Syracusia, built by Archimedes for the tyrant Ieron II of Syracuse,
carried (among other marvels) a library donated to Ptolemy (Atheneus, Deipnosophistae, V, 206–d-209 b).
It is said that Alexandria boasted over 700,000 papyrus on every branch of
knowledge. Since then, the idea of a library conceived as a “wholeness” has become
legendary, and never again would humanity come so close to realizing this dream.
The first recorded librarian was Zenodotus of Ephesus (340–260 b.c.); his
successor, Callimachus of Cyrene (310–240 b.c.), was perhaps Alexandria’s most
famous librarian, and created the first subject catalog of the Library’s holdings, consisting in 120,000 scrolls called the Pinakes. This catalog was probably similar to an
analytical subject index. Apollonius of Rhodes, his younger rival and the writer
of the Argonautica, seems to have been Callimachus’s replacement. Eratosthenes of
Cyrene (276–194 b.c.), Stoic, geographer and mathematician, succeeded him in
235 b.c. and compiled his Tetagmenos epi teis megaleis bibliothekeis, the “Scheme of
the great bookshelves.”
In 195 b.c. Aristophanes (a Homeric scholar unrelated to the comic playwright) took up the position of chief librarian, and updated Callimachus’ Pinakes.
The last recorded librarian was the astronomer Aristarchus of Samo, who took over
the position in 180 b.c. and was driven out during the dynastic struggles between
two Ptolemies.
Thus the library enjoyed a perfectly systematic organization, and from the
time of Callimachus attempted to keep track of its holdings by means of a subject
catalogue.
The subject divisions consisted of mathematics, medicine, astronomy and
geometry, as well as philology; to this can be added the Aristotelian discipline of
mechanics.
ch01_4416.qxd
4/4/05
11:02 AM
Page 3
Giovanni di Pasquale
3
The presence of so many great scholars in this Alexandrian institution, for
more than five centuries, leads us to believe that the library held scientific treatises
as well as literary masterpieces.
Undoubtedly, many books on medicine were written in Alexandria. Thanks to
copies kept in the library, physicians received much basic knowledge from the
works of Hippocrates, and created the Hippocratic vocabulary and comments.
It was here that the first specialized lexicons were created, such as the lexicon
of architecture by Eratosthenes, Apollonius’s naval lexicon, and the lexicon of
everyday instruments by Nicander of Colophon. Unfortunately these texts no
longer exist, but they are believed to have been the basis for studies by lexicographers such as Hesychius, Pollux and Suida.
The library also opened up new fields of study, such as the histories of sciences.
Among these were the history of geometry and arithmetic written by Eudemus of
Rhodes and the history of medicine by Menon.
In this fertile cultural environment, the art of commentary burgeoned as well.
Of these works the writings of mechanical engineers should be mentioned (the
commentary of Hero of Alexandria on Ctesibius, Pappus’s commentary on Hero’s
and Proclus’s and Eutocius’s works on Euclid, Archimedes and Apollonius).
The library was nearly wholly destroyed several times. However, the tale
of its apocalyptic devastation by Julius Caesar during the Alexandrian war
(48–47 b.c.) is contradicted by the fact that Strabo stayed and worked there during his journey to Egypt, between 25 and 20 b.c., during which he wrote a description of the Museum (Geografia, XVII, 1, 8). As a matter of fact, the library’s
destruction actually occurred during the war between Aurelianus and Zenobia of
Palmyra between 270 and 275 a.d., when many pitched battles were fought in the
streets of Alexandria.
It was during these clashes, as the historian Ammian Marcellinus (XXII, 16,
15) stated, that “Alexandria lost the area called Bruchion, where great scholars
lived for a long time.”
In conclusion, the library and museum were still quite active for three centuries
after the war of 48–47 b.c.. This is underlined by the continued presence of
Alexandrian cultural institutions, which still played an influential role during the
Imperial Age of Rome. At the end of the first century a.d., the Emperor Domitian sent a large number of men to Alexandria to make copies of books, in order to
re-build the libraries destroyed by fire in Rome (Svetonius, Domitianus, 20). Many
years later, Atheneus of Naucrati could enjoy the treasures of the Alexandria library when writing his masterpiece Deipnosophistae. The library’s existence was
closely linked to the founding of the Museum. Built during the same period and
part of the royal buildings (300–250 b.c.), the Museum provided certain areas for
guest scholars, who found an ideal place to carry out research in many disciplines.
The museum was described by Grammaticus Aristonicus of Alexandria, author of a work entitled “On the Museum,” although none of that text has survived
ch01_4416.qxd
4
4/4/05
11:02 AM
Page 4
From Private to Public
(Fozius Bibliotheca, 104b, 40–41). The best description is found in Strabo, who,
after visiting the museum, says (Geographia, XVII, 1–8):
The museum is also part of the royal palaces; it has a public walk, an exedra
with seats, and a large house containing the common mess-hall of the men of
learning who share the museum. This group of men not only hold property in
common, but also have a priest in charge of the museum, who formerly was
appointed by the kings.
In addition to the features described by Strabo, the museum offered lodgings for its
members and rooms for the study of each separate discipline. Aelian (De natura animalium, XVII, 3) and Athneus of Naucrati (Deipnosophistae, V, 196; XIV, 654) recalls that the museum also possessed a garden containing exotic flora and fauna.
The Ptolemies had lavished great wealth on expeditions to India and Arabia, with
the purpose of creating a collection of rare animals, and among these various
sources record a giant serpent. Imitations of the wonderful oriental gardens called
paradeisos, these places became areas for exchanging scientific information, which
was also nurtured by scholarly debate.
Moreover, the museum harbored a special category of painters and sculptors
who could render flora and fauna in incredibly rich detail.
Also in the museum, physicians could put into practice their observations made
during the dissection of cadavers and, sometimes in the city jails, of living prisoners condemned to death. These practices may have contributed to the extraordinary
progress of the Alexandrian school of anatomists.
From a few observations in the Almagest by Claudius Ptolemy, we can deduce
that the museum’s astronomers must have had access to an observatory equipped
with instruments. This, however, was hardly something new.
During his journey to Egypt done at the time of Ptolemy I, the historian
Hecateus of Abdera visited the funerary mausoleum of Pharaoh Ramses II in
Thebes. He described a series of rooms, one after another, among which were a
big library; and, at the top of the building housing the pharaoh’s tomb, a great
solar annulus for astronomical observations, similar to the one in the Museum of
Alexandria.
Moreover, special rooms were allotted to scholars of mechanics, specifically to
individuals like Ctesibius and Philo of Byzantium and like Hero of Alexandria, the
founder of pneumatics, a discipline which arose as a result of discussions about
the existence of the vacuum. To be studied effectively, pneumatics required a series
of devices that had to be designed, constructed, and put to work in appropriate
places, laboratories where one observed the marvellous effects of the contiguity of
the elements.
The library of Alexandria and the Museum remained powerful symbols of the
preservation of knowledge, and as a meeting place for different cultures, in perfect
ch01_4416.qxd
4/4/05
11:02 AM
Page 5
Giovanni di Pasquale
5
agreement with the original significance intended by Johann Gustav Droysen when
he introduced the category of Hellenism.1
The Museum of Alexandria was therefore not only designed and presented as
a temple for the Muses, but was above all a place where scholars could meet, exchange ideas, and debate. Thus, the library and museum became the cornerstone
for a new history of humanity. The areas of the library where written texts were
kept and the rooms of the museum used for debate contributed to an entirely new
method of study. In the library and museum of Alexandria, a scientific community
gathered to read, comment, argue and actively participate in the transmission of
naturalistic, scientific and technological knowledge.
Especially among mathematicians, accepting the validity of common theories
facilitated a form of cooperation; a precious record of this is seen in the letters of
Archimedes, Apollonius and Diocles, used as introductions to their treatises.
The writings Archimedes sent to Alexandria to Dositeus (a pupil of Conon) and
to Eratosthenes report their conclusions and sometimes indicate the methods followed to obtain them. Archimedes greatly valued communication between experts,
and he believed that it would prove to be highly fruitful. For this reason he regretted
the death of Conon, who had also been contacted by Pythion of Tasus to enquire
about the burning glasses mentioned by Diocles. The roles of scholars involved with
the institutions of Alexandria covered all fields, including that of controlling and verifying the circulation of theories. Apollonius, in the first book of Conics assigns the
task of judging his work to the community. Of course, this occurred in disciplines
when study was facilitated by the existence of a common, generally accepted language. For example, a common language bound the mechanic Philo of Byzantium
and the physician Andreas of Caristo, who had the opportunity to meet in Alexandria and discuss a device to reduce the fractures (ad extendendum femur).
Therefore, the Museum of Alexandria, together with the library, could be considered an institution of higher learning, like a university or academy. They were
destined to become a model and a point of reference for the research, transmission
and preservation of knowledge, a place where the fundamental and original data of
each discipline could be observed, catalogued, preserved and passed on to future
generations.
In Roman times, libraries and museums were set up in various Mediterranean
cities; Polybius records the existence of a museum in Tarentum (VIII, 27, 11).
Great impetus was given to the institution of the library. Public libraries with separate sections for Latin and Greek literature were founded in Rome and the
Empire’s provinces, in order to spread that culture (not only humanistic), to which
the Romans devoted an enormous amount of work in re-ordering. By addressing
it to future generations, such a task was well defined by Vitruvius (VI, praef. 7) as
munus non ingratum (. . . opinans in munus omnibus gentibus non ingratum futurum).
1Johann
Gustav Droysen, Geschichte des Hellenismus (Hamburg: Perthes, 1836–1843), 2 vols.
ch01_4416.qxd
4/4/05
6
11:02 AM
Page 6
From Private to Public
The Alexandrian institutions continued to expand their functions during the
Imperial Age of Rome; one need only to recall the works by Hero, Galen, Ptolemy
and Pappus, who lived and worked in the Egyptian city. Furthermore, with the
Romans the term mouseion appears to have become the title of an institution of
higher learning as well. Two inscriptions from the second century a.d. testify that
the Greek term mouseion was used to indicate a research institute: the first inscription records “physicians teaching in the mouseion in Ephesus”2 and the second
refers to law students in the mouseion of Smirne.3
A particular meaning had been attached to the Latin word musaeum in Rome
since the end of the Republican Age. In De re rustica (III, 5, 9), Varro describes an
area of the garden of his house in Casinum (Cassino), in the south of Italy:
I have got in the surroundings of Casinum a river, clean and deep, that runs by
my house along stony banks; it is 57 feet wide—but there are many bridges
crossing it to pass from one side of the house to the other—and 950 feet long
straight ahead from an island situated in the lower part of the river, where another stream flows into it in the upper side where the musaeum is situated.
Here, Varro refers to it as a sheltered place for study and meditation. Some years
later, Pliny the Elder, discussing pumice stone, claims (XXXVI, 154):
We must not forget to discuss the characteristics of pumice. This name, of
course, is given to the hollowed rocks in the buildings called (by the Greeks
Homes of the Muses) musaea, where such rocks hang from the ceilings so as
to create an artificial imitation of a cave.
Pliny’s passage confirms that during the first Imperial Age the term musaeum was
also used to denote the artificial caves constructed in many villas and country
houses. One of the most famous examples of these speluncae was the grotto of the
Emperor Tiberius, in Sperlonga, full of precious stones, sculptures and vases.
In Rome, the collection of art objects, curiosities and wonders was closely
linked to political and military events. Pliny the Elder’s Naturalis Historia offers the
best perspective on understanding the Roman attitude toward collecting art, marvels and curiosities. The objects and places listed by Pliny are presented as the acquisitions of Rome, and he emphasizes that collecting was connected to military
conquest.
Pliny the Elder’s 37-volume Naturalis Historia is the most important surviving
encyclopedia from the ancient world and is an invaluable guide to the various cultural aspects of everyday life in Rome. Moreover, Naturalis Historia has been a great
influence on collectors throughout the ages.
2Jahreshefte
3H.
des Osterreichen archäologische Instituts in Wien, 1905, VIII, p. 135.
Marrou, Histoire de l’éducation dans l’Antiquité, 2nd ed. (Paris: Le Seuil, 1964), p. 261.
ch01_4416.qxd
4/4/05
11:02 AM
Page 7
Giovanni di Pasquale
7
At the beginning of the first century a.d., the pax augusta spread the benefits
of peace throughout the world, providing ideal conditions for accumulating naturalistic, scientific and technological knowledge. This was made possible by collecting objects from distant countries as well as relics of the past. In other words,
a transition occurred from the idea of a private (i.e., Alexandria’s Library and
Museum) to a public institution. In Rome, everyone had access to public Greek
and Latin libraries, public collections, natural and artificial curiosities, botanical
gardens, and masterpieces of art.
Immediately after the conquest of Greece and Asia in the second century b.c.,
there was an extraordinary importation of Greek art masterpieces, as the first public and private collections were created, adding a new dimension to city living.
Pliny’s entire account of marble sculpture dwells on the presence of works in
Rome and a sense of rivalry with the collections of other cities. Pliny knew of the
marble masterpieces by Scopas and Praxiteles and the encomium of Rome was reflected in his listing of many other famous works of Greek art residing in private
(such as that of Asinius Pollio) and public collections (such as those of the temple
of Apollo Sosianus, the Horti Serviliani and Agrippa’s Pantheon). These works
were the spoils of conquest and their possession mirrored Rome’s possession of
their places of origin.
This form of collecting went beyond art. For Cicero gives us the most detailed
description of a mechanical device representing the Universe, made by Archimedes
in Syracuse. Brought to Rome at the end of the second Punic war, it brought attention to mechanical marvels as well. This famous mechanical planetarium and
clock was shipwrecked on the way to Rome in the Aegean sea near the little island
of Antikytera, in the middle of the first century b.c.
Thus, objects and collections mirrored a new way of proclaiming Rome’s conquest of the world.
According to Suetonius, Caesar was fascinated by precious stones. This contributed to his decision to land with the Army in Britannia, lured by a conviction
that there were immense gems to be found there. But according to Pliny the Elder,
the real introduction of precious stones to Rome resulted from the conquest of Asia
by Pompey Magnus (XXXVII, 11–14).
The first Roman to own a collection of gemstones—for which we normally
use the foreign term dactyliotheca—was Sulla’s stepson Scaurus. Pompey’s example was followed by Julius Caesar, who during his dictatorship consecrated
six cabinets of gems in the temple of Venus Genitrix, and by Marcellus, Octavia’s son, who dedicated one in the temple of Apollo on the Palatine. However, it was this victory of Pompey over Mithridates that caused fashion to turn
towards pearls and gemstones [...]. To clarify my point, I shall append statements directly taken from official records of Pompey’s triumphs. Thus,
Pompey’s third triumph was held on his own birthday, September 29th of the
year when Marcus Piso and Marcus Messala were consuls, to celebrate his
ch01_4416.qxd
8
4/4/05
11:02 AM
Page 8
From Private to Public
conquests over the pirates, Asia, Pontus, and all the peoples and kings mentioned in the seventh volume of this work. In this triumph, carried in the procession was a gaming board complete with a set of pieces, the board being
made of two precious minerals and measuring three feet wide by four feet long.
And in case anyone should doubt that our natural resources have become exhausted, seeing that today no gems even approach such a size, there rested on
this board a golden moon weighing 30 pounds. Also displayed were three
gold dining couches; enough gold vessels inlaid with gems to fill nine display
stands; three gold figures of Minerva, Mars and Apollo respectively; 33 pearl
crowns; a square mountain of gold with deer, lions . . . and a musaeum—grotto
of pearls, on the top of which there was a sundial.
The description of various animals was also a way of discussing the varietas of
nature, and Pliny goes on to comment on things he has seen and heard of (prodigia fabulae against prodigia confessa). He tells (XXII, 108) of having personally seen
a centaur, to be taken to the emperor Claudius and then preserved in honey. The
same emperor was known to have written about centaurs as prodigies (VII, 35). We
can assume that it was appropriate for an emperor to collect natural curiosities.
Moreover, the emperor was responsible for receiving and interpreting strange portents. The wonders of nature allowed an emperor to display his resources in a spectacular way.
A method of classification was needed after wild animals first appeared in
Rome. Pliny notes that a hippopotamus, an animal he had already defined belva,
was first seen in Rome along with five crocodiles at the games held by Scaurus during his aedilitas in 58 b.c. Elephants were first used in Rome to draw Pompey’s
chariot in his African triumph (VII, 4: “In Rome they were first used in harness to
draw the chariot of Pompey the Great in his African triumph . . .”) and a
camelopard (giraffe) was first seen at the games held by Julius Caesar. Moreover,
while discussing the wonders of nature, Pliny records a gigantic octopus weighing
700 pounds, whose remains were preserved precisely because of their remarkable
nature (reliquiae adservatae miraculo).
Thus the world of nature sometimes presented mirabilia, things to be preserved, and objects to be collected.
In VII, 75 Pliny states that
The tallest person our age has seen was a man named Gabbara who was
brought from Arabia to the principality of his late Majesty Claudius and was 9
feet and 9 inches in height.
But Pliny knows (VII, 75) that during the reign of Augustus
[...] there were two persons 6 inches taller, whose bodies on account of this
remarkable height were preserved in the tomb in Sallust’s Gardens.
ch01_4416.qxd
4/4/05
11:02 AM
Page 9
Giovanni di Pasquale
9
He then relates that under the same emperor, the smallest person known was a certain Conopas, 2 feet and 5 inches tall, and then goes on to say (VII, 75) that he
knows from Marcus Varro that
[...] the knights of Rome Manius Maximus and Marcus Tullius were 3 feet
tall, and we ourselves have seen their bodies preserved in coffins (et ipsi vidimus
in loculis adservatos).
Again, Pliny (VII, 73) talks about the discovery of a huge body with bones 46 cubits long, after an earthquake in a mountain in the isle of Crete:
When a mountain in Crete was cleft by an earthquake, a body 69 feet in
height was found, which some people thought must be that of Orion and others of Otus. The records attest that the body of Orestes, dug up at the command of an oracle, measured 10 feet and 6 inches.
Thus it was given to understand that the bones may have belonged to Oto and
Orion, giants mentioned by Homer.
A similar interest in curiosities from the past is also reflected in the writings of
Suetonius.
Recounting certain events foretelling the death of Julius Caesar, he repeats
what he heard from a friend of the dictator (Life of Julius Caesar, LXXXI): in
Capua, people working on the construction of new buildings found a very ancient
tomb. It was the tomb of Capi, the founder of Capua. Inside, they found precious
ancient vases, and, most important, bronze tablets with a Greek inscription; these
predicted the imminent death of someone of the Julian dynasty when the tomb was
opened. The ancient vases and inscription were carefully preserved; and we would
encounter the vases again, for they were kept for a while in the grotto of Tiberius
in Sperlonga.
Fascination with relics from the past is also found in the description, again by
Suetonius, of the house of the Emperor Augustus. The emperor did not care for
sculptures and frescoes, but instead preferred collecting precious ancient objects,
and on the isle of Capri he possessed the bones of enormous beasts, called giants’
bones or heroes’ weapons (Suetonius, Life of Augustus, LXXII).
In book XXXVI, Pliny states that Rome boasted many man-made wonders as
well: obelisks, for example, are mirabilia of this kind. Pliny begins by noting that
originally obelisks were dedicated to the sun by Egyptian pharaohs. But Egypt,
notes Pliny, was now Roman, and the Romans attempted to transport two obelisks
from Egypt to Rome (XXXVI, 69–70):
Above all came the difficult task of transporting obelisks to Rome by sea. The
ships used attracted much attention from sightseers. The one carrying the first
of two obelisks was solemnly laid up by Augustus of Revered Memory in a
ch01_4416.qxd
10
4/4/05
11:02 AM
Page 10
From Private to Public
permanent dock at Puteoli, to celebrate this remarkable achievement [...]. The
ship used by the emperor Gaius for bringing a third was carefully preserved for
several years by Claudius of Revered Memory, for it was the most amazing
thing ever beheld at sea.
Then there is another problem, that of providing ships that can carry
obelisks up the Tiber; and successful experiment shows that the river has just
as deep a channel as the Nile.
This transport to Rome was the real wonder, something Pliny defines as miraculum. The preservation of the ship in Puteoli is the preservation of a miraculum as
well. Thus the appropriation of foreign mirabilia, the Egyptian obelisks, was transformed into a miracle of Roman engineering. This was carried even further when
the emperor Augustus used one of these obelisks in his horologium to mark the time
by the shadow.
Moreover, Rome and Italy also contained buildings built to imitate the wonders of the world. Pliny describes the Pharos of Alexandria, one of the seven
wonders of the world, imitated by the new Roman lighthouses built at Ostia and
Ravenna (XXXVI, 83). Of the Alexandrian Pharos, Pliny says:
It serves, in connection with the movements of ships at night, to show a beacon to give warning of shoals and indicate the entrance to the harbour. Similar beacons now burn brightly in several places, for instance at Ostia and
Ravenna.
The pyramid of Caius Caestius is another extraordinary case, and it can be considered an early example of an outdoor replica museum. Since it was impossible
to transport a pyramid to Rome, Caius Caestius decided to built a smaller one
in the city; while it was covered with marble, underneath we find the typical opus
latericium.
The most extraordinary example of a replica museum is the villa of the Emperor Adrian at Tivoli. Adrian was a connoisseur of art masterpieces, and created
an impressive collection of different kinds of Greek sculpture and architecture.
Moreover, in the Naturalis Historia, Pliny introduces a singular description of
the wonders of Rome (XXXVI, 101), a microcosm filled to overflowing with its
possessions from all over the world.
Pliny imagines all the buildings of Rome piled one on top of the other, forming another world:
But this is the moment for us to go on to the wonders of our own city, to review the resources derived from the experiences of 800 years, and to show here
in our buildings that we have vanquished the world; and the frequency of this
occurrence will prove to match closely the number of marvels that we shall
describe. If we imagine the whole agglomeration of our buildings massed
ch01_4416.qxd
4/4/05
11:02 AM
Page 11
Giovanni di Pasquale
11
together and placed on one great heap, we shall see such great construction
towering above us as to make us think that some other world were being described, all concentrated in one single place.
Pliny starts the list of buildings constituting Rome as the world, beginning
with those which are seen as positive exempla: Julius Caesar’s Circus Maximus, the
Basilica Aemilia (whose columns are mirabile), the Forum of Augustus, and
the temple of Vespasian (XXXVI, 102).
But referring to architecture, Pliny uses the world mirabile not only to define
certain buildings, but to describe the insania of certain builders. The imperial
palaces of Caligula and Nero are luxurious wonders. There was a builder (XXXVI,
113), Marcus Scaurus, whose insania led him to build a theatre with its 360 columns
of a three-storied stage of marble, glass and wood, and 3,000 bronze sculptures:
“Scaurus had collected his material from all parts of the world, . . . and it will be impossible in the future for everyone to emulate his madness” (XXXVI, 116).
Like Pliny’s image of Rome, Scaurus’s theatre was made up of things from all
over the world (convectis ex orbe terrarum rebus). The theatre is another world, a
mundus alius, but, unlike the world that Pliny catalogues and preserves, the excess
from Scaurus’s theatre was destroyed by fire.
Like the Library and the Museum of Alexandria, Rome was another world, a
museum where people collected objects from all over the world. Masterpieces of
art, buildings and curiosities were ornamenta urbis, their presence signifying the
greatness of Rome.
If the Naturalis Historia is a single text where curiosities and nature’s variety
could be reassembled, Rome was a place where countless diverse intellectual traditions could come together under the kingdom of imperial authority.
Despite the fall of the empire, Europe maintains its monumental Roman character. Thus, the ruins of antiquity are scattered throughout the continent and
emerge everywhere from the landscape. In addition to temples, statues, and sarcophagi, natural and artificial curiosities are also found.
During Medieval times and the Renaissance, the Roman world was perceived
as a distant circumscribed episode, just as Rome had looked back at Greek civilization as “antiquity.” It is only the idea of collecting relics that separates the present from remote antiquity. During the Renaissance, the rediscovered knowledge
of antiquity would become the basis for the creation of a perfect, ideal museum.
Thus the Renaissance museum found collectors’ items in the history of ancient civilizations, just as the Emperor Augustus attempted to preserve an era of myth and
legend by collecting its remains.
ch01_4416.qxd
4/4/05
11:02 AM
Page 12