Excavated: 1914 (NSc 1914, 288 with 286 fig. 3; Calza).
Mosaic: SO IV, 74-76 nr. 108, tav. 184.
Inscription: ---.
Date: ca. 150 AD (SO IV); ca. 170 AD (Clarke).
Meas. of tesserae: 0.015-0.02 (SO IV).
Mosaic
General descriptionThe floor of the northern one-third of the back room is mostly lost. In the south-east corner of this part are the remains of a dolphin and an antique restoration with black and white tesserae in a checkerboard pattern. Becatti recognized two dolphins, facing each other. This part of the room is separated from the front part by an east-west running black band, six tesserae wide.
The remainder of the floor of the back room forms an entity with the floor of the front room. Here a river delta an a bridge with gates are depicted. In the back room damage is minor: the north-west corner is missing. In the front room the south part is missing. In the front room the west side has a minor ancient repair with black tesserae, while the east side is almost entirely an ancient repair, consisting of a solid black area and of an area made with black and white tesserae in a checkerboard pattern. The central part of the eastern river branch is also an ancient repair, made of black tesserae.
The front room is bordered on the east by a wide band of white marble (slightly to the east of the axis of the central column), and on the west by a thinner band of white stone (on the axis of the central column). The depictions are surrounded by a frame with a wicker-work pattern that, on the square, is found only here, in the adjacent stationes 26 and 28, and at the lower level of statio 52. It runs between two black bands, two tesserae wide. The wicker-work pattern around the central brick column was laid with a different spacing from the plinth of the column between stationes 27 and 28.
A drawing of the floor in the Notizie degli Scavi shows that the central part of the three branches of the river was lost, but also, an ancient restoration is omitted here. The photo published in Scavi di Ostia IV shows a somewhat different situation. Furthermore there are great discrepancies between the drawing and the photo in the way the upper part of the bridge and the gates are depicted. These dicrepancies might be related to further cleaning of the mosaics in 1916.
TextNo text has been preserved and there is not enough free space for a text, unless it was at the south end, which would be unusual.
DepictionsInside the wicker-work frame is an elaborate depiction. In the back room is a pontoon or boat bridge flanked by two gates. In the passage to the front room and in the front room itself is a river with three tributaries, or a delta with three branches. Horizontal lines below the three branches indicate the sea (on the drawing in the Notizie degli Scavi, now lost), so it must be a delta.
The depictions are described and discussed in great detail by Becatti. The bridge consists of wooden planks between two fences. The planks are supported by three boats. On either side of the bridge is a low column with a base and without a capital, most likely a milestone. Flanking the milestones are two stylized military arches. On each architrave is a white rectangle. Above the architraves are war trophies, consisting of schematic cuirasses and shields (note the difference between the drawing in the Notizie degli Scavi and the photo in Scavi di Ostia IV).
Becatti
Frame. Fascia a treccia bianco-nera fra due linee parallele di 2 file di tessere nere delimitante tutto il campo e rientrante lungo le basi delle due colonne. Sul lato Est la treccia nel portico anteriore è cancellata da un rifacimento antico del fondo a tessere nere, miste e a scacchiera.
Dolphins. Sul lato Nord rimane qualche parte di un riquadro con due delfini affrontati.
River and bridge. Raffigurazione convenzionale a volo d'uccello di un fiume da Nord a Sud, ampio all'estremità settentrionale, dove è attraversato da un ponte di barche, assottigliantesi lungo il corso, per dividersi e allargarsi poi all'estremità Sud in tre foci distinte, che sboccano nel mare rappresentato simbolicamente da tratti paralleli neri, terminanti all'estremità destra in due piccoli semicerchi, ciascuno ad indicarne il moto ondoso stilizzato. La corrente e l'acqua del fiume sono rappresentate invece con linee serpeggianti che si intrecciano tra loro e rendono in maniera stilizzata i gorghi e il movimento delle onde. Il braccio destro del fiume ha un rappezzo antico a tessere nere. Il ponte di barche dell'estremità Nord, rappresentato a volo di uccello, è costituito da tre scaphae ricurve o monxyli, sorreggenti il tavolato con due transenne lignee o plutei; è cioè un pons tumultuarius, smontabile. Alle due estremità del ponte rimangono le parti inferiori di due basse colonne con base e senza capitello, che si direbbero miliari; alla testata Nord e alla testata Sud del ponte si innalzano due fornici o archi monumentali stilizzati, con piloni, sottilissimi, arco a tutto sesto e attico con riquadratura bianca, sul quale si ergono all'estremità due trofei con corazze e scudi schematici.
Masonry
The ends of the back wall consist of big piers of opus vittatum simplex. In between is a latericium wall, set back somewhat to form an alcove. There is no west wall, even though it is indicated on Gismondi's plan. The east wall is of opus vittatum simplex. An east and a west wall are also shown on the drawing published in the Notizie degli Scavi, both standing on top of the wicker-work frame.
Interpretation
The river has been identified as the Tiber near Ostia, the Rhône near Arles, and the Nile. The first two are problematic. The Tiber flows into the sea with two branches: the river itself at Ostia and Trajan's channel at Portus. The Rhône has two mouths: the "Grand Rhône" and the "Petit Rhône". A boat bridge in Arles is mentioned by Ausonius in the late fourth century.[1]
The Nile seems less problematic. Today it has two branches, but it had many more in antiquity.[2] According to Strabo the three largest were called the Canopic, Phatnitic, and Pelusiac mouths.[3] The Madaba Mosaic Map (6th century AD) depicts three mouths. Here the Sebennytic mouth, not the Phatnitic, is in the centre.[4] The Canopic and Pelusiac mouths created a triangle that was called "delta" in antiquity, because together with the coastline it resembled the Greek capital letter delta: Δ. The boat bridge was necessitated by strong changes in the level of the Nile.
That we must be looking at the Nile is also evident from the mosaic in the adjacent statio 28. The frames of stationes 26, 27 and 28 are identical: they formed a single office. In statio 28 are depictions of wild animals: an elephant, a boar, and an antelope or gazelle or deer. Such animals were taken to Rome for the venationes. The elephant rules out Arles and Ostia.
The Nile of course takes us to Alexandria, the only major harbour in Egypt. Egypt was an important grain supplier of Rome. The Alexandrian grain fleet originally sailed to Puteoli in the Bay of Naples, but was redirected to Ostia and Portus in the second century.[5] In ca. 332 AD the Alexandrian grain fleet was redirected to Constantinople.[6]
As to the goods that were imported: all that we see are the wild animals in statio 28. However, Egypt was one of the main grain suppliers of Rome, and it seems unlikely that grain did not have a place here. There could have been references to grain in statio 26, by grain measures or grain ears, but it is quite understandable if it was not referred to at all. The proud Egypt had become Imperial property, and was obliged to take grain to Rome each year with its Alexandrian grain fleet. Its famous lighthouse, the Pharos, had been copied and improved by Claudius in Portus, even sinking a ship that had transported an obelisk from Egypt to Rome as part of the foundation - a great humiliation. The situation is visualised by a coin of Caracalla from 215 AD.[7] The Emperor, in military attire, rests with his right boot on a crocodile, representing Egypt; approaching Caracalla is the goddess Isis, holding a sistrum in her left hand and giving grain ears to the Emperor with her right hand.
Depicting the lighthouse of Portus and grain measures may simply not have been an option for the Alexandrians. It would stress their humilitiation. And perhaps grain exports were also seen as too mundane to be emphasized. A more fitting solution was to stress the exotic nature of Egypt and depict the Nile, now almost physically connected with the Tiber, that was only some 70 metres to the north.
The only reference to Egypt's defeat and the rule of Rome are the trophies flanking the bridge. Quoting Dilke: "Since the pontoon bridge is above the lowest point on the undivided river, one may conjecture that it was between Memphis, the dynastic capital, which was still of some importance under the Roman Empire, and Babylon (Old Cairo). The military trophies would be appropriate to Babylon, which was fortified as a legionary camp under Augustus, while Memphis was the center for the export of wild animals from Egypt to Rome".[8]
But the trophies, the bridge and the milestones are not necessarily to be understood, primarily, as a reference to the military power of Rome and the subjugation of Egypt. Quoting Kleiner: "... when arches were erected within the secure frontiers of the empire and their stated purpose was not to celebrate the defeat of Rome's enemies but rather the paving of roads and bridging of rivers, ... tropaic statuary carried another message, namely that Roman victories could be won not only against men but against Nature herself. ... It is easy to lose sight of the deep and genuine pride that the Romans took in cutting roads through mountains and throwing bridges across difficult waterways. For them a great bridge was a triumph over nature worthy of celebration in epic poetry, ... a Roman arch crowned by trophies the ideal vehicle for the expression of their pride as 'conquerors'."[9]
More on Alexandria: see statio 40. For the river cf. statio 8.
(1) See for example https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pont_de_Constantin_(Arles).
(2) See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nile_Delta; Cooper 2014.
(3) Strabo XVII,1,4 and 18.
(4) See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madaba_Map.
(5) Keay 2010, 15.
(6) Sirks 1991, 199-200. Sirks argues that already from ca. 308 AD the Alexandrian grain was no longer transported to Rome, but to armies.
(7) Sestertius, RIC IV 544.
(8) Dilke 1987, 24.
(9) Kleiner 1991.