THE EQUINE CUCKOO 75
there was still the Forum Square itself. That space was largely kept
free in order to make it available not just for daily use but for public
events such as funerals, triumphs, and theatrical and gladiatorial per-
formances. Although it had a share of monuments from hallowed an-
tiquity, not least the Lacus Curtius and the statue of Marsyas, these
were exceptions licensed by their religious and judicial functions. Nor
did they take up much space. Domitian’s equestrian statue, however,
was slapped down pretty much right in the middle of the Forum, or
rather not much off centre, across from the Temple of the Deified
Julius and right next to the Lacus Curtius. As Statius puts it, it stood
embracing the whole Forum:
stat Latium complexa forum
(Si lv. 1.1.2)Statius’ phrasing is so vague that it is, unfortunately, of very little help
in determining the precise location in which the equestrian statue
originally stood. It can be read, however, as suggesting that the statue
was placed in the very middle of the Forum, and this consideration
appears to have influenced Giacomi Boni who, early in the last cen-
tury, found what he thought were the foundations for the statue’s base
in a very central location a little to the north-east of the Lacus Cur-
tius.^12 Boni’s view was generally accepted until as recently as a gen-
er ation ago, when excavations conducted by Cairoli Giuliani and Pa-
trizia Verduchi showed that the foundations identified by Boni were
far too early for Domitian’s statue, since they predated the Augustan-
era pavement of the Forum area. They therefore proposed an alterna-
tive location, albeit one very close to Boni’s, a little to the north-east,
on a roughly rectangular area of concrete and travertine blocks.^13 This
proposal, tentative in itself, has been tentatively accepted, not least
because no new excavations have revealed an alternative location. In a
recent article, however, Michael L. Thomas has pointed out that
Giuliani and Verduchi did not excavate in the precise area under dis-
cussion and that they may have been unduly influenced by Boni’s
12 See Boni 1904–7, 574–7. I have not been able to consult this work directly, and
here rely on Thomas 2004, 21 with n. 4.
13 See Giuliani and Verduchi 1980, 35–49, Giuliani and Verduchi 1987, 133–9.
Here too I am indebted to Thomas 2004, 21 with n. 5.