Work dossier · summary and historical context
The Descriptio Urbis Romae, traditionally attributed to Publius Victor, is a late antique descriptive catalogue of Rome's monuments and administrative regions. The extant text is a composite, with a core likely dating to the 4th century CE, but it survives in multiple recensions with significant interpolations from the 8th–12th centuries. Written in a plain, enumerative style, it follows the 14-region division of Rome established by Augustus, listing monuments and administrative data per region. The work was used as a source for medieval mirabilia and Renaissance antiquarian studies, influencing topographical descriptions of Rome until the 18th century. The attribution to Publius Victor is widely doubted, and the text may be a later compilation falsely ascribed to a 4th-century authority.
The Descriptio Urbis Romae is significant as a key source for the topography of late antique Rome, bridging classical administrative records and medieval mirabilia. It influenced Renaissance antiquarian studies and shaped topographical descriptions of Rome until the 18th century. Its complex transmission and disputed authorship highlight the challenges of reconstructing late antique texts and the enduring legacy of Roman urban identity.
The Descriptio Urbis Romae is rooted in the late antique administrative and antiquarian tradition of cataloguing Rome's regions and monuments, similar to the Regionary Catalogues (Notitia and Curiosum). The core likely dates to the 4th century CE, a period of transformation for Rome as the empire shifted eastward and the city faced decline. The text was transmitted through medieval manuscripts, with significant interpolations from the 8th–12th centuries, reflecting continued interest in Rome's classical heritage. The work was used by medieval mirabilia writers and later Renaissance antiquarians, shaping topographical studies until the 18th century. The attribution to Publius Victor is conventional and widely doubted; the text may be a later compilation falsely ascribed to a 4th-century authority. The manuscript tradition is complex, with multiple recensions, and the edition used (ogl-pl) lacks a critical apparatus, making it difficult to assess textual variants.
Apparatus · what the pipeline recorded
| Coptic | Rendering | Count | First |
|---|---|---|---|
| no glossary terms recorded | |||