Description
Porta Borsari is a Roman gate in Verona, at the end of Corso Porta Borsari: the white stone facade, about 13 meters high, with two arches and two rows of windows, is what remains of the main entrance to Roman Verona.
What you see is the facade, in white stone from the Valpantena. On the lower level are two large arches, each framed by two half-columns with a Corinthian capital, an entablature and a pediment.
Above rise two more floors, with six windows each, framed by delicate decoration. On the first floor the two central windows have small aedicules; on the second they sit between slender columns. The effect is rich and colorful, intended for an entrance that was meant to make a show.
On the architrave you can read an inscription of Gallienus, the emperor who in 265 AD had work done on the city walls. It was not a true reconstruction, but a restoration with extensions.
The side facing the city, on the other hand, has vanished completely. The one facing the countryside is the only one left, and it was restored in the 1970s and 1980s, securing the most damaged parts and covering the exposed surfaces with lead sheets against standing water.
For the Romans it was the main entrance: anyone arriving along the Via Postumia found themselves on the decumanus maximus. Back then it was called Porta Iovia, because it was dedicated to Jupiter, like the nearby temple of Jupiter Lustralis.
Today's name comes from the Middle Ages, when the bursarii worked here, the collectors who levied duties on goods coming in and going out.
The original gate was in brick, built in the second half of the first century BC together with the walls. It had a square plan with an inner courtyard, where travelers stopped and were checked, and two tall towers toward the countryside.
In the first half of the first century AD the city wanted to look more beautiful. The gate was dressed in white stone, with new facades on the Forum side and the countryside side. Not far away there was also a post station, with those who ran transport for the public administration.
In the Renaissance the gate was studied by Giovanni Caroto and Andrea Palladio, but not everyone liked it: Sebastiano Serlio did not consider it worthy of appearing in his work.
What you see is the facade, in white stone from the Valpantena. On the lower level are two large arches, each framed by two half-columns with a Corinthian capital, an entablature and a pediment.
Above rise two more floors, with six windows each, framed by delicate decoration. On the first floor the two central windows have small aedicules; on the second they sit between slender columns. The effect is rich and colorful, intended for an entrance that was meant to make a show.
On the architrave you can read an inscription of Gallienus, the emperor who in 265 AD had work done on the city walls. It was not a true reconstruction, but a restoration with extensions.
The side facing the city, on the other hand, has vanished completely. The one facing the countryside is the only one left, and it was restored in the 1970s and 1980s, securing the most damaged parts and covering the exposed surfaces with lead sheets against standing water.
For the Romans it was the main entrance: anyone arriving along the Via Postumia found themselves on the decumanus maximus. Back then it was called Porta Iovia, because it was dedicated to Jupiter, like the nearby temple of Jupiter Lustralis.
Today's name comes from the Middle Ages, when the bursarii worked here, the collectors who levied duties on goods coming in and going out.
The original gate was in brick, built in the second half of the first century BC together with the walls. It had a square plan with an inner courtyard, where travelers stopped and were checked, and two tall towers toward the countryside.
In the first half of the first century AD the city wanted to look more beautiful. The gate was dressed in white stone, with new facades on the Forum side and the countryside side. Not far away there was also a post station, with those who ran transport for the public administration.
In the Renaissance the gate was studied by Giovanni Caroto and Andrea Palladio, but not everyone liked it: Sebastiano Serlio did not consider it worthy of appearing in his work.