The existence of multiple gods (theòi) are supernatural presences (dàimones) to whom the Greeks attributed special abilities and powers. They believed that the presence and will of a god were manifested in every act and moment of life.

There were also heroes, legendary men deified after death or, according to myth, born of a god and a mortal being, such as Hercules and Dionysus, and many others.

Urban sanctuaries and temples were usually built in the acropolis, the sacred site of the city and the center of religious life for the Greeks. The gods worshiped there ensured the protection of the pòlis, its laws, and traditions.

According to one of the most famous Greek legends found in Virgil’s Aeneid (ii, 10, et seq.), Laocoön is a priest of the god Apollo; he was the son of Agefor of Troy or, according to others, the brother of Anchises (the father of the hero Aeneas).

During the legendary conflict between the early Greeks and the inhabitants of Troy, Laocoön was a priest of Troy (the ancient city was located along the northwest coast of Asia Minor, which is now Turkey). The siege of Troy by the Greek King Menelaus was to vindicate the offense by Prince Paris for kidnapping his beautiful wife, Helen, in the thirteenth century before the common era. The siege was long, but the walls were strong, and the city resisted. The Greeks needed to find a solution, and Odysseus (Ulysses, in Latin), the legendary hero and king of Ithaca, devised a plan. The great Latin writer Virgil describes it in his Aeneid.

Ulysses had a giant wooden horse constructed, which his men left on the beach in honor of the goddess Athena. The Greek fleet then departed from the island. The Trojans were at first perplexed to see this great wooden horse, but finally believed the huge wooden horse was a peace offering to their gods and thus a symbol of their victory, and started celebrating.

As the towering wooden horse was being dragged into the city as a sign of victory, only one man opposed this idea, the priest Laocoön. He had a strong feeling that something unpleasant was about to happen, and it related to the horse. Ulysses, along with other warriors, had hidden themselves inside the wooden horse. Laocoön did everything possible to warn his fellow Trojans against bringing the horse inside their walls, especially after flinging his lance at the horse and noting the sound of banging metal coming from within due to the weapons of the Greeks hiding there.

In addition, the Trojan war was also a war between divinities, with the gods continuously intervening and taking one side or the other. The goddess Athena, protectorress of the Greeks and enemy of the Trojans, remembered that Paris (who was a Trojan) had offended her by giving the so-called golden "apple of discord," the prize for beauty, to Aphrodite rather than to herself. Thus, she intervenes and does everything in her power to stop Laocoön. It was Athena who ultimately sent two enormous snakes to kill Laocoön and his two sons.

This is the story one hears from their tour guides in the Vatican Museums, as some twenty-two years later after its publication, the guides of Rome continue to refer to the best explanation found “In the Footsteps of Popes: A Spirited Guide to the Masterpieces in the Vatican” by Enrico Bruschini (2001, HarperCollins). Foreword written by Cokie Roberts.

The Octagonal Courtyard in the Vatican Museums houses the cabinet of the Laocoön. The statue had been lost and was rediscovered in 1506 during the excavations carried out in the area of Nero’s residence, the Domus Aurea. Professor Enrico Bruschini tells us, “As soon as Pope Julius II (Rome, Giuliano Della Rovere 1443–1513) heard about the discovery, he immediately acquired the statue and displayed it in his courtyard as a precious part of the very young archaeological collection of the Vatican.” Michelangelo (Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simoni, Caprese 1475–Rome 1564), who was present at the discovery of the statue, was tremendously impressed by its beauty and powerful muscles, the veins, the feet, and the anguished expression on the face.

He noted Laocoön’s suffering arose not only from the bite of the snake gnawing at his side, but from the priest's internal struggle as well, because he is trying to save his city and cannot understand why the gods are against him. He is naked because for the ancients, nudity signified purity, explains Bruschini.

In addition, says Bruschini, “we can say that the powerful figures in the vault of the Sistine Chapel, begun in 1508, two years after the discovery of the Laocoön, were offspring of this statue. The idea of painting the angels of The Last Judgement without wings and nude, as a symbol of purity, also found inspiration here!”

The Laocoön is a Greek original sculpture in marble from the first century of the common era. It was done by Hagesandros and his two sons, Athenodoros and Polydoros, from the Greek island of Rhodes, as recorded by Pliny the Elder.

Michelangelo, Ludwig Pollak, and the Laocoön

An interesting note indicating the brilliance of Michelangelo concerns this statue, the recreation, and the missing right arm when the statue was first found, and the arm’s position. According to an old legend, Bruschini says that Michelangelo began to sculpt the missing arm. Then, however, for lack of time, or because he went to Florence, or for other reasons we may never know, he never completed it. Later in 1532, Pope Clement VII commissioned the sculptor Giovanni Antonio Montorsoli (Florence 1507-1563), (the same sculptor who reattached the forearm of the Apollo Belvedere), to prepare a new arm, which he sculpted, as it turns out erroneously, in a stretched-out position, comments Bruschini.

It was not until 1905 that a Jewish Czech-Austrian classical archaeologist and skilled art dealer, Ludwig Pollak (Prague 1868-Auschwitz 1943), found the authentic arm in a marble workshop of a Roman artisan and donated it to the Vatican. The original arm was completely different from what Montorsoli had recreated—it was bent in the act of tearing the snake off his body.

After five decades, in 1960, during restoration work by the archaeologist Filippo Magi (Rome 1905-1986), the arm made by Montorsoli was removed. Before attaching the authentic arm found by Pollak, the unfinished arm created by Michelangelo was temporarily attached. Amazingly, the bent arm created by Michelangelo was nearly identical to the original arm of the Laocoön, which was found three centuries later by Pollak, says Bruschini.

A few years ago, there were two interesting museum exhibitions at the Jewish Museum of Rome and the Vatican Museums:

  • Ludwig Pollak: archaeologist and merchant of art (Prague 1868–Auschwitz 1943). The golden years of international collecting. From Giovanni Barracco to Sigmund Freud.” Jewish Museum of Rome and Giovanni Barracco Museum of Ancient Sculpture, 5 December 2018–5 May 2019.

  • Menorah: Worship, History, Legend Exhibition* in the Vatican Museums and in the Jewish Museum in 2017.

Museum educator and licensed tour guide from Rome’s Jewish community, Patrick Chaloum, guided VIP guests from the Vatican Patrons of the Arts during both exhibitions. He shares one of his most memorable experiences:

On December 3, 2018, I had the pleasure of accompanying the descendants of Ludwig Pollak, Americans and Israelis, on a visit to the Vatican Museums and, in particular, to the famous Laocoön sculpture. We recalled the audacious discovery of the missing arm made by their ancestor. Some 400 years later, that's when Ludwig Pollack, taking a walk on the same hill (via delle sette sale) found a bent arm in a shop of a junk dealer, which told him it was found in excavations just there, and moved like Michelangelo in a way, bought it. He was aware of 2 things: it was found in the same area of the Laocoon, and he knew that the outstretched arm was an addition made in the taste of those years.

We are in 1903, and he was not sure that it was a correct interpretation that the arm should be bent, and if yes, he was not sure too that it was part of the original in the Vatican, and not of a copy. Romans made a lot of copies at that time. In 1904, he went to the Vatican to offer his arm. And, to try to see it was suitable, if it fits. He was doubtful. The arm seemed ten cm too short and did not seem to fit.

In 1906 for the 4 centuries anniversary of the discovery, in an important meeting, pollack declared his persuasion about the fact that Laocoon had a bent arm and that we should integrate the statute a bent arm in the style of the one that he found, but what he found must have been a part of a copy and not the one in the Vatican, And all the scholars accepted this theory. Pope Pius X gave him a medal, the Commander’s Cross. He is the only Jew, not converted, who received it.

Much later in the 1940s, other scholars discovered that the arm was the right one, and in the late 1950s they replaced the wrong one with it. They understood that what happened was that a part of the shoulder of the original was cut of for completing it with the outstretched arm. And they had to do the missing part of the shoulder, according to a bronze mold in the Louvre now, which was made of another mold made in the 16th century before the refurbishing of the statue. He didn't live long enough to see his arm again on the Laocoon, but he knew of these discoveries. In his archives were found clippings of articles in the newspaper of 1942 with his own annotations, writing that Pollack was right.

400 years earlier, in 1506, at the time of Michelangelo. He buys it and takes it to the Vatican, but it appears to be 10 centimeters too short. He then starts to believe that it was part of a copy of the statue and not from the original.

However, in the 1940s, some scholars discovered in the Louvre a bronze copy of Laocoön fashioned before the addition of the outstretched arm. When this bronze copy was subsequently examined, they discovered that part of the shoulder had indeed been cut, around 1950 or so, to fit the restoration of the arm. Thus, Pollak had in fact found the original arm!” says Patrick Chaloum.

Patrick and I work at the Jewish Museum of Rome, and we are also guides in the Eternal City and the Vatican City. I had an opportunity to ask him the following questions, piquing my curiosity.

Did Pollak know he had found the original arm?

Yes, in his personal archives, they found clippings from articles in the Corriere Della Sera and the Osservatore Romano of 1942, with his autographed notes acknowledging Pollak’s discovery.

Ludwig Pollak is remembered for his important archaeological discovery of finding the original Laocoön arm. Unfortunately, Pollak, being Jewish, was deported with his wife and two children, victims of the round-ups of Rome on 16 October 1943. He was the only unconverted Jew to have had a medal of merit from a pope, says Chaloum.

How did you get in touch with his family?

The family was in Rome for the temporary exhibition organized by the Jewish Museum on behalf of the 150th birthday of Ludwig Pollak. If I remember correctly, one of them, an Israeli, also knew of the other identification theory, which would make Laocoön a marble copy of an original bronze Hellenistic statue of the second century BCE.

The Laocoön and the spoils from the second temple

The Roman writer and scientist Pliny the Elder (Gaius Plinius Secundas 23/24-79 CE), who died during the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius near Pompeii, tells us that “...the Laocoön [is] in the palace of General Titus, a work superior to any painting and any bronze. Laocoön, his children, and the wonderful clasping coils of the snakes were carved from a single block” (NH 39.4.37).” Pliny adds that “this is considered the most perfect work of art in existence” (NH 34.19.550).

He comments on the Temple of Peace among Rome’s “noble buildings,” listing it among “the most beautiful (buildings) the world has ever seen” (NH 36.102).

Pliny continues to say that “Imperial mansions were often filled with excellent statues” (NH 39.4.38). Pliny suggests that important artifacts were displayed in the Domus Titus Flavius Vespasianus, and the Laocoön was exhibited there. In addition, another noted author, Flavius Josephus (author of Books of the History of the Jewish War against the Romans, c. 75 CE), observed that the Temple of Peace contained quite a collection of artifacts from throughout the Empire.

In Chapter 7 of The Jewish War, Josephus Flavius describes in extensive detail the vessels taken to Rome, a description which fits well with the “inventory” documented in Rabbinic traditions.

When placed in their proper context, early literary depictions of the Tabernacle and its implements in the Pentateuch to the most recent times provide evidence regarding the existence of a historical religious community, the Jews of Rome.

This is true of the implements described in detail in Exodus 25 and 37, and to a lesser extent, the implements of the Second Temple, explains Professor Steven Fine, Chapter 15, “When I Went to Rome... There I Saw the Menorah..." The Jerusalem Temple Implements during the Second Century C.E.

“Our evidence for the disposition of the Temple vessels after the destruction of the Temple comes from two complementary sources,” explains Professor Fine. Josephus’s Jewish War (completed ca. 75 C.E.) and the Arch of Titus in the Roman Forum, completed ca. 90 C.E.”

According to Fine, Josephus Flavius puts the table and menorah at the Temple of Peace, the torah and the curtain in the palace. These were among the spoils (booty) brought to Rome in triumph by Titus and paraded through the streets of Rome (War 7:5, 132–61). This event can be seen today on the relief panels of the Arch of Titus. Josephus tells us in detail that the Temple vessels were turned over to the Romans.

In Chapter 7, lines 148–52 of The Jewish War, Josephus Flavius describes Titus’s triumphal return to Rome from his successful campaign in Judea in detail. His description of the Temple vessels is particularly relevant:

The spoils in general were borne in promiscuous heaps; but conspicuous above all stood those captured in the temple at Jerusalem. These consisted of a golden table, many talents in weight, and a lampstand, likewise made of gold, but constructed on a different pattern than those which we use in ordinary life. Affixed to a pedestal was a central shaft, from which there extended slender branches, arranged trident fashion, a wrought lamp being attached to the extremity of each branch. Of these there were seven, indicating the honor paid to that number among the Jews. After these, and last of all the spoils, was carried a copy of the Jewish Law. They followed a large party carrying images of victory, all made of ivory and gold. Behind them drove Vespasian, followed by Titus; while Domitian rode beside them, in magnificent apparel and mounted on a steed that was in itself a sight.

Josephus continues in lines 158-62:

The triumphal ceremonies being concluded, and the empire of the Romans established on the firmest foundation, Vespasian decided to erect a Temple of Peace. This was very speedily completed, and in a style surpassing all human conception. For, besides having prodigious resources of wealth on which to draw, he also embellished this edifice with ancient masterpieces of painting and sculpture. Indeed, into that shrine were accumulated and stored all objects for the mere sight of which men had once wandered over the whole world, eager to see them severally while they lay in various countries. Here, too, he laid up the vessels of gold from the temple of the Jews, on which he prided himself; but their law and the purple hangings of the sanctuary he ordered to be deposited and kept in place.

These detailed descriptions of vessels taken to Rome coincide very well with the “inventory” provided by Rabbinic traditions. It is also important to note how Josephus describes the menorah as being “arranged trident fashion.” This is indicative of the uniqueness of this menorah, which the artist of the Arch of Titus panel visually realized. For a detailed description, refer to the volume The Arch of Titus: From Jerusalem to Rome and Back (Brill, 2021).

According to Josephus, many of the temple vessels were eventually deposited in Vespasian’s Temple of Peace. The temple was built to commemorate the Flavian defeat. The Templum Pacis (Temple of Peace) was begun in 71 C.E., completed in 75 C.E., and later rebuilt by Domitian. According to J.A. Anderson ("Domitian, the Argiletum and the Temple of Peace, "American Journal of Archaeology 86.1982: 101-10), L. Jr. Richardson (A New Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University, 1992: 286-87), and J.B. Ward-Perkins (Constantine and the Origins of the Christian Basilica.

Papers and Monographs of the British School at Rome 22:69-90, 1954), Pliny the Elder includes the Temple of Peace among Rome’s “noble buildings,” listing it among “the most beautiful (buildings) the world has ever seen” (Pliny, NH 36, 102). Furthermore, it is said that the square was surrounded by porticoes, which enclosed a garden. It also contained a library. As described by Josephus (The Jewish War 7, 158 - quoted above), the Temple of Peace contained quite a collection of artifacts from throughout the Empire.

Scholar Paul Zanker, in In Search of the Roman Viewer (pp. 179-91 in The Interpretation of Architectural Sculpture in Greece and Rome, ed. D. Buitron-Oliver. Washington DC: National Gallery of Art), suggests, “The opulence and variety of the furnishings stood as a symbol for Rome as the center of the world.”

Pliny the Elder describes the vessels as being in the Domus Titus Flavius Vespasianus (place of Titus), whereas Josephus Flavius locates them in Vespasian’s Temple of Peace. So, is the Domus Titus Flavius and the Temple of Peace the same place? Were the Temple vessels part of the same public/private collection displayed there? Did this also include, at one time, the Laocoön?

Walking down the Via Fori Imperiali road in Rome, one can see traces of the Templum Pacis (Temple of Peace). It was built to commemorate the Flavian defeat, begun in 71 C.E., completed in 75 C.E., and later rebuilt by Domitian.