In the catalogue the fragments are organized by their building of origin, i.e. all of the basilica’s fragments are presented together. For each building the fragments are arranged by their type, e.g. base, column shaft, capital, entablature, etc. The description of each fragment includes its catalogue number, material, dimensions, location, condition, and a short analysis of the fragment. The buildings are ordered as follows: Forum Portico, Forum Basilica and its attached portico, and the Temples (West, South, North, and Southwest). Listed at the end of the catalogue are other known elements as well as unidentifiable fragments from the site.
Each fragment has a catalogue number that was assigned to it when the fragment was first analyzed. The number to the left of the decimal refers to the year in which the fragment was catalogued, while the number to the right of the decimal refers to the place of that particular fragment in the total number of fragments studied that year. For example, no. 98.49 was the forty-ninth fragment analyzed in 1998. Some fragments have numbers, such as C-1101, and these refer to acquisition numbers or assigned numbers in various museums.
Without having samples of all of the fragments analyzed in a geological laboratory, it has been impossible to identify the fragment’s stone type with absolute certainty. Thus, stones, especially white marbles, are often described in terms of grain size, crystal structure, translucency, striations, inclusions, and color. From these characteristics the marble type is often proposed.
Many of the architectural fragments have been damaged, and thus the original dimensions could not be determined precisely. In addition, a decision was made early on in the cataloguing process that one should not ‘excavate’ each individual fragment, thus some dimensions are incomplete. If the fragment is on the surface, the total dimensions, as preserved, are provided. For fragments found partially underground then the dimensions of the visible section are given, and “fragment is partially submerged and thus it has greater dimensions” appears in the ‘measurements – details’ section of the fragment’s entry.
Very few column shaft fragments still have their diameters in tact. When the diameter or radius is preserved it is listed; otherwise, the greatest measurable width is given. M. Wilson Jones has written that the lower diameter of column shafts should be measured above the flare, while N. Ferchiou believes that the flare should be included in the lower diameter. When possible I have included the diameter with the flare.
Various scholars have demonstrated that there is a need for many measurements to successfully analyze column capitals. Unfortunately, very few capitals have been found at Meninx, and almost all are poorly preserved. All standard measurements that one can possibly obtain from the capitals are included. The following abbreviations, based on M. Wilson Jones’ studies, are used in the catalogue:
D: lower diameter,
H: total height of capital,
H1cr: height of the first crown of leaves,
H2cr: height of the second crown of leaves,
Hkal: height of the kalathos,
Hab: height of the abacus,
CWab: cross-sectional width of abacus.
Fragments from Meninx, which are currently in Tunisian museum collections, are placed within their original structures. If a fragment's location in the forum is unknown it was simply listed in the ‘unknown’ section. If a museum fragment has Meninx as its place of origin indicated, and if one cannot connect the fragment to any of the buildings around the forum, the fragment has not been included in this catalogue.
