The precise line of the Roman coastline and the location of the port remain unclear. Even thelimits of the site
the city walls, and the extent of occupation
are not fully certain. Extensivestone-robbing operations and early, poorly documented excavations have turned over large parts of the site, leaving robber trenches, excavation trenches and spoil heaps (e.g. those by Comte CamilloBorgio in 1853, unpublished owing to his death from a fever caught during the excavations; AdolpheDaux in 1860, Nathan Davis in 1860, B. Smith in 1878 and Comte Maurice Irisso
érisson in 1881).Many of these operations were on a considerable scale, at times employing substantial labourforces:
Davis used marines from the ship
Hérisson engaged 100 workmen initially,supplemented a month later by a further 30,
and the excavations of the large baths by FrançoisReyniers in 1949-1951 used a detachment of
Of the existing plans of the site, that by Daux published in the account of the Irisson
Hérisson expedition appears remarkably detailed (Fig. 2),
and the general topographical outlinesare well delineated, but much of it is sheer fantasy. Like a number of others, he misinterpreted thelarge Roman baths in the north-
west part of the site as a Punic port with an admiral’s headquarters
on an island in the middle of it,
and invented other port basins around the headland in the north-
east part of the site. Although his plan does also show structures excavated by Irisson d’Hérisson and
others, and many of these are at least on the correct alignment of the Roman insulae blocks, it is
Irisson d’Hérisson 1881, 275
-9; Lézine 1970, 35-6.
Davis 1861, 409.
Irisson d’Hérisson 1881, 104
Picard 1946-49, 623.
on 1881; also in Reinach 1888, fig. 6. Cf. Daux 1869.
Beulé 1861, 111; Daux 1869, 160-219; Reyniers 1952. First correctly identified as baths by Torr (1894a, 46-7and 1894b, 306-7); cf. Gsell 1920, 145-6; Cintas 1951; Picard 1953. Martin (1915, xcviii) realised it was Roman,but could not identify its function. The port idea had its supporters until 1953 (Reyniers 1952; refuted byPicard 1953). See Lézine 1970, 66.Fig. 2: Plan of Utica by Adolphe Daux (
Irisson d’Hérisson 1881)
; large spoil heaps have obscured the ancienttopography of the coastal zone.