T H E PREFACE

T H E historian was expected to preface his volume with a prooemium in

which he set out the scope and purpose of his work and advanced his
own attitude to history (Cicero, ad Att, 16. 6. 4 ; Lucian, Quomodo
Historia 52-55). The custom had been begun by Hecataeus, Herodotus,
and Thucydides and had been canonized by the historians of the
Hellenistic period under the influence of Isocrates and others. As
the writing of history was increasingly governed by rhetorical prin­
ciples, so the themes deployed in such prefaces degenerated into
rhetorical commonplaces. Their aim was the rhetorical aim of winning
the reader's goodwill by presenting the history as something worthy
of his attention, as something useful and profitable. Into the basis
of that utility they did not closely inquire. It was taken for granted
that the statesman would learn to regulate his policy or the individual
his conduct by historical example.
The Romans inherited the custom from the Greeks with little
change. The impersonal 'Hpo&orov AXiKapv^uoeos or &OVKV818T)S
AOrjvatos might give way to the more intimate ego but the content and
character of the preface remained the same. The rules for its com­
position were formulated in handbooks (cf. Rhet, Lat. Min., p. 588. 28
Halm). L. was no exception to the fashion. In form his Praefatio cor­
responds to the traditional mode. Most of the arguments can be
paralleled from the prefaces of his predecessors and are illustrated
in the notes below. Yet it would be wrong to assume that because
L. employs commonplaces he does not necessarily subscribe to them
himself. A cliche need not be a lie. In such a formal context it would
have been difficult, if not improper, to make radical innovations,
None the less it is the novelties which tell us most about his intentions,
and it is possible to form some impression of where L. disagreed with
earlier historians.
The closeness of Praef. 9-11 (nn.) to the language used by Sallust
is proof that in writing his preface L. had his formidable predecessor
in mind. In the Catiline and the Jugurtha Sallust had adopted and in
the Historiae only tangentially modified the thesis that 146 B.C. was
the turning-point of Roman history. Before that date the Romans had
uniformly displayed virtus, that is, they had aspired to accomplish on
behalf of the state egregia facinora through bonae artes and so to win
gloria; after that date, when the destruction of Carthage had removed
the last externally cohesive influence on Roman morals (1. 19. 4 n.)
the society was invaded by avaritia and ambitio (cupido honorum) which

23
 PREFACE
led remorselessly to depravity (luxuria). It was not a profound thesis.
Sallust was not a profound thinker. Such ideas enjoyed wide circula­
tion in contemporary R o m e . But Sallust believed in it enough to dis­
tort the facts of history to fit the strait-jacket of his philosophical
scheme. L. rejects it. In assessing the decline of public morality u p to
his own day L. admits the emergence of avaritia but is silent about
ambitio (Praef. 10) because he recognizes that whereas the oppor-
tunites for affluent living only became available in the second century,
forces such as ambitio had always been at work from the very founda­
tion of the city. By omitting ambitio L. tacitly rebukes Sallust for his
over-simplified and schematic philosophy. L. had the truer historical
judgement. Where Sallust tailored his material to fit his view of the
historical process, L. presupposed no such determinism. For him the
course of history was not a straight progression from black to white
but a chequered patchwork in which good a n d evil had always been
interwoven. Each event had its moral, but the moral was the eye round
which the story could be constructed not a farther stage along a pre­
determined path.
L.'s rejection of Sallust's thesis that ambitio was a late and decisive
phenomenon, explained as it may be by the fact that Sallust's earliest
efforts as a n historian were confined to the events of the recent past, is
interesting in another way. In it we may discern the prejudices of the
man. So far as we know, L. held no public office and his ignorance of
public business is disclosed by almost every page of the history. T h e
political ambitions of the normal R o m a n appear never to have
attracted him. ambitio or cupido honorum did not have the same sig-
ficance for him that it did for Sallust, the tribune and pro-consul.
The second singularity of the Preface is L.'s escapism. H e confesses
that early history appealed to him because it distracted the mind for
a time from the present [Praef. 5). O n e m a y search the prefaces of
other historians in vain for a similar confession, but it is very typical
of L. who elsewhere states 'mini vetustas res scribenti nescioquo pacto
antiquus fit animus' (43. 13. 2).
The third distinctive feature is L.'s emphasis on the magnitude of
his task [Praef 4 immensi operis; Praef. 13 tantum operis). From the very
beginning L. gives the sense of being oppressed by what he has under­
taken and this feeling, which must often assail his commentators as
well, is coiToborated by the anecdote that he contemplated abandon­
ing the work when it was already well advanced (Pliny, N.H. praef
16). It is a new note, not heard in the confident proclamations of his
predecessors.
Thus beneath the conventional themes a n d figures the Praefatio
tells us much. It is the preface of a small m a n , detached from affairs,
who writes less to preach political or moral lessons than to enshrine

24
 PREFACE Praef. i
in literature persons and events that have given him a thrill of excite­
ment as he studied them. See also the Introduction, p . 3.
For the preface see H . Dessau, Festschrift 0. Hirschfeld, 461 fF.; G.
Curcio, R.I.G.L 1 (1917), 7 7 - 8 5 ; E. Dutoit, R.E.L. 20 (1942), 9 8 - 1 0 5 ;
L. Amundsen, Symb. OsL 25 (1947), 3 1 - 3 5 ; L- Ferrero, Riv. FiL
27 (i949)> x ~47; O . Leggewie, Gymnasium, 60 (1953), 343~55; K -
Vretska, Gymnasium, 61 (1954), 191-203; P. G. Walsh, A.J.P. 76
(x955)> 3 ^ 9 - 8 3 ; H . Oppermann, D. Altsprach. Unterricht (1955), 8 7 - 9 8 ;
I. Kajanto, Arctos, 2 (1958), 5 5 - 6 3 ; A. D . Leeman, Helikon I. 28 fF.
For similar prefaces cf, e.g., Hecataeus, F. Gr. Hist. 1 F 1; Herodotus
1.1; Thucydides 1. 1; Ephorus, F. Gr. Hist. 70 F 7 - 9 ; Polybius 1. 1-5;
Tacitus, Hist. 1. 1.

The Reasons for Undertaking a Subject already treated by Many and Dis­
tinguished Authors
1. facturusne operae pretium sim: confirmed by Quintilian 9. 4. 74 who
says that the corrupt order facturusne sim operae pretium, found in N ,
had already gained currency by his own day. T h e true order gives
a dactylic opening (7". Livius hexametri exordio coepit) which seems to
have been a fashionable affectation; cf. Tacitus, Annals 1. 1 urbem
Romam a principio reges habuere. It lends no support to Lundstrom's
belief that L.'s opening words are a quotation from Ennius (Eranos,
15 (1915), 1-24). T h e reflection on the worth-while nature of the
task is a conventional way of beginning (3. 26. 7 n . ; see Fraenkel,
Horace, 81). See also M . Muller's n.
a primerdio urbis: cf. Saliust, Hist. fr. 8 M. nam a principio urbis ad
bellum Persi Macedonicum.
res populi Romani: cf. Sallust, Hist. fr. 1 M. res populi Romani. . .
militiae et domi gestas composui: Catiline 4. 2.
2. cum veterem turn volgatam: cf. Xenophon, H.G. 4. 8. 1. For the allitera­
tion cf. Plautus, Epid. 350.
novi semper scriptores: for this and (3) in tanta scriptorum turba cf.
Sallust, Hist. fr. 3 M. nos in tanta doctissumorum hominum copia.
aliquid allaturos: cf. Cicero, de Off. 1. 155.
3. principis terrarumpopuli'. cf. Herodotus 1. 1.
et ipsum: for the use of et ipse cf. 7. 4, 12. 3, 46. 2. T h e marginal me
added by the correctors of M and O results from the misplacing of
me in the following sentence.
nobilitate: of L.'s predecessors among historians, Q,. Fabius Pictor
was a senator (Polybius 3. 9. 4), L. Cincius Alimentus a praetor
(26. 23. 1), A. Postumius Albinus consul (Polybius 35. 3. 7), M .
Porcius Cato consul and censor, L. Calpurnius Piso consul and censor,
L. Coelius Antipater a nobilis (Cicero, Brutus 102), C. Licinius Macer

25
 Praef. 3 PREFACE
tribune and praetor. Only of L. Cassius Hemina is nothing known.
Even Valerius Antias came from a service family (see above, p . 12)
and Q . Aelius Tubero belonged to a family distinguished in the public
service (Cicero, Brutus 117; Pomponius, Enchiridii 40). L. might,
therefore, well feel abashed at venturing into such company. For the
general sentiments cf. Martial, Praef, 1. It was more usual to denigrate
the incompetence and dishonesty of foregoing authors (5 n.).
eorum me . . . meo: the reading of N is sure.
The Magnitude of the Undertaking
4 . praeterea: a second reason for bridling at the prospect of writing
Roman history. Not merely have so many important men turned
their hands to it before but the task is daunting in itself. This view
seems unique to L.
The Unpalatability of Early History
voluptatis: cf. Thucydides 1. 22. 4 ; Tacitus, Annals 2. 88. L.'s allusion
to the current fashion for contemporary history (haec nova) may be an
oblique reference to Sallust or to his relations with Pollio and Tima-
genes (see above, p. 4).
5. nostra . . . aetas: notice the hyperbaton which is not poetic (H. J .
Miiller) but emphatic. L.'s distaste for his own times could not be
more strongly stated.
tantisper: 1. 3. 1, 22. 5 but avoided thereafter: 'a wee while'. T h e
colloquial character of the word is seen in the fact that Cicero uses it
in racy letters (ad Att. 12. 14. 3 ; ad Fam. 9. 2. 4) and in a quotation
from Terence (de Fin. 5. 2 8 ; Tusc. Disp. 3. 65) whereas Caesar, Sallust,
Virgil, Tacitus, and Lucretius eschew it altogether. It is common in
Plautus and Terence.
[total ilia mente: there are no good grounds for deleting tota which
was read by N : cf. Cicero, pro Cluent. 190; Phil. 10. 23. T h e only
matter for doubt is its position. N's order, prisca tota ilia mente, involves
a harsh interlacing which cannot be satisfactorily paralleled. Perhaps
7r's emended order (ilia tota), accepted by Weissenborn, H . J . Miiller,
Bayet, and Ernout, should be followed.
avertam: the novelty of L.'s escapist attitude is disclosed by the care
which Curtius, living a generation later, took to rebut it (10. 9, 7 ) :
ut ad ordinem a quo me contemplatio publicae felicitatis averterat redeam.
curae . . . a vero: the regular claim of historians for which cf. Heca-
taeus 1 F 1; Thucydides 1. 22. 2 ; Sallust, Hist. fr. 6 M . neque me diversa
pars in civilibus armis movit a vero; Catiline 4. 2 ; Tacitus, Annals 1. 1.
posset: for the tense cf. 1. 26. 10, 35. 3, 9. 29. 10.
The Indifference to Prehistoric History
6. decora: for the thought cf. Thucydides 1. 1. 3. L. does not imply
26
 PREFACE Praef. 6
that his sources for the earliest R o m a n history were directly the poets
but rather that the material which was transmitted about it was more
suited for poetical than historical treatment.
7. miscendo humana divinis: as recommended by Cicero, de Inv. i. 23
for securing the favourable attention of readers.
Interest in the Moral Aspects of History
L's interest in human conduct is not, like Sallust's, didactic or
philosophical but psychological. T h e behaviour and reactions of men
fascinate him as such, while the work of the gods he is ready to ration­
alize, abbreviate, or by-pass (cf, e.g., his treatment of N u m a (1.18-21);
the omission of the Dioscuri (2. 19-20)).
9. mores . . . viros: the collocation recalls Ennius, Ann. 500 V. moribus
antiquis res stat Romana virisque but the terms had long passed into the
political vocabulary (see Earl, Political Thought of Sallust, 4 ff.).
artibus domi militiaeque: cf. Plautus' humorous definition of bonae artes
(virtutes) as quae domi duellique male fecisti which shows that there was
a familiar equation of bonae artes and domi duellique bene facta (Asin.
558 ff.)-
labente . . . desidentes; cf. Sallust, Hist. fr. 16 M . 'ex quo tempore
maiorum mores non paulatim ut antea sed torrentis modo praecipitati:
adeo iuventus luxu atque avaritia conrupta ut merito dicatur genitos
esse qui neque ipsi habere possent res familiares neque alios pati . T h e
similarity extends not only to the thought but to the phrasing as the
italicized words display.
There is doubt about the exact text. N read labente . . . diss (disc-
yi)identis. labente can be defended by comparison with Cicero, Phil.
2. 51 labentem et prope cadentem rem publicam. The metaphor will be of a
large object beginning to slip downhill and gathering momentum for
the final plunge. So in Sallust. Even if it were not at variance with the
metaphor implied by labente, dissidentis would call for comment since
dissido is only found in the perfect (Fraenkel, Thes. Ling. Lat. s.v.) and
discido is always transitive (cf. Lucretius 3. 659). dissidentis would,
therefore, have to come from dissideo Tall apart, disagree'. T h e
accepted emendation is desidentes 'subsiding', already proposed by
the early humanists; cf. Cicero, de Div. 1.97: other writers only use the
word literally. Elsewhere, however, L. writes labante egregia discipline
(36. 6. 2) and Cicero tota ut labet disciplina {de Fin. 4. 53), whereas dis-
ciplina labitur would be unique here. I think that Gronovius's labante
must be read. If so, the metaphor is not of a slipping body but of a
house tottering, breaking up, and collapsing and dissidentes, describing
the disunity and disintegration of the mores, seems an appropriate
word (cf. Seneca, Benef. 1. 10. 3 ; Epist. 18. 2, 56. 5 ; Dial. 7. 8. 6).
Ratherius so understood it, glossing discordantes.
27
Praef. 9 PREFACE
nee vitia nostra nee remedia: cf. 34. 49. 3 ; Plutarch, Cato min. 20;
Josephus, B.J. 4. 9. 11. T h e conventional character of the expression
might lead us to see in it a general reference to opposition to Augustus 5
solution of Rome's disorders by personal government; cf. Tacitus,
Annals 1. 9. 4. But the connexion between moral, especially sexual,
laxity and political disaster was made in very similar terms by Horace
in Odes 3. 24 intactis opulentior and Odes 3. 6 delicta maiorum at much this
date (soon after 28 B.C.). In 28 B.C. Augustus had attempted to intro­
duce moral legislation enforcing marriage by law and invoking
penalties on immorality (Propertius 2. 7), but had been driven by
opposition to withdraw it and was only able to renew the attempt in
18 B.C. and A.D. 9. It is hard, therefore, to doubt that Livy, like
Horace, is referring to the failure of that legislation. See Syme,
Harvard Studies in Class. Phil. 64 (1959), 4 2 - 3 ; G. W. Williams, J.R.S.
52 (1962), 28 ff.
The Usefulness of History
In parenthesis L. pays formal tribute to the moral value of history,
a regular TOTTOS deriving from Thucydides 1. 22. 4 and given an ex­
clusively moral application by Hellenistic historians (cf. Polybius
I. 1. 2, 2. 61. 3 ; Diodorus 1. 1. 4 ; Sallust, Jugurtha 4. 5 ; Tacitus,
Annals 3. 65. 1 ; Agr. 46. 3). For L. the moral content is less important
than the literary opportunity thereby provided. See Introduction,
p. 18.
10. hoc illudesse: 5. 2. 3 n.
in inlustri posita monumento: the general sense is clear—'history offers
examples of every sort of conduct'—but the precise force of these words
is disputed (Foster, T.A.P.A. 42 (1911), lxvi). They have been taken
to mean ' (examples) enshrined in conspicuous historical characters'
(Haupt, Greenhough) but this does not suit the context which is con­
cerned more with history in general rather than historical personages/
(cf. in cognitione rerum). I would take monumento to refer to history as
such, the history of a nation—'examples set in the clear record of a
nation'.
The Remarkable Character of Rome
I I . amor: cf. Polybius 1. 14. 2: Philinus and Fabius SoKovm . . . /xot
TTeiTOvSevai rt TrapairXriaiov rots* epiocri.
nulla . . . rnaior: cf. Thucydides 1. 1. 3.
civitatem: there is no need to delete the word as an interpolation after
res publica (Novak); for such repetition of ideas cf. 2. 28. 3, 5. 2. 8,
10. 1. 4.
avaritia luxuriaque: Sallust dated the moral crisis at Rome to the
destruction of Carthage in 146 B.C. {Catiline 7 - 9 ; Jugurtha 41. 2). His
28
 PREFACE Praef. u
date is lower than that given by most authors who tended to select a
turning-point in the first half of the century, Piso fixing on 154 (Pliny,
N.H. 17. 244), Polybius on 168 (31. 25. 3, 6. 57. 5), and Livy's annalis-
tic source on 187 (39. 6. 7). They were agreed that the causal factors
were the contact with Greek material prosperity, the elimination of
an external menace, and the opportunities for individual Romans to
acquire wealth, avaritia brings luxuria in its train. Apart from the omis­
sion of ambitio L. does not dispute the traditional diagnosis fully set out
by Sallust {Catiline 10-12).
For avaritia and luxuria contrasted with paupertas and parsimonia cf.
34. 4. 2-13 (Cato's speech). T h e terms are conventional rhetoric.
The Invocation of the Gods
Such invocations, although regular at the commencement of great
affairs (22. 9. 7, 38. 48. 14, 45. 39. 10) and at the start of poems (e.g.
Homer, Theognis, Ennius, Virgil: for the formulaic opening <rV Aios
dpx<6fj,€crda see Gow on Theocritus 17. 1), were not made by earlier
historians. Besides conventional piety L.'s decision reflects on his
attitude to his task. H e saw himself as a creative artist, as a poet rather
than a researcher.

29
 BOOK I

T H E first five books were planned and published as a unity, and

Book i states the overall theme—the greatness of Rome. Rome
was a great city both as a physical entity and as a world-power. From
the very outset L. stresses the strength of the city (9. 1 iam res Romana
adeo erat valida; cf. 11. 4, 21. 6) and reiterates its increasing size (8. 4
crescebat interim urbs; cf. 9. 10, 30. 1, 33. 9, 35. 7, 37. r, 44. 5). R o m e
early became and remained a great city. And corresponding to her
physical greatness was an imperial greatness. R o m e was to be, as
L. is at pains to repeat, caput rerum (16. 7, 45. 3, 55. 6).
Book r also adumbrates the other themes which form the dominant
threads in the later four books. Book 2 is preoccupied with the nature
and problems of libertas. Already in 17. 3 we are given a foreboding
of this (libertatis dulcedine nondum experta; cf. 46. 3, 48. 9, 56. 8)« T h e
consequence oflibertas, as of free enterprise, is discordia as is illustrated
by the events of the latter half of Book 2 and as is already hinted in
r. 17. 1 or 1. 42. 2. A free society requires for its preservation the
exercise by individual citizens of the social virtues. T o give way to
avaritia and to scorn modestia must entail the disruption of society
(Praef. 11 n.). This is clearly seen in the course of Book 3 ; and the way
is prepared in Book 1 where Ancus Marcius' pillaging (35. 7) is in
contrast with Romulus' forbearance (15. 4). It is in modestia and the
corresponding virtue of moderation the theme of Book 4, that the last
Tarquin is egregiously deficient. Book 5 is shot through with pietas:
Rome's success depends both on divine will and on her own observance
of divine ordinance. In many ways this was a daring and novel theme.
Divine causality had been banished from history since Herodotus /
(Cicero, de Orat. 2. 63) but in reintroducing it L. caught the mood of
his generation. Once again he foreshadows it in Book 1. Aeneas, like
Gamillus, is afatalis dux (1.4) and R o m e is founded under the guidance
of the fates (7. 15). M u c h attention is given to the desirability of
performing due rites and ceremonies (18. 10, 19. 7, 36. 6) for only so
can divine co-operation be secured. L.'s own attitude to the gods and
the alleged stories of their intervention on earth is often sceptical and
rationalistic (4. 2 n.). H e will offer a naturalistic interpretation side-
by-side with a miracle.
T h e structure of the book is dictated by the length and character
of the reigns of the kings. Tradition had already given each king a
distinctive personality before the philosophies of constitutional his­
tory began to press them into the moulds of fxovapxia^ /WiAeia, or
30
 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
Tvpawis. L. accepts the general philosophy of deterioration. Tullus
and Ancus are decadent counterparts of Romulus and Numa. Each
is singled out for some one particular quality: Romulus for military
expertise, Numa for the creation of the religious observances of peace­
time, Tullus for ferocity, Ancus for the ceremonies of war; and the
comparison between them is expressly drawn (22. 2 (Tullus) ferocior
. . . quam Romulus; 32. 5 Numa in pace religiones, a(b Anco) bellkae caeri-
moniae). As N u m a founded divine law, so Servius Tullus founds the
social order (42. 4). superbia characterizes the last Tarquin. Thus each
section within the book has its own place within a general framework
and the corresponsion between the two halves of the book gives the
whole a symmetrical shape.

The Foundation of Rome

/ The Facts
There are a few traces of Ghalcolithic and Bronze Age settlement
at Rome, chiefly from the Esquiline, which may correspond to the
legends about Sicels and Aborigines but the first extensive evidence
comes from the middle of the eighth century. A series of post-holes
have been found on the two ridges of the Palatine, the Palatium and
the Germalus, which can be dated stratigraphically and by the
pottery associated with them, which is characteristic of the Early Iron
Age, to c. 750. Contemporary with this earliest community at Rome
was a cemetery in the Forum. Excavations have shown that both
cremation and inhumation were practised. T h e ashes were regularly
placed in a small urn in the shape of a hut which was stored with other
utensils in a large funerary jar. The hut urns correspond precisely
with the plan as it can be reconstructed of the Palatine huts whose
memory was also preserved in the casa Romuli. The primitive culture of
the Palatine community is found at the same period elsewhere in
Latium, particularly at Alba Longa. It is a regional variant of the
Villanovan culture which was widespread throughout Italy in the
eighth century. Little can be hazarded about the ethnic origins of
these earliest inhabitants. T h e linguistic character of the Latin lan­
guage has suggested to some that they were a wave of Indo-European
immigrants who came from Central Europe c. 1000 B.C. and who found
their abode in Latium about 800 B.C. The community was a resident
nucleus of shepherds and swineherds.
Very shortly after the first huts had been built on the Palatine and
the first graves sunk in the Forum, other groi )S settled on other hills
of Rome. Cemeteries have been found in e Esquiline and the
Quirinal, which imply the existence of vl"agc ' ommunities on those
hills as well. T h e excavations on the Quirinal were significant in that

3i
 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
they disclosed only inhumation-graves, a fact which lends colour to
the traditional belief that the inhabitants of the Quirinal were of
different racial origin from the inhabitants of the Palatine and that the
mixture of inhumation and cremation to be found in the Forum results
from the gradual fusion and intermingling of the Latins and an off­
shoot of the Osco-Umbrians, the Sabines. M a n y of the oldest names at
Rome appear to be Sabine, and Latin demonstrably contains many
Sabine words. T h e duality is to be seen in the formal title populus
Romanus Quirites.
In summary it can be said that a settlement had existed on the
Palatine from pre-historic times, that it expanded in the middle of the
eighth century, that soon afterwards the Quirinal was settled by a dif­
ferent, possibly Sabine, community, that the two communities together
with others on other hills gradually coalesced, and that the process of
synoecism was completed by the draining of the Forum and the build­
ing of a market-place c. 625-575. T h e salient points of Roman tradition
are thus vindicated."All the attendant details and legends tell nothing
about the actual history of Rome but much about how that history
was written and how it came to be regarded.
T h e archaeological evidence is most conveniently to be found in
the three volumes of E. Gjerstad's Early Rome. T h e best general intro­
duction in English is R. Bloch, The Origins of Rome, in the series
Ancient Peoples and Places, published by Thames and Hudson. See also
E. Gjerstad, Legends and Facts of Early Roman History, 6 ff.

The Legends
T w o mutually exclusive legends, of Romulus and of Aeneas,
attend the foundation of Rome. Of these Romulus was the older and
the more deep-rooted; it is assumed in an official R o m a n dedication
at Chios of c. 225 B.C. T h e legend of Aeneas became current\in the
sixth century and represents the view which the Greeks of that time
took of Rome. It was left to later historians to effect a synthesis of the
two.
Romulus is the eponymous founder of Rome. T h e suffix -ulus is
Etruscan a n d denotes a /cricmfc: Gaeculus is the mythical founder
of Praeneste. In the earliest legends he is variously associated with
Latinus, the eponymous hero of the Latins, who had penetrated Greek
consciousness as early as Hesiod (Theog. 1011). I n one version Latinus
was the father of R h o m e and R h o m y l o s . J n another Latinus had a
sister R h o m e and was himself the founder of Rome. In yet another
Latinus had a daughter who married Italus from whom Rhomos was
born. All these accounts say n o more than that Rome was founded
by the Latins. Equally the two dominant facts about the personality
of Romulus as they materialized in later telling, the antagonistic
32
 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
rivalry with his brother and the aggressive militarism which contrasts
so abruptly with the piety of his successor, correspond to no historical
actuality. They represent a peculiarly R o m a n form of myth much
older than Rome which belong to the very core of Indo-European
thought. Romulus and Remus are Cain and Abel or J a c o b and Esau.
Romulus and N u m a are Varuna and Mitra or Uranus and Zeus. T h e
detailed biography with which the name of Romulus was clothed
was m a d e up from a series of myths most of which are aetiological in
nature explaining objects and monuments and ceremonies. Many
have been supplemented from the resources of Greek mythology.
They are studied individually in their place.
T h e legend of Aeneas can be more closely determined. Scattered
groups of migrants from Greece or Asia Minor may well have touched
the coast of Latium in the seventh and sixth centuries but the first
connexion of Aeneas with central Italy is revealed by statuettes from
Veii, Greek vases from Etruria and Spina, and on Etruscan scarabs
all portraying Aeneas carrying his father on his shoulders and all
dating from the end of the sixth century. T h e first literary allusion to
Aeneas in Italy occurs a century later (D.H. 1.47-48. 1 = Hellanicus,
F.Gr. Hist 4 F 31 Jacoby) but it is possible that the tradition was
already known to Stesichorus if the Tabula Iliaca, which depicts
Aeneas departing with his father and the sacra eV rqv 'EmrepLav is
based on Stesichorus. T h e route by which the legend reached Italy
is not certain. Weinstock conjectured that it was mediated through
Sicily. More recently Bomer has argued that it came with the
Phocaeans when they fled to the west c. 540. T h e important point is
that it was a Greek view imposed on Italy. T h e Greeks attributed to
heroes of the Greek world the discovery and settlement of the com-
munities of the west with which they had dealings. Diomede, Evander,
and, above all, Ulysses provided pedigrees in their wanderings.
Aeneas found a home in the Etruscan world and in particular at Rome.
Initially the Aeneas story was widely spread in Etruria. It became
localized at Rome partly because the Greeks already recognized in
the Romans of the early fifth century those same qualities of pietas
which distinguished Aeneas and partly because of the accidental
occurrence of a pre-Indo-European place name Troia on the coast
near R o m e (1.311.).
T h e legend represented the changing image of Rome, first as seen
through Greek eyes, then in relation to her position in Latium and
Italy, finally as the adversary of Carthage. Simultaneously a more
mechanical process was at work synthesizing the conflicting stories of
Romulus and Aeneas and devising relationships which would co­
ordinate the two incompatibles. These early stages are not germane,
for it was only when Eratosthenes fixed a date for the Fall of Troy
814432 33 D
 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
that the chronological gap between Aeneas and Romulus the founder
of Rome became manifest and required bridging. It is probably that
both Fabius Pictor and Ennius were aware that a prolonged sojourn
at Alba was required if Aeneas and Romulus were to be retained in
the tradition but Cato, who calculated the interval between the Fall
of Troy and the foundation of Rome as 432 years (fr. 17), was the first
to fill the gap with circumstantial events drawn from local traditions.
His version may be briefly summarized. Latium was inhabited by
Aborigines under King Latinus. Aeneas, landing with his father
Anchises (fr. 9), founded Troia (fr. 4). Latinus granted him an
area of 2,700 iugera and the hand of his daughter Lavinia (frr. 8, 11)
and the united peoples adopted the name of Latins. T h e Trojans,
however, dishonoured the treaty by embarking on a foray (fr. 10). I n
disgust, the Latins (Aborigines) turned to Turnus the king of Rutu-
lians who nursed a grievance against Aeneas for marrying Lavinia
(fr. 12). In the resulting war both Latinus and Turnus were killed,
while Aeneas disappeared from human sight. Aeneas' son Ascanius,
now called from his beard lulus, killed Mezentius who had come to
Turnus' aid and ruled over the city of Laurolavinium (frr. 9, 10, 11).
During the disturbances Lavinia had fled to the woods, where she
bore a son Silvius. Thirty years after the Trojan arrival in Italy
Ascanius handed Laurolavinium over to Lavinia and Silvius his half-
brother, and himself founded Alba Longa (fr. 13). Finally he trans­
ferred Alba Longa also to Silvius who thus became the father of the
dynasty of Alban kings, the last of whom, Numitor, was father of a
daughter variously known as Ilia, Rhea, or Silvia. It was she who was
the mother of Romulus and Remus.
The Alban king-list did violence to history in order to preserve a
literary chronology. Rome was not the late-born offspring of Alba
Longa. T h e two villages shared a contemporary culture. Nonetheless
Cato's account of early Roman history became the standard vulgate
from which later writers only diverged to assert their individuality.
It finds typical expression in the elogium of Aeneas from Pompeii
(Inscr. Ital. 13 no. 85 : there were elogia of Aeneas and the Alban kings
also at Rome), or in the numerous versions assembled by D . H . T h e
surviving fragments of Cassius Hemina (fr. 2), Sisenna (fr. 2), and
Sempronius Tuditanus (fr. 1) show no disagreement of substance. W e
know of several minor modifications. T h e Aemilii substituted an
Aemilia for Rhea Silvia (Plutarch, Romulus 2). Others doubted the
paternity of Romulus (D.H. 1. 77). Varro added religious and
antiquarian refinements.
It is to this late stage in the synthesis of the legends that the two
authorities which L. consulted belong (1. 6 n., 3. 2 n.). Unlike Virgil,
who appears to have relied on the epic tradition created by Naevius and

34
 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E i. i. 1-3
Ennius rather than the Catonian, L. followed recent historians (3. 8 n.).
There is no trace of Ennius in his account. Since nothing survives of
Valerius Antias 5 or Licinius Macer's treatment of the Trojan pre­
history of Latium, L.'s sources cannot be certainly identified. T h e only
significant idiosyncrasy is that in L. Ascanius is the son of Aeneas and
his second wife, Lavinia, and Silvius is the grandson not the son of
Aeneas.
T h e principal modern works on the subject are J . Perret, Les
Origines de la Legende Trqyenne de Rome, reviewed by Momigliano, J.R.S.
35 ( r 945) 9 9 _ I O 4 J F- Bomer, Rom und Troia, 1955; A. Alfoldi, Die
Troian. Urahnen d. Romer, 1957; see also P. Ducati, Tito Livio e le
origini di Roma. T h e thesis that L. is dependent upon Ennius is main­
tained among others by W. Aly, Livius und Ennius; M . Ghio, Riv. FiL
Class. 29 (1951), 1 ff.

1. 1-3. The Legend of Antenor

Nothing is known historically or archaeologically about the Euganei
who were supposed to inhabit in classical times the sub-alpine regions
above the Po valley. A number of inscriptions from the Val Camonica
dating from later than c. 500 B.G. have been adduced as evidence of
the Euganean language, for Cato ap. Pliny, N.H. 3. 134 listed the
Camunia as part of the Euganean people. T h e language is Italic,
having a closer relationship with the Latin-Faliscan group than with
the Osco-Umbrian. This does not, however, tell anything about the
ethnic or cultural character of the people since the language may well
have been acquired at a late stage in their history. Indeed place-names
from the region have been used to support the traditional account
that the Euganei were very old inhabitants of the area who pre­
dated any Indo-European contamination.
Much more is known about the Veneti (5. 33. 10). Their chief
centres were Padua and Este (Ateste), where a settled culture, distinct
from the Villanovan, can be traced from the tenth to the second
century. T h e Veneti were distinguished for their metal-work and for
their horse-breeding and had commercial contacts with the Greeks
from before the sixth century. Their language also is now generally
agreed to have had its closest affinity with the Latin-Faliscan group
although its alphabet was borrowed from the Etruscans and some
words have been claimed as Illyrian. T h e phenomena can be explained
by the cultural pressures to which the Veneti were by their very situa­
tion subjected. T h e ethnic origin of the Veneti remains in doubt.
Herodotus (1.196) speaks of 'IWvpt&v 'Everol but the long-fashionable
theory that the Veneti were a wave of migrating Illyrians is no longer
accepted and cannot be supported by the widespread distribution
of the name (e.g. the Venetulani in Latin, the Veneti of Armorica, the

35
i . i. 1-3 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
Slavonic Venidi, & c ) . T h e traditional account that the Euganei were
displaced by Venetic infiltration may be true. It is at least as likely that
the two groups were originally akin culturally as well as linguistically
but that the Euganei in their isolated region were gradually out­
stripped by the more adaptable and progressive Veneti.
T h e connexion of Antenor and his Eneti with the Veneti belongs,
however, not to history but to Greek romancing about the Adriatic.
It is natural that it should be as old as the commercial penetration
of the area by the Greeks and hence there is no difficulty in believing
that it formed the basis of Sophocles' Antenoridae (Strabo 13. 608; see
Pearson, The Fragments of Sophocles, 1. 86-90; it was perhaps adapted by
Accius; see Polybius 2. 17. 6 with Walbank's note). It is at least cer­
tain that the Antenoridae, although not necessarily Antenor, had a
cult as far west as Gyrene by the fifth century (Pindar, Pyth. 5. 80-88).
Initially, then, the Antenor legend represented the Greek attitude to
the Veneti. It was inspired by no more than a casual play on names
(cf. Pliny, N.H. 3. 130, 6. 5 ; Suidas s.v. 'EVCTOI: see Page on Alcman,
Partheneion 51). Gato was perhaps the first Roman to interest himself
in it and so to link the destinies of the Veneti and the Romans
(fr. 42). As propaganda his work was well timed, for the Veneti were
peacefully absorbed by the Romans in 184 B.C. T h e identification
was reiterated by the geographer Polemo c. 180 B.C. (E Euripides,
Hipp. 231) and thenceforth had a firm place in Roman history
(Tacitus, Annals 16. 21 ; Servius, ad Aen. 1. 243).
T h e linking of the two Trojan foundations in Italy through the
parallel legends of Aeneas and Antenor was thus a late action. It was
chiefly motivated by political considerations but folk-memory or
academic research may have recalled the curious fact that however
separated they might be geographically and culturally the Veneti
and Latins were linguistically near kin. But for L. the legend had
a special meaning. He was a Paduan and the story of his home city
was thereby joined to the history of the capital city. Hence he begins
his history with Antenor not Aeneas (but see 1. 1 n.) and takes for
granted as common knowledge that Antenor founded Padua.
For the history of the Veneti see Storia di Venezia 1 (1957); R.
Battaglia, Bull, di Paletn. Italiana, 1959, with bibliography; G.
Capovilla, Miscellanea Galbiati, 1. 238 ff.; for the Venetic language see
M. S. Beeler, The Venetic Language; Palmer, The Latin Language, 41 ff.;
for the Antenor legend seeThallon A. J.A. 28 (1924), 47 fT.; Beaumont,
J.HS. 56 (1936), 159 ff-; Ferret i57~ 2 5 6 -

1 . 1 . iam primum: the opening of the history is unusual. T h e conven­

tional practice was to state at the outset the name of the historian (cf.
the openings of Herodotus and Thucydides: see Gow on Theocritus
36
 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E i. i. i

i. 65) or the name of the subject (cf. Polybius 1.5. 1; Tacitus, Annals
1. 1 urbemRomam; Agricola 4. 1 Cn. Iulius Agricola \ D.H. 1. 8. 9). This
peculiarity led Wex to doubt whether the opening survives in its
original form {Neue Jahrb.f. PhiloL 71 (1855), 123-5). He n o t e d that
Servius (ad Aen. 1. 242) appeared to credit L. with having told of
Aeneas' betrayal of Troy (hi enim duo (Antenor et Aeneas) Troiam pro-
didisse dicuntur secundum Livium; cf. Origo Gentis Romanae 9. 1-2) and he
observed that L. never uses iam primum to begin a paragraph (cf.
5. 51. 6, 28. 39. 5, 39. 52. 8, 40. 3. 3). From this he concluded that a
sentence or sentences had been lost. But L.'s reason for not naming
Rome at the very beginning is that he gives pride of place to his native
district of Padua and iam primum is not strictly the opening for it
follows on from the general introduction contained in the Praefatio.
satis constat: implying that L. has consulted more than one authority
(48. 5. 5- 33- 5, 37- 34- 7)-
vetusti: Antenor had entertained Menelaus and Odysseus when they
came to Troy (Iliad 3. 207 with 2J) and had recommended the sur­
render of Helen (Iliad 7. 347 ff.; Horace, Epist. 1. 2. 9). T h e earliest
versions do not associate Aeneas in these negotiations but cf., e.g.,
Quint us Smyrn. 13. 291 ff.
1 . 2 . et sedes: the sense is that they had lost their homes because they
had been driven out of Paphlagonia and their leader because Pylae-
menes had been killed.
Pylaemene: cf. Iliad 2. 851, 5. 576.
1. 3 . Troia: so also Steph. Byz. s.v. Tpola. T h e same place-name is
better attested on the coast of Latium ( 1 . 4 ; Gato fr. 4 ; Paulus Festus
504 L . ; D.H. 1. 53. 3 ; Servius, ad Aen. 1.5, 7. 158, 9. 47). An Etruscan
oinochoe from Caere depicting a labyrinth has the inscription Truia
and the very primitive military rite at R o m e was known as the lusus
Troiae. Stephanus glosses the name by x^paZ- This evidence, whether
it be coupled with the name of old Troy itself or not, has been taken
to indicate that Troia was a pre-Indo-European term, used as a place-
name, meaning a fortified place (Rehm, Philologus, Supp. Band, 24
(1932), 46 ff.). When once the Greeks began to spread the Trojan
legend to Italy they naturally attached it to similar names. T h e Latian
Troia is to be sited at or near Zingarini.

1. 4 - 3 . Aeneas and the Alban Kings

1. 4. maiora: by enallage with rerum.
fatis: 4. 1 n.
Macedoniam: the old town of Rakelos in Macedonia-Thrace changed
its name to Aineia (Herodotus 7. 123. 2 ; Lycophron 1236 with U)
and issued coins of Aeneas carrying Anchises, on his shoulders (Head,
37
i. i. 4 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
Historia Numorum, 214). T h e change is perhaps to be associated with
Pisistratid control of the area (Aristotle, Ad. -TTOX. 15. 2 ; see Ath.
Tribute Lists 1. 465). T h e connexion of name was, however, long­
standing in the district (cf. Ainos) and taken with Iliad 20, 303 ff.,
suggests that the Aeneadae had come to Troy from the Balkans in the
thirteenth or fourteenth century leaving traces of their passage in the
place-names en route. See Malten, Archiv f. Relig.-Wissen. 29 (1931),
33 ff.
Siciliam: Thucydides (6.2. 3 drawing on Antiochus) called theElymi
whose chief towns were Segesta and Eryx Trojan refugees, and Hel-
lanicus (F. Gr. Hist. 4 F 31) named Elymus as a companion-in-arms
of Aegestus and Aeneas, though in another context saying that the
Elymi came from Italy (4 F 79 b with Jacoby's note). Their culture
was characterized by elements which were more Phoenician than
Greek, lending colour to the belief that they reached Sicily from the
East before the Greeks (details in Dunbabin, The Western Greeks,
336-7). T h e specifically Trojan origin may have been devised, or at
least published, by Stesichorus of Himera and inspired by the cult
of Aphrodite Aeneias at Eryx (D.H. 1. 53). T h e Aeneas story was
rooted in Sicily at the end of the sixth century and Sicily was a possible
channel by which it could have reached Rome.
Laurentem: 1. 10 n.
tenuisse: sc. cur sum 'he had held course with his fleet to the land of
the Laurentes', cf. 31. 45. 14; for classe cf 36. 7. 15. L.'s use oftenere
is, however, awkward here so close to two places where it is used
in the meaning 'inhabit5 (1. 3 eas tenuisse terras', 1. 5 ea tenebant loca).
Frigell proposed deletion.

1. 5. Aborigines', the inhabitants of Latium were known to Hesiod as

Latini. T h e Aborigines (ab origine) figure first in Gallias (F. Gr. Hist.
564 F 5 a and b) apparently because the introduction of the Aeneas
legend entailed that the Latins could not have been an autochthonous
race but must have been the result of the fusion of Trojan and native
(aboriginal) stock (Cato frr. 9-11 P.). Thereafter they remained a
constant element in the story (for Lycophron's Bopelyovoi cf. Zielinski,
Deutsch. Philol. 1891, 4 1 ; de Sanctis, Storia, 1. 173; Kretschmer,
Glotta 20 (1932), 198),
1 . 6 . duplex: the second version, which spares the Latins the humilia­
tion of defeat and the Romans the infamy of aggression, doubtless
gained currency from the late fourth century when the foundation
legend was invoked to improve relations with the Latins. It is in sub­
stance the version of Cato, Virgil (7. 170 ff.), and Varro (cf. D.H.
1. 57-60, 64). T h e first version, which makes Aeneas the aggressor is,
like the dismissal of Julian pretensions in 3. 2 (n.), anti-dynastic.
38
 FOUNDATION OF ROME i. 1.6
Laurentinum: at i. 4 N read Laurentem, which has the authority
here against 7r5s Laurentinum. L. uses neither form elsewhere.
1. 9. penates: 1. 10 n.
1. 10. Lavinium'. identified by inscriptions (C.I.L. 14. 2067-8) with
the modern Pratica di Mare. T h e relation of the ager Laurens and the
people known as Laurentes to the city of Lavinium was obscure even
in classical times. No town of Laurentum is attested in inscriptions,
itineraries, or historical sources (but cf. Steph. Byz. s.v. ^vreia), but
the adjective Laurens denotes a people as early as the first Cartha­
ginian treaty (Polybius 3. 22. 11 with Walbank's note: apevrlvajv as
emended) and the Arician League (Gato fr. 58 P.) In classical in­
scriptions it is almost invariably linked with Lavinas (C.I.L. 14.
2070-8) and always from the site of Lavinium. It is thus scarcely to be
believed that there existed in classical antiquity a town of Laurentum
distinct from Lavinium. T h e proles biformis Laurolavinium cited only
by Servius (adAen. 1. 5, 4. 620, 6. 760, &c.) is an antiquarian invention.
Further Lavinium lay in the ager Laurens (Obsequens 7 3 ; Val. M a x .
1. 6. 7), a coastal strip some 14 miles long adjoining the land of Ardea.
Thus either Laurens was the name of the people, Lavinium of the city
(cf. the populus Ardeatis Rutulus in the Aricia inscription) or Lavinium
absorbed at a very early date a short-lived community on a different
site called Laurentum (to be sought between Ostia and A r d e a ; cf.
C.I.L. 14. 2045 vicus Augustanus Laurentium, 7 miles from Lavinium).
Both Laurentes and Lavinates figure in the list of thirty peoples given
by D . H . (2. 18. 3 n.) which might be used to support the former
alternative. See H . Boas, Aeneas' Arrival in Latium, 96-126, especially
for the etymology of Laurentes; Philipp, R.E., 'Lavinium 5 .
T h e part played by Lavinium in the development of the Trojan
legend at Rome is one of the most obscure problems in Roman
tradition. T h e Aeneas story was widely dispersed through Etruria by
the end of the sixth century: it subsequently became monopolized
by Rome. Alba Longa was incorporated into the story partly for
mere chronological convenience to supply the gap between 1184 and
750 and partly because of the intimate cultural affinity of the two
communities. In this scheme Lavinium would seem to have no place.
Yet the connexion was long established. Tradition spoke of Lavinium
as being Aeneas 5 first foundation in Italy (Timaeus 566 F 59 Jacoby ;
Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 144) and substance for the claim is provided
by the annual ceremony which Roman magistrates performed at Lavi­
nium soon after vacating office (14. 2, 5. 52. 8). It was further claimed
that the Trojan penates came to Rome from Lavinium and this
has been largely confirmed by the discovery of a fifth-century dedica­
tion to Castor and Pollux at Pratica (2. 20. 12 n.). T h e cult of Aeneas
Indiges, i.e. Aeneas as divine ancestor, which was attested at the river

39
I- I . 10 FOUNDATION OF ROME
Numicius near Lavinium (Fabius Pic tor fr. 4 P . ; Naevius ap. Macro-
bius 6. 2. 31) has recently been confirmed by a fourth-century cippus
found at Tor Tignosa 5 miles inland from Lavinium and inscribed
LARE AiNEiA D(ONOM) to be of comparable antiquity with the
Lavinian Penates (Guarducci, Bull. Commun. 76 (1956-8) 3 ff.; Wein-
stock, J.R.S. 50 (1 g6o), 114-18). Now the cult of Aeneas never reached
Rome, although the legend did, and the explanation of the role played
by Lavinium in the Trojan origins of Rome may lie in the significance
of that fact coupled with the peculiar nature of the R o m a n Penates.
In one form the Penates certainly reached Rome from Lavinium but
the word penates must originally have designated the gods of the perms
rather than either di patrii or national protectors like the Dioscuri.
T h e basic meaning is in accord with their association with Vesta (D.H.
8. 4 1 . 3 ; Cicero, Har. Resp. 12). They were the gods of the store-house
and are to be recognized in the primitive statuettes found buried with
hut urns in the earliest graves at Rome and Alba. At some point
therefore a synthesis must have taken place which converted the
primitive penates into the complex and manifold deities with their
Trojan links which are familiar in classical times, and that synthesis
must have been made in the period 520-480 B.C. T h a t is precisely
the period when Rome became mistress of the neighbouring towns
of Latium including Lavinium. T h e hegemony implicit in the first
Carthaginian treaty is finally regularized by the treaty of Sp. Cassius.
Rome developed the Aeneas myth so that it became centred on her
while leaving a transient, if memorable, part for Lavinium; whereas
in fact it was Lavinium with the nearby Troia which had been
the first place in Latium to take u p the myth seriously and to claim
Aeneas and the Trojans as ancestors. Lavinium retained the honour
as the foundation of Aeneas and as the first home of the Penates and
throughout historical times was accorded appropriate respect by the
Romans, but it had become a mere res ting-point on the Trojan path
to Rome.
T h e bibliography is very extensive but is usefully assembled by
Weinstock, R.E. Tenates' and J.R.S., loc. cit., and Bomer, Rom und
Troia.
1. 11. Ascanium: 3. 2 n.

2. 1. Turnus rex Rutulorum: for the name Turnus see 50. 3 n., for the
Rutuli see 57. 1 n. T h e addition of Turnus and, above all, of Mezen-
tius to the Aeneas saga is later than and dependent on the synthesis
of the Lavinian and R o m a n tradition analysed above (1. 10 n.),
although it was firmly settled by the time of Cato (cf. Servius, ad Aen.
1. 267) and admitted only of minor adjustments such as the insertion
of the dream-oracle found in D.H. 1. 57 and Virgil, Aeneid 7. 81 ff.
40
 F O U N D A T I O N OF ROME I. 2. 1
5
which was designed to mitigate Latinus discourtesy in rejecting
Turnus in favour of Aeneas as suitor for his daughter's hand. The
Etruscan name of Turnus and his Etruscan sympathies have no place
in an eighth-century context and in particular the detailed history of
Mezentius' fate was evidently modelled on the Fall of Veii, where the
king like Mezentius was impious and detested and met his match at
the hands ofafatalis dux (Aeneas, Gamillus). T h e name Mezentius, not
elsewhere attested, represents a modernized spelling of an Etr. Medi-
or Mess- with a Latin termination.
2. 3. Caere: 6o. 2, 4. 61. 11, 5. 40. 10, the modern Cervetri, situated on
a tongue of tufa rock, 30 miles north of Rome and 3 \ miles from the
coast on which it had a port, Agylla. Its position with access to the
sea secured it prosperity from the earliest times: the oldest tombs are
dated to c. 700. Caere would, then, have been in existence in this
legendary period but that is all that can be said. For the remains see
R. Mengarelli, Mon. Ant. Ace. Lincei/\.2 (1955), 4 ff.; Maule and Smith,
Votive Religion at Caere; for the history, Sordi, / Rapporti Romano-Ceriti.
nimio plus: 2. 37. 4 n.
2. 5. implesset: 5. 33. 7 n.
2. 6. iusfasque est: the phrase (cf. 3. 55. 5, 7. 6. 11, 31. 2, 8. 10. 1,
23. 12. 15, 45. 33. 2 ; 23. 42. 4 si fas est dici) reflects the well-known
liturgical formula by which the many names and appellations of a god
are summarized (see Fraenkel on Aeschylus, Agamemnon 160). Thus
although there was no actual cult of Aeneas at Rome there is no cause
to doubt the text with SchadeL Aeneas was worshipped as a -fjpws in
the Greek world, in Macedonia, Zacynthus, Ambracia, and Segesta,
and the literary evidence for his worship by the river Numicius
(Naevius ap. Macrobius, 6. 2. 3 1 ; Fabius Pictor fr. 4 P.) is ^con­
firmed by the dedication to Lar Aineas recently found at the near­
by Tor Tignosa and by the elogium set up in his honour at Pompeii in
which he is styled Indiges Pater. L. implies that Aeneas was wor­
shipped there under a variety of names and we have explicit evidence
for two other titles in addition to Juppiter Indiges mentioned by L.
in this passage and by Servius, ad Aen. 1. 259: Indiges Pater (see
above ; Origo Gentis Romanae 14. 4) and Aeneas Indiges (Varro, Ant.
15ft. 12; Virgil, Aeneid 12. 794; Martianus Gapella 6. 637: see Wein-
stock, J.R.S. 50 (i960), 117).
Numkum: Numicus and Numicius are found indiscriminately
(Schulze 481). T h e identification of the Numicius with the Rio Torto
which runs from the Alban hills to the coast between Lavinium and
Ardea is certain (B. Tilly, J.R.S. 26 (1936), 1-12). T h e manuscripts
offer a straight choice between fluvium (M) and flumen (nX). While
certain principles seem to dictate his use of amnis, none can be dis­
cerned for the choice betweenjluvius andJlumen (Gries, Constancy, 21 fF.)
4i
 I. 2. 6 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
except that Jiuvius is very much the rarer word (33: 182). This
phenomenon alone would incline one to prefer Jlaviiim here were
it not for the proven unreliability of M in these early chapters.
Jiuvius is not used by Caesar, Hirtius, Sallust, Nepos, Velleius, Valerius
Maximus, or the authors of the Wars in Africa, Alexandria, and
Spain.
indigetem: an obscure term which must mean 'divine ancestor'. T h e
di indigetes invoked in prayers include Sol Indiges who according to
one tradition was grandfather of Latinus (Hesiod, Theogony 1011 ff.)
and the Latin word is reproduced by the Greek yevdpxqs (Diodorus
37. 11). See further Kretschmer, Glotta 31 (1951), 157 ff.; Weinstock,
loc. cit.

3 . 2 . haud ambigam: L. betrays clearly that he has consulted two

sources, one of which maintained the identification of Ascanius and
lulus the ancestor of the gens Iulia and another which denied or ignored
it. T h e history of the question can be traced. Ascanius, who is an un­
obtrusive figure in Homer, acquired importance with his brothers in
the post-Homeric tradition as the surviving inheritors of the Trojan
kingdom. H e rules over the Daskylites (Hellanicus) or Ida (Demetrius
of Scepsis; cf. Steph. Byz. s.v. aoKavia\ Mela 1. 92) or Troy itself
(D.H. 1. 53. 4). Originally his mother was called Eurydice but
Creusa—the name familiar from Virgil {Aeneid 2. 666; see Austin
on Virgil, Aeneid 2. 795)—was at a later but unascertainable date
substituted. His brothers are equally fluid. The Verona scholiast
on Aeneid 2. 717 mentions Eurybates and Servius, ad Aen. 4. 159
Dardanus and Leontodamas but there is no firm tradition about
any of them. When Aeneas moved west Ascanius accompanied him
(cf. Sophocles, Antenoridae). So it was natural to believe that Ascanius
was the ancestor of the founder of Rome. Chronological considera­
tions which inserted Alba as a link in the history of Rome between the
Trojan landing and the foundation of the city enabled Ascanius to
have an honourable role as founder of Alba. It was doubtless aided
by the family pride of the gens Iulia, an Alban family (30. 2 n.) who
connected their name with Troy by the equivalence lulus = Ilos
and accordingly claimed that lulus was another name for Ascanius.
This was an old claim, already found in Cato (fr. 9 P.)- But the gens
Iulia in the second century was of little influence and it was only in the
closing years that it revived and began to exploit its claims for political
ends. Sextus Julius Caesar, about 125 B.C., minted coins displaying
Venus Genetrix referring to their Trojan ancestry (Sydenham no. 476)
and the theme recurs in the coins of L. Julius Caesar in 94 B.C.
(Sydenham no. 593). T h e consul of 90 B.C. made capital out of the
link and took pains to publicize his patronage of the people of Ilium

42
 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E i. 3. 2
(Dessau, I.L.S. 8770). This Julius was a staunch opponent of Marius
and was killed by Ginna in 87 B.C. A political motive for the two diver­
gent accounts in Livy follows. T h e one which asserted that Ascanius
was the offspring of Aeneas and Lavinia, a relationship not elsewhere
attested, denied by implication the high-flying claims of the gens
lulia. It is Marian propaganda and, as such, to be attributed to Licinius
Macer. T h e alternative version is the conventional one, differing
little from that given by Cato.
3 . 3 . Longa Alba: Alba as used in the name of the mountains, the town,
and the river has no connexion with the Latin albus 'white' but is a
pre-Indo-European word meaning 'mountain 5 (cf. Alps; see Bertola,
Zeitschr. Roman. PhiloL 56 (1936), 179-88). Hence the substitution of
Tiber for Albula represents the victory of the Etruscan language
(Thebris) over the indigenous. Alba Longa, on the site of the modern
Gastel Gandolfo, was a parallel foundation to Rome, being peopled by
a race of the same ethnic stock and the same culture, but the cemeteries
found in the neighbourhood show that it was a somewhat older settle­
ment than Rome, although only by decades not centuries. A recent
attempt to site Alba on the slopes of Mte. Cavo has no archaeological
support. See Ashby, Journ. Phil. 27 (1899), 3 7 - 5 0 ; I. G. Scott, Mem.
Amer. Acad. Rome, 7 (1929), 21 ff.; F. Dionisi, La Scoperta Topographica.
3 . 4. Lavinium: sc. conditum which H a r a n t would supply but cf. for the
zeugma 21. 34. 1, 28. 42. 8.
triginta: L. omits the famous prodigy of the sow with 30 piglets,
which was said to have appeared to Aeneas, presumably because he
regarded it as a piece of superstitious gullibility. T h e legend began as
an aetiological explanation of the league of 30 cities (Lycophron
1253 ff.; Pliny, JV.H. 3. 69). It has been conjectured that it sprang
from a misinterpretation of the pre-Indo-European place-name
Troia ( 1 . 3 . n.) as 'sow', a meaning which the word troia possesses in
late vulgar Latin. In any case the prodigy is old. It reflects a primitive
economic situation when Rome was no more than a community of
swineherds. Rome, anxious to reduce the standing and prestige of
the 30 cities, succeeded in proposing a new interpretation by which the
30 piglets represented, as here, the thirty-year interval between the
founding of Lavinium and Alba Longa (cf. Alcimus, F. Gr. Hist. 560
F 4 ; Fabius Pictor fr. 4 P . ; Varro, de Re Rust. 2 . 4 . 18; de Ling. Lat. 6.
141 ff.; see Ehlers, Mus. Helv. 6 (1949), 166 ff.; Sordi 168-9).
3 . 5. Albula: cf. Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 29 ff.

The Alban King-list

T h e dynasty of the Silvii was invented to span the 400 years which
separated the Fall of Troy from the foundation of Rome. It occurs in
many authors with minor variations (D.H. 1. 7 1 ; Ovid, Met. 14. 610 ff.;

43
i. 3. 6 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
Fasti 4. 35 ff.; Virgil, Aeneid 6. 767 ff.; Diodorus 7 . 5 ; Dio fr. 4) and
will be as old as the realization of the approximate dates of Troy and
Rome. T h e inclusion of Capys points to a third-century date when the
relations between Rome and Capua were fraught. Certainly it was to
be found in some form in Fabius Pictor (fr. 5 P.) and Cato (fr. 11 P.)
but the exact names are not quoted before the first century. In their
invention little ingenuity was displayed. They provide patron heroes
for local places and a symbolic pageant of R o m a n history—Latinus
is succeeded by Alba whose descendant is a Romulus (3. 9 n.), signify­
ing the stages of Lavinium, Alba, and Rome. Tiberinus, Aventinus,
and Capetus ( = Capitolium) personify the prominent features of
the city. O n the other side names were selected to emphasize the
Trojan origins of the people. Atys (for whom Ovid, in the Fasti,
Diodorus, and Eusebius substitute Epytus; cf. Iliad 2. 604) is the name
of several members of the Lydian royal house (Herodotus 1. 7, 34, 9 4 ;
7. 27, 74: cf. 'ATTLS). Capys was also the name of Anchises' father (cf.
4. 37. 1 n.). Capetus (elsewhere given as Calpetus to provide a pedigree
for the Calpurnii) was a suitor of Hippodameia (Pausanias 6. 21. 10).
For the more controversial names see in detail below.
Numitor and Amulius cannot be accounted for on these lines because
they belonged to an early stage of the Romulus story and so were
originally independent of the Alban king-list. They were incorporated
in it when the Romulus legend was united with that of Aeneas.
Servius (ad Am. 8. 72, 330) says that L. followed Alexander (Poly-
histor) in stating that the Tiber got its name from an Alban king
Tiberinus who perished in it. This has been generally taken to mean
that L. consulted Alexander as a source but the conclusion is neither
necessary nor attractive. Alexander, a slave or freedman given the
citizenship by Sulla (c. 80 B.C.), wrote an encyclopaedia of Eastern and
R o m a n antiquities in Greek (Jacoby, F. Gr. Hist. 273). T h e obscurity
of the author, the unsuitable lay-out of his work, the unfamiliarity of
his language, the unoriginality of his technique, all make him a
most improbable authority for L. to have used. It is now generally
admitted that L. can only have consulted him, if at all, for the specific
detail about Tiberinus (3.8) and not for the Alban king-list as a whole.
Yet even so such a procedure is at variance with all that we know of L.'s
method of work. If Servius is correct in attributing this version of
the name of the Tiber to Alexander, I prefer to believe that L.
learnt it not at first hand from Alexander but through an intermediary.
Since it was argued above that the main source of the chapters was
not Licinius Macer who is quoted only in criticism, it is natural to
think of another admirer of Sulla's who wrote after Alexander and
would have had both occasion and inclination to consult his work—
Valerius Antias.

44
 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E i. 3. 6
For the king-list see Trieber, Hermes 29 (1894), 124 ff.; Schwartz,
A.G.G.W. 40 (1894), 3 ff.; Bomer on Ovid, Fasti 4. 39 ff.
3 . 6. Silvius: was probably inspired by the character of the land­
scape of early Latium, traces of which survive in the names silva
Arsia, silva Malitiosa, &c. It is not plausible, with Sundwall (Klio 11
(1913), 250), to connect it with the Asiatic name ZY'A/fos. casu quodam
in silvis natus is the product of later romanticism.
3 . 7. Prisci Latini'. the casci Latini of Ennius. T h e name is not ancient
but stems from the Latin settlement of 338, when the need arose to
distinguish between the title 'Latin 5 with its juridical implications
which then came into force and the earlier ethnic term 'Latin'. T h e
colonies here referred to, which comprised the area between the
Anio and the Tiber, are equally anachronistic. See Sherwin-White,
Roman Citizenship, 9 ff.
3 . 8. Atys: Epytus in Ovid (Fasti), Diodorus, and Eusebius, emphasiz­
ing the Trojan lineage (Iliad 2. 604).
Tiberimts: the eponymous hero of the Tiber had been cast in other
roles besides that of an Alban king. He had been an aboriginal, killed
by Glaucus, an Etruscan, a Latin, or a son ofJuppiter who fell in battle
near the river (Servius, ad Aen. 8. 72, 330).
3 . 9. Agrippa: the original name is likely to have been Acrota (Ovid,
Met. 14. 617; from at<po—alluding to the arx as Capetus alludes to the
Capitol) which was then rationalized to Agrippa. Agrippa as a name
was originally a praenomen descriptive of the manner of birth (Pliny,
N.H. 7. 45) and as a cognomen was later in vogue among the Furii and
Menenii. But the only Agrippa of note between the early Republic
and the Empire was M . Vipsanius Agrippa and it is generally assumed
that the substitution of Agrippa for Acrota was out of compliment to
Augustus' general (Trieber; see Reinhold, M. Agrippa, 10 n. 38). The
suggestion is not compelling. T h e formation of the Alban king-list
belongs to the same era that gave such wide publicity to the parable
of Menenius Agrippa (2. 32. 8 n.).
Romulus: the name is given as Aremulus by Diodorus (7. 5. 10),
Cassiodorus, Hieronyrnus (1. 46. 7), and the author of the Origo Gentis
Romanae (18. 2). P. Burman, on Ovid, Met. 14. 616, wished to read
Remulus here, which is more probable than Aremulus in that it pro­
vides an attractive aetiology for the ager Remurinus (Paulus Festus
345 L.) and the Remoria (Ovid, Fasti 5. 479). Nonetheless Romulus is
not only better attested; it is a necessary anticipation of the great
Romulus and makes a piquant successor to Agrippa.
fulmine: there was a meteorite held in great veneration on the
Aventine which goes far to explaining this detail.
Proca: etymologically the name is connected with proceres and Pro-
culus and the meaning will be, 'elder, leader, prince' (Walde-Hofmann

45
i- 3- 9 FOUNDATION OF R O M E
s.v.). It may have been chosen also for the reminiscence of Prochyte,
Aeneas' kinswoman, who died en route for Sicily and gave her name to
a Gampanian headland (Servius, ad Aen. 9. 712).

' 3 . 10-4. The Birth of Romulus and Remus

I give only a cursory account of the birth of the founder of Rome in
so far as it is directly relevant to the understanding of L.'s narrative.
The subject is treated extensively in Rosenberg's articles in R.E. ('Rhea
Silvia' and 'Romulus'). T h e primary discussion is by Mommsen,
Rom. Forschungen, 1 ff. An acute analysis, with a full bibliography of
the problem, is given by G . J . Classen, Historia 12 (1963), 447 ff.
Before the insertion of the Alban king-list the founder of Rome,
variously named as Rhomos or Rhomylos, was held to be either the
son of Aeneas (Alcimus ap. Festus 326 L.) or his grandson by a Trojan
daughter (Callias ap. D.H. 1. 72 ; so also Ennius and Naevius accord­
ing to Servius, ad Aen. 1. 273, 6. 777), who is consequentially named
Ilia. Originally he was an only son but by the third century at
the latest the tradition of the twins was recognized (Lycophron 1232).
Originally Romulus and Remus may have been no more than the
Etruscan (cf. rumlna and the gens Romilia) and Greek forms of the same
name, misunderstood to give two personalities.
T h e genealogy, therefore, is Greek and two Greek legends were
grafted on to it. O n 4 J a n u a r y 1837 Macaulay in Calcutta com­
mented in his copy of Livy that the story of the exposure of the twins
was Very like Herodotus' account of the early history of Gyrus'. A
closer parallel is the fortunes of Neleus and Pelias, sons of Tyro by
Poseidon, set adrift on the Enipeus and suckled by a bitch and
a mare respectively. It is an age-old explanation, like siring by the fire-
god (39. 1 n.), to account for the emergence of a new force without
background or pedigree. The specifically Roman turn which it took
was to make the foster-mother a wolf. This may be attested as early
as the fourth century when an Etruscan stele from the Gertosa di
Bologna (Ducati, Monum. Antichi, 20. 531) depicts a she-wo If suckling
a human. It is certainly established by the early third century when
the Ogulnii set up a statue of the wolf and twins (10. 23. 11-12) and
the motif is figured on Romano-Campanian didrachms (Sydenham
no. 6). It was evidently the theme of Naevius' play Lupus. We cannot
be certain when or why the she-wolf was selected. T h e most probable
explanation sees it as an aetiological explanation of the luperci (see
note on ch. 5.). T h e recognition of the identity of the twins is a typically
Greek dvayvwptcjts.
Once the exposure story was accepted it became necessary to devise
reasons why the royal heirs should have been so humiliated. Recourse
46
 FOUNDATION OF ROME i. 3. 10
was again had to Greek mythology. The names of Numitor and
Amulius, unlike the other Alban kings, are not in themselves signifi­
cant and so must belong to an old stratum of oral tradition. It is not
fanciful to see in Numitor an echo or duplication of Numa (3. 10 n.)
and Amulius may also have been the original name of a king or chief­
tain later pushed into obscurity by the more etymologically satisfying
Romulus (3. 10 n.). At all events, if the names survived from the
earliest times (Amulius already occurs in Naevius before the Alban
king-list was fabricated), the careers and characters of the two
brothers are directly modelled upon the legends of Polyneices and
Eteocles, so much so that some later authorities even credited Numitor
and Amulius with a division of inheritance or alternation of rule
(Plutarch, Romulus 3; Origo Gentis Romanae 19; cf. Hellanicus 4 F
98 Jacoby).
Thus motivation and circumstantial detail were acquired for the
story of the birth of Romulus and Remus. It was left to later historians
to elaborate. At an early date the aetiological connexion with the
ficus Ruminalis was made (4. 5 n.). Subsequent historians either em­
bellished by intensifying the scandalous (vi compressa) or rationalized
by reinterpreting the supernatural elements in the story. One sophis­
ticated development was the result of the schematization of Roman
history to fit the Greek pattern of a developing constitution. Romulus
was the ideal or typical fxovapxos. Hence he is portrayed as a man of
mental and physical accomplishment (4. 9 n.), a trait that is as old
as Polybius and could be as old as Fabius Pictor. Sensationalism was
catered for by the ingenious identification first made, as we are
expressly told, by Valerius Antias (fr. 1 P.; from Aul. Gell. 7. 7. 1)
of the wolf (lupd) which suckled the twins with a renowned mistress
from mythology—Acca Larentia (4. 7 n.)—on the basis of the collo­
quial use of lupa as a synonym for meretrix (Plautus, Epid. 403; True.
657). According to the usual version she was inspired by temple-
dreams to marry the first person that she met who would leave her his
fortune. This turned out to be Tarutius, who bequeathed to her the
site of Rome which she in her turn left to the new settlers. It was easy
to manipulate this story. Acca Larentia was the lupa, the harlot who
conceived Romulus and Remus and bequeathed to them the land on
which Rome was to be built. Scepticism was served by Licinius Macer
(fr. 1 P.; from Macrobius 1. 10. 17; so also Masurius Sabinus ap. Aul.
Gell. 7. 7. 8) who refined the story, explaining Acca Larentia's name
(4. 7 n.) by her marriage to Faustulus and making the relationship
to Romulus and Remus not that of an unmarried mother but of a
nurse.
Both versions are represented in L. (4. 6-7) and it would be in
accord with his usual practice if he had directly used these two writers
47
i. 3. 10 F O U N D A T I O N OF ROME
as his sole first-hand sources. T h e story is told simpJy, without
dramatic effects or literary touches.
3 . 10. Numitorem: cf. the Etr. numQral (CLE. 15; see Schulze 200).
Amulium: a diminutive of Ammius, commonly found in the early
Empire as a nomen at Puteoli. It corresponds to the Etr. amni (Schulze
121).
3 . 11. Vestalem: 20. 2 n.

4. 1. debebatur: 1. 4. Here as elsewhere L. subscribes to the view that

the growth of Rome was inevitable and predetermined. T h e Fall of
Veii like the sack of Rome or the disaster of Cannae are all spoken
of as happening in accordance with the pattern laid down by fatum (rj
€LfjiapfX€vr)). L. does use the word fatum in weaker senses, denoting, for
example, divine oracles (cf. 5. 16. 10), but, particularly in the first
decade, he commits himself to the Stoic conception of history as pro­
pagated by Posidonius. This might be mere literary convention—
Gasaubon drew attention to the reminiscence here of the common­
place Greek dAA' e'Set dpa TOVTO ytveordai—were it not for the express
evidence of Seneca (Epist. 100. 9) that L. also wrote philosophical and
historico-philosophical works. But L.'s Stoicism was polite and un-
rigorous. See further Kajanto, God and Fate in Livy\ Walsh, Livy,
46 ff.
4. 2. vi compressa: comprimo, of reluctant intercourse, is not elsewhere
found in prose before Tacitus (Annals 5. 9) but is frequent in comedy
(cf, e.g., Plautus, Aul. 28, 29, 30, 33, 689; Terence, Phormio 1018).
It is unexpected here but was perhaps chosen to give point to auctor
culpae honestior where culpa combines the notion of sacrilege and sexual
sin (cf. Propertius 4. 4. 70; 1. 5. 2 5 ; Tacitus, Annals 3. 24). T h e Ves­
tal's rape was common and sordid: it is ennobled when a god is
credited with having been responsible.
seu . . ♦ sew. 6. 12. 1, representing different opinions more fully
summarized by D . H . 1. 77. According to one Rhea was on her way
etV Upov aXoros 'Aptos (perhaps the Incus Martis between the first and
second milestones on the Appian way (E Juvenal 1.7)) when she was
ravished. T h e juxtaposition of a natural and supernatural explanation
is common in L. (4. 4 n., 4. 7, 12. 7, 16. 4, 19. 4, 34. 8, 51. 3 : see
above p. 12).
4. A. forte quadam divinitus: the concepts of chance and providence
have struck editors as alternatives (cf. Caesar, B.G. 1. 12. 6), hence
Gruter's forte quadam an divinitus found favour with scholars as widely
distinct as Merula and Bentley, Bauer and Madvig. But there is
nothing unusual in the use offors relating to an event which is god-
inspired but, from the human point of view, unexpected or unfore­
seen. Cf. 22. 42. 10 di. . . distulere: nam forte ita evenit; Plutarch,
48
 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E 1.4.4
Theseus 3 5 ; Suetonius, Claudius 13; Euripides, LA. 3 5 1 ; Medea 671.
forte quadam occurs at 3. 64. 4, 5. 49. 1.
4. 5. alluvie: not elsewhere found in L., but cf. [Cicero, Q.F. 3. 7. 1] ;
Columella 3. 11. 8 ; Frontinus, Strat. 2. 3. 22. Gronovius's eluvies would
describe stagnant, motionless water (Tacitus, Annals 13. 57) which is
incompatible with prqfluentem aquam.
ficus Ruminalis: the Romans derived Ruminalis from the goddess
Rumina, a primeval goddess of nursing, whose name is to be connected
with ruma 'a breast' (Varro, de Re Rust. 2. 11. 5 ; Festus 332 L . ; Pliny,
N.H. 15. 77). Figs are often symbolical of the human breast. T h e fig-
tree has a milky juice and both in Greece (the Thargelia) and in Rome
(the Nonae Caprotinae) there were festivals in which the fig-tree
was central but which were primarily concerned with human pro­
creation (W. R. Paton, Rev. Arch. 9 (1907), 51 ff.; Frazer, Golden
Bough, 9. 257-8; Jacobsohn, Charites f. Leo, 425 ff.; van L.Johnson,
T.A.P.A. 91 (i960), i n ff.; Weinstock, R.E., 'Nonae Caprotinae').
Modern critics, however, discounting the ancient view as a mere play
on words, link Ruminalis with the Etruscan gentile name Rumina
from which the name of R o m e and the Romilii ultimately stem
(Schulze 368). With the former interpretation the association of
Romulus and the ficus Ruminalis will be a late and contrived aetiology
based on the similarity of sound. According to the latter the associa­
tion may be necessary rather than accidental and the fig-tree have
been from the very beginning intimately bound up with the legend
of Romulus. T h e former is clearly to be preferred.
T h e sources record two distinct trees called by the name ficus
Ruminalis. O n e lay at the south-western corner of the Palatine near
the Lupercal (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 5 4 ; Servius, ad Aen. 8. 90; Festus
332 L . ; Pliny, N.H. 15. 77) and was said by Ovid to survive only
vestigiously in his day {Fasti 2. 411). T h e other was situated in the
comitium (Tacitus, Annals 13. 58). Tradition claimed that the augur
Navius had miraculously transplanted the tree from the corner of the
Palatine to the comitium (Festus 168 L . ; D . H . 3. 7 1 ; see note on 1. 36).
Only the latter will have been the true ficus Ruminalis, but it was im­
possible topographically for that one to have sheltered the royal
twins. Hence two trees were postulated and the proximity of the
real tree to the statue of Navius made it easy to dream up a magical
transplantation. See Nordh, Eranos 31 (1933), 85 ff.; Hadsits, Class.
Phil. 31 (1936), 305 ff.
4 . 7. Faustulo: the shepherd of Amulius' herds who found the twins is
mentioned by Varro (de Re Rust. 2. 1. 9 ; cf. D.H. 1. 79. 9 ; Plutarch,
Romulus 6), but already on a coin of the Gracchan age, minted by Sex.
Pompeius Fostlus (Sydenham no. 461) he is depicted standing beside
the wolf suckling the twins in front of a fig-tree (the ficus Ruminalis).
814432 49 E
i. 4. 7 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E

So his place in the story is old, although his name is unaccountable.

The innovation that was made after the Gracchan age was to give
him as wife Acca Larentia. T h e character and history of Acca Larentia
have never been satisfactorily explained, and any theory is bound to
be disputable. Varro {de Ling. Lat. 6. 23) writes 'Larentalia . . . ab
Acca Larentia nominatus cui sacerdotes nostri publice parentant',
thus linking her with the rites paid at the Lar(ent)alia on 23 December
to the Lares or the deified ancestors. This has been rejected because
the quantity of the a in Lares is short but of Larentia long (Ovid,
Fasti 3. 55, 57), but alternating root-vowels present no obstacle
(Palatium is later scanned Palatium; cf. lustrum from lu) and the coin
of P. Accoleius Lariscolus (Sydenham no. 1148), figuring Acca
Larentia, presupposes the connexion. Varro's identification gains
support from the unusual name Acca which should be compared with
Greek OLKKU) and Sanskrit akka 'mother'. For Acca Larentia would
be none other than the mother of the Lares, Mater Larum (I.L.S.
5047-8). Certainly A.L. must be a divinity, for sacrifice in honour
of a mortal would be unprecedented. The development thereafter
is more easily guessed. Romulus and Remus were the ancestors of
the R o m a n people and so, on death, became Lares par excellence. It
was natural, therefore, that their (foster-) mother should be Acca
Larentia, the Mater Larum, and that she came to assume a share in
the functions of the wolf. This pairing of Acca Larentia and the wolf
abetted by the equation lupa = meretrix led to a new tradition of Acca
Larentia as the notorious whore, which is at least as old as Gato (fr. 16
P.). She is given the nickname 0a£oAa (Plutarch) or Faula (Lactan-
tius), a common «hrcupa-name, is transferred to the reign of Ancus
Marcius, or becomes the mistress of Hercules (Plutarch, Romulus 5 ;
Q.R. 3 5 ; Macrobius 1. 10. 11)—a fitting couple, for Hercules' amatory
exploits were a match for her own. A somewhat different tale is told
by Aul. Gell. 7. 7. 8 (cf. Pliny, N.H. 18. 6). It was left to Valerius
Antias to take the obvious step and to substitute Acca Larentia for
the wolf herself making her (Faula) the wife of Faustulus. See further
Pais, Ancient Legends, 60-95 5 Wissowa, R.E., 'Faustulus'; Bayet,
Hercule Romain, 3 4 8 - 9 ; Otto, Wien. Stud. 35 (1913), 62 ff.; Tabeling,
Mater Larum, 46 ff.; Koch, Gnomon 18 (1942), 241-4; Krappe, A.J.A.
46 (1942), 490 ff.; Bomer on Ovid, Fasti 3. 5 5 ; Latte, Rom. Religions-
geschichte, 92-93.
datos: 9. 15. 7.
4 . 9. corporibus animisque: the beau ideal, cf. Polybius 6. 5. 7 with
Walbank's note; Cicero, de Rep. 2. 4.
seria ac iocos celebrare: the rare use ofcelebrare cto enjoy together' has
led editors to read ferias for seria (Doujat, Ruperti) but the com­
panionship of Romulus and the shepherds was not confined to public
50
 FOUNDATION O F R O M E 1.4. 9
holidays. For celebrare cf. Cicero, de Orat. 3. 197; for seria ac iocos cf.
Ps.-Aur. Vict. Epit. 9. 17; Claudian 22. 165.

5. 1-2. Evander and the Luperci

T h e Lupercalia, held on 15 February, was among the most primitive
of R o m a n rituals. Naked patrician youths ran, not, as was once
thought, round the Palatine, but up a n d down the Sacra Via in the
Forum, armed with strips of goatskin with v/hich they hit bystanders.
Three main explanations of the ceremony have been supported and
judgement might be given in favour of one of them if only there could
be any certainty about the etymology of the word Luperci. A. K.
Michels (T.A.P.A. 84 (1953), 35-59 with references to the principal
ancient and modern authorities a m o n g whom notice especially
Deubner, Archivf. Relig.-Wiss. 13 (1910), 481 ff.), points out that the
Lupercalia fell in the middle of three days of propitiation of the dead
(dies parentales; cf. Ovid, Fasti 2. 533-70; Varro, de Ling. Lat. 6. 13)
and that the area where the Luperci ran marked the boundary of the
primitive sepulcretum in the Forum. She sees the festival as intended to
protect the community against the power of the dead manifesting
themselves at this season in the form of wolves (cf, e.g., Petronius 62;
Augustine, Civ. Dei 18. 17; Pliny, N.H. 8. 81) and the Luperci as
priests who are endowed with the gift of controlling wolves or the
spirits of the dead manifested as wolves (lupercus formed from lupus like
noverca; so also Ernout-Meillet). A second theory, maintained by the
ancients themselves (Ovid, Fasti 2.425-52; [Servius], adAen. 8.343; Livy
fr. 63) and championed, for example, by K. Kerenyi (Mobe, 136-47), held
that it was a fertility ceremony and that flagellation was designed to
promote fertility in women. Such a theory cannot account either for
the name Luperci or for the flagellation of men as well as women. T h e
simplest hypothesis is that reaffirmed by Nilsson (Latomus 15(1956), 133).
Taking the Luperci to be derived from lupus and arceo (cf. XvKovpyos),
he regarded the ceremony as the natural concern of a shepherding com­
munity to avert depredations on its herds by wolves. T h e superstitious
horror of wolves in early Rome, occasioned by economic necessity, is
plain from the prodigy of 3. 29. 9. Although it seems agreed that this
etymology of Luperci is inadmissible (see Walde-Hofmann; E r n o u t -
Meillet; also Latte, Rom. Religionsgeschichte, 84-86; J . Gruber, Glotta
39 (1961), 273-6), none the less the recognition of the Lupercalia as a
purification of the flocks is most in accord with the character of early
R o m a n religion (cf. the Parilia) and with the ancient evidence. T h e
Luperci may be not wolf-averters but wolf-men, who impersonate and
so control wolves. With the transition from a pastoral to an urban
society, the original character of the ceremony will also have undergone
change, until it came to be thought of as a fertility-rite.

51
I. 5. 1-2 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
Whatever its exact nature, the Lupercalia afforded the grounds for
a link between Greece and Rome. T h e similarity of the Luperci to
the cult of Ztvs AVKOLIOS in Arcadia facilitated the construction, prob­
ably in the fourth century, of the myth that the Arcadian Evander had
inhabited the Palatine before the arrival of the descendants of Aeneas.
Evander also supplied an etymology of the name Palatium (5. 1 n.).
It is a purely literary invention, dating from an age which wished to
see Greek precedents for all things R o m a n and, in particular, saw the
influence of Arcadia strong in Rome (Bayet, Mel. d'Arch. et d'Hist. 38
(1920), 63 ff.; he argues for Magna Graecia as the intermediary of
the legends). For a different view see Gjerstad, Legends and Facts,
10 ff., who agrees that the rite is of the greatest antiquity.
5 1. monte: wrongly excised by Madvig, is in apposition to Palatio
(cf. Tacitus, Annals 12. 2 4 ; see Andresen, Woch. Klass. Phil. 1916,
976 ff.). Elsewhere mons Palatinus is found but it was necessary to have
the substantive form Palatium here in order to clarify the etymology.
Pallanteo: this etymology is as old as Fabius Pictor (cf. D . H . 1.31.4,
79. 4 ; Pliny, N.H. 4. 20; Pausanias 8. 43. 2 ; Servius, ad Aen. 8. 313)
but it had many rivals, e.g. from a putative son of Hercules and
Evander's daughter Launa (Lavinia) (Polybius 6. 11a 1 with Wal-
bank's note; D . H . 1. 34. 1; Origo Gentis Romanae 5. 3 ; Servius, ad
Aen. 8. 5 1 ; the addition of Hercules helped to justify his encounter
with Cacus); from balare (Naevius ap. Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 5 3 ;
Paulus Festus 245 L.), polare (Paulus Festus, loc. cit.) or the god Pales
(Veil. Pat. 1. 8. 4 ; Solinus 1. 15; cf. Palatua: this etymology is de­
fended by Vanicek and Altheim). There are, however, a number of
other place-names beginning Pal- or Fal- (cf. Falerii). This points
rather to a pre-Indo-European root meaning'rock, hill' (cf., e.g., Etr.
falad 'sky': see Walde-Hofmann s.v. 'Palatium').
5. 2. Evandrum: in Greek mythology a minor 8cu/xa>v associated with
Pan and worshipped principally in Arcadia. His ties with the Trojans
were partly those of family, for he was related to Dardanus through his
great-grandfather Atlas, and partly political since he had entertained
Anchises on a visit to Arcadia (Virgil, Aeneid 8. 155) and had been
driven from his homeland by the hostility of the Argives. It is possible
that in him is preserved the dim memory of scattered Greek migrations
to Italy in the tenth century (H. Miiller-Karpe, Vom Anfang Roms).
There was a Bronze Age settlement at Rome.
Lycaeum Pana: Pan {TJdiov—The Feeder) began as a local, pastoral
deity of Arcadia. In company with Zeus he made his residence on
M t . Lykaeus near Megalopolis from where his power continued to
spread. In time of famine it was customary for Arcadian boys to whip
his statue with squills (Theocritus 7. 106-8 with Gow's notes; cf.
1. 123 ff.), and this fertility-rite, together with the name Lykaeus, is

52
 F O U N D A T I O N OF ROME 1.5- 2

sufficiently reminiscent of the Lupercalia to encourage identification.

References and discussion in Farnell, Greek Cults, 5. 431-5 with
nn. 149-88).
Inuum: identified with Pan also by Macrobius (1. 22. 2) but with
Faunus by others (Servius, ad Aen. 6. 775). Virgil mentions a Castrum
Inui (near Ardea) but nothing else is known either of the place or the
god. T h e name is perhaps pre-Italic. T h e identification with Pan is a
clear case of interpretatio graeca.

5. 3 - 6 . 2 The Recognition of the Twins

T h e recognition scene was a staple ingredient of Hellenistic theorizing
about drama (cf. Aristotle, Poetics 1452*29 ff.) and hence became an
element in Hellenistic historical technique as well. Fabius Pictor who
was the first R o m a n to give an extended account of the twins may even
have been directly influenced here by Sophocles' Tyro. L.'s telling
matches the dramatic possibilities of the material. The charges are laid
in two short sentences in or. obi. and Remus is handed over for instant
punishment. His death is immediately expected but the suspense is
maintained by two long, balancing sentences (iam .. . noluerat; forte . . .
agnosceret) in which both Romulus and Numitor are apprised of the
facts and undertake the rescue of Remus. T h e result is as final as it is
unexpected—ita regem obtruncat—and the ends of the story are tied
up in a model periodic sentence (6. 1 pres. part., cum, postquam, abl.
abs.). For the first time in the History L. allows himself a more coloured
vocabulary to suit the dramatic excitement of the narrative (5. 6 nn.).
5. 4. impetum: the plural, proposed by Gronovius, is needed (cf. 4. 9, 10.
3, 7. 42. 4). More than one foray was the subject of the accusation.
5. 5. aperiri: the active, read by Frigell, Weissenborn, and Bayet, has
no authority, being found only in TT.
5. 6. fratres: Quintilian (9. 4. 24) formulates the rule thatfrater should
always precede geminus when both words are used, otherwise it is
superfluous. It should not, however, be deleted as a gloss here because
the emphasis on geminos ('he knew they were brothers: the startling
news was that they were twins') requires the word-order geminos esse
fratres.
tetigerat: 3. 17. 3 n.
eodem: 'he came to the same conclusion as Faustulus'. This is the
only meaning possible from N's text but it makes poor sense because
it is refuted by the succeeding words which show that Numitor's
suspicions did not in fact lead him as far as recognizing Remus. T h e
best correction is eo demum (Perizonius). Frigell preferred Crevier's eo
denique which is certainly better than eo dein (Gebhard, Lipsius) where
dein is insupportable.
dolus nectitur: 27. 28. 4, elsewhere only in Seneca's tragedies (Phoen.

53
1-5.6 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
119; Tro. 927) and Sil. Ital. 3. 234. It is no doubt meant to suggest
the Greek SdAous" v<f>alveiv (cf., e.g., Iliad 6. 187).

6. 3 - 7 . 3 . The Foundation of Rome

Only Ovid (Fasti. 4. 809 fif. with Bomer's note) makes any striking
departures from the familiar account of the death of Remus and the
foundation of the city. Yet the story, in common with so much of the
Romulus legend, is a later invention based on Greek mythology. At
bottom is the primitive belief in the sanctity of walls (Festus 358 L.).
But the evil consequences which attend contempt of walls is Greek
in origin, recalling the tale of Poimandros and Leukippos (Plutarch,
Q.R. 37) or Oeneus and Toxeus (Apollodorus 1.8. 1 ; Ox. Pap. 2463).
Its localization at Rome, natural as it was in any case, was eased by a
suggestive technical term from augury (Paulus Festus 345 L. 'remores
aves in auspicio dicuntur, quae acturum aliquid remorari conpel-
lunt'). L. gives two versions both of which are of demonstrably late
date (6. 4 n.). A rationalistic account is placed side by side/wittLthe
volgatior fama. T h e former, which on a priori grounds can credibly be
attributed to Licinius Macer, substituted a political motive (6. 4 n.,
regni cupido) for a religious one. L., by temperament in sympathy with
such scepticism, accepts from the vulgate only the curse (7. 2 n.) which
he makes the core of the incident. It is the first of many such episodes
which are m a d e into a unity round a short piece of dramatic and
characterizing speech (7. 4-15, 2. 10. 1-13 n.). It was a story which
evidently had a contemporary message. For although the rivalry
between two brothers in which the superiority of the one entailed the
eclipse of the other represents an age-old theme prominent in many
societies (cf. Cain and Abel), Romulus' victory was only secured by
a crime and that crime of fratricide continued to reassert itself through­
out Roman history. T h e evils of the Civil Wars were seen as a legacy
of Romulus' acts (Horace, Epod. 7. 17-20). Thus there was a con­
tradiction between Romulus the fratricide and Romulus the conditor
urbis, the bad man and the good. In L. the conflict is still unresolved
for he depended on pre-Augustan sources, but Ovid and Virgil
(Aeneid 1. 292), reacting in different ways to Augustus' assertion of the
Romulus motif (7. 9 n.), were at pains to minimize the crime of
Romulus by emphasizing the sacrilege of Remus, by substituting
Celer for Romulus as the actual murderer, and by depicting Romulus
as shocked and saddened by what occurred. See Schilling, R.£.L. 38
(i960), 182-99.
6. 4. regni cupido: 17. 1 n., 23. 7, 34. 1, 2. 7. 9, 4. 46. 2.
tutelae: the dative has archetypal authority and may be supported
by 24. 22. 15, 42. 19. 15. Nagelsbach, following Doujat, would read
quorum in tutela, Holscher quorum in tutelam.

54
 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E 1.6.4
Palatium Romulus, Remus Aventinum: the uniform tradition of
authorities after Ennius (Aul. Gell. 13. 14. 5 ; Propertius 4. 1. 5 0 ;
Ovid, Fasti 4. 815 ff.; Seneca, de Brev. Vitae 13. 8 ; Val. M a x . 1. 4 ;
Aelian, Hist. Anim. 10. 22 et al.). Ennius, as also Servius, ad Aen. 3. 46,
appears to preserve an earlier version which sited Romulus on the
Aventine and Remus, probably, on the mons Murcus (Cicero, de Div.
1. 107; see O . Skutsch, C.Q. 11 (1961), 252-9). T h e change was no
doubt influenced by the fact that the Aventine was not within the
original pomerium and by the contrasted prosperity of the Palatine.
It is further rebuttal of the view that L. is dependent on Ennius.
templa capiunt: 18. 6 n.

7. 1. duplex-, the vulture belonged to the small category of augural

birds, including the eagle, the immusulus, and the sangualis (Festus
214 L.; Paulus Festus 3 L . ; [Servius], ad Aen. 1. 394), who afforded
omens by their flight. T h e augur considered the height, speed, and
direction of the flight but nowhere else is the number of birds held to
be significant, which might suggest that the whole episode is of later
creation when Etruscan divination had predicted a life-cycle of 12
saecula for R o m e (Censorinus, de Die Natali 17; cf. the 12 sons of Acca
Larentia). When Octavian claimed to have seen 12 vultures on
19 August 43 B.C., he was asserting his connexion with Romulus. For
vultures in augury see Plutarch, Q.R. 9 3 ; Pliny, N.H. 29, 112, 30. 130.
7. 2. sic deinde: 26. 4 n. T h e turn of phrase is reminiscent of the
equivalent passage of Ennius, Annales 99-100 V. It is deliberately
presented as an archaic-sounding formula.
interfectum: notice its dramatic position.

7. 3-15. Hercules and Cacus

T h e legend of Hercules and Cacus represents the fusion of an Italian
and a Greek version of the same basic myth, the attempted purloining
of a god's cattle, which is elaborately investigated and documented by
Fontenrose {Python, 339 ff. with earlier bibliography). In the Italian
version, Cacus, a deity of the Palatine, entertained Geranes or R e -
coranus (Origo GentisRomanae 6: [Servius], ad Aen. 8.203), who affronted
his hospitality by stealing his cattle. Cacus, it would seem, was a deity
of the underworld and the theft of his cattle symbolized an attempt to
break the power of death and release the dead. T h e nub of the Greek
legend was the attempt made by a brigand to steal Geryon's cattle as
H . brought them back from Erytheia. A characteristic form of it is
found in Herodotus 4. 8 or in the Scholiast on Lycophron 46. It must
therefore belong to one of the oldest layers of Indo-European myth,
but I am disinclined to believe that the coincidence between the cele­
bration of the Kpovta at Athens on 12 Hekatombaion and the festival

55
i. 7- 3 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
of Hercules Invictus (the name of whose opponent, Recoranus, bears
a superficial resemblance to Cronos) on 12 August at the Circus
Maximus is substantial evidence for a pre-Hellenic common origin
of the actual cults (A. Piganiol, Hommages Grenier, 3. 1261-4).
The fusion of the Greek and Italian myths was accomplished to
provide an aetiology for the cult of Hercules at the Ara Maxima
(5. 13. 6 n.). This was a private cult, in the hands of two gentes,
the Pinarii and Potitii (7. 12 n.) and is to be distinguished from the
earliest state cult of Hercules attested in the lectisternium of 399. In the
former Hercules was a god of commerce, in the latter his function
was that of a protector of crops. Being a Greek rite (7. 3 n,), the cult
of the Ara Maxima cannot be very old. Although the claims of
different places such as Tibur (Hallam, J.R.S. 21 (1931), 276 ff.) or
Croton (Bayet) to have been the direct link through which Hercules
came to Rome have been stoutly championed, the evidence only per­
mits the conclusion that the cult cannot have been older than the
fifth century. Given the underlying similarity, it was not difficult to
graft it on to the Roman myth. Cacus' original functions were almost
forgotten, so that the false equivalence Cacus = KCLKOS could easily be
made and Cacus turned from the hero to the villain. Greek literature
provided the substance of the story (7. 4 n., 7. 5 n., 7. 7 n., 7. i o n . ) .
When an historical occasion was sought to localize the myth Evander
'the Benefactor' (Evavbpos) was an obvious counterpart to Cacus 'the
Bad-man'. This, then, became the traditional story retailed with only
minor modifications by poets from the time of Ennius and by the
historians (Virgil, Aeneid 8. 185-275; Propertius 4. 9. 1-20; Ovid,
Fasti 1. 543-86, 5. 643-52; D.H. 1. 39-42; Servius, ad Aen. 8. 190).
Some accounts substituted Faunus for Evander (Derkyllos ap. [Plu­
tarch], Moralia 315 c = F. Gr. Hist, 288. 2) and there was some dif­
ference over the sex of the cattle (7. 7 n.) and over the precise identity
of the founder of the cult (7. i o n . ) but the differences are too minor to
enable us to determine what immediate source L. was following.
It is in the telling of the story that the interest lies. L. continues the
technique which he employed for the first time in the preceding chapter
of relating an episode so that it builds up to dramatic utterance in
archaic and forceful language (7. 10 n.) intended to suggest remote
antiquity. In that way the episode is shaped and rounded.
T h e close resemblance, extending even to verbal details, between L.
and Virgil has led many scholars to follow Stacey in believing that
both authors are directly dependent on Ennius. T h e agreements
between L. and Virgil are on matters of description which could
hardly be expressed otherwise, e.g. 7. 5 caudis in speluncam traxit =
8. 210 cauda in speluncam tractos (cf. Propertius 4. 9. 12 aversos cauda
traxit in antra boves). Where L. has used highly coloured language it is
56
 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E i- 7-3
a creative method of giving character to the narrative and not de­
rivative copying (7. 4 n., 7. 6 n., 7. 10 n.).
T h e literary skill is harnessed to a moral purpose. L. is no religious
enthusiast, but the proper maintenance of cult he, like most Romans,
regarded as essential for the well-being of the state. He omits the fire
and smoke which in Virgil (Aeneid 8. 199) and other authors de­
fended Cacus' cave as being too obviously fabulous for history. At the
same time he stresses the piety which led to the foundation of the Ara
Maxima and the devotion of the Pinarii and Potitii who maintained it.
T h e message is conveyed in the words sacra . . .facit (7.3) and for L.'s
audience it was bound to have a contemporary meaning. Augustus,
too, was concerned to ensure the perpetuation of cult. In this, as in
other ways, he was a second Romulus (7. 9 n.).
In addition to the bibliography cited by Fontenrose see F. Miinzer,
Cacus der Rinderdieb (Basel, 1911); Santoro, Liviofonte di Vergilio, 1938;
L. Alfonsi, Aevum 19 (1945), 357-7 1 -
7. 3 . Graeco: it is symptomatic of the Graecus ritus that the offering was
made capite aperto (Varro ap. Macrobius 3. 6. 17), that the celebrant's
head was crowned with laurel (Varro, Menip. fr. 413 B. = Macrobius
3. 12. 2; [Servius], ad Aen. 8. 276), and that women were excluded
(Macrobius 1. 12. 2 8 ; Plutarch, Q.R. 90), as they were also from the
Herakles cult in Greece (cf., e.g., S.E.G. 2. 505 (Thasos)).
ab Evandro: so also D.H. 1. 40. 6; Macrobius 3. 11. 7; Tacitus,
Annals 15. 41 ; Strabo 5. 230. A second tradition, which is the
express opinion of L. or his source at 9. 34. 18, attributed
the actual dedication of the altar to Hercules himself (Ovid,
Fasti 1. 5 8 1 ; Propertius 4. 9. 67; Virgil, Aeneid 8. 271 ; Solinus 1. 10).
7. 4. loco herbido: the picture of the weary Hercules recalls Herodotus
4. 8 and may be derived from it. herbidus for herbosus is rare and colour­
ful (cf. 9. 2. 7, 23. 19. 14, 29. 31. 9) but not confined to specifically
poetic authors. It is avoided by Cicero and Caesar but used by Pliny
(JV.H. 18. 164) and Varro (de Re Rust. 2. 1. 16).
7. 5. gravatum: used of food and drink, gravare (cf. 25. 24. 6) is bold
and uncommon, being found elsewhere only in Seneca, Thyest. 910;
Curtius 6. 11. 2 8 ; Apuleius, Met. 1. 26.
Cacus: his name is preserved in the scalae Caci which led from the
south side of the Palatine to the Circus Maximus (cf. Plutarch,
Romulus 20) and the atrium Caci mentioned in the Regionary Catalogue
(Reg. V I I I ) , but of a Caca, who in the later synthetic myth was said
to have been a sister of Cacus and to have aided Hercules, it is said
'sacellum meruit in quo ei pervigili igne sicut Vestae sacrificabatur ,
(Servius, ad Aen. 8. 190; cf. Lactantius 1. 20. 36). Such perpetual
fires are found also in the cult of Demeter, Apollo, and Pan (Pausanias
8. 37. 11) and prove that Cacus-Caca was originally a bisexual deity
57
i- 7-5 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
like Faunus-Fauna, Porno-Pomona, J a n u s - J a n a , Liber-Libera (cf.
the ritual formula sive deus sive dea), whose location in a cave on the
Palatine might be taken as evidence of chthonic powers. Cacus may
be an Etruscan word: Cacu is found as a name on an Etruscan mirror.
aversos: borrowed from the trick by which Hermes deceived Apollo
when he stole his cattle, as told in the Homeric Hymn to Apollo (413).
The archetype read aversos . . . eximium quemque . . . relictarum . . .
inclusarum. If Cacus removed bulls and only bulls, relictarum and in-
clusarum are impossible; if he removed some bulls and some cows,
Livian usage would still demand the masculine (Kiihnast, Liv. Syntax,
81). Stroth, followed by Kleine and Madvig, saw the difficulty.
Following the account in D.H. 1. 39 where the animals are cows
throughout he altered the text to aversas boves eximiam quamque,
keeping relictarum . . . inclusarum. It is not, however, obvious that D.H.
and L. are dependent on the same tradition. In Virgil, for ritual
reasons, the stolen cattle were 4 bulls and 4 cows but in Propertius
an unspecified number of bulls. In fact, L.'s source is unlikely to have
been either Ennius or the source used by D.H. Nonetheless it is certain
that he must have intended Cacus to have stolen only bulls from a
mixed herd. For Ovid (Fasti 1. 547 ff.), who is closely modelled on L.,
speaks exclusively of bulls (traxerat aversos Cacus in antra feros) and
desiderium is conventionally used of the longing of the female for the
male (ef. e.g. Lucretius 2. 359-60 crebra revisit ad stabulum desiderio
perfixa iuvenci; Ovid, Met, 7. 731). Cacus, no doubt, wished to improve
the strain of his own cattle. It is therefore necessary to read relictorum
. . . inclusorum,
7 . 6 . primam auroram: only here in L. Elsewhere in Ovid, Met. 3. 600;
Pliny, N.H, 11. 30; [Amm. Marc. 19. 1.2]. It enhances the fairyland
character of the narrative as do excitus somno (cf. Catullus 63. 42,
64. 5 6 : elsewhere L. uses ex somno excitus; cf. 4. 27. 6, 8. 37. 6) and
incertum animi which occurs this once in L. and is otherwise used by
Terence (Hecyra 121), Val. Flaccus (1. 79), and Statius (Theb. 3. 444).
7. 7. vadentem: Weissenborn compares Homer, Odyssey 9. 399. vado,
as a colourful synonym for eo (2. 10. 5, 12. 8, 3. 49. 2, 63. 1, 4. 38. 4,
5. 47. 4), was first used in literary prose by Sallust (Jugurtha 94. 6).
Cicero uses it only in verse (Arat. 326) and letters (ad Att. 4. 10. 2,
14. 11. 2). The word which is naturally at home in the vocabulary of
the poets (Ennius 273, 479 V . ; Catullus 63. 31, 86; Virgil, Aeneid
2. 359 et al, saep.) is employed by L. to give point to striking episodes.
7. 8. ea: with loca. The hyperbaton is not intended to provide special
emphasis so much as to set off the harmonious balance of prqfugus ex
Peloponneso, auctoritate magis quam imperio. prqfugus, are (frvyas a>v, ex­
plains the point of what follows, for which cf. Augustus' claim in
Res Gestae 34. 3.
58
 F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E 1.7.8
litterarum: Evander is expressly credited not with the invention,
which traditionally was due to Cadmus, but only with the use of
writing, but R o m a n belief evidently made him responsible for the
introduction of the Latin alphabet (Tacitus, Annals 11. 14). T h e earliest
Latin inscription (from Praeneste c. 600 B.C.) shows that the alphabet
was derived not directly from the Greeks of Cumae, as had been
thought, but from Etruria. T h e same conclusion is reached by observ­
ing that the order of the voiced and unvoiced gutturals C and G
in the Latin alphabet differs from that in Greek and is explained by
the modification of the Greek alphabet made by the Etruscans
whose language lacked voiced consonants. Writing being regarded as
the greatest of benefactions was naturally attributed to Evander,
the Benefactor, although the Latin alphabet in fact only dates
from the seventh century. See M . Lejeune, R.E.L. 35 (1957), 88 ff.;
L. H . Jeffery, The Local Scripts of Archaic Greece, 4.
Carmentae: in Greek always Kapficvrrj, Latin varies between Carmentis
(Varro, Virgil, AulusGellius, Servius) and Carmenta (Hyginus, Fab. 277;
Solinus 1. 13 ; Origo Gentis Romanae 5. 1.2), both of which signify the
same meaning 'she who is full of carmen' (cf. pollenta: sementis; Skrit.
Kakati). T h e other ancient etymologies (Ovid, Fasti 1. 620: Plutarch,
Q.R. 56) do not bear examination. T h e goddess was one of the oldest
R o m a n deities, with her ownjlamen (Cicero, Brutus 56) and festival on
11 and 15 January, but her exact function was in doubt. The ancients
regarded her as either a goddess of child-birth (Aul. GelL 16. 16. 4 ;
Ovid, Fasti 617 ff.) or of prophecy (Servius, adAen. 8 . 5 1 ; D.H. 1. 31. 1)
or of both {Fasti Praenest.; Augustine, Civ. Dei 4. 11), while modern
scholars have identified her as a moon-goddess (Pettazzoni), a spring-
nymph (Wissowa, Bayet), or a goddess of beginnings (von Doma-
zewski). The truth is probably that she was a goddess closely connected
with the Cermalus region of the Palatine (Clement, Strom. 1. 21)
whcse magical powers (carmen) were invoked in child-birth. Hence
the embargo ne quod scorteum adhibeatur (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 7. 8 4 ;
Fasti Praenest.; Ovid, Fasti 1. 629 ff.) and the prohibition on leather
objects which were an omen morticinum. Later generations interpreted
the carmina as prophetic rather than magical until she became
a goddess of prophecy. Augustine pertinently quotes from Varro the
detail fata (?= carmina) nascentibus canunt . . . Carmentes.
H e r status as Evander's mother was a late manipulation. In Greek
myth that position was held by Nicostrate or, more popularly, Themis
(Pausanias 8. 43. 2 ; Strabo 5. 230), a nymph with prophetic powers
who had controlled Delphi before the arrival of Apollo. When Evander
was transferred to Rome, Carmenta was the natural equivalent
of Themis (Servius, ad Aen. 8. 336). See Pagliaro, Studi e Materiali, 21
(1947), 121 ff.; L. L. Tels de Jong, Sur quelques divinites romaines, 21 ff.

59
i.7.8 F O U N D A T I O N OF ROME
fatiloquam: a variant of the technical fatidicus (cf. Cicero, de Nat.
Deorum i. 18), used otherwise only by Apuleius, Flor. 15; Ausonius
196. 5°-
7 . 9 . augustioremque: commonly used in opposition to humanus ( 5 . 4 1 . 8 ,
8. 6. 9, 8. 9. 10; Praef. 7) and not applied to persons except Hercules,
Romulus ( 1 . 8 . 3), and Decius (8. 9. 10), although applied to sacred
places and things (29. 5, 3. 17. 5, 5. 41. 2, 38. 13. 1, 42. 3. 6, 45. 5. 3).
This selectivity may be deliberate. Octavius assumed the surname
Augustus in 27 B.G. having already been linked with Hercules by
Horace {Odes 3. 3. 9-12) and having considered but rejected the
name Romulus as possessing unfortunate associations (Suetonius,
Augustus 7; Florus 4. 66; Dio 53. 16). In using the adjective augustus
of Hercules and Romulus twice in such close proximity, L. may be
intending to call Augustus to mind. See L. R. Taylor, C.R. 32 (1918),
158-61; G. M . Hirst, A.J.P. 47 (1926), 347-57. See also 7. 10 n.
(aucturum); H. Erkell, Augustus Felicitas Fortuna, 19 ff.
7. 10. nomen patremque ac patriam: recalling the Homeric formula TIV
rrodev €t? av8pa)v; irodi roi TTOXIS r)Se rotcrjes; (Odyssey i. 170 et al.).
love nate: Evander's greeting is intended to convey a solemnity
appropriate to the occasion. Notice the ritual repetition tibi . . . tuo
(3. 17. 6 n.) and the impressive future pass. inf. dicatum iri (3. 67. 1 n.).
veridicus seems to be a religious technical term (cf. Lucretius 6. 24;
Cicero, de Divin. 1. 101). Equally formal is the vocative Hercules (cf.
C.LL. 6. 313, 319, 329) instead of the colloquial Hercule. For augere
caelestium numerum cf. Virgil, Aeneid 7. 2 1 1 ; Ovid, Amores 3. 9. 6 6 ;
Pliny, N.H. 31. 4. interpres deum is sacral (Cicero, de Leg. 2. 20; de
Nat. Deorum 2. 12; cf. Virgil, Aeneid 3. 359, 4. 378, 10. 175; Horace,
Ars Poetica 3 9 1 ; C.L.E. 1528).
aucturum : implying the etymology augustus from augeo (cf. 7. 8 aucto-
ritate). In the same way L. underwrites his interpretation of Feretrius
by the repetition of few (10. 6-7) or of Stator by the repetition of sisto
(12. 5-8). augustus and augeo are in fact connected, augustus being
derived from *augus (cf. Ind. djah; see Walde-Hofmann; E r n o u t -
Meillet).
tibi: at 9. 34. 18 Hercules is expressly stated to have founded the
altar, whereas other authorities attribute the foundation to Evander
(Tacitus, Annals 15. 41). T h e language here is ambiguous, tibi could
be either dat. of agent or dat. commodi.
7. 1 1 . accipere: 5. 55. 2 n.
7. 12. Potitiis ac Pinariis: traditionally the cult of Hercules at the Ara
Maxima was in the hands of these two gentes until 312 when corrupt
dealings (9. 29. 9 ff.) resulted in their being deprived of their office
and visited with divine destruction. It is more likely that on the
natural extinction of the two families the gentile cult was taken over
60
 ROMULUS i. 7. 12

by the state (Varro, de Ling, Lat. 6. 5 4 ; [Servius], ad Aen. 8. 270;

Macrobius 3. 12. 2). T h e traditional story savours of political mis­
representation.
Potitii are not met elsewhere. A Tiburtine provenance cannot be
proved and the a t t e m p t to associate them with the Valerii, one
branch of w h o m had the cognomen Potitus, is also speculative. V a n
Berchem has recently argued that the name is a title, 'the possessed',
analogous to the KOLTOXOI of Zeus Ouranios at Baetocaece (Rend.
Accad. Pontif. 32 (1959/60), 61-68), b u t s u c h a view is not in line with
gentile character of so m u c h early R o m a n religion. T h e Pinarii, on the
other hand, survive into classical times but it is significant that neither of
the later branches, the Nattae and Scarpi, who provide moneyers, makes
any allusions on its coins to the cult of Hercules (Sydenham nos. 382,
390, 1279 ff.) a n d m a t a r i y a l pedigree claimed them as descendants
of N u m a (Plutarch, JVuma 21. 3 ; D . H . 2. 76. 5). It follows that the
Potitii and the oldest branch of the Pinarii must have died out by
the end of the fourth century, and, although we do not know where
the gentes originated from, there is nothing to prevent them, like the
Fabii, importing their own gentile cult.
T h e purported distinctions of role implied in 7. 13 (Potitius as
auctor, Pinarius as custos of the cult; cf. Virgil, Aen. 8. 269; Festus 270
L..; Cicero, de Domo 134; C.LL. 6. 313), based on popular etymologies
(Servius, ad Aen. 8. 270 Potitios dici quod eorum auctor epulis sacris potitus
sit; Pinarius from neivav), deserve no credit. Sources and bibliography
in Miinzer, R.E. 'Pinarius'; Ehlers, R.E. 'Potitii'.
7. 13. eorum: has no authority, extis eo sollemnium being read in A only,
the result of the dittography eo so-, extis sollemnium in M , and extis
sollemnibus in IT.

8. Constitutional Measures
As an interlude between Cacus and the R a p e of the Sabine women,
L. inserts a short note dealing with three constitutional measures
allegedly introduced by Romulus.

The Introduction of Magisterial Emblems

T h e unanimous tradition in other authors (cf. 8. 3 eorum sententiae;
Sallust, Catil. 51. 3 8 ; Diodorus 5. 40. 1; Strabo 5. 220; D . H . 3. 6 1 - 6 2 ;
Pliny, N.H. 8. 195; Appian, Lib. 66) recognized an Etruscan origin
of the several insignia and historically that tradition must be right (see
most recently Lambrechts, Essai sur les magistratures, 26 ff.; against,
de Francisci, Studi Etr. 24 (1955), 25 ff.). L. is not likely to have in­
vented such an unconventional doctrine for himself and we should
rather attribute it to a source, such as Licinius Macer, who can be
shown to have concerned himself with such questions.
61
I. 8. 2 ROMULUS
8. 2. insignibus imperii: 17. 6, 20. 2, 2. 1. 8, 7. 7, 3. 51. 12; cf. 5. 4 1 . 2.
lictoribus: a double axe with rods, such as were carried by the lictors,
was discovered in Vetulonia, the very city from which Silius Italicus
(8. 483-5) asserted that the Romans had derived their fasces (Falchi,
Not. Scavi, 1898, 147 ff.). See further 2. 1. 7-2. 2 n.
8. 3 . hoc genus: the manuscripts had et hoc genus, emended by the
younger Gronovius, but there is nothing amiss with the text, et hoc
genus means 'and all this kind of thing', i.e. the accensi and other
officials in attendance on the magistrates as well as the lictors. T h e
use, only here in L., is colloquial: cf. Tertullian, Idol. 12 per spectacula
et hoc genus; Gaelius, ad Fam. 8. 4. 2 ; Suetonius, Claudius 34. 2. Such
stylistic lapses are found where L. is speaking propria persona. It is
equally unnecessary to insert et before numerum.
sella curulis: originally a seat placed in the royal chariot from which
justice was administered. One actual example survives from Caere
and others are depicted in Etruscan paintings. See Helbig, Melanges
Perrot, 167 ff.; Pellegrini, Studi e Materiali, 1 (1924), 87-118. Under the
Republic it became the magisterial throne (cf. also 2. 30. 5 n.).
toga praetexta: with purple border, worn by children and magis­
trates. Antiquity was divided between Etruscan ([Servius], ad Aen.
2. 7 8 1 ; Tertullian, de Pali; Photius) and Peloponnesian (Suidas s.v.
rrjpevvos; Pollux 7. 61) claims for inventing it but Etruscan monu­
ments which clearly depict it support the former. See Goethert, R.E.,
'toga (2)'; Alfoldi, Der Fruhromische Reiteradel, 63 ff.
duodecim: 5. 33. 9 n.

The Asylum
In the Greek world the right of asylum is commonly associated
with the right of settlement. At Cos (Herzog, Heilige Gesetze aus Kos,
36) and Cyrene (Latte, Archiv f. Relig.-Wiss. 26 (1928), 4 1 ; cf.
Aeschylus, SuppL 609, 963 ff.) provision was expressly made in accor­
dance with the terms of a Delphic oracle for an asylum under the
protection of Apollo. Those who sought asylum were subsequently
allowed to become citizens. T h e Greek model has obviously in­
fluenced the Roman asylum inter duos lucos (8. 5 n . ) ; Plutarch even
speaks of a fiavretov nvdoxprjerrov (Romulus 9). It would seem that
there was a very ancient asylum in the dip between the two peaks of
the Capitoline hill, dating from a time before the inclusion of the hill
within the boundaries of the city. No particular deity presided over it
(D.H. 2. 15. 4). T h e attempts to associate it with Veiovis (Ovid, Fasti
3. 430; cf. Vitruvius 4. 8. 4 ; C.I.L. i 2 . 233) or deus Lucoris (Piso ap.
Servius, ad Aen. 2. 761) are antiquarian schematizations. I n common
with other topographical features it was utilized to provide aetio-
logical material for R o m a n historians and by assimilation to Greek
62
 ROMULUS i. 8. 4
institutions was taken to be an act of policy for increasing the popula­
tion arid ascribed to Romulus (cf. Veil. Pat. i. 8. 5 ; Cicero, de Divin.
2. 40). See Mommsen, Ges. Schriften, 4. 2 2 ; Altheim, History of Roman
Religion, 258 ff.; W. S. Watt, C.Q. 43 (1949), 9 - 1 1 ; van Berchem,
Mus. Helv. 17 (i960), 29-33.
8. 5. adiciendae: 'in order to add a large number (to the existing
population)'. For adicere cf. 1. 36. 7, 10. 8. 3, 38. 1. 6. alliciendae
(Ascensius, Kreyssig, Madvig) would wrongly imply a policy of de­
liberate advertisement, of which there is no hint.
obscurant atque humilem: alluding to the proverbial expression 7 ? / ^
terrae (cf. Cicero, ad Att. 1. 13. 4 ; ad Fam. 7. 9. 3 ; Persius 6. 59;
Petronius 43. 5 ; Minuc. Felix 21. 7; Fronto 98. 4 H o u t ; U J u v .
4. 98). It is to be distinguished from the universal myth that m a n
originally rose from the ground and from the Greek yrjyevrjs which
denotes stupidity (see Starkie on Aristophanes, Nub. 854).
saeptus . . , est: the exact sense of the passage is obscure. Ifsaeptus est
be taken together the meaning would be 'which has now been en­
closed at the place where you descend from the capitol inter duos lucos'.
Since Cicero {de Divin. 2. 40) implies that the area was open in his day,
it is reasonable to believe that it was enclosed as part of the improve­
ments carried out on the Capitoline after 31 B.C.; but descendentibus
remains pointless. T h e area was enclosed, irrespective of whether
people descended from or ascended to the Capitol. Furthermore, the
long separation is against taking saeptus with est. If, on the other hand,
saeptus is a participle, est by itself cannot be construed: whether inter
duos lucos be taken with est ('the area which has now been enclosed
lies inter duos lucos when you descend from the Capitol') or with de­
scendentibus ('the area . . . lies if you descend inter duos lucos'). Of both
it may be asked 'Why only for those descending? W h a t happens to
the area if you ascend to the Capitol?' L. is clearly locating the
asylum and this requires a closer geographical specification, as one
would expect from the use of the dative absolute descendentibus: cf.
42. 15. 5 ascendentibus . . . maceria erat ab laeva\ Thucydides 1. 24. 1 ;
Mela 2. 1 ; H. Stiirenberg, Relative Ortsbezeichnung, 37-38. T h e asylum
would, in fact, lie on one's left as one descended from the Capitol
and either sinistra (Jordan, Hermes 9 (1875), 347 n 0 o r a^ ^aeva (H. J-
Miiller) should be supplied before est.
8. 6. an: the indirect question is introduced by discrimine, so that
the comma is best placed not after discrimine but after omnis (cf. 28. 3.
10).

'The Creation of the Senate

A Council of Elders (senatus, yepovola) is as old as society and its
origins at Rome cannot profitably be investigated. W h a t does bear

63
1.8.7 ROMULUS
examination is the question when the tradition that Romulus founded
a Senate of ioo took root (cf. 17. 5, 35. 6 n.). Conventionally the
Senate of the early Republic numbered 300 (2. 1. 10 n.) and in
deference to Greek models in which the total number of members
of the council was directly related to the number of tribes (i.e. the
Solonian fiovXrj had 400 members, 100 for each of 4 tribes; wider
details in A. H. M . Jones, The Greek City, 176 with n, 40) that figure
was regarded as corresponding to 100 members of each of the 3 pre-
Servian tribes, the Ramnes, Tities, and Luceres (13. 8 n.). T h e
senatorial total is, therefore, analogous to the 300 equites (36. 7 n.) and
does not rest on any original evidence. In Romulus 5 time only the first
of the tribes existed, so that by a matter of simple logic his Senate can
only have consisted of 100 (D.H. 2 . 1 2 ; Festus 454 L . ; Ovid, Fasti 3.
127; Propertius 4 . 1 . 1 4 ; Veil. Pat. 1.8.6; Plutarch, Romulus 13; Servius,
ad Aen. 8. 105). This a priori reconstruction could be supported by
appeals to the normal size of municipal councils or to the councils of
Veii and Cures which also were 100 strong. T h e number 300 does
not, however, rest on any documentary evidence, and its artificiality
is betrayed by the discrepant accounts of how an original total of
100 was expanded to 300. O n e account presumed a Romulean Senate
of 100 augmented by 50 under Titus Tatius and doubled by Tar-
quinius Priscus (D.H. 2. 47). Other versions agreed that Tarquinius
added the final 100 but differed on the question whether the earlier
100 was the result of the Sabine influx (D.H. 2. 57) or the absorp­
tion of Alba. Zonaras (7. 8) knew yet another version. Indeed, if the
original Senate consisted of the heads of the principal families, it is
incredible that it should have totalled any precise number, let alone
the round number 100. D.H.'s principle of selection (90 chosen by the
30 curiae, 9 by the 3 tribes, and 1 by Romulus), which is implied but
not stated by L., is strongly democratic in sympathy and may with
reason be ascribed to Licinius Macer. See O'Brien Moore, R.E. Suppl.
6, 'Senatus'; Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 884 fF.
8. 7. consilium: not concretely 'a council' but abstractly 'guidance 5 .
For the pairing with vires cf. 2. 56. 16, 3. 62. 7. Romulus tempered
force with discretion. So also Cicero, de Rep. 2. 4.

9-13. The Sabine Synoecism

L. now embarks on the most ambitious essay in narrative so far. There
was a nexus of stories treating of Rome's relations with her Sabine
neighbours, of which the centrepiece was the Rape of the Sabine
women. Each of these incidents could be and in origin was self-con­
tained—the Consualia, Thalassio, Tarpeia, the dedication to J u p -
piter Feretrius, Mettius Curtius—and each of them is discussed in
detail in its place below. Historians long before Livy had welded them
64
 ROMULUS i- 9-^3
together into a connected account but L. goes further and turns them
into satisfying romance. His method is to use the Sabine women like
a Greek chorus as a constant background to each episode and to
allow their emotions gradually to change with circumstances. Thus
there is a formal structure which can be analysed as follows:
9. 1—16 Internal: Rape of the Sabine Women.
10. 1—11. 4 External: (a) War with Gaeninenses.
(b) War with Antemnates.
(c) War with Grustumini.
11. 5-9 Internal: Tarpeia.
12 External: Mettius Gurtius and the Defeat of the
Sabines.
13 Internal: Reconciliation.

There is also an emotional structure, ranging from defiance and

indignation (9. 14), through resignation (11. 2), to reconciliation
(13. 8 non modo commune sed concors etiam). The whole is knit together;
and a comparison with the parallel versions of Cicero (de Rep. 2. 12),
D.H. (2. 30. 1), and Plutarch in his life of Romulus leaves no doubt
that the artistry is directly due to L. T h e institution of the Gonsualia
for the particular purpose of attracting the Sabines is psychologically
more satisfying than Cicero's casual mention that there happened
to be an annual festival. So too the omission of the numerous circum­
stantial details which clutter the pages of D.H. makes for clarity and
movement. Cicero is embarrassed and ashamed by the whole affair.
H e calls Romulus 5 plan subagreste and hastens to point out that the
Sabine women really were well born (honesto ortas loco). There is no
apologetic tone in L. For him it is a noble and inspiring story in
keeping with the importance and size of Romz (9. 1, 9. 8). Where
the scale is noble, the events cannot be unworthy.
Historically the only question is whether primitive Roman society
was the result of a fusion of Sabine and Latin elements. Arch geolo­
gically there is ample evidence that in the eighth and early seventh
centuries there were separate village communities on the Palatine, the
Oppian (Esquiline), and the Quirinal, and that the culture of the
Palatine, as revealed by its arts and crafts, was different from that of
the other two hills. T h e same dichotomy may be disclosed by the
existence of two different burial-rites, cremation predominating in the
earliest graves of the Forum and inhumation on the Esquiline and
Quirinal. T h e same phenomenon is to b^ seen in the fields of religion
and language. Certain special ceremonies belong to the Quirinal
alone and have characteristically Sabine affinities.
T h e bsst summaries (with references) of the archaeological evidence
for the Sabine element in early Rome may b * found in R. Bloch,
814432 65 F
i- 9-13 ROMULUS
The Orgins of I. ne> -8\ and E, Gjerstad, Opuscida Romana, 3. 79 ff.;
Lege?? a: Frc 1 ' ,? t J so A. Piganiol, Essai sur les origines
dr. ;> < ' ee, e.g., L. R. Palmer, The Latin
Lt n^ • :nt of the material see O . Seel,
Ant. {<
K
the Sabine Women
T h e c o n . i t ^ o n betv ualia and the R a p e has not yet been
satisfactorily explaii. 1 tain that in origin Gonsus (from con-
dere: see Schulze 474, Philologica 2 (1957), 175; J.R.S. 51
(1961), 32) was a god anary or storehouse. Apart from the
etymology, his two festi 1 August; 15 December) are paired
with the Opiconsivia (25 ^ st) and the Opalia (19 December)
and correspond in time respectively to the garnering of the harvest
and the onset of winter when anxiety arises whether the supplies will
last till the following harvest. This much is plain. T h e horse- or mule-
races which in historical times accompanied the Gonsualia were no
original feature but will have been added under Etruscan influence
(D. H . 2. 3 1 ; Servius, ad Aen. 8. 636), for such contests are figured
frequently on Etruscan paintings and are Etruscan in character. T h e
motive for the addition may have been a change in the conception of
Consus' functions. As a god of the granary his altar was underground,
but to the Etruscans such shrines (puteal) were associated with the
spirits of the dead. T h e horse was the funerary animal (cf. Aul. Gell.
10. 15. 3 : also the tantalizing entry in Praenestine Fasti for 15 Decem­
ber) and equine ceremonies are regular at funerals (cf, e.g., Herodotus
4. 71-72). T h e elaboration of the Gonsualia by the addition of horse­
races which turned it into one of the most spectacular of the early
festivals led in its turn to a misrepresentation of the deity in whose
honour it was held. T o the Greeks Poseidon was the god of horses. H e
enjoyed the cult-title "Iimuos and was thought of as a horse-god
(Pausanias 7. 2 1 . 7). Thus Greek concepts suggested the wholly false
and un-Roman notion that the Gonsualia were held in honour of
Neptunus equestris (9. 6; cf. Tertullian, de Sped. 5. 5). The early Nep­
tune shared only the aquatic functions of Poseidon (5. 13. 6 n.) his
Greek counterpart.
Three stages, Latin, Etruscan, and Greek, can be postulated for the
evolution of Gonsus but none illuminate his connexion with the Sabine
women. Yet this connexion is old, at least as old as Ennius (Servius,
ad Aen. 8. 636) and perhaps much older (2. 18. 2 n.). It is true that
both in the forms of marriage and in the election of Vestals (veluti
bello captae) a token display of force was used and it may be significant
that at the Nonae Gaprotinae on 7 July sacerdotes publici make sacrifice
to Consus. Equally it could be held that it was a dramatic historization
66
 ROMULUS i. 9. 1
of a Greek myth—the rape of Demeter's daughter, Kore, by Hades,
the fruits of the earth buried underground. Yet in default of other
evidence these are no more than guesses. Once the first idea had taken
root it could be extended by adding wars which served to account for
Rome's absorption of the nearby villages of Antemna, Caeninum, and
Grustumerium, and by incorporating one explanation of the archaic
wedding-cry Thalassio (9. 12 n.). So with minor idiosyncrasies and
much embellishment on Hellenistic principles the story maintained
a consistent shape at the hands of historians from Ennius to D.H. It
was only the antiquarians who questioned the conventional accounts
and advanced heterodox explanations. Varro derived Consus from
consilium (Paulus Festus 36 L . ; Augustine, Civ. Dei4. 11) and proposed
a wholly different explanation of Thalassio (9. 12 n.).
L. follows the historical tradition and shows no awareness of Var-
ronian researches. His concern is to make it psychologically effective
(e.g. there is no mention of Roman lust) and stylistically elegant as the
first act of the Sabine drama. To this end he shapes it so that the
narrative begins and ends with an oration in indirect speech (9. 2 - 4 ;
9. 14-15). Both express reasonable, if sententious, arguments, the first
in rhetorical, the second in tragic language.
See P. Lambrechts, Ant. Class. 15 (1946), 61-82; P. H. N. G. Ste-
houwer, £tude sur Ops et Consus (Diss. Utrecht, 1956); J . Gage, Ant.
Class. 28 (1959), 255 ff.
9. 1. hominis: 'was likely to last only a single generation as a result of
the dearth of women'.
conubia: 4. 1. 1 n.
9. 2. legatos: the arguments, not found in D.H., will be original to L.
They are Greek in conception, although phrased in oratorical Latin.
For the double guarantee of Rome's prosperity (sua virtus ac di) cf.
Thucydides 3. 58. 1; 4. 92. 7. The underlying philosophy is developed
by Plato (Laws 829 A) and Aristotle (Politics 1323 s 14 ff.). T h e passage
was admired by Quintilian who quotes it as an example of 777000x077077-0 «a
(9. 2. 37 with deinde for dein, rightly since in L. dein is normally used
with a preceding primo (2. 12. 4, 50. 7, 54. 8, 3. 32. 2, 47. 6, 4. 13.
13, 5. 22. 5) and is not found before qu-). For ex infimo nasci (3) cf.
Seneca de Bene/. 3. 38. 1; for opes . . . nomen cf. Cicero, pro Murena
33. By contrast the Sabine reply is abrupt and discourteous (9. 5 n.).
9. 3 . virtus ac di: 4. 37. 7 n.
9. 5. rogitantibus: probably dative; cf. 23. 10 quaerentibus.
compar: the adjective is of very rare occurrence being used previously
by Varro, Menip. fr. 47 and Lucretius 4. 1255. L. has it here and at 28.
42. 20 compar consilium (speech of Q . Fabius), which suggests that in
both places its alliterative sound and unliterary associations are
meant to characterize the speakers. Here there may be overtones of
67
*• 9- 5 ROMULUS

the inscriptional use of compar as a substantive = 'consort, i.e. hus­

band, wife' (cf., e.g., C.I.L. 3. 1895, 4183 et aL).
9. 6. vocat: omitted by M. Frigell thought that vocat in TTA (vacat in
R, D, L) was the corruption of a scribe's note that a word or words was
missing at this point, thus corroborating M's omission. He would read
Consualia (appellate?) ; Gronoviushad already proposed the punctuation
parat . . . sollemnes, Consualia. indict. . . . But M.'s omissions in the
earlier chapters of Book 1 are peculiar to itself (cf. the omission ofsibi
in 9. 3) and TTA read vocat not vacat. Cf. 29. 14. 14, 36. 36. 4.
9. 8. mortales: 37. 2, 3. 30. 8, 4. 61. 7, 5. 7. 3, 16. 6. T h e force of this
variation for multi homines is discussed by Fronto ap. Aul. Gell. 13. 29
(see Gries, Constancy\ 104-7). Not specifically 'poetic', it was favoured
by historians for its impressiveness (Claudius Quadrigarius; Sallust,
Jugurtha 20. 3 ; Naevius, Bell. Pun. 5 Mo.).
Caeninenses: the ancient Caenina, listed by Pliny as one of the
vanished cities (N.H. 3. 68), must have been very near Rome since
Romulus sacrified there (D.H. 2. 33) and because the survival of
sacerdotes Caeninenses among the R o m a n priesthoods implies early
absorption by Rome (CI.L. 5. 4059, 9. 4885-6). T h e only other in­
dication of its site is D.H. 1. 16 if the emendation be accepted:
Avrefivdras /cat Kaiviviras /cat &LKO\V€OVS. The fact that Fidenae is not
mentioned among these primitive neighbours of Rome might suggest
that Caenina was situated on the naturally strong site of Castel Giub-
bileo, and that after Caenina was absorbed by Rome its site was
subsequently used by the Veientes for the founding of Fidenae. See
also Ashby, P.B.S.R. 3 (1906), 22, 65-66.
Crustumini: 38. 4 n., 2. 19. 1 n. There are two clues to its site: the
Allia rose Crustuminis montibus (5. 37. 7); the Romans retreating down
the Via Salaria from Eretum camped on a hill between Fidenae and
C. (3. 42. 3). A study of the Etruscan road system shows that an
important road led from Veii by way of the tunnel at Pietra Pertusa
to a Tiber crossing about 1 mile north of the Casale Marcigliana.
After the crossing the cuttings of the road are clearly visible and show
that it continued across country in the direction of Gabii and by­
passed Rome. T h e ascent of the road from the Tiber is made up a
valley on the south of a commanding tongue of land which is a typical
early site. It is easily defensible, having steep cliffs on three sides and
only a narrow neck to the east, and it is strategically placed, dominat­
ing both the Via Salaria and the Tiber crossing. All these indications
point to the identification of the site with Crustumerium. T h a t there
was an early settlement here is confirmed by the discovery on 21 M a y
1962 of what seemed to be a seventh-century cemetery by the side
of the road close to the neck. Detailed investigation of it has unfor­
tunately so far been frustrated. T w o Etruscan bronze statuettes are
68
 ROMULUS 1.9.8

housed at Marcigliana itself {Stud. Etr. 23 (1954), 411-15), but their

provenance is not specifically recorded. For earlier identification see
Ashby, P.B.S.R. 3 (1906), 50-51. It was one of the few settlements
near R o m e to merit a legendary origin, being ascribed to Sicilian
(Cassius Hemina ap. Servius, ad Aen. 7. 631), Trojan, or Athenian
( D . H . 2. 65) foundation. T h e n a m e is variously spelled.
Antemnates: of the three communities, Antemnae, situated at the
mouth of the Anio (cf. the false etymology ante amnem in Varro, de
Ling. Lat. 5. 28) alone survived into classical times. It is mentioned
as the site of a battle in 82 B.C. and is recorded even by Strabo (5. 230).
T h e remains which have been found on the site contain local and
Etruscan pottery of the seventh century as well as rough-squared
masonry (Blake, Ancient Roman Construction, 104-5; Ashby, op. cit.,
14-15). T h e evidence indicates that the settlement, as presumably
Caenina and Crustumerium, was absorbed by Rome but at a date at
least a century later than that traditionally given.
9, 9» iam: for this use, introducing a further stage of a narrative, cf.
35. 1, 23. 5. 15. Scheibe would read etiam.
9. 12* Thalassi: the anecdote is one of many aetiologies of the
marriage-cry Talassio (Martial 1. 36. 6, 3. 93. 2 5 ; Sidon. Apoll.
Epist. 1. 5 ; cf. Catullus 6 1 . 134; Plutarch, Q.R. 3 1 ; Romulus 15),
alternatively written as Thallasio probably by a false etymological
connexion with the Greek ddXafios (cf. Servius, ad Aen. 1. 6 5 1 ;
[Virgil], Catal. 12. 9). T h e account given of its origin by L. (so also
Servius; Isidore 15. 3. 6) was evidently the ordinary annalistic view
but deserves no credence: Thalass(i)us is a name first borne by the
notable general of Constantius (Zosimus 2. 4 8 ; cf. also Libanius, Ep.
843). It was perhaps suggested by a similar explanation given of the
Greek fYfi4vatos. By contrast with the annalists the antiquarians were
prolific in proposals, deriving it from rdXapov 'wool' (Festus 478 L . ;
cf. Plutarch, Romulus 15) or talla (Festus 492 L. on the analogy of
vnrjv and vfievaios). Sextius Sulla, quoted by Plutarch, made one
valuable contribution when he claimed that the word was Sabine,
but whether it is an exclamation or the name of a deity is indetermin­
able. For full evidence see R. Schmidt, De Hymenaeo et Talassio (Diss.
Kiel, 1886); Richter, Roscher's Mythologie s.v.
9, 13, violati hospitii foedus: Perizonius's conjecture violatum is neces­
sary to avoid the intolerable enallage. T h e parents complained that
the laws of hospitality had been outraged. For violate foedus cf. 8. 7. 5,
30. 42. 8; Cicero, pro Sest. 15; pro Balbo 13, 31, 5 5 ; Scaur. 4 2 ; Phil.
13. 4 ; de Rep. 1. 31. For similar corruptions due to assimilation of
endings cf. 28. 33. 16, 43. 1, 30. 32. 2.
per fas acfidem: the parents are made to take refuge in legal formulae
to express their indignation at the treatment of their daughters, per
69
 *-9- r 3 ROMULUS
fas ac fidem is an old expression from the law in which per, like the
Greek napd, means 'contrary to' (cf. perfidus). It is preserved in
Plautus, Most. 500 with Sonnenschein's note; Cicero, pro S. Roscio
n o , 116; de Inv. 1. 71 perfidemfefellerunt.
9. 14. docebat; the arguments which Romulus uses to placate the
Sabine women are drawn, at least indirectly, from Greek sources.
L. has deliberately chosen them in order to convey the atmosphere of a
Greek tragedy, in the same way that he had earlier presented Romulus
as a political negotiator (9. 3-4 n.). T h e general argument that women
should make the best of their position recalls Euripides, Medea 475 ff.
Of the three particular arguments used, the plea quibus fors corpora
dedisset, darent animos is not unlike Sophocles, Ajax 490-1, (note also
514-19), the consolation that in marriage at least ex iniuria . . .
gratiam ortam resembles the thought of Andromache when faced with
being a slave of Neoptolemus (Euripides, Troades 665-6), and the
assurance that their husbands will endeavour to fill the place of
parents and country is a clear recollection of Andromache's touching
words to Hector av /zoi eocri irarrip /cat irorvia p-riTqp (Homer, Iliad
6. 429).

10. War with the Caeninenses: Juppiter Feretrius

T h e ancients derived the title Feretrius either from ferre (Paulus
Festus 81 L.), connecting it with the bringing of weapons for dedica­
tion, or from ferire (Propertius 4. 10. 46), observing that the shrine
contained the sacred silex used in the conclusion of treaties (24. 9 n.),
but only the former can be sustained philologically. T h e title cannot
be derived fromferetrum which is a loan-word from Greek (fyeperpov (see
Ernout-Meillet; Walde-Hofmann). If the true root is ferre, it will
imply that the function of the god was from the beginning military,
which is in accord with the fact that the diminutive temple had no
cult-statue other than the silex and a sceptre: the silex was used in the
ceremonies of the ius fetiale which prescribed the proper declaration
and conclusion of wars and the sceptre was symbolic of military
success. Yet the cult itself must be a later systematization of a more
primitive worship and certainly cannot be as old as the eighth century
B.C. T h e silex was evidently a meteorite, and superstitious awe of the
object was by slow and rational degrees transformed into reverence
for a thunderbolt sent by Juppiter. Moreover, the worship of Juppiter
as a god of war is unique to Rome, being unknown in any other Italic
community, and must have sprung from the pre-eminent position en­
joyed by Juppiter at Rome. In other words, the worship of Juppiter
Feretrius is only comprehensible at a period when Juppiter has already
become the presiding deity of Rome. Besides, the temple of Feretrius
lay on the Capitol, outside the boundaries of the earliest city. O n the

70
 ROMULUS I . IO

other hand, it can hardly be later than the great temple of Gapitoline
Juppiter, for it is unlikely that a new foundation would have been
made inside the area Capitolina. A date in the period 650-550 is in­
dicated by the evidence, and some trace of the truth may survive in
the tradition that Ancus Marcius enlarged the temple (33. 9).
T h e custom of setting u p a trophy of captured arms on a wooden
stem can be paralleled from many parts of the Mediterranean world.
Although the Romans did not adopt the Greek habit of setting up a
trophy on the battlefield until 121 B.C. (Florus 1. 37. 6 mos inusitatus),
spolia are clearly analogous to rpo-naia which were dedicated to Zcvs
Tpo7Taios (Gorgias, Epitaphios fr. 6 Diels) and were set up on a wooden
stump so that they should not endure for ever (Diodorus 13. 24. 5).
Thus the local Italic custom was assimilated to the Greek, presumably
in the first age of penetration by Greek religious ideas (650-550 B.C.).
At R o m e it was early confined to the armour taken from the corpse
of the opposing commander. Such an event was sufficiently rare for
there to be some latitude as to who was entitled to claim the honour
(Varro ap. Festus 204 L.) but under the influence of pontifical
codification distinctions were introduced between types of spolia. spolia
prima or opima, offered to Juppiter Feretrius, had to be won by a
general enjoying full command of a Roman army (3. 1. 4 n . ; see the
S.C. of 44 B.C. in Dio 44. 4). Lesser spoils, spolia secunda, and tertia,
were offered to Mars and J a n u s Quirinus (1. 32. 9 n . ; but see L. A.
Holland, Janus, 110 n. 8) respectively. At the same time as this systema-
tization was being undertaken, the attribution of the temple to
Romulus will have been made. Later still an actual inscription was
set up recording the dedication of the spolia by 'Romulus' (cf. Dessau,
LL.S. 64), like the mythical dedications attested for Hercules {I.L.S.
3401).
M u c h has been made of L.'s treatment, scholars finding in it
evidence both for the date of composition of Book 1 and for L.'s
relations with Augustus (10. 7 n.). This is to overlook L.'s purpose.
For him, interested in the literary rather than the political possibilities
of this material, it is an entr'acte in the story of the Sabine women. H e
makes it a unit with its own form and climax, leading through the
briskly military communique of the battle (notice the crisp unsub­
ordinated sentences in 10. 4) to the proudly worded statement of the
dedication (10. 6 n.). T h e construction of the episode may be com­
pared with 7. 4-15 or 2. 10. 1—13.
For the temple see Platner-Ashby s.v.; Andren, Hommages Herrmann,
9 0 ; for its restoration under Augustus see 4. 20. 6 n . ; for Juppiter
Feretrius and the spolia opima see W . A. B. Hartzberg, Pkilologus, 1
(1846), 331-9; Marquardt, Staatsverwaltung, 2. 580; Cook, C.R. 18
(1904), 3 6 4 - 5 ; Lammert, R.E. 'rpoiraiov ; L. A. Springer, Class.
7i
I. 10. I ROMULUS
Journ. 50 (1954), 27 ff.; Latte, Rom. Religionsgeschichte, 126, 204-5.
10, 1, raptarum parentes: the whole section is rounded off at n . 4 by
the repetition a parentibus . . . raptarum, when the scene switches back
again to Rome.
10. 1. T. Tatium: a mysterious and colourless figure, traditionally king
of the Sabine town of Cures, undistinguished by word or action. T h e
lack of firm legend about him suggests that he is a personification of
the Sabine element in Rome created to explain the existence of the
tribe Tities (13. 8 n.) and the priesthood of sodales Titii (Tacitus,
Annals 1. 5 4 ; Hist. 2. 95). Romulus required a rival to overcome and
Tatius filled that need. His subsequent career, in which he is sup­
posed to have shared the kingship with Romulus (13.8), was a political
invention to supply a regal precedent for the dual consulship and to
emphasize the continuity of the constitution. T h e date at which his
biography was formed can be approximately placed in the early part
of the third century. It is certainly earlier than Ennius (Ann. 109 V.)
but betrays by its clumsy construction that it must be later than
the canon of seven kings. See Glaser, R.E., 'Tatius (1)'.
T h e name Tatius was held by Schulze (97, 425) to be Etruscan, and
by Glaser to be formed from the baby-word tate 'father'. Both used
the derivation as evidence for the king's unhistoricity. In fact, how­
ever, Tatius is the latinized form of a Sabine name. T h e Sabine con­
nexion was stressed by the coins of the moneyer L. Titurius L.f.
Sabinus (88 B.G. ; Sydenham nos. 698-701). T h e fusion of Latins and
Sabines acquired a special topicality in the 80's when it was used
as propaganda in the Social W a r for the integration of Romans and
Italians. L.'s source reflects these conditions.
1 0 . 5 . ducis: his name is given as Acro(n) (I.L.S. 6 4 ; Propertius 4.10. 7).
T a n . Faber wished to inset Acronis in the text but it is in L.'s manner
to omit superfluous details which might divert attention from the
main plot.
10. 6. Iuppiter Feretri: Romulus' dedication is made in solemn and
formal terms. The placing of inquit isolates the cult-title whose sig­
nificance is emphasized by the repeated fero . . . ferent (cf. 10. 7
laturos). Notice the alliterative juxtaposition of (Romulus) rex regia and
the separation oihaec... arma to enclose the subsidiary words (41. 3 n. ;
Praef. 5). T h e language is sacral, being intended to recall the augural
formula. For regionibus cf. 18. 7 n . ; for the rare metatus—a word re­
stored by Weinstock at Varro, de Ling. Lat. 7. 8—see Norden, Altrom.
Priest. 88, n. 1. For templum see note on 18. 6 ff.
10. 7. bina: L. refers to A. Cornelius Cossus (4. 20. 6 n.) and M .
Claudius Marcellus who defeated the Gauls in 222 B.C. (Act. Triumph.;
Plutarch, Marcellus 7 - 8 ; Cicero, Tusc. Disp. 4. 4 9 ; Livy, Per. 2 0 ;
Virgil, Aeneid 6. 855-9 with Servius 5 commentary). In 29 B.C. M .
72
 ROMULUS i. i o , 7
Licinius Crassus, having defeated the Basternae and killed their chief
Deldo, claimed the spolia opima (Dio 51. 24). His claim was rejected
by Octavian on the score that as proconsul of Macedonia he did not
enjoy full imperium and was therefore not entitled to the honour. T h e
decision was political. Octavian was disturbed at the challenge to his
position as Romulus' successor (see Dessau, Hermes, 41 (1906), 142 ff.;
Syme, Harvard Studies, 64 (1959), 44~47)» L. is here silent alike about
Crassus' claim and Octavian's rebuilding of the temple, and his
silence is interpreted by Bayet (tome 1. xvi ff.) as indicating that Book
1 was written before 29 B.C. and Book 4 after 28 B.C. Bayet's argument
is not compelling. There are good grounds for believing that L. began
to write his history in 29 (see Introduction). L.'s connexion with
Octavian arose from the success of his history and not from prior
acquaintance, and it would be easy for a literary historian, not in
the confidence of the inner political circle, to have written of Romulus
and the spolia opima in ignorance of the technical machinations being
devised by Octavian and his advisers.

11. 1-4. Hersilia

A widow with daughters of her own when she came to Rome
(Macrobius 1.6. 16; D . H . 2. 4 5 ; Plutarch, Romulus 14), Hersilia was
remembered as the person who mediated between the Romans and
Sabines. In addition to the version given by L. which made her the
wife of Romulus (Ovid, Met. 14. 830; Sil. Ital. 13. 812; Servius,
ad Aen. 8. 638) and the mother of two inexplicably named children,
Prima and Avillius (Zenodotus ap. Plutarch), she was alternatively
paired with Hostus Hostilius to become the grandmother of Tullus
Hostilius (Macrobius; D . H . ; Plutarch). At death she was legendarily
apotheosized as Hora, remaining Romulus' wife in his new guise
Quirinus. H o r a Quirini figures in inscriptions (Guarducci, Bull. Com.
Arch. 64 (1936), 3 1 ; C.I.L. i 2 , p. 326) but it is evident that au fond
Hora Quirini was not the name of the wife of Quirinus but specified
one of Quirinus' special properties. This much can be inferred from
Aulus. Gellius (13.23) who gives a list of such attributes: Luam Saturni,
Salaciam Neptuni, H o r a m Quirini, Maiam Volcani, Nerienem Martis.
Hora should be connected with horior and hortor and taken to mean
'the power of Quirinus'. It would seem that the story of Hersilia is
an aetiological rationalization of Hora Quirini. T h e first stage was
to make Hora the name of the goddess-wife of Quirinus. Then,
since the divine Quirinus had been the mortal Romulus, a mortal
name and a human role were found for Hora. T h e old gens Hersilia
{C.I.L. 6. 21100; cf. Etr. hersu: see Schulze 174) supplied the lack.
Hora Quirini 'the power of Quirinus' was personified in Hersilia
who reconciled enemies to Romulus. T h a t this is an approximately

73
I. I I . 1-4 ROMULUS
correct interpretation is confirmed by the appearance in the Hersilia
story of another from the list of attributes given by Cicero and Servius.
In the moment of crisis Hersilia prayed to Nerio Martis (Cn. Gellius
ap. Aul. Gell. 13. 23. 13). Nerio Martis probably denoted the strength
of M a r s ; cf. the gloss neriosus fortis (cf. Suetonius, Tiberius 1.2). See
Otto, R.E. 'Hersilia'; Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 55 and n. 3 ; Gage,
Ant. Class. 28 (1959), 255 ff; Ernout, Hommages Grenier, 2. 569.

11. 5 - 9 . Tarpeia
T h e second act of the internal drama, the story of Tarpeia, is by con­
trast told undramatically and briefly. L. presents it with scholarly
pedantry, adding variants (11. 7 seu . ♦ . seu; 11. 9) and exercising
criticism (11. 8). The simplicity of the telling is notable: Sp. Tarpeius
. . . praeerat. huius fdiam . . . corrumpit Tatius: aquam forte ea turn . . .
petitum ierat.
The myth of Tarpeia explained the name of the Tarpeian rock. In
fact the name is Etruscan and is to be connected with Tarquinius &c.
(Schulze 561) but the associations of that rock with the lamentable
ends of traitors such as M . Manlius made it fertile ground for a story
about an eponymous traitor; for rival aetiologies see Festus 464 L . ;
Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5 . 4 1 . Two versions were current. In the one given
by L. the motive for Tarpeia's treachery was her love of the golden
armillae. In the second, given in sundry forms with variations of detail
by Simylus {ap. Plutarch, Romulus 18), Antigonus of Carystus, and Pro-
pertius (4. 4), the motive was love for the opposing general—a Hel­
lenistic plot recurrent in the treacheries of Komeitho (Apollodorus
2. 4. 7), Skylla (Apollodorus 3. 15. 8), Leukophrye (Parthenius 5),
Peisidike (Parthenius 21), Nanis (Parthenius), and Tharbis (Josephus,
A.J. 2. 10. 2), all Hellenistic tales. T h e gold-motive is also Hellenistic.
In particular it was for gold that Arne betrayed her native Liphnum
(Ovid, Met. 7. 465 ff.). Of the two motives gold is perhaps the original.
Rumpf, who investigated the nature of the armillae, concluded that
they were the golden bracelets carrying a talisman (bullae) often seen
on the arms of men in Etruscan paintings and statuary. T h e vogue
for these ornaments was the fifth century B.C.: they are not to be seen
after the third.
The gold-motive became the accepted historical version and, as
such, was used by Fabius Pictor and Cincius Alimentus (D.H.
2. 3 8 ; cf. Ovid, Fasti 1. 2 6 1 ; Festus 496 L.). In course of time ana­
chronistic improvements were added (11. 6 nn.). Her infamy was
intensified by making her a Vestal Virgin (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 4 1 ;
Propertius; Val. Max. 9.6. 1; notice virginem in 11. 6) and the charac­
ter of her father is worked up. T h e quest for novelty provoked a
reaction. T h e historian Piso (D.H. 2. 38), influenced by the survival

74
 ROMULUS i. 1 1 . 5

of a libation ceremony at Tarpeia's tomb, argued that she cannot

have been guilty of treachery and therefore that her action was a
ruse to disarm the Sabines which miscarried (cf. also Chron. 354).
This is the substance of the variant in 11. 9 {sunt qui) and it may be
attributed to Valerius Antias.
See Pais, Ancient Legends, 96 ff.; S. Reinach, Rev. Arch. 10 (1908),
43 ff.; Mielantz, R.E., ' T a r p e i a ' ; R . Krappe, Rh. Mus. 78 (1929),
249 ff.; Z. Gansiniec, Act. Soc. Arch. Pol. 1 (1949), 37 ff.; A. Rumpf,
J.H.S. 71 (1951), 168 ff.; La Penna, Studi Class, e. Orient. 6 (1956),
112-33; Devoto, Stud. Etrusc. 26 (1958), 17-27.
11. 6. arci: implying that the Capitol was already a part of the city
(but cf. Tacitus, Annals 12. 24), whereas, in fact, it was not incor­
porated until the seventh century.
virginem: although not expressly stated it is implied that she was a
Vestal, for it was a daily duty of the Vestals to draw water for cult-
purposes (Plutarch, JSfuma 13; see Wissowa, Religion, 160). Her status
is anachronistic, if dramatically apt. See 21. 3 n.
1 1 . 8 . additur fabula: 5. 21. 8 n.
armillas: the surviving representations of such armlets are Etruscan
(see the photograph in Rumpf, op. cit.) but D.H. says that the Sabines
learnt appoSlaira from the Etruscans.

12-13. 5. Mettius Curtius

L. reverts to the external danger. T h e fourth act of the Sabine drama
is taken up with the great battle in the Forum. As the legend of
Tarpeia was to account for the name of the Tarpeian rock, so the
prominent features of the Forum, the temple of Juppiter Stator and
the Lacus Curtius, supplied the material for the present episode. In
296 B.C., during a critical phase of a battle against the Samnites, M .
Atilius Regulus vowed a temple to Juppiter Stator (10. 36. 11) which
was erected soon after (10. 37. 15). Historically this was the earliest
temple to that god; for although L. states that it replaced an earlier
Romulean fanum, the dedication-date, 27 J u n e (Ovid, Fasti 6. 793;
the notice in Fast. Ant. refers to the second temple of J . S. in the
porticus Metelli) cannot be that of a primitive shrine of Juppiter
whose temples were always dedicated on the Ides of the month.
Thus the whole story of Romulus' vow is pure legend. Whether the
legend is older than the early third century or whether the known
relationship between Sabines and Samnites suggested its invention as
encouraging propaganda for the Romans is uncertain.
T h e Lacus Curtius, on the other hand, was a long-standing monu­
ment. A cavity in the ground, caused by lightning or by natural
subsidence, it was revered as mundus and regarded as one of the ports
of communication with the underworld. Hence coins were thrown into
75
x. 12-13- 5 ROMULUS
it by every Roman annually, a practice later secularized as a vow for
the emperor's safety (Suetonius, Augustus 57). Like the stone of Attus
Navius (36. 5) and other such features, it was consecrated. The true
explanation of the name escapes us but three views were canvassed
in antiquity (Varro, de Ling. LaL 5. 148-50). T h e first, the product of
late Republican antiquarianism, proposed that it derived its name
from the consul of 445, C. Curtius (4. 1. 1 n.), who consecrated the
place ex S. C. after it had been struck by lightning. Although this view
is specious, it presupposes that a pontifical notice survived in the
Annales. If such a notice had survived, it is hard to see why it did not
occur in the annalistic narrative but there is no trace of it in L. or D . H .
T h e two other views are variations on the same theme. T h e story
given by L. (cf. D.H. 2. 4 2 - 5 0 ; Plutarch, Romulus 50), attributing it to
the mythical Mettius Curtius, goes back at least to Piso (fr. 6 P.).
An alternative (7. 6. 3-5, a Licinian passage) made the eponymous
hero a certain M . Curtius who in 362 B.C. performed a devotio of him­
self and disappeared into the cavity (cf. Paulus Festus 42 L . ; Val.
Max. 5. 6. 2 ; Augustine, Civ. Dei 5. 18). Piso's story is clearly old.
Myths which explain caverns by telling of heroes being swallowed up
in the ground are of great antiquity. T h e disappearance of Am-
phiaraus (Pindar, Nem. 9) is typical. So it is likely that this was the
original aetiology, Greek in character, which dated from the fourth
century at the latest (12. 2 n.). L. follows the conventional version, as
depicted also on a relief now in the Museo Nuovo which decorated
a balustrade round the lacus. He may have taken it from Valerius
Antias, to whom he will have switched after consulting him for the
variant in 11. g.
If his telling of the fate of Tarpeia was bald and brief, L. lavishes
his art on Mettius Curtius. Macaulay himself exclaimed that it was
'evidently from some poem' but a comparison with the narrative in
D.H. shows that the epic and dramatic character is due not to L.'s
source but to his technique. Apart from the similarity of situation to
Agenor at the gate of Troy (Iliad 21. 537 ff.) and the echoes of epic
language frequent in such battle-pieces (12. 2 n., 12. 4 n., 12. 8 n.,
12. 10 n., 13. 1 n.) two features are distinctive. T h e intervention of the
matrons, just as the battle is being renewed with fresh ferocity (12.
10-13. O J ls a p i e c e of calculated timing absent from D.H. who lamely
leaves it until the fighting is over. T h e same concern for dramatic
effect is shown when L. omits the consultation of the Senate and people
(D.H. 2. 46) and reduces the R o m a n discomfiture from two routs
to one. T h e psychology of the parties is strongly brought out (12. 1, 2,
9, 10). Secondly, L. brings the whole episode alive by devising charac­
terizing speeches for three principal participants. In 12. 4-6 (n.) the
piety of Romulus, in 12. 8 (n.) the truculence of Mettius Curtius, and
76
 ROMULUS i. 12-13. 5
in 13. 2 - 3 (n.) the nobility of the chorus of Sabine women are finely
suggested. T h e whole is rounded off with a topographical note (13. 5).
Ovid Fasti 1. 255 ff. is directly modelled on L.
See G. Tomassetti, Bull. Com. Arch. 24 (1904), 181 ff.; E. Caetani-
Lovatelli, Aurea Roma, 1915, 23 ff.; Platner-Ashby s.v. Lacus Curtius
and Juppiter Stator; A. Akerstrom, Svenska Inst, i Rom, 2 (1932),
72 ff.; Lugli, Roma Antica, 156-7; A. Andren, Hommages Herrmann,
99; E. Welin, Studien zur Topographie des Forum Romanum, 75 ff.
12. 1. tamen: resumptive 'however that may be' marking a return to
the main plot after a digression: cf. 3. 42. 5, 4. 58. 5, 22. 39. 6,
35-15-6.
12. 2 . pugnam ciebant: 2. 47. 1, 3. 18. 8, 9. 22. 7. Otherwise found in
Virgil (Aeneid 1. 541, 5. 585, 9. 766, 12. 158) and Silius Italicus (5.
335. 7- 605).
Mettius Curtius: for the name Mettius cf. 23. 4 n. Hostus Hostilius
is a fiction invented to supply a respectable pedigree for his grandson
Tullus Hostilius who would otherwise have seemed an upstart king
(cf. Ancus Marcius). L. preserves the annalistic version, in which
Hostilius was a companion-in-arms of Romulus a n d died bravely
fighting the Sabines. I t will be seen that the conflict of Hostilius and
Mettius is a straight doublet of the conflict between Tullus Hostilius
and Mettius Fufetius two generations later and is in no sense historical.
This naive biography was much expanded by the antiquarians, who
gave Hersilia as wife to him instead of to Romulus (11. 1-4 n.), and,
in consequence of his being the first Roman parent, credited him with
the invention of the bulla aurea a n d the toga praetexta (Macrobius
1.6. 16; cf. C.I.L. 15.7066). Some of this embroidery may stem from the
private pretensions of the gens Hostilia. T h e claim that he was the first
m a n to breach the walls of Fidenae (Pliny, N.H. 16. 11) is certainly in­
spired by the exploits of L. Hostilius Mancinus who was the first person
to break into Carthage in 148 B.C. (Pliny, N.H. 35. 23). See Miinzer,
R.E., 'Hostilius (4)'.
12. 3 . Palati: the traditional punctuation, taking the words ad vete-
rem . . . Palati With fusaque est a n d putting a strong stop after Palati, is
to be preferred on linguistic grounds (cf. 2. 49. 12 fusi retro ad saxa
rubra); and it is implied by ipse that Romulus shared the general retreat.
T h e words hie in Palatio are not to be pressed too exactly. Conway's
assertion that the punctuation proposed by Madvig a n d adopted in
the O.C.T. is supported by resulting Ciceronian clausulae is irrele­
vant, since in narrative L.'s preference is, if anything, for a dactylic
clausula. D . H . 2. 42 writes, in agreement, TOVS <f>evyovras . . . \L*XP1 T&V
rfvKGiv avTovs ^'Aaaev.
T h e Porta Mugionia, one of the three gates of the early Palatine
city, lay on the north side of the hill where the ridge of the Velia joins
77
I. 12. 3 ROMULUS
the Palatine. T h e name is variously spelled (D.H. 2. 50; Nonius
852 L . ; Festus 131 L . ; Solin. 1. 24; Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 164) and
was anciently derived either a Mugio quodam (Festus) or from the
lowing {mugitus) of the cattle which passed daily through it to pas­
ture. See Platner-Ashby s.v.
12. 4. Iuppiter: notice the markedly priestly style of the prayer with
the repeated hie . . . hue . . . hinc . . . hie. arceo is used, here as elsewhere,
as a technical term of keeping profani at a distance (cf Horace, Odes
3. 1. 1; Ovid, Fasti 6. 482; Virgil, Aeneid 1. 3 1 ; Tacitus, Hist. 5. 8 ;
Lucan 5. 139). For praesens of immediate and effective divine aid cf.
Virgil, Aeneid 9. 404; Horace, Odes 3. 5. 2 ; Ovid, Met. 7. 178; Cicero,
Verr. 4. 107; C.I.L. 6. 545. For deme terrorem cf. Virgil, Aeneid 2. 775.
12. 5. at: to be taken with saltern (cf. Plautus, Merc. 637; Propertius
3. 7. 63 ; Virgil, Aeneid 1. 557) rather than tu. at tu {ego &c.) occurs only
in the apodosis of a conditional sentence (cf, e.g., 41. 3 n.).
12. 6. Statori: cf. C.I.L. 3. 895 depulsor. In later times a political inter­
pretation was given of the cult-title, representing Juppiter as the
stabilizing providence of the state (Seneca de Bene/. 4. 7. 1; Cicero,
in Catil. 1. 3 3 ; C.I.L. 6. 434), but the specific, military function is in
general likely to be the earlier. It is rendered by the Greek Urrjcnos
or ' OpSwoLos. T h e temple is depicted on the relief from the tomb
of the Haterii as Corinthian hexastyle.
12. 7. veluti: N read veluti si, which is to preferred (cf. 1. 56. 12).
12. 8. ab Sabinis princeps: regarded by Walker as mistakenly inserted
from 12. 2 but perhaps to be taken as an instance of an 'unconscious
repetition 5 (14. 4 n.).
vieimus: Mettius' language is coarse and abusive. For hospites . . .
hostes cf. 58. 8 n., 4. 32. 12. T h e alliteration is continued with virgines
. . . viris. T h e sentiments are doubtless intended to recall Hector's out­
burst against Paris.
12. 10. convalle: a synonym for vallis avoided by Cicero and the other
classical prose-writers but affected, for example, by Virgil {Aeneid
6. 139. 6 79)-

13. 1. turn: the TTepnrereia, taking the form of intervention by the

Sabine women, is described in graphic terms: crinibuspassis (7. 40. 12,
26. 9. 7) is the normal state of hysterical women in epic (Virgil, Aeneid
1. 480, 2. 404; notice also two mock-serious passages of Petronius (54,
i n ) ) and is not found elsewhere, inter tela volantia from its rhythm
sounds like an epic phrase and may be E n n i a n : it is cited from Cato
{Inc. Libr. Ret., p. 86 Jordan) and Fronto {de Bello Parth., p . 210 van
den Hout).
Their appeal for peace is equally emotional. Notice the frequent
a n a p h o r a : dirimere . . . dirimere (for the second Gronovius read delenire
78
 ROMULUS i . 13. 1

which is less forceful); hinc . . . hinc (for hinc . . . Mine; cf. 2. 46. 2, 3. 23.
7 : elsewhere not before Virgil, Aeneid 1. 162); si. . . si; nos . . . nos . . .
fl0.y. Equally marked is the chiasmus nepotum Mi, hi liberum. In switching
from indirect to direct speech without introducing a verb of speaking
L. accelerates the climax (cf. 47. 6; see Lambert, Die Indirekte Rede,
38), an effect heightened by the contrast with the clipped sentences
which conclude the narrative. In content, too, their appeal seems to
owe something to the traditional pleas of poetry. For parricidio . . .
progeniem cf. Ovid, Met. 14. 801-2.
1 3 . 2 . sanguine se: se sanguine, the order of nX, preferred by H . J .
Muller and Bayet, is certainly right. Apart from the eccentric word-
order exhibited by M , elsewhere in the first chapters of Book 1 (1. 1,
1. 10, 2. 6, 3. 5, 5. 4, 5. 7 et al.), the natural position o£se is as near the
second place in the sentence or clause as possible; cf. 3. 28. 10 sanguinis
se . . . non egere; Cicero, Brutus 12 populus se Romanus erexit: see Ktihner-
Stegmann 2. 593.
13. 4 . silentium: 3. 47. 6 n.
13. 5. Quirites: Cures was a Sabine town on the left bank of the Tiber
close to the Via Salaria. It was built on a hill with two summits at the
foot of which flows the Fosso Corese. T h e existing ruins, excavated
by Lanciani (Commentationes Philologicae in honorem T. Mommseni, 1877,
411 ff.; see Hulsen, R.E., 'Cures') date from the late Republic when
Cures survived as a municipium, and the antiquity of the settlement
cannot be established archaeologically. It was, however, intimately
connected with the legends of early Rome, being traditionally the
birth-place of Numa (18. 1).
T h e theory which derived the official name Quirites from Cures
was maintained without serious dissent by the ancients (Columella,
Praef. 19; Festus 304 L . ; Ovid, Fasti 2. 4 7 5 ; Servius, ad Aen. 7. 710),
despite the fact that the ethnic of Cures was Curenses (Varro, de Ling.
Lat. 6. 68) which cannot morphologically be transmuted to Quirites.
T h e etymology of Quirites (the singular is found once in the old
formula ollus quiris leto datus est) remains unsolved. Plutarch [Romulus
29) urged a derivation from the Sabine word for a spear, curis. T h e
only other attractive conjecture is Kretschmer's: *couiriom 'an assembly
of people' (cf. curia).
See Kretschmer, Glotta 10 (1919), 147 ff.; Otto, Rh. Mus. 54 (1905),
197 ff.; Koch, Religio, 23 ff.; Walde-Hofmann s.v.
monumentum: the Lacus Curtius, mentioned incidentally by Plautus
(Curculio 477), Pliny (N.H. 15. 78), and Suetonius (Augustus 5 7 ;
Galba 20), was close to the later Column of Phocas. In Sullan times
the depression was paved over with two layers of grey capellaccio and
brown tufa stone.

79
i. 13. 6-8 ROMULUS

13. 6-8. The Creation of 30 Curiae and 3 Centuries

T h e organization of the people into 3 tribes—which L. does not
specifically mention (10. 6. 7)—and 30 curiae, based on family, was
the oldest political system known at Rome. In an attenuated form
the comitia curiata survived down to the last days of the Republic (5.
46. 10 n.). Before the creation of the comitia centuriata and comitia
tributa, the curiae and their assembly will have formed the governing
body. A memory of that position survived in the magisterial honours
accorded to the curio maximus (3. 7. 6 n.). But it is inconceivable that
the curiate organization was as old as Romulus, or the eighth century.
It should belong to the Etruscan period, the period of transition from
a purely pastoral to an urban community thriving on agriculture and
trade. Moreover, 30 curiae must either be contemporary with or later
than the institution of the 3 tribes, for curiae are a decimal subdivision
of the tribes. T h e names of the tribes, which are the same as the names
of the 3 'Romulean 5 centuries, Ramn(ens)es, Titi(ens)es, and Luceres, are
indubitably Etruscan, as Volnius ap. Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 55 argued.
They are formed from Etruscan gentile names, lu\re, tide, *ramne
(Schulze 218). Thus, although the 3-tribe system is one of the oldest
and commonest features of other Indo-European groups, at R o m e it
was a conscious creation of the late sixth or early fifth century con­
sequent upon the urbanization of the state. So too the surviving names
of the curiae, which are either local (Foriensis, Veliensis) or gentile
(Acculeia), imply a late d a t e : the Forum was not inhabited before
the Etruscans.
In throwing back the origin of these institutions to Romulus the
Romans were partly influenced by the normal desire to attribute
everything to 'the founder' (cf. the Spartan institutions and 'Lycurgus')
and partly by false etymology. Ramnes suggested Romulus, Tities
Tatius: only Luceres was a stumbling-block (13. 8 n.). If two of the
tribes were called after Romulus and Tatius respectively, the tribal
organization must be the result of the fusion of the Romans and
Sabines. Ergo, the curiae must also be. One of the curiae was called
R a p t a (but cf. Etr. rapine).
L. would seem not to be following Valerius Antias here who num­
bered the raped as 527 (fr. 3 P . : J u b a put it as high as 683). T h e
usual figure was 30 (Plutarch, Romulus 14).
For the centuriae see also 15. 8 n . ; 43. 9 n.
See Pelham, Journal of Philology 9 (1880), 266-79; Botsford,
Roman Assemblies, 9 fF.; Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 87 ff.; Berne, R.E.,
'Luceres'; Devoto, Athenaeum 31 (1953), 335 ff.
13. 7. virorumve: -ve is used to convey a subordinate alternative within
alternatives; cf. 29. 2, 21. 35. 2, 25. 1. 12, 34. 35. 4.
80
 ROMULUS i. 1 3 . 8

1 3 . 8 . Lucerum: cf. Servius, ad Aen. 5. 560 Lucerum quorum secundum

Livium et nomen et causa in occulta sunt. Various conjectures were pre­
valent in antiquity: (1) from a king Lucumo, Lucius, or Lucomedius
from Etruria who helped Romulus against Tatius (Cicero, de Rep.
2. 14; Junius ap. Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 5 5 ; see also D.H. 2. 37. 2 ) ;
(2) from a king Lucerus of Ardea (Paulus Festus 106 L . ) ; (3) from
tucus (Plutarch, Romulus 20; de Viris Illustr. 2. 11). L.'s reticence is in
part due to his conviction that the third element in the tripartite com­
munity was not Etruscan, as would be entailed by the first conjecture,
but Alban (30. 3, 33. 2). Yet if the three tribes are Romulean and
Alba was only absorbed by Tullus, the Luceres could not be Alban.

14. 1-3. The Death of Tatius

T h e connexion between Lavinium and the death of Tatius is not
plausible. It is designed to account for the close religious ties between
the two cities (1. 10 n.).
L. gives a double motive for Romulus' actions (14. 3 seu . . . seu).
T h e first is the older and was known to Ennius (Annales 107 V.). T h e
dangers inherent in joint kingship were proverbial (Columella 9. 9. 1;
Phaedrus 1. 5. 1). T h e second is rationalistic. This citation of variant
motives may betray that L. has here switched from one source to
another; the reason for Tatius' mission to Lavinium (ad sollemne
sacrificium) was not the reason given by Licinius Macer who with
typical anti-clericalism supposed that Tatius set out merely to appease
an angry mob (fr. 5 P.).
14. 2. sacrificium: 1. 10 n. Not specified, but presumably taken to be
a forerunner of the annual sacrifice to Vesta and the Penates performed
by dictators, consuls, and praetors on relinquishing office ([Servius],
ad Aen. 2. 296; Macrobius 3. 4. 1 1 ; Latte, Rom. Religionsgeschichte, 295
n
- 5).
14. 4 - 1 5 . War with Fidenae and Veii
T h e career of Romulus traditionally closed with two wars against
Rome's nearest rivals, Fidenae and Veii. Neither is historical. Veii
did not become a serious power until the fifth century and Fidenae
was her bridgehead against Rome. Both cities were to tax the in­
genuity of R o m a n commanders and in particular of that second
Romulus, Camillus, in the closing years of the fifth century. Rome's
ultimate success in that generation called for an earlier precedent
which only Romulus could supply. T h e significant details of the battle
are conventional tricks derived from textbooks (14. 7 n., 15. 311.),
T h e whole is narrated in a flat style with little invention or em­
bellishment (14. 4 n.).
14. 4. propius: notice ipsis prope portis, prope se, and below (14. 7) the
&14432 81 G
1.14.4 ROMULUS
repeated ipsis prope portis. Such unconscious repetitions are a feature
of L.'s style, particularly when the subject-matter does not call for
elaborate writing. Gf. 20. 7 n., 35. 6 n., 49. 9 n., 59. 13 n., 2. 3. 4 n.,
42. 11 n., 45. 3 n., 58. 6 n., 3. 9. 6 n., 11. 8 n., 26. 1 n., 38. 11 n.,
40. 3 n., 44. 8 n., 47. 4 n., 51. 2 n., 51. 13 n., 4. 58. 9 n., 5. 24. 2 n.
See K. Gries, Class. Phil. 46 (1951), 36-37. J a c . Gronovius wished to
delete prope se.
14. 6. enim: this reflection, which is not to be found in the correspond­
ing sections of D.H. or Plutarch, is characteristic of L.'s rhetori­
cal moralizing (4. 37. 7 n.).
14. 7. locis circa densa obsita virgulta obscuris: so N, but to this, the most
celebrated of all Livian cruces, there are objections, circa cannot be a
preposition here and the conjunction of densa and obsita without a
connecting particle is not adequately paralleled by 3. 43. 6 where
armatum is pregnant or 40. 56. 9. Livian usage establishes that virgulta
is only found in the plural (21. 54. 1, 28. 2. 1, 29. 32. 9, 42. 63. 9) and
that obsitus should be qualified by an abl. (21. 54. 1 rivus . . . circa
obsitus . . . virgultis vepribusque). It follows, with Hertz, that the only
commendable emendation of the passage is locis circa densis obsitis vir­
gultis, taking obscuris with insidiis (Amm. Marc. 16. 12. 2 3 ; cf. Cicero,
in Catil. 3 . 3 ) : 'he ordered a detachment to lurk in a concealed ambush,
the area being overgrown all round with thick bushes'. Against the
emendation is the unparalleled array of -is sounds.
T h e reading of N is retained by Turnebus, Bekker, Gonway, and
Bayet, among others, but cannot be defended.
fugae: Frontinus 2. 5 gives a score of examples of the use of this
stratagem.
14. 9. quique: N read, with misgiving, the double quique cum
^ . . . Such dittographies are not infrequently found in N, but
eo visi erant
neither is by itself adequate, visi erant cannot stand without a
qualifying adverb in the sense 'were seen' (Madvig, M . Miiller; but cf. 4.
40. 2, 7. 23. 6). cum equis ierant, on the other hand, does not supply the
necessary clarification that the cavalry had joined Romulus in the pre­
tended flight, although it has met with wide acceptance (Gronovius,
Nannius, Drakenborch, Crevier, Ruperti, Twiss, Kreyssig, Hertz,
Frigell). Most of the emendations do violence to the sense: e.g.fusi
(Bayet), pulsi (Grunauer), or abire visi (Weissenborn), avehi visi
(Walters) erant. T h e Romans had not seemed to ride away: they had
ridden away. They had not been routed but had only pretended to be
routed, equites erant is possible (Alschefski, H . J . Miiller; cf. 4. 33. 12,
24. 1. 9) but palaeographically more attractive is viri erant (cf. Virgil,
Aeneid 7. 682 ; see C.Q. 9 (1959), 277).
15. 1. Fidenates: for later history see 2. 19. 2 n.
82
 ROMULUS i. 15- i
Veientium: the first mention in L. of Veii, for which see the introduc­
tion to Book 5. T h e site was first occupied, like the Palatine, by
scattered settlements in the Early Iron Age, and Villanovan pottery
(800-700 B.C.) has been found over a wide area. Contact with Rome at
this very early date is indicated by the discovery at Veii of some dis­
tinctively 'Latian' sherds of the same period, but these lend no support
to the historicity of Romulus' war. For a detailed report of the early
finds from Veii see J . B. Ward-Perkins, P.B.S.R. 39 (1961), 22 ff.
15. 3 . dimicarent: the decision to fight an open battle rather than en­
dure a siege is exemplified and commended by Frontinus (2. 6).
15. 5. oratores: 38. 2 n.
centum: 30. 7 n.
15. 7. ab Mo: sc. Romulus, a bello Ruperti.
quadraginta: Numa's reign.
15. 8. Celeres: two explanations of the Celeres were current, one
identifying them with the 300 equites of Romulus' army (13. 3 ; cf.
Festus 48 L . ; Pliny, N.H. 33. 3 5 ; Servius, ad Am. 9. 368, 11. 6 0 3 ;
Pomponius, Dig. 1.2. 2. 15, 2. 15. 9 : the name derived from ogvrrjs),
the other, as here, seeing them as a bodyguard (D.H. 2. 13, 29, 64, 4.
71 ; Plutarch, Romulus 26; Numa 7; Diodorus 8. 6. 3 ; Origo Gentis
Romanae 23. 6 : the name derived either from their leader, Celer, who
in some accounts had been Romulus' assassin, or from o^vr^s). T h e
two versions correspond to the antiquarian and annalistic traditions
respectively. Speculation seems to have started from the office of
the tribunus celerum mentioned in connexion with the Salian ritual of
19 March (Fasti Praen. [salii] faciunt in comitio saltu [adstantibus
po]ntijicibus et trib. celer.). Evidently in early times the tribunus celerum
was a military officer of importance: he survived only in religious cult.
Thus the Celeres were remembered but their function and nature were
lost in the past. Now by the second century there was a cleavage
between the social or political status of an eques Romanus and the mili­
tary eques, the cavalryman who actually fought. T h e one word eques
covered both the soldier and the civilian. At the same time the uniform
and armour of the contemporary cavalryman were quite different
from the ceremonial dress of the eques Romanus or of the young com­
batants in the Ludus Troiae as it is depicted on monuments (Rostow-
zew, Klio, Beiheft 3) and described by Polybius (6. 25. 3). With the
increasing importance of the equites as a political body in consequence
of the activities of the Gracchi, it was desirable to invent a pedigree for
them, distinct from the pedigree of the cavalry as such. T h e mysterious
Celeres offered scope. Thus it is no accident that the earliest speculation
about the Celeres goes back to M . Junius Congus Gracchanus (fl. c.
100 B.C.).
T h e antiquarian account is, therefore, the older and dates from the
83
1.15.8 ROMULUS
second century. T h e annalistic, making the Celeres into a bodyguard,
with its sinister overtones, is in keeping with the tendency of the
Sullan annalists to invent precedents for contemporary events. In
88 Sulpicius formed a bodyguard of 600 knights (Plutarch, Marius 35).
L.'s source can thus be shown to be no earlier than Sulla. Its identity
cannot be ascertained for sure. Only Valerius Antias' account is
known (fr. 2 ) : the Celeres were a bodyguard who took their name
from their leader Celer. See also Hill, Class. Phil. 33 (1938), 283.

16. The Apotheosis of Romulus

T h e earliest legend of Romulus' end allowed him merely to vanish
into thin air. This was the orthodox scheme for the death of heroes,
particularly Greek heroes. T h e circumstances in which the dis­
appearance occurred were gradually evolved. A review of the army
in the Campus Martius was an appropriate occasion, the Caprae
Palus an appropriate place. T h e latter in turn suggested by its name
a date—Nonae Caprotinae = 7 J u l y ; see also Plutarch, Romulus
27; Solinus 1. 20). T h e thunder and lightning were the expected
accompaniment.
T h e apotheosis of Romulus under the enigmatic name of Quirinus
was fabricated earlier than Ennius (65, 115, 117 V.), and recent
attempts to attribute it to the manipulations of Julius Caesar, who
was Pontifex Maximus from 63 B.C., and his cousin, Sex. Julius Caesar,
who was Flamen Quirinalis in 57 B.C., must fail. Caesar exploited an
existing tradition.
Quirinus is found not merely by himself (20. 2 n.) but also in
J a n u s Quirinus (32. 9 n.), Mars Quirinus (Servius, ad Aen. 1. 292),
Juppiter Quirinus (I.L.S. 3036), and Hercules Quirinus. T h e mean­
ing and grammatical status of the name are alike uncertain but
current etymology derives it from *co-uiri-no 'the god of the assembly
of men' and links it with Quirites and the Quirinal. T h e data indicate
a Sabine origin ultimately, but in Roman rite Quirinus is connected
with the peaceful activities of the Roman host. Mars Quirinus pre­
sides over the storing of the ancilia while Mars Gradivus is concerned
with their stirring. Janus Quirinus governs the conclusion of wars,
the return of the army to peace-time conditions, as Servius says
(ad Aen. 6. 859): 'Quirinus est Mars qui praeest paci et intra civitatem
colitur'. But Quirinus is no mere equivalent in Sabine demonology of
the Roman Mars. His function was more extensive, to watch over the
whole ordered community, the exercitus, at peace. In this sense the
apotheosis of Romulus, the parens urbis, as Quirinus, quite apart from
helping to fuse Roman and Sabine cults, was eminently suitable, but
it betrays Hellenic influence, above all in the descensio (16. 6 n.).
To it was added the separate story ofProculus Julius. It was certainly
84
 ROMULUS i. 16
older than the heyday of the gens Julia in the first century, for it is
found in Cicero (de Rep. 2. 20; cf. de Legibus 1.3), but seems to have
been a Julian tale invented to square the Alban origin of the Julii
(30. 2 n.) with a proper feeling that a member of the family must have
played a prominent part in the birth of Rome. Proculus is a farmer
living at Alba who comes to Rome for the day (Cicero; Ovid, Fasti
2. 499: 16. 5 n.).
Throughout R o m a n history Romulus remained a controversial
figure. At the back of his career lurked the fratricide and other violent
deeds, to be turned to his discredit if political needs required. T h e tide
against him had certainly set in by the second century. Even Cicero,
drawing ultimately on Fabius Pictor, reports that Proculus' announce­
ment of Romulus' apotheosis was a put-up job—impulsu patrum. Such
rationalization could be carried farther. Romulus was not translated,
he was torn into little pieces by enraged enemies, by his new citizens,
according to Licinius Macer, wishfully thinking of Sulla, or by the
senators as in the variant cited in 16. 4. With the revival in the for­
tunes of the Julii the apotheosis, and by implication the select role of
Proculus, was strengthened. T h e assassination was referred to in the
discussions of 67 B.C. Quirinus is figured for the only time on a
coin of C. Memmius (Sydenham no. 921 ; c. 56 B.C.). After 44 B.C.
the accounts of the death of Romulus are modelled on the murder of
Caesar (D.H. 2. 56. 5 ; Plutarch, Romulus 2 7 ; Val. Max. 5. 3. 1).
L. follows a p re-Caesarian source which favours Romulus (16. 4
nobilitavit) and is, therefore, likely to be none other than Valerius
Antias. But he makes the story into a set piece, whose climax is, as
so often, a passage of moving speech (16. 6-7). T h e preliminaries
are carefully staged. L. stresses the psychological reactions of the
spectators (pavor, desiderio, desiderium) and employs his favourite device—
the dramatic pause at the moment of tension (16. 2 n.). Well constructed
and written in memorable language (16. 3 n., 16. 6-7 n.) it is designed
incidentally to illustrate the power of simple faith (fides, fidei, fide).
See J . B. Carter, A, J. A. 13 (1909), 29 ft.; Klotz 207; Miinzer, R.E.,
'Julius (33)'; R. Klein, Kbnigtum u. Konigzeit bet Cicero; Classen, Philo-
logus 106 (1962), 174 ff.; Kajanto, God and Fate in Livv, 31 ; Hubaux
98 ff.; Weinstock, J.R.S. 50 (i960), 118; Burkert, Historia 11 (1962),
356 ff.
16. 1. immortalibus: 'worthy of immortality'; cf. Seneca, Suas. 6. 5 ;
Pliny, N.H. 35. 50. But, with Crcvier and Ruperti, I would prefer
mortalibus, 'there were the works done in his lifetime'; cf. 2. 6 Aeneae
ultimum operum mortaliumfuit.
Caprae: a depression or swamp in the lowest part of the Campus
Martius near the Pantheon (cf. the Vicus Caprarius), formed by the
silting of a small stream.
85
I. l 6 . 2 ROMULUS
16. 2. suhlimem raptum: the expression otherwise confined to poetry
(34. 8 ; cf. Virgil, Aeneid 5. 255, 1. 4 1 5 ; Plautus, Asin. 868; Terence,
Andria 861) paves the way for the high-flown language which follows.
silentium: 3. 47. 6 n.
16. 3 . deum: the crowds recognize the deity and acclaim him in
fittingly religious terms. For deum deo natus see 40. 3 n . ; for pacem
exposcunt cf. 3. 7. 7-8 n.
parentem solvere iubent represents the ancient formula used for invok­
ing dead ancestors at the Parentalia—salve, parens (cf. Virgil, Aeneid
5. 8 0 ; Silius Ital. 17. 651 ; C.I.L. 6. 6457; Pliny, N.H. 37. 205 salve,
parens rerum). Thus Romulus is regarded as physically the father of
Rome and as such he is invoked as one of the di genitales (cf. Dio 44.
37. 3). T h e identification with Quirinus exalted that status. For
parens urbis cf. Propertius, 4. 10. 17; Val. Max. 5 . 3 . 1. After the saluta­
tion the Romans turn in the proper manner of prayers to entreat
salvation (Appel, De Romanorum Precationibus, 122), as in the saecular
prayer of 17 B.C. (I.L.S. 5050 quaeso precorque uti . . . semper Latinum
nomen tueamini; cf. Plautus, Capt. 976; Men. 1114). T h e terms also
are sacral: for volenspropitius cf. Gato, de Re Rust. 134; C.I.L. 6. 32329,
12. 4333; Plautus, Cure. 89 (a parody of a prayer); Livy 7. 26. 4,
24. 21. 10, 24. 38. 8. sospitare 'to keep safe' is an archaic word found
in the prayer in Catullus 34. 24 (see Fordyce's n.).
16. A,fuisse: echoed by Tacitus, Annals 3. 29. 2 (see Syme, Tacitus,
734)-
16. 5. et consilio: all that need be said in defence of et, deleted by the
Aldine editors and Bekker, has been said by Ruhnken on Veil. Pat.
lm I 7
'
Proculus Julius: with his usual desire not to complicate a story by
distracting details L. omits the fact that traditionally Proculus was
a farmer (Cicero calls him agrestis) from Alba Longa. An Alban origin
may be implied in the praenomen which designates someone born when
his father was away (procul; cf. 2. 4 1 . 1, 4. 21. 6 n.).
magnae: 'strange, supernatural'; see Shackle ton Bailey, Proper-
tiana, 55.
16. 6-7. inquit: Proculus' speech is highly poetic in tone as befits the
recital of such a miraculous event. Notice the dactyllic clausula {re-
sistere posse) with which Romulus' message concludes. Parallels for
many of the phrases are only to be found among the poets. For
hodierna luce cf Lucretius 3. 1092; Propertius 3. 10. 7; Ovid, Heroid.
9. 167; for caelo, instead of de caelo (Cicero, Har. Resp. 62), delapsus cf.
Virgil, Aeneid 7. 620; Ovid, Met. 1. 212; for caelestes, as a pure sub­
stantive = di, cf. Ennius, fr. var. 23 V . ; Catullus 64. 191, 204, 68. 76;
for sublimis abiit cf. Virgil, Aeneid 1. 415. ita velle id is found only
here in L. and does not seem to be sacral.
86
 INTERREGNUM i. 16. 6-7
T h e epiphany, or technically, KarcufSaoLa, is a wholly Greek con­
cept. A commonplace in Homer (e.g. Odyssey 1. 102; Iliad 24. 121;
cf. Aeneid 8. 423) it remained a constant feature of Greek religion (see
the details given by P. Burman, Zevs KaTaipdrrjs (1734), passim)
but found only a half-hearted acceptance in Roman rite (5. 13. 6 n.).
Romulus' descensio is, therefore, a piece of Hellenistic romanticizing.
It has, however, been pointed out by Wagenvoort (Studies, 184) that
it is presented in R o m a n guise. T h e superstition that one should not
look upon the deity is not Greek but R o m a n (contra intueri fas; cf.
Seneca, Epist. 115, 4 ; Virgil, Aeneid 1. 327 ff.; Ovid, Fasti 6. 7 AT.) and
the message which Romulus gives—rem militarem colant—the standard
R o m a n self-justification (Virgil, Aeneid 6. 847-53 with Norden's
note).
16. 6. adstitissem: Burman (op. cit. 232) proposed restitissem which
is perhaps to be preferred. Proculus, despite his terror, held his
ground.
16. 7. sciant: governing nullas . . . posse.
16. 8. mirum quantum: 2. 1. 11 n. fides, the reading of N, should be re­
tained (Frigell, Epilegomena, 32-33). For fides est cf. 3. 10. 6, 43. 6.

17. The Interregnum

It was a. fable convenue of R o m a n constitutional history that the power
of the kings had been transferred in some form to the consuls. This
theory, which does violence both to the facts of the historical process
and to every probability about the nature of regnum and imperium re­
spectively, was the outcome of conservative thinking which looked
to see a continuous tradition in Roman institutions (3. 33. 1). It had
two consequences. Since by the second century the Senate had claimed
and to some extent asserted an over-all supervision over the consuls'
actions (2. 56. 12 n., 4. 26. 7 n., 4. 43. 7 n.), it followed that the
Senate must have had some say in regal times over the choice of the
kings. Hence patres auctores fiunt (17. 8 - 9 ) : the Senate are supposed
to have been responsible for the selection of a suitable candidate.
Equally, however, the basis of the consular imperium in fact rested upon
popular election. Therefore the choice of the king must have been
ratified by popular vote (46. 1 n., 47. 10). I n this way grew up the
accepted version that the kings were elected and power vested in them
auctoribus patribus, iussupopuli and it is this version which is exemplified
in the present chapter. It has no historical foundation but recalls the
political issues of the 8o's (Appian, B.C. 1. 59).
Equally anachronistic is the putative origin of the interregnum
(3. 8. 2 n.). Although all the authorities agree that the first interregnum
occurred after Romulus (Cicero, de Rep. 2. 2 3 ; D.H. 2. 57), this is
mere invention to supply a precedent coeval with the state for an
87