UNIT I: ROMAN HISTORY

SECTION I: ANCIENT HISTORY

Era I: The Beginnings of Rome and Monarchy

See Plates VI. and VII.

Both the city and the state of Rome are represented in tradition as having been gradually formed by the fusion of separate communities. The original settlement of Romulus is said to have been limited to the Palatine Mount. With this were united before the end of his reign the Capitoline and the Quirinal; Tullus Hostilius added the Caelian, Ancus Martius the Aventine; and finally Servius Tullius included the Esquiline and Viminal, and enclosed the whole seven hills with a stone wall. The growth of the state closely followed that of the city. To the original Romans on the Palatine were added successively the Sabine followers of King Tatius, Albans transplanted by Tullus, Latins by Ancus, and lastly the Etruscan comrades of Caeles Vibenna. This tradition is supported by other and more positive evidence. The race of the Luperci on February 15 was in fact a purification of the boundaries of the "ancient Palatine town," the "square Rome" of Ennius; and the course taken is that described by Tacitus as the "pomoerium" of the city founded by Romulus. On the Esquiline, Varro mentions an "ancient city" and an "earthen rampart," and the festival of the Septimontium is evidence of a union between this settlement and that on the Palatine. The fusion of these "Mounts" with a settlement on the Quirinal "Hill" is also attested by trustworthy evidence; and in particular the line taken by the procession of the Argei represents the enlarged boundaries of these united communities. Lastly, the Servian agger still remains as a witness to the final enclosure of the various settlements within a single ring-wall.

Rome a Latin City

But is tradition right in representing this fusion of distinct settlements as a fusion also of communities of different race? Much of what it says on this point may be at once dismissed as fabulous. The tales of Aeneas and his Trojans, of Evander and his Arcadians, of the followers of Heracles, and of the still earlier Aborigines have no claim to a place in history; we cannot accept the tradition to which the Romans clung with proud humility of the asylum opened by Romulus, or believe that the ancestors of the Romans were a mixed concourse of outlaws and refugees, nor, while admitting the probability of the tradition that in remote times the " Sicels " had dwelt on the seven hills, can we allow them any part or lot in the historic Roman people. That this people were in the main homogeneous and in the main of Latin descent is unquestionable. Indications of the truth are not wanting even in the traditions themselves : King Faunus who rules the Aborigines on the Palatine is Latin; " Latini" is the name assumed by the united Aborigines and Trojans; the immediate progenitors of Rome are the Latin Lavinium and the Latin Alba. The evidence of the language, the religion, the institutions and civilization of early Rome points to the same conclusion. The speech of the Romans is from the first Latin j the oldest gods of Rome—Saturn, Janus, Jupiter, Juno, Diana, &c.—are all Latin; "rex," "praetor," "dictator," "curia," are Latin titles and institutions.12 Geographically too the low hills by the Tiber form a part of the strip of coast-land from which the Latini took their name, and the primitive settlements, with their earthen ramparts and wooden palisades planted upon them out of reach both of human foes and of the malaria of the swampy low grounds, are only typical of the mode of settlement which the conditions of life dictated throughout Latium.13 But tradition insists on the admixture of at least two non-Latin elements, a Sabine and an Etruscan. The question as regards the latter will be more fully discussed hereafter; it is enough to say here that there is no satisfactory evidence that any one of the communities which combined to form Rome was Etruscan, or that there was any important Etruscan strain in the Roman blood.14 With the Sabines it is otherwise.

The Sabines in Rome

That union of the Palatine and Quirinal settlements which constituted so decisive a stage in the growth of Rome is represented as having been in reality a union of the original Latins with a band of Sabine invaders who had seized and held not only the Quirinal Hill but the northern and nearest peak of the Capitoline Mount. The tradition was evidently deeply rooted. The name of the Quirinal Hill itself was derived from the Sabine town of Cures.15 The ancient worships connected with it were said to be Sabine.16 One of the three old tribes, the Tities, was believed to represent the Sabine element;17 the second and the fourth kings are both of Sabine descent. By the great majority of modern writers the substance of the tradition, the fusion of a body of Sabine invaders with the original Latins, is accepted as historical; and even Mommsen allows its possibility, though he throws back the time of its occurrence to an earlier period than that of the union of the two settlements.18 We cannot here enter into the question at length, but two statements may be safely made respecting it. The Sabine invasion, if it took place at all, must have taken place far back in the prehistoric age; it must have been on a small scale ; and the Sabine invaders must have amalgamated easily and completely with the Latin settlers. The structure of the early Roman state, while it bears evident marks of a fusion of communities, shows no traces of a mixture of race. Nor is it easy to point to any provably Sabine element in the language, religion, or civilization of primitive Rome.1 The theory of a Sabine conquest can hardly be maintained in the face of the predominantly Latin character of both people and institutions. On the other hand, the probability of a Sabine raid and a Sabine settlement, possibly on the Quirinal Hill, in very early times may be admitted. The incursions of the highland Apennine tribes into the lowlands fill a large place in early Italian history. The Latins were said to have originally descended from the mountain glens near Eeate. The invasions of Campania and of Magna Graecia by Sabellian tribes are matter of history, and the Sabines themselves are represented as a restless highland people, ever seeking new homes in richer lands. In very early days they appear on the borders of Latium, in close proximity to Rome, and Sabine forays are familiar and frequent occurrences in the old legends.

The Early State

Such is all we know of the manner in which the separate settlements on the seven hills grew into a single city and community. How long Rome took in the making, or when or by whom the work was completed, we cannot say. Nor is it possible to give more than a very meagre outline of the constitution and of the history of the united state in the
early days of its existence.

The People

The "populus Romanus" was, we are told, divided into three tribes, Ramnes, Tities, and Luceres, and into thirty " curiae." The three tribes probably represent a primitive clan division, older than the Roman state itself. They survived in later times only as divisions of the ancient " equitum centuriae," and even in the accounts of the earliest constitution they have ceased to serve as a political division of the people. Of far greater importance is the division into "curiae." In Cicero's time there were still curies, curial festivals, and curiate assemblies, and modern authors are unquestionably right in regarding the curia as the keystone of the primitive political system. It was a primitive association held together by participation in common "sacra," and possessing common festivals, common priests, and a common chapel, hall, and hearth. The members of a curia were very probably neighbours and kinsmen, but the curia seems to represent a stage in political development midway between that in which clanship is the sole bond of union and that in which such claims as those of territorial contiguity and ownership of land have obtained recognition. As separate associations the curiae are probably older than the Roman state, but, however this may be, it is certain that of this state when formed they constituted the only effective political subdivisions. The members of the thirty curiae are the populus Romanus, and the earliest known condition of Roman citizenship is the "communio sacrorum," partnership in the curial "sacra." Below the curia there was no further political division, for there is no reason to believe that the curia was ever formally subdivided into a fixed number of gentes and families. Nor can we assent to the view which would represent the curiae as containing only the " patrician gentes." The primitive Roman people of the thirty curia? included all the freemen of the community, simple as well as gentle.

The King

At their head was the "rex," the ruler of the united people. The Roman " king" is not simply either the hereditary and patriarchal chief of a clan, the priestly head of a community bound together by common sacra, or the elected magistrate of a state, but a mixture of all three. In later times, when no " patrician magistrates'; were forthcoming to hold the elections for their successors, a procedure was adopted which was believed to represent the manner in which the early kings had been appointed. In this procedure the ancient privileges of the old " gentes " and their elders, the importance of maintaining unbroken the continuity of the "sacra," on the transmission and observance of which the welfare of the community depended, and thirdly the rights of the freemen, are all recognized. On the death of a king, the auspicia, and with them the supreme authority, revert to the council of elders, the "patres," as representing the "gentes." By the " patres" an " interrex" is appointed, who in turn nominates a second ; by him, or even by a third or fourth interrex, a new king is selected in consultation with the "patres." The king-designate is then proposed to the freemen assembled by their curiae for their acceptance, and finally their formal acceptance is ratified by the " patres," as a security that the " sacra" of which they are the guardians have been respected.11 Thus the king is in the first instance selected by the representatives of the old gentes, and they ratify his appointment. In form he is nominated directly by a predecessor from whose hands he receives the auspicia. But it is necessary also that the choice of the patres and the nomination of the interrex should be confirmed by a solemn vote of the community.

It is useless to attempt a precise definition of the prerogatives of the king when once installed in office. Tradition ascribes to him a position and powers closely resembling those of the heroic kings of Greece. He rules for life, and he is the sole ruler, unfettered by written statutes. He is the supreme judge, settling all disputes and punishing wrongdoers even with death. All other officials are appointed by him. He imposes taxes, distributes lands, and erects buildings. Senate and assembly meet only when he convenes them, and meet for little else than to receive communications from him. In war he is absolute leader, and finally he is also the religious head of the community. It is his business to consult the gods on its behalf, to offer the solemn sacrifices, and to announce the days of the public festivals. Hard by his house was the common hearth of the state, where the vestal virgins cherished the sacred fire.

The Senate

By the side of the king stood the senate, or council of elders. In the descriptions left us of the primitive senate, as in those of the " rex," we can discover traces of a transition from an earlier state of things when Rome was only an assemblage of clans or village communities, allied indeed, but each still ruled by its own chiefs and headmen, to one in which these groups have been fused into a single state under a common ruler. On the one hand the senate appears as a representative council of chiefs, with inalienable prerogatives of its own, and claiming to be the ultimate depository of the supreme authority and of the " sacra " connected with it. The senators are the " patres " ; they are taken from the leading " gentes " ; they hold their seats for life ; to them the "auspicia" revert on the death of a king ; they appoint the interrex from their own body, are consulted in the choice of the new king, and their sanction is necessary to ratify the vote of the assembled freemen. On the other hand they are no longer supreme. They cannot appoint a king but with the consent of the community, and their relation to the king when appointed is one of subordination. Vacancies in their ranks are filled up by him, and they can but give him advice and counsel when he chooses to consult them.

The Assembly

The popular assembly of united Rome in its earliest days was that in which the freemen met and voted by their curiae (comitia curiata ). The assembly met in the comitium at the north-east end of the forum, at the summons and under the presidency of the king or, failing him, of the "interrex." By the "rex" or "interrex" the question was put, and the voting took place " curiatim," the curias being called up in turn. The vote of each curia was decided by the majority of individual votes, and a majority of the votes of the curia? determined the final result. But the occasions on which the assembly could exercise its power must have been few. Their right to elect magistrates was apparently limited to the acceptance or rejection of the king proposed by the interrex. Of the passing of laws, in the later sense of the term, there is no trace in the kingly period. Dionysius's statement6 that they voted on questions of war and peace is improbable in itself and unsupported by tradition. They are indeed represented, in one instance, as deciding a capital case, but it is by the express permission of the king and not of right.6 Assemblies of the people were also, and probably more frequently, convened for other purposes. Not only did they meet to hear from the king the announcement of the high days and holidays for each month, and to witness such solemn religious rites as the inauguration of a priest, but their presence (and sometimes their vote) was furthei icq aired to authorize and attest certain acts, which in a later age assumed a more private character. The disposal of property by will and the solemn renunciation of family or gentile "sacra" could only take place in the presence of the assembled freemen, while for adoption (arrogatio) not only their presence but their formal consent was necessary.





Such in outline was the political structure of the Roman state at the earliest period known to us. It is clear that it belongs to a comparatively advanced stage in the development of society, and that a long previous history lies behind it. Traces of an older and more primitive order of things still linger in the three ancient shadowy tribes, in the curia? and gentes, in many of the features noticeable in the senate; but they are traces of an order that has passed away. The supremacy of the state is established over the groups out of whose fusion it has grown, and such of these groups as still retain a distinct existence are merely private corporations. Private differences are settled and wrongdoers punished by the state tribunals, and even within the close limits of the family the authority of the head is limited by the claims of the state upon the services of the sons and dependants.

Rome Under the Kings

A history of this early Roman state is out of the question. The names, dates, and achievements of the first four kings are all too unsubstantial to form the basis of a sober narrative ; a few points only can be considered as fairly well established. If we except the long eventless reign ascribed to King Numa, tradition represents the first kings as incessantly at war with their immediate neighbours. The details of these wars are no doubt mythical; but the implied condition of continual struggle, and the narrow range within which the struggle is confined, may be accepted as true. The picture drawn is that of a small community with a few square miles of territory, at deadly feud with its nearest neighbours, within a radius of some 12 miles round Rome. Nor, in spite of the repeated victories with which tradition credits Romulus, Ancus, and Tullus, does there seem to have been any real extension of Roman territory except towards the sea. Fidena? remains Etruscan; the Sabines continue masters up to the Anio; Proeneste, Gabii, and Tusculum are still untouched; and on this side it is doubtful if Roman territory, in spite of the possible destruction of Alba, extended to a greater distance than the sixth milestone from Rome. But along the course of the Tiber below the city there was a decided advance. The fortification of the Janiculum, the building of the " pons sublicius," the foundation of Ostia, and the acquisition of the saltworks near the sea may all be safely ascribed to this early period. Closely connected, too, with the control of the Tiber from Rome to the sea was the subjugation of the petty Latin communities lying south of the river; and the tradition of the conquest and destruction of Politorium, Tellena?, and Ficana is confirmed by the absence in historical times of any Latin communities in this district.

The Tarquins

With the reign of the fifth king Tarquinius Priscus a marked change takes place. The traditional accounts of the last three kings not only wear a more historical air than those of the first four, but they describe something like a transformation of the Eoman city and state. Under the rule of these latter kings the separate settlements are for the first time enclosed with a rampart of colossal size and extent.1 The low grounds are drained, and a forum and circus elaborately laid out; on the Capitoline Mount a temple is erected, the massive foundations of which were an object of wonder even to Pliny. To the same period are assigned the redivision of the city area into four new districts and the introduction of a new military system, The kings increase in power and surround themselves with new splendour. Abroad, too, Rome suddenly appears as a powerful state ruling far and wide over southern Etruria and Latium. These startling changes are, moreover, ascribed to kings of alien descent, who one and all ascend the throne in the teeth of established constitutional forms. Finally, with the expulsion of the last of them—the younger Tarquin—comes a sudden shrinkage of power. At the commencement of the republic Rome is once more a comparatively small state, with hostile and independent neighbours at her very doors. It is difficult to avoid the conviction that the true explanation of this phenomenon is to be found in the supposition that Rome during this period passed under the rule of powerful Etruscan lords. In the 7th and 6th centuries B.C., and probably earlier still, the Etruscans appear as ruling widely outside the limits of Etruria proper. They were supreme in the valley of the Po until their power there was broken by the irruption of Celtic tribes from beyond the Alps, and while still masters of the plains of Lombardy they established themselves in the rich lowlands of Campania, where they held their ground until the capture of Capua by the Samnite highlanders in 423 B.C. It is on the face of it improbable that a power which had extended its sway from the Alps to the Tiber, and from the Liris to Surrentum, should have left untouched the intervening stretch of country between the Tiber and the Liris. Nor are we without evidence of Etruscan rule in Latium. According to Dionysius there was a time when the Latins were known to the Greeks as Tyrrhenians, and Rome as a Tyrrhenian city. When Aeneas landed in Italy the Latins were at feud with Turnus (Turrhenos ? Dionys., i. 64) of Ardea, whose close ally is the ruthless Mezentius, prince of Caare, to whom the Latins had been forced to pay a tribute of wine. Cato declared the Volsci to have been once subject to Etruscan rule, and Etruscan remains found at Velitrse, as well as the second name of the Volscian Auxur, Tarracina (the city of Tarchon), tend to confirm his statement. Nearer still to Rome is Tusculum, with its significant name, and at Alba we hear of a prince _______ [Gk.], 9 lawless and cruel like Mezentius, who consults the "oracle of Tethys in Tyrrhenia." Thus we find the Etruscan power encircling Rome on all sides, and in Rome itself a tradition of the rule of princes of Etruscan origin. The Tarquinii come from South Etruria; their name can hardly be anything else than the Latin equivalent of the Etruscan Tarchon, and is therefore possibly a title (= " lord " or " prince ") rather than a proper name. Even Servius Tullius was identified by Tuscan chroniclers with an Etruscan "Mastarna." Again, what we are told of Etruscan conquests does not represent them as moving, like the Sabellian tribes, in large bodies and settling down en masse in the conquered districts. We hear rather of military raids led by ambitious chiefs who carve out principalities for themselves with their own good swords, and with their followers rule oppressively over alien and subject peoples.12 And so at Rome the story of the Tarquins implies not a wave of Etruscan immigration so much as a rule of Etruscan princes over conquered Latins.

The achievements ascribed to the Tarquins are not less characteristic. Their despotic rule and splendour contrast with the primitive simplicity of the native kings. Only Etruscan builders, under the direction of wealthy and powerful Etruscan lords, could have built the great cloaca, the Servian wall, or the Capitoline temple,—monuments which challenged comparison with those of the emperors themselves. Nor do the traces of Greek influence upon Rome during this period13 conflict with the theory of an Etruscan supremacy; on the contrary, it is at least possible that it was thanks to the extended rule and wide connexions of her Etruscan rulers that Rome was first brought into direct contact with the Greeks, who had long traded with the Etruscan ports and influenced Etruscan culture.14

The Servian Reforms

These Etruscan princes are represented, not only as having raised Rome for the time to a commanding position in Latium and lavished upon the city itself the resources of Etruscan civilization, but also as the authors of important internal changes. They are represented as favouring new men at the expense of the old patrician families, and as reorganizing the Roman army on a new footing, a policy natural enough in military princes of alien birth, and rendered possible by the additions which conquest had made to the original community. From ampng the lead ing families of the conquered Latin states a hundred new members were admitted to the senate, and these gentes thenceforth ranked as patrician, and became known as " gentes minores."16 The changes in the army begun, it is said, by the elder Tarquin and completed by Servius Tullius were more important. The basis of the primitive military system had been the three tribes, each of which furnished 1000 men to the legion and 100 to the cavalry.16 Tarquinius Priscus, we are told, contemplated the creation of three fresh tribes and three additional centuries of horsemen with new names,17 though in face of the opposition offered by the old families he contented himself with simply doubling the strength without altering the names of the old divisions.18 But the change attributed to Servius Tullius went far beyond this. His famous distribution of all freeholders (assidui) into tribes, classes, and centuries,1 though subsequently adopted with modifications as the basis of the political system, was at first exclusively military in its nature and objects. It amounted in fact to the formation of a new and enlarged army on <a new footing. In this force, excepting in the case of the centuries of the horsemen, no regard was paid either to the old clan divisions, or to the semi-religious semi-political curiae. In its ranks were included all free-holders within the Roman territory, whether members or not of any of the old divisions, and the organization of this new army of assidui was not less independent of the old system with its clannish and religious traditions and forms. The unit was the "centuria" or company of 100 men; the centuriae were grouped in "classes" and drawn up in the order of the phalanx. The centuries in front were composed of the wealthier citizens, whose means _enabled them to bear the cost of the complete equipments necessary for those who were to bear the brunt of the onset. These centuries formed the first class. Behind them stood the centuries of the second and third classes, less completely armed, but making up together with those of the first class the heavy-armed infantry. In the rear were the centuries of the fourth and fifth classes, recruited from the poorer freeholders, and serving only as light-armed troops. The entire available body of freeholders was divided into two equal portions, a reserve corps of " seniores " and a corps of " juniores " for active service. Each of these corps consisted of 85 centuries or 8500 men, i.e., of two legions of about 4200 men each, the normal strength of a consular legion under the early republic. It is noticeable also that the heavy-armed centuries of the three first classes in each of these legions represented a total of 3000 men, a number which agrees exactly with the number of heavy-armed troops in the legion as described by Polybius. Attached to the legions, but not included in them, were the companies of sappers and trumpeters. Lastly, to the six centuries of horsemen, which still retained the old tribal names, twelve more were added as a distinct body, and recruited from the wealthiest class of citizens. The four " tribes " also instituted by Servius were probably intended to serve as the basis for the levy of freeholders for the new army. As their names show, they corresponded with the natural local divisions of the city territory, but that they included freeholders residing on Roman territory but outside Rome is indicated by the fact that both Ostia and Alba belonged to the Palatine tribe.

Fall of the Monarchy

The last of these Etruscan lords to rule in Rome was Tarquín the Proud. He is described as a splendid and despotic monarch. His sway extended over Latium as far south as Circeii. Aristodemus, tyrant of Cumae, was his ally, and kinsmen of his own were princes at Collatia, at Gabii, and at Tusculum. The Volscian highlanders were chastised, and Signia with its massive walls was built to hold them in check. In Rome itself the Capitoline temple and the great cloaca bore witness to his power. But his rule pressed heavily upon the Romans, and at the last, on the news of the foul wrong done by his son Sextus to a noble Roman matron, Lucretia, the indignant people rose in revolt. Tarquín, who was away besieging Ardea, was deposed ; sentence of exile was passed upon him and upon all his race; and the people swore that never again should a king rule in Rome. Freed from the tyrant, they chose for themselves two yearly magistrates who should exercise the supreme authority, and thus the republic of Rome was founded. Three times the banished Tarquin strove desperately to recover the throne he had lost. First of all the men of Veii and Tarquinii marched to his aid, but were defeated in a pitched battle on the Roman frontier. A year later Lars Porsena, prince of Clusium, at the head of all the powers of Etruria, appeared before the gates of Rome, and closely besieged the city, until, moved by the valour of his foe, he granted honourable terms of peace and withdrew. Once again, by Lake Regillus, the Romans fought victoriously for their liberty against Tarquin's son-in-law Mamilius, prince of Tusculum, and chief of the Latin name. Mamilius was slain; Tarquin in despair found a refuge at Cumse, and there soon afterwards died.

So, in brief, ran the story of the flight of the kings, as it was told by the chroniclers whom Livy followed. Its details are most of them fabulous; it is crowded with inconsistencies and improbabilities; there are no trustworthy dates; the names even of the chief actors are probably fictitious, and the hand of the improver, Greek or Roman, is traceable throughout.11 The struggle was doubtless longer and sharper, and the new constitution more gradually shaped, than tradition would have us believe. Possibly, too, this revolution in Rome was but a part of a widespreading wave of change in Latium and central Italy, similar to that which in Greece swept away the old heroic monarchies. But there is no room for doubting the main facts of the emancipation of Rome from the rule of alien princes and the final abolition of the kingly office.





Footnotes

Varro, L. L., vi. 34.
Pest., 258 ; Varro ap. Solinus, i. 17.
Tae., Ann., xii. 24. For a full discussion of the exact limits of the Palatine city see Smith, Diet. Geog., s. v. "Roma"; Jordan, Topog. d. Stadt Rom, i. cap. 2 ; Gilbert, Topog. u. Gesch. d. Stadt Rom, i. caps. 1, 2 ; and "Topography" below.
L. L., v. 48 ; of. ibid., 50.
s Festus, 348 ; Jordan, i. 199; Gilbert, i. 161. The seven "montes" are the Palatine with the Velia and Germalus, the Subura, and the three points of the Esquiline (Fagutal, Oppius, and Cispius).
See Mommsen, R. G. (7th ed.), i. 51.
Varro, L. L., V. 45, vii. 44 ; Jordan, ii. 237.
For these traditions see Dionys., i. 31-71.
For a criticism of the myth of the asylum see Schwegler, R. G., i. 465 sq., who, however, exaggerates the mixed character of the Roman people. Hegel, Phil. d. Gesch., 345, takes the story seriously.
Dionys., i. 9 ; Thue., vi. 2 ; Dionys., i. 16, ii. 1.
The theory that Latin was a "mongrel speech" is now discarded; see Schwegler, i. 190, and Lira LANGUAGE, vol. xiv. p. 327.
12 The title " rex " occurs on inscriptions at Lanuvium, Tusculum, Bovilke; Henzen, Bullettino dell. Inst., 1868, p. 159; Orelli, 2279 ; Corp. I. Lat., vi., 2125. For "dictator" and "praetor," see Livy, i. 23, viii. 3 ; of. Marquardt, Rom. Staatsverwaltung, i. 475 ; for "curia," Serv. on Jin. i. 17 ; Marquardt, i. 467.
13 Helbig, Die ltaliker in d. Poebene ; Pohlmann, Anfange Roms, 40 ; Abeken, Mittel-Italien, 61 sq.
14 The existence of a Tuscan quarter (Tuscus vicus) in early Rome probably points to nothing more than the presence in Rome of Etruscan artisans and craftsmen. The Etruscan origin ascribed to the third tribe, the "Luceres," is a mere guess; see Schwegler, i. 504, and Lange, Rom. Alterth., i. 85.
15 Varro, L. L., v. 51.
16 Varro, L. L., v. 74; Schwegler, i. 248 sq. ; but Mommsen (R. G., i. 53) points out that most of these so-called Sabine deities are at least equally Latin.
17 Varro, L. L., v. 55; Livy, i. 13.
18 Mommsen, R. G.,i. 43. Schwegler (J?. G., i. 478) accepts the tradition of a Sabine settlement on the Quirinal, and considers that in the united state the Sabine element predominated. Volquardsen (Rhein. Mus., xxxiii. 559) believes in a complete Sabine conquest; and so does Zoller (Latium u. Rom, Leipsic, 1878), who, however, places it after the expulsion of the Tarquins. Gilbert (Topogr., i. cap. 5) accepts the Sabine settlement, but holds rightly that in the union the Latin element decisively predominated.

1 See Mommsen, i. 43. The Sabine words in Latin, if not common to both dialects, were probably introduced later, or are Sabinized Latin (Mommsen, Unterital. Dialekten, 347). Schwegler's attempt to distinguish Sabine features in the Roman character is ingenious but unsatisfactory.

Cato ap. Dionys., ii. 48, 49.
Cato ap. Dionys., ii. 48, 49. For the institution of the "ver sacrum" see Schwegler, Rom. Gesch., i. 240; Nissen, Templum, iv.
The tradition connecting the Ramnes with Romulus and the
Tities with Tatius is as old as Ennius (Varro, L. L., v. 55). Mommsen (i. 41) explains Ramnes as = Romani, but this etymology is rejected by Schwegler and by Corssen. As regards the Luceres there is little to add to Livy's statement (i. 13), "nominis et originis causa incerta
est." Gf., on the whole question, Schwegler, i. 505, and Volquardsen,
est." Gf., on the whole question, Schwegler, i. 505, and Volquardsen,
Rhein. Mus., xxxiii. 538.
s They are traditionally connected only with the senate of 300
patres, with the primitive legion of 3000, with the vestal virgins, and
with the augurs (Varro, L. L., v.'81, 89, 91; Livy, x. 6 ; Festus,

For the references, see Schwegler, i. 646 sq.
2 If the analogy of the " rex sacrorum" is to be trusted, the "king " could only be chosen from the ranks of the "patricii." Cic. Pro Domo, 14 ; Gaius, i. 122.
Cic. De Rep., ii. 13 ; Dionys., ii. 14, &c.
Cic. De Rep., ii. 13 ; Dionys., ii. 14, &c.
* Varrò, L. L., v. 155. For the position of the "comitium," see Smith, Diet. Geog., s.v. " Roma," and Jordan, Topog. d. Stadt Rom.
5 Dionys., I.e. 6 Livy, i. 26; Dionys., iii. 22.
Gaius, ii. 101. 8 Gell., xv. 27.
9 Gell., v. 19, "Comitia praebentur, quae curiata appellantur."
Of. Cic. Pro Domo, 13, 14; and see ROMAN LAW.
By far the most complete criticism of the traditional accounts of the first four kings will be found in Schwegler's Rom. Geschichte, vol. i.; compare also Ihne's Early Rome, and Sir G. C. Lewis's Credibility of Early Roman History.
The "fossa Cluilia," 5 miles from Rome (Livy, ii. 39), is regarded by Schwegler (i. 585) and by Mommsen (i. 45) as marking the Roman frontier towards Latium. Cf. Ovid., Fast., ii. 681; Strabo, 230, " ______."


Livy,»i. 38, 55 ; Pirn., N. H., xxxvi. 15.
This is the view of O. Miiller, and more recently of Deecke, Gardthausen, and Zoller ; it is rejected by Schwegler. Mommsen accepts the Etruscan origin of the Tarquins, but denies that it proves an Etruscan rule in Rome.
Zoller, Latium u. Rom, 166, 189 ; Gardthausen, Mastarna
Livy, i. 2 ; Dionys., i. 64, 65 ; Plut., Q. R., 18.
Livy, i. 2 ; Dionys., i. 64, 65 ; Plut., Q. R., 18.
Cato ap. Serv., Ain., xi. 567.
* Helbig, Ann. d. Inst., 1865.
Plut., Rom., 2, TrapavoiiiiTaTOs Kal u/xoraTOS; of. Rutulian
Tarquitius, Virg., Ain., x. 550.
See speech of Claudius, Tab. Lugd., -App. to Nipperdey's edition of the Annals of Tacitus, " Tusce Mastarna ei nomen erat." For the painting in the Francois tomb at Vulci, see Gardthausen, Mastarna, 29 sq. ; Annali dell. Instit., Rome, 1859.
22 Cf. the traditions of Mezentius, of Cseles Vibenna, Porsena, &c.
13 Schwegler, R. 67., i. 679 sq.
14 Schwegler, i. 791, 792. He accepts as genuine, and as represent-ing the extent of Roman rule and connexions under the Tarquins, the first treaty between Rome and Carthage mentioned by Polybius (iii. 22); see, for a discussion of the question, Vollmer, Rhein. Mus., xxxii. 614 sq. ; Mommsen, Rom. Chronologie, 20 ; Dyer, Journ. of Philol., ix. 238. 15 Livy, i. 35 ; Dionys., iii. 67; Cic. De Rep., ii. 20.
16 Varro, L. L., v. 89. 17 Livy, i. 36 ; Dionys., iii. 71.
18 The six centuries of horsemen were thenceforward known as "primi secundique Ramnes " (Fest., 344; cf. Schwegler, i. 685 sq.). It is possible that the reforms of Tarquinius Priscus were limited to the cavalry.

1 Cic. De Rap., ii. 22 ; Livy, i. 42 ; Dionys., iv. 16.
This is recognized by Mommsen, Genz, and Soltau, as against Niebuhr, Schwegler, and Ihne. Even in the later "comitia cen-turiata" the traces of the originally military character of the organ-ization are unmistakable.
The century ceased to represent companies of one hundred when the whole organization ceased to be military and became exclusively political.
The property qualification for service in the first class is given at 100,000 asses (Livy), for the second at 70,000, third 50,000, fourth 25,000, fifth 11,000. It was prooably originally a certain acreage in land, afterwards translated into terms of money ; cf. Mommsen, Rom. Tribus, 115.
5 Polyb., vi. 20 ; Mommsen, Rom. Trib., 132 sq.
Livy, i. 43. Dionys. (iv. 18) and Cic. (De Rep., ii. 22) ascribe the whole eighteen to Servius. But the six older centuries remained distinct, as the "sex suffragia" of the comitia centuriata ; Cic. De Rep., ii. 22. ">
Livy, i. 43. Dionys. (iv. 18) and Cic. (De Rep., ii. 22) ascribe the whole eighteen to Servius. But the six older centuries remained distinct, as the "sex suffragia" of the comitia centuriata ; Cic. De Rep., ii. 22. ">
Dionys., iv. 14, els ras KarayptMpas raji* GTpa.Twrwv.
Livy, i. 43. The four were Palatina, Suburana, Exqiulina, Collina.
See Grotefend, Imperium R. tributim clescriptum, 27, 67. The
inclusion of landless men (" proletarii") in the tribes belongs to a
significance ; cf. the formation of a century of " capite censi."


Read the rest of this article:
Rome - Table of Contents