Bruzzo

I have heard a lot of stories about the seven kings of ancient Rome, but how much is true and how much was made up after the destruction of Roman records in 390 BC? As far as I can tell they are almost entirely legendary, but some form of government must have existed in the pre-Republican era of Roman history, and the story of Brutus' uprising against Superbus makes some degree of sense. Thoughts?

Mangekyou

One of the nicer legends is based around Tarquinius Superbus. Approached by Sibyl, he was offered nine books which would foretell the future of Rome. He turns her down. She burns three. She comes back again with the same offer. He turns her down again, she burns another three. When she comes back a third time, he eventually takes her offer and takes the remaining three books at the original price she offered them at. They were then locked away in the Jupiter temple, one of the prophecie being that Rome would end in 1000 years.

Its a mixture of legend and truth. We know that the Romans modelled a lot of their stuff from the Etruscans, including gladiatorial games, so its safe to say they had an influence, and the Roman hatred for kings would have stemmed from somewhere..

Caracalla

I remember seeing a documentary - might have been Cities of the Underground (not sure?) - where they said that new archological evidence supported some of what was known about the latter kings. And, as you say, the story of the birth of the Republic sounds very plausable.

Almost certainly the earlier kings are mythalogical.

Tobias Binch

Unless anyone knows differently, there is no written proof from non-roman sources that confirms the kings at the time when they existed - no Greek mention of it from the times when the kings were supposed to have existed or through to 400 BC or so.

Some sort of monarchy, sure, but no way to prove there were 7 (which happens to match the seven hills). And no way to prove that because a corrupt judge/monarch, Tarquin, supported his son, Sextus, the people kicked him out. There could have been a council of seven men, or more probably seven families - and they elected a king or Doge like in Venice.

There was a roman holy day called Regifugium that may have celebrated the fact that Tarquinius fled from Rome, but the Romans themselves didn't really know; some thought it had nothing to do with that and was about something entirely different.

Everything later, in the Republican times, everything that we have, is tinged with the Roman mythopoeic view, with Roman exceptionalism and Roman destiny. Plutarch writes about King Numa as a factual historical figure ... and there were religious/social festivals throughout the year in Rome that confirmed it. There were dancing and leaping priests, the Salii, going around throughout most of March reminding the people about Numa as a factual person.

beorna

Correct, quintus fabius pictor in the end of 3rd (he even wrote in greek) and marcus Portius cato in the beginning of the 2nd century were the first generation of historians in Rome and even the oldest greek historians don't go futher back than the late 6th or early 5th century. So only the Greeks could be contemporary sources of the fall of the kings, but they keep silence. We don't know, when the Romans invented their alphabet. It is said, that the used it since the 7th century. It probably derived from Etrsucan, but it is of course possible, that it derived from a greek alphabet. The oldest etruscan inscription at least is from 700. It is reported, that there were books by Numa Pompilius in Latin, but we have to doubt this. Even the Romans had nothing about these old kings.

What was existing was the 12-table-law. It reported old customs of the rural Rome. Perhaps there were some short annales of the pontifices, for sure not more.

So all we, all the Romans knew about their kings were tales. maybe the names are true, maybe some stories, but we can't be sure.

Even the tale of the Roman uprise against the brutal etruscan dynasty is a myth. Lucius Iunius Brutus was the son of Tarquinius' sister. So it was an uprise of the nobility of Rome, against the ruler, not the uprise against an foreign king.

pixi666

The Kings are almost entirely mythical, IMO. They serve as archetypes of rulers that the Romans could throw responsibility on for various matters. Who founded our city and tied us to the Sabines? Romulus. Who founded our religious institutions? Numa, of course! How did we start expanding? It was Tullus Hostilius. Who built our infrastructure and early buildings? Tarquinius Priscus! Who organized our military? Servius Tullius! Who was so bad that we founded a Republic? Tarquinius Superbus!

They're all formulaic characters, except for Ancus Marcius, perhaps.

caldrail

That isn't actually true. Whilst I cannot deny the Etruscans had any influence at all, the gladiatorial fights were also influenced by greek warrior myth and the Rome's very own martial mindset. It was, in other words, a something uniquely Roman.

There is of course the point that gladiatorial combat emerges very strongly from Campagnia rather than Rome itself.

benkernow

My opion is it's all myth based on fact. Where there 7 kings that ruled for a average of 25 years each? Unlightly! even in this day in age. But I believe that some of the named kings probably excisted but the stories where not quite as true as we know them and there probably gaps in the records of the lists of kings, So I think that people filled in the gaps and put there own stories and names there.

pixi666

Gladiatorial combat in Rome didn't begin as part of a martial mindset or warrior myths of the Greeks. Early gladiatorial combats were part of funeral games honoring the dead, which is taken directly from Etruscan practices. It later evolved into the gladiatorial combat that is better known.

Mangekyou

Although therre is no clear evidence from Etruscan archeological finds of the games per ce, it is believed they descended from the Etruscans. The Romans simply turned it into what we know today.

Quote:

The Etruscans are credited (secondhand, by the Greek writer Athenaeus in the first century A.D., who was quoting an earlier, lost source) as the originators of the games. Source: The Roman Arena

This.