- Feb 2011
Cornell (writing in 1995) explained that there were settlements on each of the main hills going back to nearly 1000BCE or before. (I suspect Alpin Luke is more up to date on arachaeological finds.). Rome flourished because it is at an important site- on the Tiber, at a river crossing and close to Salt Works. At some stage these settlements coalesced, at which stage 'Rome' could be said to have come into existence. When exactly this took place is hard to say. Beard's view is that, keen to pinpoint a date and founder, later Romans calculated a date (753BCE) and deemed the founder, 'Mr Rome'. (Romulus). This left a gap for the monarchy they believed had existed from 753-509, when the Consular fasti were deemed to have commenced.So when we talk about this 'coming together', is this what is meant by a foundation (as in the alleged 753BCE event) of Rome?