The Ancients - The Origins of Rome

Episode Date: July 21, 2022

Known as the Eternal City, ancient Rome was one of the greatest civilisations in human history, but how did it come about?With a turbulent history of Kings, civil wars and imperial desires - Rome has an incredible history. But who founded it? Were Romulus and Remus real brothers fighting for their kingdoms, or did a Trojan hero found one of the mightiest Italian states? Recent archaeological discoveries indicate a far more complicated picture of Rome's beginnings - but where does its mystic past fall into this new story?In this episode Tristan is joined by Professor Guy Bradley from Cardiff University to discover more about the origins of Rome around the 8th century B.C.TW: This episode contains a reference to rapeFor more Ancients content, subscribe to our Ancients newsletter here.If you'd like to learn even more, we have hundreds of history documentaries, ad free podcasts and audiobooks at History Hit - subscribe today!

Hi, I'm Tristan Hughes, and if you would like the Ancient ad-free, get early access and bonus episodes, sign up to History Hit. With a History Hit subscription, you can also watch hundreds of hours of original documentaries, including my recent documentary all about Petra and the Nabataeans, and enjoy a new release every week. Sign up now by visiting historyhit.com slash subscribe. It's the Ancients on History Hit. I'm Tristan Hughes, your host, and in today's podcast, we're going back to the beginnings of ancient Rome. We're talking all about the origins of Rome, looking at the archaeology, and also the literature that refers to Rome's beginnings, what the Romans believed. So names such as Romulus, Aeneas, and then we're going to be going a bit later on and talking about a few of the kings as well. But alongside that, we're also going to be looking at what the

most recent archaeology is revealing about this distant time in Rome's history and it's really exciting at the moment because of some brand new discoveries, particularly surrounding the mythical figure of Romulus. Did he exist? Did he not? Well there is some archaeology which seems to be now shining some more light on that. As our guest today will explain in this episode, our guest is none other than Professor Guy Bradley from the University of Cardiff. I headed over to Guy's office a couple of weeks back to interview him all about the origins of Rome.

It was a great chat and here is the finished episode. So without further ado, to talk all about the origins of Rome, here's Guy. Guy, it is great to have you on the podcast today. Lovely, it's great to be here and thanks very much for coming down to Cardiff to talk to me. Well, you're very welcome indeed and for a great topic as well and it's a lovely day outside so, you know, everything is going according to plan and this podcast no doubt will too. Because Guy, looking at the origins of Rome the early history of Rome the city and how it grows it's really interesting isn't it because it seems

as if in recent years and recent decades new archaeological discoveries is helping us learn much more about this very distant past alongside the sparse literature we have of it too. Yeah I think that's been one of the most exciting developments in recent years, is the way that the archaeological material has really massively enhanced our understanding of the origins of Rome. We do have a very interesting account in the literary sources. We have a range of literary sources, Livy, Dionysus, Valicarnassus, and many other Greek and Roman writers. But the archaeological evidence gives us a wholly new picture, really. Actually, let's talk about those sources quickly that you highlighted there.

So we get an idea in regards to the literature side of things. When are these historians writing? How much later? Yeah, well, this is the great challenge in many ways, because they're seven or so centuries later. So Livy is writing, and in fact Dionysus of Halicarnassus is writing in the Augustan period. So Livy is probably publishing his history of Rome, his great 142 book history of Rome, probably just as Augustus is coming to power in the late 30s, early 20s BC. So that's 700 years after the foundation of the city, which immediately poses us with an immense problem of how does he get the information from earlier on? Personally, I think we can be a bit more optimistic than

scholars have tended to be in the past, because obviously that is a huge gap. But one of the key things about information about the foundation of the city is the variety of different sources or different ways in which the information was preserved, both in documentary records, but also in a very rich and complex oral tradition that interacted with those two areas, interact with each other. And really Romans had a very vibrant sense of who they were and where they came from, even if that had become quite changed over time, I think, as they talked about it increasingly. And from what you're saying there, does it sound almost as if there's,

or at least what the Romans believe, there's a mythological founding of Rome and then an archaeological founding of Rome too? Yeah. I mean, the Romans themselves wouldn't conceive an archaeological founding, but the mythological side of things, they were regarded as historical. And they look back on these stories about Romulus and Remus, these two great famous founders of the city, as history. You know, and they tried to put it in a historical context, identify exactly the dates of them, and really fully understand this as part of what they regard as their history. Livy does, when he talks about the origins of Rome, he does talk about the earlier mists of time making things a bit more difficult to discern earlier on. And he says, I'll tell you what

happened or tell you what I find in my sources, but I won't refute or confirm whether the stories are true or not. And for that, he's talking about the period before the foundation of the city, probably. Well, you mentioned Romulus and Remus, so let's really go into that now. What, therefore, did the Romans believe was the story of the foundation of Rome? Yeah, well, the story is a really incredible story. It's a story of two twins who are illegitimately pushed out of their rightful inheritance from a nearby city called Alba Longa. And there's lots of different traditions about Alba Longa, whether it may have been founded originally by Aeneas, who was a refugee from Troy after the sack of Troy in the Trojan War. So Alba Longa, Romulus and Remus have a rightful claim to the throne, but they become

victims to a usurper called Amulius. And Amulius basically has them as babies cast adrift on the river Tiber in an attempt to have them killed. But they are miraculously rescued, most famously by a wolf initially, and then by a shepherd who comes across the wolf actually suckling them. And then they grow up to become powerful sort of king-like young men and seize back the kingdom ultimately, or seize back the kingdom for their lineage. And they put their grandfather back in charge. He was the rightful owner of the throne there in Alba Longa. And they themselves found rival new settlements on the site of Rome. Romulus chooses the Palatine Hill and Remus chooses the Aventine. So there's immediately

this sense of two different rival foundations. And the story goes that they experience a dispute and the dispute, they agree, is going to be resolved by Augury. So Augury is looking for signs from the gods, sent by the gods in terms of birds flying in the sky. And they both get signs. So they're not quite sure what to do. So Remus gets the earlier sign. He sees six vultures. Romulus sees a later sign. So he doesn't have precedent, but he sees more vultures. So they're constantly in dispute. And then the most famous version of the story is that Romulus begins the foundation walls of his version of Rome on the Palatine. Remus jumps over those walls as they're very low and Romulus kills him.

Or in different versions, he's killed by an acolyte of Romulus, depending on which version probably you favour in order to get your founder of the city off the hook from this potential fratricide, killing of his brother. And that's the interesting foundation story which they believed. And when did the Romans believe that this foundation dated to? Yeah, so again, there's a wide variety of different dates assigned to the foundation of the city. The most canonical one, the one most widely accepted by the Romans, is 753 BC. But that date wasn't arrived at and didn't become canonical until probably the mid-first century BC with the chronological investigations of the Roman

polymath Terentius Varro. But the Romans had other dates as well. So in the second century BC, various historians give other dates such as 814, the same date as the foundation of Carthage, Rome's great rival. And there were also later dates as well, going as late as 728 BC. And some poets even thought that Rome was founded at the time of the Trojan War. It's only later on, it's only as Varro does his investigations and the story becomes refined and canonised, if you like, that they alight on that particular very famous date of 753. I do really appreciate you going through all of this because as you mentioned there are various versions so obviously trying to tell this what the Romans believed is

always an interesting question to answer. Just one more thing before we can try and like see if there's any truth in all of this in the archaeology and that's because you also mentioned the Trojan War because in the surviving literature the Romans also believe that there is a Trojan War. Because in the surviving literature, the Romans also believe that there is a Trojan War link to Rome's founding, Rome's origins too. Yeah, that's right. So they look back to the Trojan War and particularly they focus on Aeneas. And then Aeneas is one of the Trojan princes, one of the sons of Priam, the ruler of Troy. And after the sack of Troy, Aeneas is said to have been one of the few Trojans who escapes with his father on his shoulders. And he goes on to have a son as well, who is said to have founded a dynasty in Latium, in the area around Rome. And Aeneas did lots of travels. Virgil in the Aeneid

talks about Aeneas' journey and talks about him going to Carthage, meeting Dido, of course, in the famous love story. And actually also you mentioned Leishman and the area around Rome so actually it'd be great if also you could give us an idea of what the topography of Rome we think that area obviously looks like in those early stages. Yeah yeah so it's really important actually to understand the foundation of the city we really need to look at the geographical situation of Rome. Rome is on the most important river in peninsula Italy, which is the Tiber. It's at the lowest crossing point, the nearest crossing point from the coast over the Tiber. Rome has defendable hills as well. Those hills are, some of them are isolated like

the Capitoline and the Palatine and the Aventine hills. Others are spurs of higher ground like the Esquiline. So the idea that the Romans had that there were seven hills of Rome is a little bit of an oversimplification. The Romans never quite agreed on which seven hills should be the canonical seven, but there's lots of defendable ground basically right next to this important artery going into central Italy, the Tiber. And there's very important roads as well. So there's a road leading into the mountainous areas in the centre of the peninsula called the Via Salaria, the salt route, and a road leading down to the coast as well called the Via Campana. and a road leading down to the coast as well called the Via Campana.

And in general, in terms of Latium, Latium is the area in which the Latins reside. Rome is on the northern edge of that and is at a boundary point with Etruria and the Etruscans to the north. The Latins themselves are organised around the Orban Mount, which is a great extinct volcano, a massive mountain in the middle of Latium, where they came together annually for an annual sacrifice. And I think that this is also a really interesting point to mention now, isn't it? In these really, really early days of Rome, in Latium itself, the Latins, these people, the Romans are just one of these people, aren't they? There are various different Latin groups in settlements all around. Yeah, that's right. Yeah.

I mean, there were different counts. You know, you could come up with 30, you could come up with 50 Latin peoples. The Romans later on in their sources identify Latin peoples who once existed but now have disappeared. And really, they're talking about individual towns or small cities spread throughout the area of latium well let's delve into the archaeology now behind the origin story of rome and before we go on to rome proper you mentioned a few other names there like alba longa and of course we talked about neos reaching italy from tri after the trojan war now if we look at the archaeology we're at around that see if there could be any potential truth do we have any

archaeological evidence for instance of people coming to italy from the eastern mediterranean around that time at the beginning of the first millennium bc and do we have any archaeological evidence for places like alba longa yeah that's a really good question because archaeologists have been desperate to find something that they can really hitch up to the literary myths. And unfortunately, some parts of the story are, well, as is inevitable with history, some parts of the story tie in quite nicely with the archaeology, some parts don't. So certain things like Alba Longa as a large, important city in the early part of the first millennium BC, well, no, there's no archaeological evidence for any city up on

what's called the Auburn Mount, the great mountain in the middle of Latium. Instead, we do find some early burials there. There's no signs of any city, basically. Conversely, Rome itself has signs of very early settlement. So the earliest material from the site of Rome goes back to the Middle Bronze Age. And we have Bronze Age material, so 2nd millennium BC, including middle 2nd millennium BC. That material from the Capitoline Hill, from the Forum, from the Forum Boarium as well. So already before 1000 BC, we've got mostly fragments of pottery. What's called Apennine pottery, characteristic of the Bronze Age in Italy, is found on the site of Rome. Is it the hut of Romulus or is that one of those

key archaeological finds from the city? Yeah, what there is on top of the Palatine Hill is post holes. And the dating of the huts, probably early first millennium BC, where there were small hut settlements, basically. And the hut of Romulus is something that the Romans kept preserved on the Palatine Hill in one of these spaces where there have been very early huts. They themselves believe that the hut, it's probably better to use a term like habitation structure because they're not small, they're quite big, these spaces, they're basically houses. The Romans themselves believe that this hut of Romulus had been preserved since the reign of Romulus in the 8th century BC. They're probably wrong about that. I mean, temporary materials, straw roof, wooden walls would have been rebuilt over time.

So it does beg the question, therefore, has archaeology been able to corroborate any of the surviving accounts we have of what the Romans believed about the foundations of their capital? Yeah, well that is where the most recent excavations really come in and one of the most exciting things that has been found is a wall around the Palatine Hill. Now, inevitably, archaeologists have tried to connect this up with a story that is told in the literary sources about Romulus first fortifying the Palatine Hill and then Remus jumping over the walls. So we have traces of a wall around the Palatine Hill. The traces are about 25 meters long. They're quite substantial. The wall itself is about a meter wide. It's initially built out of mud and posts, a bit like a kind of

ancient British hill fort or something like that. It's quite curious in that it's down the bottom of the hill, so it doesn't actually look as though it would have been terribly effective in fortification terms. But, you know, here's quite a close parallel with the literary sources. And there are some other parallels as well. You know, there's quite a lot of increasing evidence from the 8th century BC. Romulus said to have founded the city around 753. You know, the 8th century is emerging as a more important period in terms of other structures as well so there's a building that the palestine wall was excavated by a very prominent italian

professor called andrea carandini and his team also found in a very closely related area early traces of a great large courtyard building that they called the Domus Regii, the house of the king, and also early traces of what will become a very important sanctuary in the middle of Rome, the Temple of Vesta as well. Right, so talk to me a bit about the Temple of Vesta. So if that's got its origins at this time, because this seems also to be the centre of one of the most important religious aspects of ancient Rome. Yeah. So having a hearth at the centre of the city is clearly a very important concept for the idea of a Roman community. That fire had to be kept burning. It had its own special priestesses called the Vestal Virgins. And the Temple of Vesta was a fundamental idea for the Romans really, that they had a continually

burning fire that expressed one of their key ancient sanctuary sites. And traces on the site of the Temple of Vesta, there seems to have been a large precinct around the sanctuary. Although we can't precisely identify the walls of the Temple of Vesta, we got sort of 8th century material from the precinct of the Temple of Vesta. And is that also talked about in the surviving literature, the Vestal Virgins, how they're very much linked to Romulus and this 8th century date? Yes. So Romulus is said to have been the offspring of a Vestal Virgin. So Vestal Virgins, according to literary sources, exist earlier, at least in Alba Longa, the city where Romulus originates from. There are other indications in the sources that the number of Vestal Virgins in Rome were established by Numa.

Numa is the second king of Rome. He's particularly important as a religious founder of the city. So he kind of fills in the gaps that Romulus left. Romulus, a great sort of sets up senate, organizes his city into tribes and curiae, which are various institutional groups. Numa comes along as the second king. He's a peaceful king, unlike the warlike Romulus, and he kind of fills in the gaps, founds many new priesthoods, sets up lots of important temples, that sort of thing. Guy, this is absolutely fascinating. You mentioned Numa. We'll go on to the kings very, very shortly. But it almost seems as if, from what you said there in the last 20 minutes or so, that the archaeology, although it seems to suggest that there was settlement on the area of Rome,

the place of Rome, hundreds of years before the 8th century, but there's this archaeological evidence that does seem to suggest that there was this figure called Romulus who came to that area in the eighth century and did these actions that you can see perhaps archaeological evidence of today including those walls could it be that this Romulus is someone who you know comes from the outside establishes a monarchy or something on Rome on a settlement that's been there before, but the whole origins of Rome then develops around this figure. Yeah, we've got to be cautious, though. I can imagine getting too excited. Yeah, yeah. I mean, inevitably, people have become incredibly excited about the 8th century

coincidence between the archaeological material and the literary idea of when the city was founded. I mean, there were a couple of problems. As you say, the archaeological evidence indicates that the 8th century is important for various foundational moments of the Roman community, if you like, in terms of the creation of a communal sanctuary, perhaps the earliest fortifications, early settlement on the Palatine Hill and elsewhere. And they're also very important burial sites in this era. But they've existed, some of these things, for some time already. So the burial sites have been going since the start of the first millennium BC, so since about 1000 BC. As I've mentioned already, there's earlier traces of settlement on the city.

So rather curiously, the Romans actually have a rather too late idea of when their city first came into being. Now, you could argue that actually with the myth of Romulus, perhaps what they're thinking of is the first points at which the city kind of coalesces as a political community. And that's the argument that Carandini's taken forward, that Romulus marks a kind of collective memory of the decisive moments in the political organisation of the city. And that's what's going on. It remains very controversial. So a lot of scholars internationally have questioned Carandini's results. And we always have to remember that the archaeology of the earliest phases is done in very small test pits. So we don't have a kind of overall picture of the city.

We only have tiny fragmentary bits that have been excavated in small areas. Did Edison really take credit for things he didn't invent? Were treadmills originally a form of corporal punishment? And would man have ever got to the moon without the bra? You can expect answers to all these questions and more in the brand new podcast from history hit, patented History of Inventions.

Join me, Dallas Campbell, as I uncover what really sparked history's most impactful ideas. Each episode, I'll be recruiting the help of experts, scientists, historians, and even a few real-life inventors. Subscribe to Patented History of Inventions wherever you listen to your podcasts. Is it in doubt whether Romulus existed? That's a really good question and a really complex one. Up until very recently, I think we would have been entirely comfortable dismissing Romulus as a historical figure. I mean, one of the obvious things is that he seems to be named directly after the city of Rome, Roma, and his name seems to be a derivation of it. And we find this elsewhere in the ancient Mediterranean figures, eponymous founders.

So people named after the city are said to have set the city up. So Capus is said to have set up the city of Capua. I mean, you see it later on with Alexander genuinely sets up Alexandria. But so, yeah, and they project back, the literary sources project this back into earlier history. And they don't like the idea of a city gradually coalescing from people coming together on the point. They've got to have a founder. So they find, you know, they give him and they don't know who it is. So they give him the name of the city. Okay. All very good. You know, then you can dismiss the idea of Romulus being a historical figure. It's slightly more complicated though, because that

name Romulus does exist or a similar version of it exists in Etruscan as well. So there's a name called Romule, which looks as though it's an Etruscan version of Romulus. So is this a name that's floating around in central Italy in this period? It's more difficult now, I think, to say that Romulus is for certain a purely mythological figure. I would hesitate now to say that. But I'm not sure that the archaeology really, you know, yet firmly confirms the historical picture of Romulus. You also said something really interesting there that I think is also keen to talk about

when perhaps the geopolitical landscape at that time is that how much connection do we think there is from the archaeological evidence that's surviving between this emerging Rome and the Etruscans, you know, this power nearby? Do we have to look to Etruscan archaeology sometimes to actually learn more about, as you mentioned, people like Romulus and Rome in, let's say, the 8th century? Yeah, and this is something I've been trying to pioneer, well, not really pioneer, but to elaborate on in my own work. I think it's vitally important to understand Rome as part of a broader central Italian context.

And we have these very advanced city civilizations to the north made up of the 12 Etruscan cities. Well, they thought there were canonical 12, but probably rather more. or 12, but probably rather more. Also very important to the south as well are the Campanian cities such as Capua and Pompeii and other places like that. And these cities grew up together. They are ethnically different, so the Etruscans speak a different language. But there are many Etruscans from the 7th and 6th centuries present in Rome. And Rome actually has a dynasty that originates, according to our literary sources, from Etruria, ruling it from the late 7th and throughout the 6th century BC. Well, let's just wrap up with Romulus first and then get on to Numa. What are the supposed achievements of Romulus by the time of his death? Was it apotheosis, his going up to be

with the gods? Yeah, so Romulus is credited with setting up most of the fundamental features of Roman society. So he's said to have divided the Roman masses into two orders, into the patrician order and the plebeian order. He is said to have set up the senate, to have created a governing council of Rome with 100 members. He's also said to have divided the population into tribes and curiae. So there were three tribes and 30 curiae, so 10 curiae for each tribe. He fortifies the cities to some extent. He sets up an army as well. Many of these things scholars have been rather sceptical about. I think quite rightly the division between patricians and plebeians is probably rather dubious. It doesn't really feature in Roman history until several centuries later. He's also said to have established things like the principle

of equality of the husband and wife in marriage, and the institution of patronage as well between patricians and plebeians but these are probably institutions that have grown up slowly over time and probably the best things that have a chance of being historical are the institutions credited to him of the curiae and the tribes fair enough well then let's move on therefore to numa this is a really interesting figure numa isn't he yeah okay talk me through what the literature is saying about him but then let's really delve into the archaeology of what archaeological evidence we do have for this really extraordinary figure. Yeah, so Numa is a fascinating king. He's the second king of Rome, said to rule for about 35 years. He came from Sabinum, from the Sabines

in the heartland of the peninsula, so up in the mountainous areas away from Rome. And he's drawn to Rome. He's called in because he's such a renowned citizen and he would be a really respectable ruler of the city. So very interesting. He's an outsider and all of the kings that come after him follow that pattern of being outsiders. He is particularly credited with creating religious institutions, as I've mentioned before, and is a peaceable king, unlike Romulus. He elaborates things like the priesthood. So he sets up the major priesthoods of the pontifices, the pontiffs. He sets up the augurs. He sets up the rest of virgins. And so the major priesthoods, he creates many of the most important Roman festivals. The calendar of Roman festivals allegedly already exists, and Romulus has created a 10-month calendar.

Numa is said to have enlarged it to become a 12-month calendar with an extra month that can be stuck in to enlarge the year where necessary. This calendar kind of organized everyone so that everyone took part in festivals at the same time. So these are numerous major achievements. He is a very interesting and rather undefined figure in the sources. He's said to have consorted with a semi-divine figure called Egeria, who in some versions dictates Rome's sacred laws to him. And he's rather ill-defined in terms of his personality. So again, scholars have been somewhat sceptical about the literary

picture of him. So what about the archaeological picture? Whether you're in your running era, Pilates era, or yoga era, dive into Peloton workouts that work with you. From meditating at your kid's game to mastering a strength program, they've got everything you need to keep knocking down your goals. No pressure to be who you're not, just workouts and classes to strengthen who you are. So no matter your era, make it your best with Peloton. Find your push, find your power. Peloton. Visit Peloton at onepeloton.ca. Archaeologically, it's much more difficult to do anything with Numa, partly because the

rain dates are probably problematic. Late 8th to early 7th century, it's a suspiciously long period of time. There almost certainly were more kings than the seven canonical ones recorded in our sources. So actually matching up the archaeology precisely to, say, a particular figure like Numa is pretty difficult. And in fact, although many of the temples that he said to have founded, you know, we have archaeological traces later on, we can't, other than the Temple of Vesta, which dates to the late 8th century, which we may credit to Romulus, we may credit to Numa, it's difficult to do much with the archaeology and Numa. And similarly for the subsequent kings as well, until we get down to the time of the last three

and the so-called Tarquin dynasty. So from an archaeological perspective then, do we therefore see any reflection, say let's say as we get into the 7th century you mentioned how these kings are actually coming from outside you know the sabines and then the etruscan kings later is there any archaeological evidence let's say from the 7th century of more buildings or perhaps even people coming in you know reflecting the fact that these kings these monarchs as you said there may be more than seven who are also coming in from outside too. Yes, there's good evidence really that Rome is a rapidly enlarging cosmopolitan city with people from different areas of central Italy coming to live there. So some of the best evidence is epigraphic evidence. So we have Etruscan epigraphy that appears in Rome from the late 7th and the 6th centuries BC.

So that's probably our best evidence that we have Etruscan speakers present in Rome. It's more difficult with other aspects of the material culture like pottery, like burials, because those features of Roman culture are actually near identical to the Latins, to the Sabines, and in fact to the southern Etruscans as well. So burial practices, for instance, in Veii, which is the nearest most important Etruscan city, and in Rome in the 7th century are very, very similar. We know them much better from Veii and from the Etruscan cities because they've not been destroyed by later habitation in the way that the cemeteries in Rome have been. So our evidence in Rome is very fragmentary. But certainly we can say with some security that Rome is a place where people are coming to from neighbouring areas. It's also very interconnected with the broader Mediterranean trade in terms of this presence of Greek pottery, a lot of Etruscan material,

Etruscan bucaro, very distinctive black pottery is found in quite large quantities in the centre of Rome, for instance. I was literally going to ask that. Next, the sea connection. We mentioned the Tiber, it being on the Tiber, and that perhaps Greek connection, perhaps Massalia, Marseille, or places like that. So as you say, it connects with the wider Mediterranean. So it does seem that even in these early originating stages of Rome, that there are those connections, as you say, those maritime connections emerging. Yeah. I mean, from what we can see of the archaeological evidence from shipwrecks, from traded goods in cemeteries, it's quite clear

that the Tyrrhenian coast, which includes the Etruscan cities, Rome, but also the cities of Campania, have been closely connected with both Greek and Phoenician seafarers from the 8th century onwards. And one of the best pieces of evidence really for the trade that is attracting seafarers up to this area of the Mediterranean is the foundation of Pythagusea, a Greek colony off the coast of Campania, which dates archaeologically and is dated in the literary sources to the early 8th century BC to around 775 BC. So the Greeks were already settling parts of the southern Italian coast on their way from mainland Greece round the peninsula of southern areas of the peninsula of Italy up the Tyrrhenian coast to Etruria. Probably they're wanting to visit the Etruscan cities

for the mineral resources. And Rome is one of those stepping off points on the way, basically. It's one of many, as you say. It probably is, yeah, to begin with, yeah. And so how do you think, therefore, from the latest archaeological evidence, what you think, and I guess if it's possible to corroborate it with some surviving literature for instance if there are mentions of certain kings i know you said it's very difficult to know that but what do you think is most likely therefore about how rome from the 8th century how do you think it grows as the 7th century progresses do we have any idea about this stage, this early stage of Rome's

history? Yeah, so there's increasing evidence that the size of the city is enlarging quite substantially. Some of the best evidence is the cemeteries, which move from the central part of the forum to the outskirts of the city. So suddenly the tombs move, and it seems as though the central part of the city, a very large area, has been allowed or it's been set up to be the habitation area, if you like, of the city. That's probably the best evidence. Later on, if you push it into the 6th century BC, we start to get the evidence of fortification walls. And we can't precisely date it, but at some point in the 6th century, it's very likely that Rome received an 11 kilometre long circuit wall around the city. And we can connect that up

with the last three kings of Rome. So Tarquinius Priscus said to come to Rome from Etruria. Servus Tullius, who came after him, who may be Latin or maybe Etruscan, depending on our sources, and Tarquinius Superbus. Those are the last three kings. They're great builders. And Servus Tullius is the one connected to the encompassing fortification circuit. And we have archaeological traces of that. The most recent archaeological investigations have worked out that under the 4th century BC wall is an earlier archaic circuit that's almost certainly that of Servius Tullius dating to the 6th century BC. It's an incredible building structure because it is so huge. The investment of manpower is enormous,

11 kilometers long. It was built out of local stone. It encompasses an area of around 420 hectares. Now that puts Rome, it indicates that Rome is a vastly larger city than any other comparable central Italian city. It's not quite as big as the largest Greek cities in the south, so Taras, Sibiris, and it's a little bit smaller than Athens and the Piraeus but Rome is on the same scale as these major Mediterranean centres basically and far surpasses all of its central Italian rivals. If you mention these great builders these great builder kings how are they therefore portrayed in the surviving literary sources if they've left such an archaeological mark on the city, on the archaeology? Yeah, well, here I think we're on much firmer ground with the literary materials.

So Tarquinius Priscus is a much more rounded and believable character. He's the third to last king of Rome than the four kings who've come before him, really. Many interesting features about his reign. So the fact that he comes from Etruria, settles in Rome, changes his name on arriving in Rome, becomes an important lieutenant of the previous king. That ties in with many features that we know from archaeology and epigraphy about individuals moving between cities in central Italy and in fact across the Mediterranean from the Homeric world down into the 6th century BC. He is a great builder as are the other two members of the so-called

Tarquin dynasty Servius Tullius and Tarquinius Superbus who come after him. I think they're highly likely to be historical figures and the archaeology of the late 7th and the whole of the 6th century BC is awash with colossal temples and other major structures. So I've mentioned the fortifications already, but the most important structure probably is the Capitoline Temple, which is the temple to Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva on the Capitoline Hill. We have archaeological traces for them. We can understand quite well, archaeologically now, archaeological traces for, we can understand quite well archaeologically now, was some 55 metres across by 62 metres in length. It is the largest temple by far in central Italy, and it's comparable with the great monument set up by the tyrants in the Aegean in the Eastern Mediterranean in

the Archaic period as well. So it's one of the most spectacular building structures in the Archaic Mediterranean. I was going to ask if there was any archaeology that could be similar to that from the Etruscan area of Italy. But at the same time, does that also suggest that there is perhaps this Hellenic influence perhaps from the Eastern Mediterranean, Central Mediterranean coming to Rome at that time? Yeah, so there's been some really interesting recent studies on the Capitoline Temple, just to take a single example. Scholars have suggested that it certainly shows expertise in the construction that probably indicates the presence of Greek craftsmen. It may have been the product of a Greek architect. There are strong similarities between the Capitoline Temple and a great temple in Samos

in the Aegean. Its decoration, though, many features of it are actually quite central Italian. So it has a three cellar arrangement, so three chambers for the three deities. That's very typical central Italian. It has decoration that looks very like the decoration on contemporary Etruscan temples. So it shows an expertise in terracotta, the working of decorative terracotta friezes that is clearly linked to southern Etruria. We used to think that it indicates that Etruscan craftsmen have worked on the Capitoline temple and were brought in as the literary sources talk about. There may be some truth in that, but probably the most important terracotta workshop in central Italy in this time is in Rome, in fact.

Probably there is some interchange with Etruria, but Rome is emerging as the key site, really. When the archaeologists today are excavating in Rome, how do they get to these really low layers in a city which has got more than a thousand years of ancient history? Yeah, well, that's one of the great challenges, is excavating beneath the beautiful structures that you see today, the remains of late Republican, early Imperial Rome. And you can't simply just destroy it. So you have to go down where there are spaces between the ancient structures that were built on top later on. So scholars, archaeologists have been able to dig down, to dig down multiple meters into the lower levels,

but it's often extremely difficult. So one of the most interesting examples is the excavation of the Forum Boarium area by an American team at the minute, where they've managed to verify the presence of archaic temples, but they've had to actually pump out water from the particular excavated area because basically it's below the level of the Tiber. It's extraordinary, isn't it? They've got to get a pump in there. You also mentioned there was one near the Forum as well. We had to dig down a really deep away to find these

early layers and learn more about archaic rock. Yeah, that's right. Carandini's excavations on the slopes of the Palatine have been extraordinarily difficult. He's had to go down a depth of about 10 metres or so, just below the existing levels of the Imperial Forum. It's extremely difficult conditions for really discovering archaic layers. They're very difficult to find. But the potential rewards are great. That's right, yeah. And fascinating new material coming out to the ground all the time.

Guy, this has been an absolutely great chat. I know that we can't speak for too much longer, but as a real and I kind of wrapping up of this overview, like the origins of Roman waste, as an expert in this area with the latest archaeology and looking at the surviving literature, what do you think right now is the most likely or a plausible story for how Rome really emerges in the early first millennium BC or before then? Yeah, I would say there's a couple of really important factors. One is the position

of Rome. It's almost inevitable that a city right in the middle of a really fundamentally important agricultural area with great communication routes, that a city arises there. And in fact, there were two great cities, Veii in South Etruria and Rome, which emerge at very similar periods. and Rome, which emerge at very similar periods. Their emergence is connected to Mediterranean-wide, but also across central Italy, currents of trade. Clearly, there's a coalescence of people on the site of Rome. The literary sources give us various stories about it, that Romulus creates an asylum where people come as outsiders and they can find a place of refuge, if you like, and that's how the population grows. It's very difficult to say whether there's any historical value in that, but what it's very interesting for is the idea that the Romans had themselves, that they are

people of very mixed origin, and that they don't see themselves like the Athenians did as autochthonous, as purely deriving from that particular spot, but rather they recognised that all sorts of people come from all sorts of areas to settle on the site of Rome. Partly they settled there for the geographical reasons, and we should perhaps mention again the role of the Tiber and also the defendable hills that are present now as well. It is really interesting that you mentioned that. Let say like stories of Romulus and the taking of the Sabine women, you know, that story, the element of truth potentially in that story could be this idea that you mentioned there of lots of people coming to Rome

and this being a place of many different peoples in that area. Yeah, so I think there's a way in which you can approach a myth like the rape of the Sabine women, the seizure of the Sabine women. This is said to have happened after the establishment of the asylum because the asylum only attracted males. Therefore, Romulus creates this situation where he can seize women from the surrounding communities. Now, obviously, that's a very formulaic idea that first he gets the mempho, then he gets the wimpho, and then you have an ideal sort of community comes together.

And we can't really historically believe that in a literal fashion. But what we can believe is that that marks some sort of distant Roman memory of the influence, a very important influence of Sabinum and the Sabines on Rome and also the influence of other areas like the Latins. Clearly the Romans are part of the Latins but also the Etruscans, I think, as well. Do we have archaeological evidence for the Sabines at all? Oh, that's such a good question and it's so impossible to answer basically because the Sabine medieval culture blends in really to Latin medieval culture. So, you know, it would be lovely to find, you know, an archaeological burial of a Sabine like Numa or

someone in Rome, but we simply wouldn't recognise them as distinctively different. Okay, Guy. Okay. That's a job for the future though, my friend. A job for the future. Find the Sabines. No, Guy, this has been absolutely great last but certainly not least you have written well you've written a few books all on this period and one of your latest is yeah early rome down to 290 so it's the first of the edinburgh history of ancient rome brilliant well guy it's been an absolute pleasure thank you for letting me come down to cardiff today and it just goes for me to say thank you so much for taking the time to come on the podcast today thanks thanks so much for having me it's been really good fun

well there you go there was professor guy bradley giving an overview of the origins of rome what we know from the latest archaeological discoveries along with the surviving literature i hope you enjoyed this episode now last things from me you know what i'm going to say if you want more ancients content in the meantime well you know what you can do you can subscribe to our weekly ancients newsletter via a link in the description below and of course if you'd also be kind enough to leave us a lovely rating on either spotify apple podcasts wherever you get your podcast from i the whole team we'd greatly appreciate it as we continue on our mission on why we do this podcast to share these ancient history stories with as wide an audience as possible give them the

limelight that they deserve but that's enough from me and i will see you in the next episode