r32 ROMA. see no reason why Janus, a very ancient Latin divinity, and to whom the Jlons Janicnlns appears to have been sacred before the buildino; of Rome, should not have been honoured with a regular temple be^ides the little affair which was the index of peace and war. As the question, however, is connected with the situation of the Argiletum and Forum Caesaris, we shall have occasion to revert to it, and have mentioned it here only because the legend of Tarpeia, and consequent building of the temple, are closely connected with the history of the city. Romulus, after his mysterious disappearance, was deified under the name of Quirinus, and his suc- cessor, Numa, erected a temple to the new God on the Quirinal. (Dionys. ii. 63 ; Ov. Fast. ii. 509). This hill, which was previously named Agonus (Fest. p. 254; Dionys. ii. 37), appears in the time of Numa to have been divided into four distinct eminences, each named after some deity, namely, Quirinalis, Salutaris, Mucialis, and Latiaris (Varr. L.L. v. § 51, Miill.); but from what deity the name of Jlucialis was derived remains inexplicable. The name of Quirinalis, which, however, some derive from the Quirites, who had come with Tatius from Cures, and settled on the hill (Varr. and Fest. II. cc), ultimately swallowed up the other three. The temple of Quirinus probably stood near the pre- sent church of S. Andrea del Noviziato. This question, however, as well as that concerning the sites of the other three temples, will recur when treating of the topography of the city. Numa, who was himself a Sabine, also founded a capitol (Hieron. i. p. 298), subsequently called, by way of distinction, " vetus Capitolium," on the Qui- rinal, which hill had been chiefly colonised by his countrymen. Of course the name of " Capitolium " could not have been applied to it till after the found- ation of the Roman Capitol, and originally it was the arx of the city, containing the three usual temples of Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva. (Varr. L.L. v. § 158, JMiill.) This ancient temple of Jupiter is al- luded to by JIartial (v. 22. 4), and probably stood on the southeiTi part of the Qairinal on the present height of Magnanapoli. Tullus Hostiliusis said to have added the Caelian hill to the city after the destruction of Alba Longa, when the population of Rome was doubled by the in- habitants of Alba being transferred thither ; and in order to render the Caelian still more thickly inha- bited Tullus chose it for his own residence. (Liv. i. 30 ; Eutrop. i. 4; Victor, Vir. III. 4.) The two accounts of the incorporation of this hill by Romulus and Tullus contain, as we have before remarked, nothing contradictory ; otherwise, Dionysius Hali- carnassensis would hardly have committed himself by adopting them both (ii. 36, 50, iii. 1). The first Tuscan settlement had been transferred to another place. But when Cicero (f/e Rep. ii. 18) and Straho (v. p. 234) state that the Caelian was added to the city by Ancus Martins, this is a real divergence for which we cannot account ; as the hill could hardly have been incorporated by Tullus and again by Ancus. Ancus is also said, by the two authorities just quoted, to have added the Aventine; and there is no improbability in this, for Romulus never made it a proper part of his city, and we learn from Plutarch {Num. 15) that it was uninhabited in the time of Numa. We must remember that the earlier en- closures were made rather to assert a future claim to the ground when the number of citizens was in- ROMA. creased, than that they were absolutely wanted at the time of making them (" Crescebat interim urbs, munitionibus alia atque alia appetendo loca ; quum in spem magis futurae multitudinis, quam ad id quod tum hominum erat, munirent," Liv. i. 8). The account of Ancus having added the Aventine is con- firmed by Dionysius (iii. 43) and by Livy (i. 33)| who state that it was assigned to the citizens of the conquered Politorium. Yet the history of the Aven- tine is more mysterious than that of any other of the Roman hills. At the end of the third century of the city we find it, as an age.r imhlicus, taken pos- session of by the patricians, and then, after a hard contest, parcelled out among the plebeians by a Lex Icilia (Dionys. x. 31, 32; cf. Liv. iii. 31, .32), by whom it was afterwards principally inhabited. It remained excluded from the pomoerium down to the time of Claudius, though the most learned Romans were ignorant of the reason. After some further victories over the Latins, Ancus brought many thousands more of them to Rome ; yet we can hardly understand Livy's account (l. c.) that he located them in the Vallis Murcia; not only because that spot seems too limited to hold so large a number, but also because the Circus Maximus seems already to have been designed, and even perhaps begun, at that spot. (Dionys. iii. 68.) At all events they could not have remained there for any length of time, since Livy himself mentions that the circus was laid out by Tarquinius Priscus (i. 35). The fortifying of the Janiculum on the right bank of the Tiber, the building of the Sublician bridge to connect it with Rome, and the foundation of the port of Ostia at the mouth of the river, are also ascribed to Ancus JIartius, as well as the forti- fication called the Fossa Quiritium. (Liv. i. 33 ; Dionys. 44, 45 ; Victor, Vir. 111. 5; Flor. i. 4.) The circuit of Rome, then, at the time of the ac- cession of Tarquinius Priscus, appears to have em- braced the Qairinal, Capitoline, Palatine, Aventine, and Caelian hills, and the Janiculum beyond the Tiber. The Viminal and Esquiline are not men- tioned as having been included, but there can be no doubt that they were partially inhabited. Whether the-first named hills were surrounded with a common wall it is impossible to say ; but the fortifications, whatever their extent, seem to have been of a very rude and primitive description (rei'x'? — avTocrxeSja Kcu (j>ava TOiS ipyaaiais tivra, Dionys. iii. 67). Tarquinius does not appear to have made any addi- tions to the city, but he planned, and perhaps partly executed, what was of much more utility, a regular and connected wall to enclose the whole city. (Liv. i. 36, 38 ; Dionys. iii. 67.) Nay, according to Victor (Vir. III. 6), he actually completed this wall, and Servius only added the ar/ffer {lb. c. 7.) The reign of Tarquin was indeed a remarkable epoch in the architectural progress of the city. We must re- member that he was of Tuscan birth, and even of Greek descent ; and therefore it is natural to sup- pose that his knowledge of architecture and of the other arts of civilised life was far superior to that of the Romans and Latins ; and hence the improve- ments which he introduced at Rome. It is satisfac- tory to discover and point out undesigned coinci- dences of this description, which greatly add to the credibility of the narratives of ancient writers, since there is too much disposition at the present day to regard them as the inventors or propagators of mere baseless fables. Tarquin also constructed those wonderful sewers for draining the Velabrum and
