Skip to comments.
Ruins may support tale of Rome's origin (Romulus & Remus Given Boost)
Washington Times ^
| 2/19/05
| Rachel Sanderson
Posted on 02/19/2005 11:00:06 PM PST by nickcarraway
Italian archaeologists digging in the Forum have unearthed the ruins of a palace they say confirms the legend of Rome's birth -- a discovery that may force the rewriting of Western history.
Most contemporary historians dismiss as fable the tale that Romulus founded Rome in 753 B.C. and built a walled city on the slopes of the Palatine hill where he and his twin brother, Remus, were suckled by a wolf in their infancy.
Andrea Carandini of Rome's La Sapienza University has spent 20 years trying to prove the skeptics wrong and last month he and his team hit on the final piece of a puzzle he believes shows the myth has root in fact.
"Archaeology and legend appear to go better together than contemporary historians thought," Mr. Carandini said in an interview before presentation of his findings this weekend.
"We now have all the elements to show that part of the legend may very well be true."
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; Front Page News; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: ancientrome; archaeology; ggg; godsgravesglyphs; history; italyrome; mythology
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
To: Canticle_of_Deborah; blam; SunkenCiv; g.g.g.; Romulus
To: nickcarraway
Romulus and Roke? i'm going to have to start getting back into studying history again.
To: nickcarraway
Has anyone seen the ads for the 'rock opera' HERO?? Set in the futuristic NYC or something?? really interesting...
4
posted on
02/19/2005 11:20:56 PM PST
by
GeronL
(Bush on the PRESS "They just float sewer out there.")
To: nickcarraway
Ancient Rome bump:
5
posted on
02/19/2005 11:24:50 PM PST
by
Plutarch
To: nickcarraway
You know, I have never understood why "historians" are so often inclined to dismiss ancient history! Granted, the part about being suckled by a wolf is a little out there, but why didn't they believe that there were actual brothers named Romulus and Remus, one became king and one got axed? There are so many instances of ancient history being "disproved" by historians and then being proved true after all -- the discovery of Troy being a rather spectacular instance of that. This snobbish and elitist idea that historians of the ancient world couldn't be trusted on anything at all presupposes that people of the ancient world were stupid. Well, they weren't stupid. Often ignorant, yes, but their brains were as good as ours, and oral traditions are often quite accurate. After all, think about how the ancients transmitted information. Until writing became common, they just plain memorized things and gave them back verbally. Apprenticed storytellers were required to memorize Homer -- all of it! -- and be able to spout it back accurately before they became masters. So I don't at all see why modern historians are so quick to dismiss ancient stories as being rubbish.
Getting off my soapbox now ....
6
posted on
02/20/2005 12:35:17 AM PST
by
Hetty_Fauxvert
(http://sonoma-moderate.blogspot.com/)
To: nickcarraway
Ah, Deimos and Phobos. Were they born from the collision that left a giant scrape across the face of Mars?
7
posted on
02/20/2005 12:56:59 AM PST
by
UCANSEE2
(DEM MOTTO: If we can't run this country, we will run it into the ground.)
To: Hetty_Fauxvert
You have said it for me as well. The "scholars" seem especially keen to disprove the Bible. They don't have a good track record however. In what I have read, it seems more often than not that the old tales are based on fact.
8
posted on
02/20/2005 1:11:13 AM PST
by
JimSEA
( "More Bush, Less Taxes.")
To: nickcarraway
All myth has a base in reality. Im surprised, and hadnt realized, that historians didnt think the story was true. I agree with Hetty_Fauxvert about the wolf part being a little questionable; but Ive always thought that the brothers were real.
To: Independent_Libertarian
Maybe it was a domesticated dog that looked something like a wolf.
10
posted on
02/20/2005 4:49:43 AM PST
by
Tax Government
(Boycott and defeat the Legacy Media. Become a monthly contributor to FR.)
To: Hetty_Fauxvert
You know, I have never understood why "historians" are so often inclined to dismiss ancient history! Good use of "quotes" - many "historians" enjoy adding their own twist/slant/bent to what they see as the salient facts. Why should they listen to others' versions when it's so much more fun to make up their own?
11
posted on
02/20/2005 5:13:52 AM PST
by
trebb
("I am the way... no one comes to the Father, but by me..." - Jesus in John 14:6 (RSV))
To: Hetty_Fauxvert
There are so many instances of ancient history being "disproved" by historians and then being proved true after all -- the discovery of Troy being a rather spectacular instance of that.
Don't forget the "There were no such people as Hittites--oops."
12
posted on
02/20/2005 5:30:28 AM PST
by
aruanan
To: Hetty_Fauxvert
You have made a lucid, perfect point. Thank you.
To: nickcarraway
Rumor has it that the ancient, past it's prime channel: CNN, was founded by Bevis and Butthead.
To: Hetty_Fauxvert
It is something that bothers me too.
In all fairness they have been burned a time or two. The Egyptian Kings list springs to mind. There were at least three Pharaohs that we know were removed from the list.
But usually the stories prove to be more accurate then not. They may leave out a bit, as the Kings List did, but what is there is generally more or less accurate.
15
posted on
02/20/2005 6:16:13 AM PST
by
Harmless Teddy Bear
(Apparently, this is the only job for which I am suited. I am beset by the ironies of my life)
To: Independent_Libertarian
Myth may not but legend usually does.
16
posted on
02/20/2005 6:17:40 AM PST
by
Harmless Teddy Bear
(Apparently, this is the only job for which I am suited. I am beset by the ironies of my life)
To: Hetty_Fauxvert
".... have never understood why "historians" are so often inclined to dismiss ancient history!"
Actually the answer is quite simple; publish or perish.
And no one ever got noticed for observing that the sky is blue. Ergo, challenge accepted truths and get your face on TV. have idiot reporters fawn over you, get quoted in the nyslimes, etc. You don't even need definitive substantiation for your point if it challenges a widely held belief. Afterall, who in their right mind thinks that Abe Lincoln was gay?
This unfortunate malady extends throughout academe and includes not only the "soft" social sciences but the "hard" sciences as well.
The elite of academe are are quickly becoming a self-parody whether they realize it or not. They are marginalizing themselves to the point of irrelevance. I can see the time, as described by H. Hesse in "The Glassbead Game", when scholars have become an esoteric society little attended to by the culture at large.
Such is the price they pay for self-indulgent gamesmanship that ignores the wisdom of the "common" man.
17
posted on
02/20/2005 6:26:14 AM PST
by
Pietro
To: nickcarraway
It is written by Reuters, which is allowed in full text.
Ruins may support tale of Rome's origin
By Rachel Sanderson
REUTERS NEWS AGENCY February 19, 2005
ROME Italian archaeologists digging in the Forum have unearthed the ruins of a palace they say confirms the legend of Rome's birth -- a discovery that may force the rewriting of Western history.
Most contemporary historians dismiss as fable the tale that Romulus founded Rome in 753 B.C. and built a walled city on the slopes of the Palatine hill where he and his twin brother, Remus, were suckled by a wolf in their infancy.
Andrea Carandini of Rome's La Sapienza University has spent 20 years trying to prove the skeptics wrong and last month he and his team hit on the final piece of a puzzle he believes shows the myth has root in fact.
"Archaeology and legend appear to go better together than contemporary historians thought," Mr. Carandini said in an interview before presentation of his findings this weekend.
"We now have all the elements to show that part of the legend may very well be true."
The source of Mr. Carandini's confidence is the discovery of traces of an 8th century B.C. house of regal proportions on the edge of the Forum that dates from the period of the Eternal City's legendary founding.
Found 10 yards or so beneath pines growing on the surface of the Palatine and under centuries of construction from classical to Renaissance times, the palace had a courtyard and covered inner area spanning an estimated 3,800 square feet.
Wooden columns marked its entrances, ceramics decorated it and seats were located against the walls of a grand central hall.
It is located by the Sanctuary of Vesta, the Roman goddess of the hearth, close to the slopes of the Palatine, the site of the earliest traces of Roman civilization and where legend has it Romulus killed Remus before building Rome.
Most historians have always dismissed Rome's founding myth because they argued the Eternal City was just a huddle of wattle huts at the time Roman historian Livy described Romulus fortifying the Palatine and showing "outward symbols of power."
Mr. Carandini, who has also found traces of sanctuaries, a defensive wall and a shingle Forum floor dating from the same period, said that view will now have to change.
"It is exceptional, a find of maximum importance," he said. "It could only be a palace fit for a king." Scholars elsewhere, when asked for their reaction to the finds, tended to be more cautious.
"The palace is completely convincing. In the 8th century B.C. people tended to live in tiny, sub-oval huts. This structure is much larger and rectangular. But this does not have a direct link to the Romulus myth," said Elizabeth Fentress, an archaeology research fellow at the British School in Rome.
"The tradition is based on royalty and an orderly community, but that does not mean that Romulus killed Remus."
18
posted on
02/20/2005 8:03:56 AM PST
by
sully777
(It's like my momma always said, "Two wrongs don't make a right but two Wrights make an airplane.")
To: Hetty_Fauxvert
You know, I have never understood why "historians" are so often inclined to dismiss ancient history! Granted, the part about being suckled by a wolf is a little out there, but why didn't they believe that there were actual brothers named Romulus and Remus, one became king and one got axed? There are so many instances of ancient history being "disproved" by historians and then being proved true after all -- the discovery of Troy being a rather spectacular instance of that...
I'm partial to Celtic history, particularly Irish history. Irish history is so thorough yet there is an unrelenting attempt to paint it as myth, legend, hearsay, and untruth. Archeologists are proving once again not to believe everything the Caesars' and the Albion Courts write.
19
posted on
02/20/2005 8:12:56 AM PST
by
sully777
(It's like my momma always said, "Two wrongs don't make a right but two Wrights make an airplane.")
To: Hetty_Fauxvert
all you need to do to answer your question is to look at the history of the Communist states and what historians said about them. You can barely find the history of the Stalin gulag - in American history books - so finding the background of the founding of Rome would seem no more surprising. Your point, however you make take my comment, is well made AND I agree with your assesment.
20
posted on
02/20/2005 9:05:25 AM PST
by
q_an_a
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson