DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.44944#0438
PALATINUS MONS
376
87 : Faviani et Quintiliani appellabantur luperci, a Favio et Quintilio
praepositis suis ; Fest. 257 (similar) ; CIL vi. 1933 (the inscription of
a Lupercus Quinctialis vetus); Ov. Fast. ii. 377 ; Liv. v. 46 (B.C. 390):
sacrificium erat statum in Quirinali colie genti Fabiae.
Richter 32 is wrong in referring to the earliest Palatine settlement
oppida condebant Etrusco ritu (Varro LL. v. 143) and Cato ap. Serv. ad
Aen. v. 755 : conditores enim civitatis taurum in dextram, vaccam
intrinsecus iungebant et ita sulco ducto loca murorum designebant, for
it was a Latin community, and no Etruscans had as yet reached Latium
(REi.A.1013; cf. Klio 1905,85; Korte in RE vi.743). Roma Quadrata
is also recent in its extended sense (BPW 1903, 1645). It could not arise
till Palatium and Cermalus were one ; and in the lists of the Argei (third
century b.c.) they are still separate (Wissowa, Ges. Abh. 224).
The fortifications of the Palatine present something of a puzzle.
It is most likely that the original settlers relied on the great natural
strength of the hill ; and that the remains of defensive walls of the sixth
century b.c., which are to be found at the north-west corner (there are
a few blocks higher up also) of the hill, belong either to a separate enceinte
contemporary with the Servian wall of the whole city, or to this wall
itself (see Murus Servii Tullii) ; while those of the fourth century—
generally known as the wall of Romulus—on the west and south sides
of the hill, may belong to a separate fort, erected perhaps in 378 b.c.,
further remains of which may be seen near the top of the Scalae Caci
(TF 91-102). Whatever may be our view as to the non-inclusion of the
Aventine, the fragments of walling on the west side and high up on the
south (if these last are correctly explained) must belong to a separate
enceinte, even if those low down on the south did not. Cf. Ann. d. Inst.
1871, 44 (the fourth and fifth pieces are no longer visible : for the fifth
cf. Visconti e Lanciani, Guida del Palatino, plan No. 26, and see Porta
Mugonia) ; 1884, 189-204; Richter, 133, 134). Bagnani suggests that
the object of a separate enceinte on the Palatine may have been the
defence of the Pons Sublicius and the all-important crossing of the Tiber
(see Vicus Iugarius).
According to Varro (and Pliny (NH iii. 66), who gives no names), the
Palatine had three gates—the porta Romana, the porta Mugonia and the
porta Ianualis (LL. v. 164). This last, however, was on the north side
of the forum, and can have had nothing to do with the Palatine (see
Ianus Geminus). And if it was founded according to Etruscan ritual,
it should have had three. Most authorities, on the other hand, speak
of only one gate (e.g. Liv. i. 12 : ad veterem portam Palati; Ov. Trist.
iii. 1. 21). The most probable explanation is that the road which passed
through the porta Mugonia forked, one branch going to the Esquiline
across the Velia, and the other along the north and west slopes of the
Palatine, descending as it went (clivus Victoriae) to the porta Romana,
which was situated somewhere on this clivus. The Scalae Caci, at the
376
87 : Faviani et Quintiliani appellabantur luperci, a Favio et Quintilio
praepositis suis ; Fest. 257 (similar) ; CIL vi. 1933 (the inscription of
a Lupercus Quinctialis vetus); Ov. Fast. ii. 377 ; Liv. v. 46 (B.C. 390):
sacrificium erat statum in Quirinali colie genti Fabiae.
Richter 32 is wrong in referring to the earliest Palatine settlement
oppida condebant Etrusco ritu (Varro LL. v. 143) and Cato ap. Serv. ad
Aen. v. 755 : conditores enim civitatis taurum in dextram, vaccam
intrinsecus iungebant et ita sulco ducto loca murorum designebant, for
it was a Latin community, and no Etruscans had as yet reached Latium
(REi.A.1013; cf. Klio 1905,85; Korte in RE vi.743). Roma Quadrata
is also recent in its extended sense (BPW 1903, 1645). It could not arise
till Palatium and Cermalus were one ; and in the lists of the Argei (third
century b.c.) they are still separate (Wissowa, Ges. Abh. 224).
The fortifications of the Palatine present something of a puzzle.
It is most likely that the original settlers relied on the great natural
strength of the hill ; and that the remains of defensive walls of the sixth
century b.c., which are to be found at the north-west corner (there are
a few blocks higher up also) of the hill, belong either to a separate enceinte
contemporary with the Servian wall of the whole city, or to this wall
itself (see Murus Servii Tullii) ; while those of the fourth century—
generally known as the wall of Romulus—on the west and south sides
of the hill, may belong to a separate fort, erected perhaps in 378 b.c.,
further remains of which may be seen near the top of the Scalae Caci
(TF 91-102). Whatever may be our view as to the non-inclusion of the
Aventine, the fragments of walling on the west side and high up on the
south (if these last are correctly explained) must belong to a separate
enceinte, even if those low down on the south did not. Cf. Ann. d. Inst.
1871, 44 (the fourth and fifth pieces are no longer visible : for the fifth
cf. Visconti e Lanciani, Guida del Palatino, plan No. 26, and see Porta
Mugonia) ; 1884, 189-204; Richter, 133, 134). Bagnani suggests that
the object of a separate enceinte on the Palatine may have been the
defence of the Pons Sublicius and the all-important crossing of the Tiber
(see Vicus Iugarius).
According to Varro (and Pliny (NH iii. 66), who gives no names), the
Palatine had three gates—the porta Romana, the porta Mugonia and the
porta Ianualis (LL. v. 164). This last, however, was on the north side
of the forum, and can have had nothing to do with the Palatine (see
Ianus Geminus). And if it was founded according to Etruscan ritual,
it should have had three. Most authorities, on the other hand, speak
of only one gate (e.g. Liv. i. 12 : ad veterem portam Palati; Ov. Trist.
iii. 1. 21). The most probable explanation is that the road which passed
through the porta Mugonia forked, one branch going to the Esquiline
across the Velia, and the other along the north and west slopes of the
Palatine, descending as it went (clivus Victoriae) to the porta Romana,
which was situated somewhere on this clivus. The Scalae Caci, at the