Livy, The Founding of Rome, 1.7.2
“inde cum altercatione congressi certamine irarum ad caedem vertuntur; ibi in turba ictus Remus cecidit. vulgatior fama est ludibrio fratris Remum novos transiluisse muros; inde ab irato Romulo, cum verbis quoque increpitans adiecisset ‘sic deinde, quicumque alius transiliet moenia mea,’ interfectum.”
Translation
“Thence, having come together by a dispute of anger with an altercation, they turn to slaughter; in that place, in the crowd, Remus, having been struck, fell. A more common rumor is that Remus jumped over the new walls in mockery of his brother; from there he was killed by the anger of Romulus, when scolding, he had added “‘In this way finally whoever else will jump over my walls.’”
Literary Analysis
The legend of Romulus and Remus and the founding of Rome has pervaded for thousands of years as part of the Roman heritage. Titus Livius desired this myth to be noted for its malicious nature in conjunction with a strange dignity, mimicking the combined gore and brutality to display the prestige and might of the Romans. This paper emphasizes the cultural influence of this legend through the writing of Livy by analyzing how the historical account directly connects the founding of Rome to Romulus and his divine heritage. One can see the cultural importance of Romulus’s avarice and bloodthirsty vengeance in Livy’s Latin writing style, demonstrating exactly why Caesar Augustus desired him to write history. Livy captures Roman values in Ab Urbe Condita, specifically in section 1.7.2, “The Founding of Rome,” by manipulating his literary style to suit the situation. The switching between tenses, use of varied clauses, and diction of “The Founding of Rome” are essential to understanding both Livy’s unique literary craftsmanship and to picking apart the story of Romulus and Remus from the perspective of the Romans.
Writers of modern prose or poetry often pick a verb tense to unify a passage to make the text more succinct. Livy’s literary style is a prose-poetry combination, breaking the current-day standards of historical writing, all while avoiding one unified verb tense. Each verb is masterfully chosen to provide movement to the text and to add vivid and powerful description for the reader. Livy often switches between the indicative present and perfect tenses, excepting the occasional subjunctive, which in 1.7.2, is adiecisset or “had added” in an indirect statement. Verbs which take the present tense, such as vertuntur and est are in action sequences in which the characters’ decisions are highlighted by Livy for effect. Vertuntur, meaning “turn” adds a kinesthetic energy to the malicious intent of both brothers in the phrase ad caedem vertuntur or “they turned to slaughter.” It is not passive, but active and happing now, and Livy wants his reader engaged with the impending doom. This would additionally grip the audience, since both in ancient Rome and now, Livy’s work is being read by an informed audience who already understands the parable of Romulus and Remus. The action is further spurred on by the verb est, which, when used in the phrase vulgatior fama est or “a more common rumor is,” demonstrates how the rumor is ongoing and still present, adding to the motion of the legend and to the relevance of the passage to the audience. The present tense reminds Romans to take pride in the viciousness and land-lust of Romulus that existed and continued to endure in their culture.
Perfect verbs give life to the excerpt by pushing the momentum of the action without transforming the historical poetry into a fictional anecdote narrated by Livy. The perfect indicative verbs maintain the fierce fraternal struggle without over-exerting authority over the passage as demonstrated in cecidit and transiluisse. Cecidit adds the fact that Remus “fell” after being struck, illustrating the severity of the wound dealt by Romulus and emphasizing the physical act of death. Even more so than cecidit, transiluisse forces a vigorous energy and textual motion in the phrase fratris Remum novos transiluisse muros, meaning that “Remus jumped over the new walls of his brother.” Though Remus is not currently jumping, the passivity is needed to accentuate his imminent death. Furthermore, transiluisse contrasts transiliet which is the future indicative form of the root word, transilio. This combination gives gravitas to the deaths of Remus and of anyone else who dares to cross the walls of Rome. In this sense, tense shifts become a proclamation, if not a threat, used to bolster the ruthless defensive nature of the Romans and to add to their prestige.
In spite of the power of both the indicative present and perfect verbs, one infinitive reverberates throughout the poem as a prevailing theme of this fratricide: interfectum (esse). Literally meaning “make between” but translated as “was killed,” this word takes the understood subject of Remus and is placed effectively at the end of the sentence. Though it is an ellipsis of the perfect passive form, interfectum is essential to the flow of the piece, forcing the reader to rapidly skim ahead to understand the meaning and connotation behind the bold scolding of Romulus. Romulus’ statement “‘In this way finally whoever else will jump over my walls’” is more dramatic because it physically proves the consequences to his verbal assault. As the last word, it is physically final in the text, symbolic of how Remus paid the ultimate price for his actions by jesting in the face of Romulus’s wrath. In addition, the word represents how the walls themselves were made between Rome and the rest of the world, much how the sword will corporeally “make between” any who will traverse their mighty walls. The dignity of Rome and its people depends upon the slaughter of all who sacrilegiously defile their heritage as children of Mars and as Quritites, an honor which they proudly uphold.
In addition to the inconsistent verb tenses, the clauses Livy uses contort the reader’s chronological perception, yet provide specific details to the text. Often, the text begins with a main idea before drifting into several literary digressions, much like an octopus with a main body and several branched-out tentacles. In a unique form a parallelism, Livy’s 1.7.2 contains two clauses which begin with ad, and two cum clauses which provide the audience with further detail and understanding. The first ad clause, ad caedem, takes the accusative to indicate how both brothers turned “to slaughter,” rather than to settling their dispute in another manner. In the second, the clause takes the ablative, reading ab irato Romulo, meaning “by Romulus’s anger” or “by the anger of Romulus,” depending on how Romulo is used to describe irato. Both cum clauses describe either when or with what the action is taking place, translated as either “with an altercation” or “when scolding.”
However, there are two more forms of clauses present in this excerpt from Livy, namely, his favorite construction, the ablative absolute, as well as an indirect statement. The ablative absolute is apparent, seen in the first sentence as ictus Remus, or “Remus, having been struck,” and is crucial because it makes the action of striking passive, pointing to the more prevalent motion of falling as a symbol for the death of Remus. The indirect statement is not as noticeable, but is present in the phrase vulgatior fama est ludibrio fratris Remum novos transiluisse muros, having an implied “that” to indicate what the rumor was said about the events which had unfolded. With this indirect statement, fama takes on a personification of sorts and increases the relevance and verity of the rumor itself. The word “that” is implied much like the allegations of how Romulus murdered his brother in such a malicious yet noble manner.
Livy’s diction itself is essential to Ab Urbe Condita, by making his historical claims more valid and more creative in literary style. Alliteration and word pictures can be found in “The Founding of Rome” due to his specific phraseology and word selection. Cum altercatione congressi certamine contains such alliteration, as the repetition of “c” produces a harsh, biting sound reminiscent of the severe tones used in a verbal dispute. Likewise an onomatopoeia, sic, has a stinging, metallic sound, like an unsheathed sword Romulus could have murdered Remus with. It is as though when Romulus utters sic, meaning “‘in this way,’” he is killing his brother, only finishing his statement deinde, quicumque alius transiliet moenia mea, or “‘in this way finally whoever else will jump over my walls’” as his brother breathes his last, never to defile Rome’s walls again. In fact, the imagery associated with Remus’s original crossing of Romulus’s walls is a word picture itself, in which the word transiluisse or “jumped” is positioned between novos muros, meaning “new walls,” allowing the text itself to add to the scurrilous scene. Finally, one last element of Livy’s diction worth noting is vulgatior, a comparative adjective which means “more common.” In the latter half of section 1.7.2, Livy makes it apparent through his immediate shift to poetic style regarding the walls of Rome that he is trying to convince the reader that Remus simply did not die in verbal dispute, but in an improper jest. With this in mind, it is puzzling as to why Livy used a comparative form of the adjective vulgus, rather than the superlative form to prove that the rumor was the “most common,” rather than simply “more common.” Perhaps Livy is deliberately understating his beliefs about the rumor to allow his audience to draw their own conclusion or that he believed his over or understatement would defy his original purpose to “neither affirm or deny the things which are handed down” as he mentions in his preface to Ab Urbe Condita.
Whether there is truth to the Roman parable of Romulus and Remus or if it simply is myth, Livy adds a sense of nobility amidst the cruelty to define his fellow countryman. Both portions of Livy 1.7.2 are imbued with his historical poetry-prose combination. The first sentence contains more clauses and reinforces the anger of both brothers whereas the second portrays a more mysterious and ennobled Romulus, adding symbolism to the walls of Rome and giving importance to the first foundational murder in Roman culture. With this combination of literary style, as seen in the shifting of verb tenses, the unique use of clauses, and diction of Livy, the reader can grasp the importance of “The Founding of Rome” to the Romans. It is not the act of fratricide or cruelty Livy aims to portray, but the power of the Quirites to fight for themselves and their honor.
Source:
Jaeger, Mary. "The Founding of Rome." A Livy Reader: Selections from Ab Urbe Condita. Mundelein: Bolchazy-Carducci, 2011. 2-3. Print.