I have written elsewhere of an instance of the reign of a Persian king, Shapur II, technically beginning before he was born with him being ‘crowned in utero’…
This time however, we are going to look at an instance at the far end of that scale – a Roman king continuing to ‘reign’ even after his death… The king in question is Tarquinius Priscus - “Tarquin the Elder” - the fifth monarch of Rome from c.616 to 578BC.
His rise to royal power in itself had been a somewhat peculiar one, even before we get to his supposed post-mortem rule. The son of a Corinthian, Tarquinius Priscus was claimed by Livy to have been born to the name ‘Lucomo’, although it is suggested that the word lucomo is in fact a slightly altered form of the Etruscan word lauchume, which meant ‘king’. It seems then that Livy or his source has mixed up Tarquin’s name and title.
Banned from public office due to his Greek heritage in Etruria, Tarquin was encouraged to move to Rome by his Etruscan wife, Tanaquil. Upon arriving in the city, Tarquin seems to have quickly became a close friend and advisor of the then king of Rome, Ancus Marcius (c.640-616BC), a lofty position which may have come about through the combination of Tanaquil’s prominent Etruscan family and Tarquin’s considerable inherited wealth.
Such was his reputation at the time of Marcius’ death, Tarquin was in a prominent enough position to go before the comitia curiata and have himself elected king of Rome ahead of Marcius’ sons. At the time, the Roman kingship was not hereditary and it could also be that Marcius’ sons were considered too young, although Livy I.35 also has Tarquin ensuring that the old king’s sons were absent from Rome on a hunting expedition at the time of their father’s death, allowing Tarquin to supplant them.
This accession story has all the hallmarks of a usurpation by an outsider, so much so that a story was put about that when Tarquin was entering Rome for the first time an eagle swooped down, took his hat off his head and then placed it back on his head – a portent of divine favour to explain his unexpected rise to power.
With such a seemingly dishonourable means of accession, it might be expected that the reign of Tarquin was short and/or bloody – this was less true that might be imagined. Indeed, Tarquinius Priscus proved a successful and long-reigned king: he continued the expansion of the city of Rome, building temples, including that of Jupiter on the Capitoline hill, the Circus Maximus and the city walls. He also increased the size of the Senate and the army.
This is not to say that his reign was bloodless, but for a seeming usurper for the most part that blood was spilt externally. The wars that had begun under his predecessor continued, with Tarquin fighting both Latin and Etruscan cities, taking more land from the former; however, his biggest conflict came against the Sabines, who caught the Romans unprepared, penetrating into the streets of Rome itself. After several bloody battles, the Romans were victorious, largely due to Tarquin’s expanded army, and particularly his expanded cavalry.
But for all his achievements in expanding and consolidating the Roman state, Tarquin had failed to fully deal with the enmity of the sons of Marcius. And when it looked like the Romans were willing to accept dynastic rule, the sons saw their chances of succeeding Tarquin. So they resorted to assassination and, under the over of a riot, with a single swing of an axe, Tarquin was dead in 578BC.
Or was he…? Well, yes, but through a strange twist, it is suggested that while dead, Tarquin’s reign was not quite over…
“[4] As the clamour and impatience of the populace could hardly be restrained, Tanaquil went to a window in the upper part of the palace … and addressed the people. [5] She bade them hope for the best; the king had been stunned by a sudden blow, but the weapon had not penetrated to any depth, he had already recovered consciousness, the blood had been washed off and the wound examined, all the symptoms were favourable, she was sure they would soon see him again, meantime it was his order that the people should recognise the authority of Servius Tullius, who would administer justice and discharge the other functions of royalty.
[6] …So for several days after Tarquin's death Servius continued to strengthen his position by giving out that he was exercising a delegated authority. At length the sounds of mourning arose in the palace and divulged the fact of the king's death. Protected by a strong bodyguard Servius was the first who ascended the throne without being elected by the people, though without opposition from the Senate.”
Livy I.41.4-6
Tanaquil then drew out the supposed recovery of the king long enough that by the time Tarquin’s death became public knowledge, the citizenry had gotten used to having Servius as their leader. It is not entirely clear why Tanaquil felt the need to perpetuate such a ruse to ensure the elevation of Servius.
The sons of Ancus Marcius, who had instigated Tarquin’s assassination, were still at large, so a passing of power to a skilled operator in Servius Tullius would be preferable. But then Tanaquil and Tarquin had offspring of their own, with one of their daughters, Tarquinia, being married to Servius.
There is some question about the identity of the sons of Tarquin and Tanaquil. Traditionally, both Lucius and Arruns Tarquinius were recorded as their sons (the former would be the last king of Rome, Tarquinius Superbus), but the chronology raises some sizeable issues.
Lucius would live on until 495BC, some 83 years after the murder of Tarquinius Priscus, which suggests that the chronology itself is wrong, that Lucius was very young at the time of Tarquin’s death or Lucius at least was not a son of Tarquin and Tanaquil, but perhaps a grandson.
It is entirely possible that the dates recorded for the life of Lucius and those around him are incorrect as the entire ‘Early Rome’ period is littered with chronological issues. While his infancy could explain Tanaquil’s need to promote Servius Tullius to king, a very young Lucius in c.578BC does not seem feasible. Given that Tarquinius Priscus was killed at the end of a reign of 38 years and he (and Tanaquil) were surely not mere teenagers when they orchestrated Tarquin’s accession in the wake of Ancus Marcius’ death, it seems likely that they were both at least well into their late 50s at the time of Tarquin’s murder, making a recent birth of Lucius almost impossible.
There is some backing to the idea of an extra Tarquinian generation in Etruscan tradition. It has a certain Macstarna, possibly a corruption of the Latin magister and therefore referring to Servius Tullius, defeating and killing a Gnaeus Tarquinius. This could represent an unsuccessful attempt by the actual son of Tarquin and Tanaquil - Gnaeus - to overthrow Servius.
That Servius then saw the need to tie the sons of Gnaeus Tarquinius - Lucius and Arruns - more closely to him by marrying them to his own daughters - Tullia Major and Tullia Minor - does not undermine this possibility. Servius was already connected to the Tarquinii through his own marriage and it appears that he did not have any sons of his own. Tying his in-laws to his regime and possibly even make it known that they were to be his heirs to the throne would seem like a good way to bring them into line.
It was not to be.
Tired of waiting for any such succession, it would be Lucius Tarquinius who would instigate the murder of his regal father-in-law in order to take the throne for himself.
Comentários