“From whom, and for what reason the great name of Rome, so famous among mankind, was given to that city, writers are not agreed.” (Plutarch’s Lives, Vol. 1, Life of Romulus, Chapter 1)
“The people were arranged in three bodies, the first called Ramnenses, from Romulus; the second Tatienses, from Tatius; and the third Lucerenses.” (Plutarch’s Lives, Vol. 1, Life of Romulus, Chapter 20)
The three legendary tribes of Rome - Ramnes or Ramnenses, Tities or Titienses, Luceres or Lucerenses - are cited by various Roman authors from the 3rd century BC to the 2nd century AD. Ennius (239-169 BC), Varro (116-27 BC), Cicero (106-43 BC), Livy (59 BC - 17 AD), Propertius (50-15 BC), and Plutarch (45 AD - 127 AD) all mention them, according to the Archaic Community of the Romans by Robert Palmer (Cambridge University Press, 1970, pg. 7). Palmer focuses on Varro, from the 1st century BC, as our main source of information. He translates Varro’s statement (De lingua latina or On the Latin Language, 5.55) thus: ‘The Roman territory was first divided into three parts which were called the tribe of Titienses, the tribe of the Ramnes and the tribe of the Luceres. According to Ennius the Titienses were named after Tatius, Ramnenses after Romulus and, according to Junius, the Luceres after Lucumo. All these words are Etruscan according to the playwright of Etruscan tragedies.’ By admitting that these tribal names are all non-Latin, while declining to explain their definition in Etruscan, we are still left confused. Why are the two names - Ramnes and Ramnenses - clearly interchangeable, exactly who or what are the names referring to, and why are they not pronounced Romnes and Romnenses? Before we can find out where these names came from, we need to know how and why they entered the Roman vocabulary of the Augustan age.
Today I am asking the whole world the question which any person familiar with Shakespeare would find amusing: Wherefore Art Thou Ramnes? In Romeo and Juliet, there is a passage where Juliet laments Romeo’s family name, because her family is at war with his family.
Juliet: O Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo? Deny thy father and refuse thy name.
Wherefore does NOT mean ‘where’, but ‘why’ or ‘for what reason’, as John August insists and Merriam Webster confirms. The meaning is not where are you, Ramnes, but why is your name Ramnes, or more exactly, for what reason are you called Ramnes! By the way, Romeo is called Romeo because his name is derived from the Ancient Greek word for Roman (Rhomaios).
In Livy’s History of Rome (here translated by T.J. Luce of Princeton University), Ramnes and Ramnenses are each noted once, so both names were definitely in vogue in Livy’s time.
Book 1, Chapter 36: Lucius Tarquinius Priscus (c. 616-579 BC), “believing that his cavalry in particular was not up to needed strength, decided to add new centuries to the Ramnes, Titienses, and Luceres that Romulus had once created and to distinguish them by naming them after himself.” (pg. 45) [Tarquin was later persuaded by an augur to not change their names, but that story may be covering up the possibility that they are anachronistic names chosen by the Etruscan dynasty of the sixth century.]
Book 1, Chapter 13: “Three centuries of knights were also created, one called Ramnenses from Romulus, and a second Titienses from Titus Tatius; the reason for the name of the third century, Luceres, is uncertain.” (pg. 19). In his explanatory notes (pg. 343), T.J. Luce concludes: “The curiae and the three tribes were doubtless later Etruscan inventions that were anachronistically carried back to the earliest days of the city (the names of the three centuries derive from Etruscan gentile names).”
Gentile names, dating from the Orientalizing period, are a fancy word for family name, or surname as we know it today (refer to pages 84-85, Beginnings of Rome by T.J. Cornell for more information). Also called the nomen to distinguish it from the praenomen, or first name, the hereditary nomen could refer to a mythological figure, an individual ancestor, or geographic location, according to Wikipedia (see Etruscan Society). It is my contention that the nomen Ramnes is primarily referring to a legendary or mythological figure, i.e. Rama or Romulus, just as Romeo in Shakespeare’s play is fictional but larger than life. Gilbert Highet was hinting at this when he said Rome’s name may originate in the name of a ‘noble Etruscan family’, but he did not extend his reasoning further to see that the family name itself, if it ever existed, originated from mythical heroes in the East. Later we will see the name Ramnes is additionally referring to a geographic location, 'Ramah', in the Near Eastern lingua franca Aramaic.
It is only a coincidence that Romeo, the prototypical male romantic lover, stays true to one woman (Juliet) as Rama remains married to Sita his whole life. However, what is interesting is how the name Romeo has stuck - it is now applied to any man who is a devoted lover or loyal boyfriend. Similarly, the Indo-Persian name Rama or Ramna has persisted through the ages, starting from at least the middle of the first millennium BC. The first Persian Empire of the Achaemenids and the ancient Indian mahajanapadas (sixteen kingdoms, including Kosala where Rama was born) already existed before the Roman republic was established circa 500 BC.
 |
| Land Routes Across Achaemenid Empire, from Indian Gandhara to Ionian Greece, Late 6th Century BC. Reference: Lindsay Allen's book The Persian Empire, page 112 |
 |
| Sixteen Great Kingdoms of India, including Gandhara (Taxila), Kosala (Ayodhya), Magadha, Kamboja, Shurasena (Mathura), Pancala, Kuru (Hastinapur), Kasi (Varanasi) |
Encyclopedia Iranica and Encyclopedia Britannica are valuable resources that can shed light on this heroic name and its origins in Iran and India, which both have Aryan roots. They both inform the reader about an obscure Persian king in the Achaemenid dynasty, which also produced the well-known Cyrus II, or Cyrus the Great in the sixth century BC.
Encyclopedia Britannica:
The Persian leader Ariyaramna, spelled as Ariaramnes by the Greeks, was an early Achaemenid king of Persia who reigned circa 640–615 BC. Arya-Ramnes allegedly ruled at the time when Rome, according to Tim Cornell, became a true metropolis worth the name (circa 625 BC, see pages 92-94, “Urbanisation” in Beginnings of Rome). In Professor Cornell’s opinion, “all the historical developments of the regal period” lie within the 625 - 500 BC range, a span which coincides with the emergence of the Persian Empire (pg. 121). The Persian Empire, at its greatest extent (c. 525 BC), covered all the land south of the Black and Caspian Seas from the Indus River to Ionia, making the transmission of 'Ramnes' to the Greeks and Italians possible. Thus the Hellenized form ‘Ramnes’ instead of ‘Ramna’ in the Persian king’s name is a hint that tells us what the Ramnes tribe of Romulus is named after. It came from Indo-Persia via Ionian Greece, and is not a native term, which explains why it is so mysterious. We have a genealogy of Persian kings from that period with Sanskrit-like names, including Ariya-Ramna, or in Greek Aria-Ramnes. It is analogous to the honorific title ‘Arya-Putra’ (son of an Aryan or honourable man, designation of a king by his wife and his subjects in Vedic culture).
Cyrus the Great, the most celebrated Persian king, has elements in his biography which are shared with many mythical heroes, including Romulus. Richard Frye states in Encyclopedia Britannica that Cyrus “held a place in the minds of the Persian people similar to that of Romulus and Remus in Rome… the overthrow of his tyrannical grandfather has echoes in other myths and legends." The stories in Italian myth and religion that revolve around Romulus contain “folk-tale elements which are echoed in myths and legends from many societies throughout the world. These legends concern the birth and upbringing of persons who grow up to become kings, founders, religious leaders, heroes or conquerors. Well-known examples include Cyrus of Persia.” (see pages 61-62, Beginnings of Rome by Cornell). Both Cyrus and Romulus are nursed by animals after their grandfather or uncle, who is a wicked king, attempts to murder them. They then grow up and overthrow the tyrant. Since Cornell accepts that the Romulus foundation legend had already started circulating by the late sixth century BC (pg. 68), we can pinpoint the Persian Empire (c. 550 - 525 BC) as the source of the heroic name Romulus. Regarding the story of Romulus, Cornell has argued against diffusion from Persia and other cultures. He claims it is indigenous or part of a universal pattern of myth-making in the Eurasian world (pg. 63), but the name Romulus itself is definitely non-indigenous, as is attested by Varro, the Roman historian, more than two thousand years ago.
Encyclopedia Iranica (overseen by Dr. Ehsan Yarshater at Columbia University) gives us critical information:
ARIYĀRAMNA (Greek Ariaramnēs) is an Old Persian proper name. The derivation of *Aryārāman-, from aryā ‘Arians’ and rāman- ‘joy, peace,’ denoting ‘He who brings peace to the Arians (Aryans),’ is supposedly problematic in the Encyclopedia Iranica, but I think perfectly reasonable, as Old Persian: Grammar, Texts, Lexicon (1953), pg. 170, attests in its dictionary of Iranian words. It could also just mean “Aryan Rama” after the king of Ayodhya. There are many people named after Rama in India. The transmission sequence is as follows: Rāma (Sanskrit) > Rāman (Old Persian) > Ramnes (Greek, Etruscan) > Romanus (Latin).
Ariya-Ramna was the great-grandfather of Darius the Great (550 - 486 BC). According to the Behistun inscription of Darius his family had ruled ‘in two lines’ (duvitāparanam) before him, with Cyrus the Great appearing in one parallel line and Ariya-Ramna appearing in the other parallel line. Achaemenes, probably the mythical ancestor of both royal lines, could simply be another symbolic hero in the Aryan line of kshatriyas like Romulus or Aeneas in Italy. Duvita-paranam is cognate to Sanskrit ‘Dvidha-Parampara’ (Twofold-Succession), in my opinion. Please see Roland G. Kent’s book on Old Persian, page 158, for a graph of the Achaemenid family tree.
If we look at a list of non-Hellenized names of Achaemenid kings, including the real name of the eponymous founder of the dynasty himself, we get a totally different perspective free of Greek distortions: Achaemenes (Haksha-Manish), Ariaramnes (Arya-Ramna), Cyaxares (Uva-Kshatra), Cyrus the Great (Kurush Vazraka), Cambyses (Kambujiya), Hystaspes (Vishtāspa), Dārius (Daraya-Vahus), Xerxes (Kshay-Arsha), and Artaxerxes (Artha-Kshatra) are examples.
Artaxerxes (Artha-Kshaca), i.e. “whose (royal kshatriya) reign is through truth” and Xerxes (Kshaya-rsha), i.e. “ruling over heroes” are the most similar examples. In Sanskrit the full literal meaning of each name would be slightly different (e.g. Ārtha-Kshatriya is a noble/honorable warrior) depending on our interpretation. What is essential to notice is the common Indo-Iranian term ‘Kshatra’ (warrior/ruling class) in the names of Cyaxares, Artaxerxes, and Xerxes.
Romulus just represents the Eastern warrior-king known as Rāma or Arya-Rāman, and this is a recurrent theme in the iconography of royalty in Etruria and Latium at that time, which Cornell has suggested is not as “far-fetched” as it may seem. He writes in The Beginnings of Rome, Italy from the Bronze Age to the Punic Wars: “That the sixth-century Roman kings claimed to enjoy the personal favour of divine powers, and that they adopted Greek and near-eastern models of kingship in their search for legitimacy and charismatic authority, may seem far-fetched; but the evidence that is now available indicates that that is precisely what they did.” (pg. 147). Thefarie Velianas of Caere, for example, made a dedication to Phoenician Astarte in Pyrgi, and Pisistratus of Athens, who identified himself with Hercules, believed he had Athena’s support and assistance (pg. 148). The 6th century Sant’Omobono santuary, or remains of an archaic temple in the Forum Boarium in Rome, contained a statue group of Hercules and Athena that verifies how Roman kings (in this case Servius Tullius according to tradition) imitated the ostentatious Greek tyrants. It may seem even more far-fetched to suggest that they adopted Indian and Persian models of kingship, but the mysterious name of Romulus and the Ramayanic paintings from Caere prove this conjecture. The god Mithra became associated with the Roman warrior class in later years, but this type of Indo-Persian impact was also present earlier; unfortunately, most of the evidence has been either ignored, suppressed, or hidden.
What is remarkable is the continuity that exists in the Hindu and Zoroastrian traditions, when we examine their respective scriptures. The Hindu Rig Veda and Zoroastrian Avesta are similiar in language, and both ethnic groups referred to themselves as Aryans. In Encyclopedia Iranica’s entry on the Indo-Iranian wind god Vāyu, the spiritual deity Rām is also described. Verses from the Zoroastrian scripture Bundahishn, which is said to have some pre-Zoroastrian elements, reveal a close affinity between the Persian Rāman (or Rām) and the Indian Rāma. The Iranian encyclopedia translates the Bundahišn (26.28-29) thus:
‘Rām, whom one calls Good Way of long-dominion, is himself Way of long-dominion who, among the Spiritual Deities, has as his proper activity chieftainship of the Warriors. And when the soul (gyān) of the righteous crosses the Cinwat-bridge, the Good Way takes his hand and brings him to his proper place. One calls (him) ‘Rām’ for the reason that he is the giver of pleasure (rāmišn-dādār) to the whole world. When the Bad Way strikes the life-breath (gyān) from the body, this Good Wāy receives it and gives it contentment.’
In Sanskrit, ‘Rāma’ has the same meaning, pleasing and charming, which has been extended to pleasing the whole world in the divine incarnation of Rama. ‘Rāma-dāthra’ (pleasure-giver) in Sanskrit is the equivalent of Zoroastrian rāmišn-dādār. The Indian god Rama is also recognized as the best Aryan warrior in the Hindu epic of Valmiki. The ‘Cinwat-bridge’ mentioned above, is defined as the pathway that “leads from this world to the next and must be crossed by the souls of the departed” by the encyclopedia. The righteous souls, who are full of knowledge or gyāna (also spelled jñana - the path of wisdom) in Hinduism, are guided to the supreme destination, heaven, or a higher birth on the earthly planet. This is one of the pillars of Hindu philosophy, regarding transmigration and reincarnation, along with liberation of the soul. The vague term ‘Good Way’ is a substitute for the personal God who rewards salvation, analogous to the Good Shepherd Jesus or Gopala Krishna. In the Valmiki Ramayana, Lord Rama builds a bridge (Rama-setu) over the ocean to save Sita from Ravana, who metaphorically symbolizes the ‘Bad Way’. Even when the body perishes due to accumulated karma, the Zoroastrian Bundahišn tells us that God preserves the life-breath, or spiritual living entity. Obviously the Upanishads contain the same philosophy. The parallels between the two cultures, Indian and Persian (known as Parsees when some of them immigrated to India), are therefore astonishingly close.
Continued in Part II
No comments:
Post a Comment