Rama (left), the lead archer, hunts the deer with his brother Laksmana (right)
Rama and Laksmana (above) carry red and black colored bows, respectively, on the Caeretan hydria kept in Boston. Rama has red hair and Laksmana has black hair, which along with their painted weapons, serve to emphasize the distinction between the two heroes.
The same distinguishing attributes are applied to another pair of heroes from Greek myth, Herakles and Iolaos, on a Caeretan hydria kept in Los Angeles at the Getty Museum.
Herakles and Iolaos are featured on a famous Caeretan hydria in the Getty Museum. If we look closely at the painted colors, Herakles is dark-skinned (black) with reddish hair and holds a reddish-black colored weapon (club). Iolaos, on the other hand, is fair-skinned (whitish) with black hair and holds a black-colored weapon (sickle). Iolaos is like the Robin to Herakles’ Batman; they are comrades. Now, if we examine the painted colors for the two nude youths on the Boston hydria, we see that the lead hunter Rama has black skin with red hair and holds a red-colored bow while the second hunter Laksmana, who is Rama’s main companion in the Indian epic, has black hair and holds a black-colored bow. Laksmana, the nude youth behind Rama who is assisting him in the deer hunt, also used to have white-painted skin that has been lost due to degradation of the paint on the vase: “The skin of the hunter A 5 (second from the left) was white: white males are very common on the hydriae (e.g. Iolaos),” according to the Dutch scholar Jaap Hemelrijk. Laksmana is depicted as lighter skinned than Rama in medieval Indian painting, probably to highlight his subordinate status. Hemelrijk also recognizes the parallel with Iolaos but does not investigate further, a recurring tendency of classical scholars when faced with inconvenient evidence.
Heracles has red colored hair (like Rama) and holds a red colored club
Thus, the artists in this particular workshop must have selected their painted colors for Rama and Laksmana based on a certain palette for two male heroes that are striking a creature. This palette was designed to distinguish the major hero from the minor hero, and it was also applied to the later dated hydria in which Herakles and Iolaos fight the monstrous Lernaean hydra. The Busiris painter and the Eagle painter must have communicated with each other about such decisions, where clearly there was a preference for the pairing of black skin with red hair, weapons, and armor, as well as the pairing of white skin with black hair, weapons, and dress for heroic male duos. The firm conclusion from this comparison of painted colors on the Getty and Boston hydriae is that like Herakles and Iolaos, who have already been identified from Greek myth on the former, Rama and Laksmana should be identified from Indian myth on the latter. The artists used the same color scheme for both heroic pairs (Herakles-Iolaos, Rama-Laksmana) because they were all great mythological heroes who played similar roles in their respective stories. This discovery of mine debunks any nonsensical attempts to label the two nude hunters as generic figures chasing deer. Vermeule notices the “scarlet bows” of the hunters, but this is technically not correct, as it implies both Rama and Laksmana are using the same-colored bow (red). Thus, we have to be extremely careful in observing each detail.
Iolaos has black colored hair (like Laksmana) and holds a black colored weapon (sickle)
The Boston deer hunt painting is a detailed and very descriptive mythological hunting scene featuring two Indian heroes against the demon Maricha that parallels the dual efforts of Greek heroes such as Apollo and Artemis against the demon Tityos, and of course, Herakles and Iolaos against the monster at Lerna. The multiple serpentine heads of the Lernaean hydra are analogous in some sense to the multiple moving poses or heads of the golden deer Maricha and the ten heads of Ravana. This general iconographic feature of ‘multiple obstacles’ is meant to highlight the difficulty of subduing the enemy. After learning about the Indian legend of the Ramayana, I think the two East Greek artists who painted the Caeretan hydriae must have realized that the warriors Rama and Laksmana were best understood as the Indian Herakles and Indian Iolaos, respectively. Megasthenes centuries later explained Krishna to the Greek world as the ‘Indian Herakles’. Rama and Krishna are basically equivalent in their eminent stature and importance in the Indian religious myth, so naturally the Greeks matched both of them to Herakles, their greatest hero.
Throughout the month I will try to post excerpts from the paper I have recently published on Academia.edu regarding the Campana plaques in Paris and the Caeretan hydria in Boston. For now I will briefly summarize my main thesis. These Mediterranean artworks are definitely Eastern or Oriental in their iconography and narrative content. The mythological episodes being told originate in India; the epic Ramayana is the literary source for the characters and their actions which are depicted on these Greco-Etruscan artifacts. The figure painting style is Ionian, the presentation style of the deer hunt is Asian, especially Near Eastern (with Anatolian and Persian influences as well), and the background story is Indian. See the link to my preliminary thesis paper below and share the link with anyone who has a genuine interest in the truth. This truth about the ancient past is independent of any person's religious or political affiliation. Read carefully and enjoy!
Source: Miniature Paintings on the Holy Ramayana by Shantilal Nagar (2001)
Books like these attempt to explain early Roman legends, but do they succeed? My opinion is they always lack a comprehensive approach.
I want to propose a Unifying Theory of History, not a Theory of Everything where one force is the cause of all forces, as in the Grand Unified Theory of Physics.
It is not my desire to propose that India or Persia or Greece is the ultimate source of all the mythologies of the world. A Unifying Theory of History argues that all these different cultures were related, not just in some trivial way, but in a meaningful way which can answer some of the unresolved questions we have about world history. To put it simply, it is a theory where all the nations involved in the so-called Axial Age need to be studied together as a unified whole to reveal historical truths, especially about individual events or people (real or mythical). Unfortunately, the approach that has predominated in historical research is one of provincialism - treating each country’s history as a monolithic entity, with some vague references to foreign influences (e.g. Orientalizing in Greece and Etruria).
Gregory Alles writes about his own approach to world history in his book The Iliad, the Ramayana, and the Work of Religion: Failed Persuasion and Religious Mystification, which compares two major epic works of ancient literature, one Greek and one Indian (pg. 11): "My mode of investigation is not hermeneutics but history - not history as the recovery of the past but as a principled and systematic exploration of events in which religion occurs, including events of meaning."
The formation of the Persian Empire, the founding and development of early Rome, the pre-Socratic philosophical movements in Greece, and the Orientalization of the Etruscan culture all represented meaningful events in which religious thought spread around the nexus of the ancient world at that time (6th century BCE), the Mediterranean Sea. My methodology is focused on recovery of the historical past through systematic analysis of these "events of meaning", as Gregory Alles called them, though he may have been referring to something slightly different.
Max Mueller, the German Indologist, recognized the importance of the sixth century BCE and the need to study the different cultures of the world that were connected to each other at that time: ‘We seem perfectly within our right when we look upon the numerous coincidences between the (Greek) fables of Aesopus and the fables occurring in Sanskrit and Pali literature as proving the fact that there was a real literary exchange between India, Persia, Asia Minor and Greece beginning with the sixth century BC.’ (pg. 29, The Bible and Asia, by R.S. Sugirtharajah)
One of my main motivations is to draw attention to this crucial period in human history that has nevertheless been neglected, not only with respect to ancient Italy, but many other nations of the ancient world such as Persia. Are there as many popular films or plays on Cyrus the Great like there are for Caesar or Alexander? I remember learning about the empires of Greece and Rome in school before college, but the empires of Persia and India were barely covered, if at all. This Eurocentrism prevents any thorough investigation of early Rome and its etymology from being conducted, because Rome was not independently founded overnight without the input of other civilizations from the East.
If someone comes to America and asks us what Memphis means (as in Memphis, Tennessee), we might tell them it is named after a famous city in ancient Egypt. Many people have never heard of Memphis, Egypt and are more familiar with Memphis, Tennessee, probably thinking incorrectly that the name Memphis is a product of English spoken in the American South. Although the Egyptians never founded any place in America, the American people drew inspiration from their great civilization (North African). Similarly, the ancient Italian people, especially the Etruscans, drew much of their inspiration from civilizations of the East, such as the Syrians, Phoenicians and Ionians. The name Rome has its roots in that same inspiration. Attention needs to be focused on the seventh and sixth centuries BC to properly answer the question of the founding and naming of Rome, a word that certainly did not come out of nowhere, as we can all agree.
For those who are still skeptical of the value of knowing the true etymology of a city's name, they should ask themselves whether people care about the origins of their own family surname. As a personal name is necessary for identifying one's ethnic heritage, the name of a city is necessary for identifying all the contributors and factors involved in its inception. Rome's evolving name also reflects the changes that occurred as Rome developed from a small hilly town to a large "eternal" city. Its etymology and subsequent modification over time reinforce our understanding of the gradual but incredible growth of the Roman world. In the beginning, we have Near Eastern Ramah (hinted at by 'Ramnes' of Indo-Persia and perhaps 'horama' of ancient Greece) from c. 700 - 500 BC; then Etruscan Ruma with its legend seen in the Francois Tomb paintings at Vulci, along with Latinized Roma and its legend of Romulus (c. 500 - 300 BC); and finally, the conversion of oral to written tradition, accompanied by the deification of the city Roma and its leaders, including Romulus himself (c. 300 BC - 200 AD). The Greek word for power, 'rhome', naturally became associated with Rome's evolving meaning in the last phase, especially the golden age or Pax Romana, along with Latin 'aeternum' (eternal), which derives from 'aevum' (age). I may note that Memphis had its own evolution from 'Men-nefer' (c. 1550, New Kingdom) meaning enduring and beautiful, to 'Memfi' in Coptic, which the Greeks adapted as Memphis. The pyramid of Pepi (Men-nefer-Pepi) is probably the ancient Egyptian pronunciation of 'Memphis'.
So as we observe the transfer of a Near Eastern Egyptian name to America via the Greeks, Romans, and the British, we also should observe the transfer of a Near Eastern Aramaic and Indo-Persian name ('Ramah' or 'Ramna') to Italy via the Phoenicians, Greeks, and Etruscans.
Summary: The numerous examples of ancient Italian water vases in full color from the Etruscan city of Cerveteri stand in sharp contrast to the Caeretan hydria in Boston (c. 525 BCE). Despite the lack of color photography, Rama and Laksmana can be positively identified as the two hunters on the front side, and Sita can be positively identified as the lady being abducted by Ravana on the back side.
So in this short presentation I want to discuss the possibility that an ancient Italian water vase, which is technically called a hydria, is depicting an episode from the legend of Rama. It is one of only 30 to 35 vases from a particular workshop in Cerveteri, Italy that have been discovered in the last 200 years. Thus, they are incredibly rare works of art, and the world deserves to know about all of them, three of which I have displayed here for your viewing pleasure in color. This terracotta pottery has a distinctive brownish-orange color. Many of these Caeretan hydriae, as they are called, are kept at various museums, many of which are world famous, such as the Louvre in Paris, British Museum in London, and the Villa Giulia Museum in Rome. Some are also housed in American museums, including the one Italian hydria that I will be analyzing in the next few slides.
This example below which has two painted sides from Boston’s Museum of Fine Arts is not only rare because it is one of 30 to 35 vases of the same type still intact, but also likely the only one surviving among them that depicts an Asian Indian mythological scene. Boston’s MFA does not realize how valuable and rare an artifact it is, and how marketable it can be to put it on view based on this fact and its appeal to South Asian visitors. There really is no excuse, given the prestige of the Boston MFA and its size, that they have not put this Caeretan hydria on view and they have not made color photos of this painted terracotta vase available. It is clearly a “very important”, rare, and early vase, judging from Hemelrijk’s commentary. Not making it viewable essentially sends the message that the western world should completely ignore this work of art, without any justification.
Most of the Caeretan hydriae that are relatively intact or not heavily fragmented are either on display in a major museum or have color images available for viewing online (or both). I would estimate that 30 of the vases qualify as relatively intact. Of these 30 vases, about 25 can be tracked down for the purposes of extensive study in color. The only exceptions seem to be this Boston hydria, and a few other obscure examples from museums in distant locales such as New Zealand and Denmark.
Finally, the Caeretan hydria in Boston is therefore likely the only non-fragmented vase that is neither on display nor has color photos available of it online. I am not a conspiracy theorist, but I do think they are hesitant to make this vase more public because of their inability to correctly interpret its mythological content. The curator of South Asian art at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts in the United States (also called the Boston MFA) is Laura Weinstein. And I actually corresponded with her briefly, and she admitted, quote: “It’s interesting that no subject has been identified for this vase.” This admission means that the Boston MFA does not value the Dutch expert Jaap Hemelrijk’s assertion above that “this is a very important hydria,” and “one of the earliest of all” and therefore should be studied more carefully. I do value his statement, however, and so should anyone interested in ancient art and history.
Before diving into the examination of this Boston hydria, I just wanted to give you another set of Caeretan hydriae from some of the most important museums in the world: New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art which you see on the left, Rome’s Villa Giulia Etruscan Museum in the middle, and London’s British Museum on the right. The one in the middle at Rome represents the popular Greek myth of abduction where Zeus, disguised as a bull, carries Europa away. The Indian myth of the golden deer chase and Sita’s abduction in the Ramayana is the subject actually of the Boston hydria, which I will now analyze.
Now these are black and white photos of the front side of the Boston hydria, in which you see two young men hunting deer. Notice that they both are aiming to shoot their arrows at the same time, which is common iconography in Indian art of the same event. In this event Rama and Laksmana are often painted together (or Rama is painted alone) while aiming an arrow at either a fleeing deer with two heads, or a fleeing deer in multiple running poses. This is what we would call the famous golden deer episode of the Valmiki Ramayana. Unfortunately, one classical scholar named Cornelius Vermeule completely misunderstands the nature of the two figures and calls them “wild men who have horses’ ears but no tails."
This blatantly misleading statement, as you can see in the graphic pointing to the human ears above of the lead character, is exactly the type of remark that makes me concerned about the sincerity of these historians, most of whom are European (or of European descent). This totally wrong assertion appears in the periodical called The Classical Journal, Volume 64, in November of 1968. To my knowledge, it has never been condemned by any of his colleagues.
In my opinion, the two male heroes hunting deer with bow and arrows are none other than the Indian protagonists Rama and Laksmana. The author Hemelrijk carefully notes: “The bow of the first hunter is double-curved (Scythian type) and at both ends provided with a separate string-hook… The bow of the second hunter is like that of the first hunter; its string is seemingly painted over his left arm, but was covered by the white of the skin… The skin of the second hunter was white… His anatomical details are exactly like those of the first hunter.”
In the Valmiki Ramayana, Laksmana is well known for being lighter skinned than his dark and powerful older brother Rama. They are like twin brothers and they are divine incarnations in Hindu tradition. Laksmana accompanies Rama in all his activities. The same type of Scythian bow is also visible on contemporary scenes on the Campana plaques that were also found in Cerveteri. In both artworks, the terracotta hydria and the terracotta painted plaques, I would identify the male hero as Rama. You can see one of the Campana plaques here on this slide, in between the sketch of the hunters Rama and Laksmana and the isolated image of them from the Caeretan hydria with no background.
So just to summarize, Hemelrijk’s observations accord well with the description of the two heroes Rama and Laksmana in the Valmiki Ramayana, whether it be the similar anatomical details, or the same Scythian bow, or the fact that Laksmana is lighter skinned than Rama, which may be the most important detail.
Now these are black and white photos of the back side of the Boston hydria, and they depict two male-female pairs on each half in an abduction sequence. The two pairs of characters are probably Ravana and Sita, with Ravana abducting Sita by grasping her arm on the right and then carrying her off in the next scene to the left. This episode in the Ramayana happens concurrently with the deer hunt by Rama and Laksmana, so it makes perfect sense for it to be painted on the reverse side of that main hunting scene.
Notice the two girls or nymphs are not distinguished easily from one another, whether it be their dresses or facial expressions - both “less pleased”, as Hemelrijk realizes, but due to ignorance of myths outside the Mediterranean world, he cannot fully complete his intelligent observation. He writes that the two girls are “being carried off by formidable satyrs”, which again indicates that the two satyrs are virtually indistinguishable with their beards, long hair, large heads, and horse-like features. Thus, we can conclude that each nymph is Sita and each satyr is Ravana. Hemelrijk also adds that the lady on the right “defends herself against the assault by menacing with her fist”, which is an unusual display of resistance. In the Ramayana, Sita strongly rejects Ravana’s sexual advances, but he eventually takes her away while her husband Rama is still distracted with the task of hunting the golden deer.
The classical scholar Cornelius Vermeule, whom I cited earlier, does recognize the possibility of a connection between the two painted sides of the Boston hydria, which are the deer hunt on one side and the abduction on the other side. However, he wrongly associates the young men hunting deer on the obverse side with the satyrs on the reverse side. He calls the satyrs “older friends” of the young hunters, but the truth is that the satyr Ravana is the enemy of Rama because he abducts his wife Sita. The satyrs have horses’ ears but no tails, whereas the young men have completely human bodies. Even though he is incorrect in this aspect, Vermeule at least sees a relationship between the front and back sides of the Boston hydria. His description of Ravana “dancing away with an acquiescent nymph”, i.e. Sita, on the left half of this back side is not totally accurate, as Sita is forcibly taken away against her will and Ravana’s arm around her chest signifies his need to keep her from escaping.
So she has not really surrendered but is nonetheless unable to free herself. Now to summarize, the maenad or nymph in both scenes here can be identified as Sita, who also had white painted skin before the paint was lost, according to Hemelrijk. The fact that Laksmana and Sita were originally painted with light skin and Rama was painted with dark skin matches exactly with painted depictions in India of these three characters from the Ramayana. So the question, “Are Rama and Sita (and Laksmana) featured on an ancient Italian water vase?”, as improbable as it may seem, it can be answered with a positive YES.
Regarding the small collection of extant water vases called the Caeretan hydriae, the most famous museum in the world, the Louvre in Paris, has the greatest number of artifacts in this pottery group. There are a large number of painted terracotta vases, with six shown here, from Cerveteri, Italy in the Louvre museum, and France is not hesitant to allow us to see them in color. As you can tell, many of them feature animal hunts, including deer, lions, and boars. These hunt scenes sometimes occur within a mythological narrative, such as Atalanta’s hunt of the Calydonian boar in Greek legend.
If the Boston Museum of Fine Arts is confident that the Caeretan hydria in their possession is merely another hunting scene with no mythological context, why hide it from the public view? The truth is that they know it is a mythological scene, but they are afraid of the consequences of acknowledging Indian or Asian influence on ancient Italy. Their reasons may include protection of European or western cultural supremacy and avoidance of any changes or additions to our understanding of world history that are seen as too controversial or hard to fully corroborate. An ancient Italian inscription with the name ‘Rama’, which has never been discovered of course, might be the only remedy that forces these institutions to abandon their ignorance.
Summary: In this short presentation I make the argument that the Indian mythological hero Rama was known to the ancient Etruscans of Italy in the 6th century BC. A comparison with one of the earliest representations of Rama found in India is conducted to make a convincing case that the Campana plaques from Cerveteri in ancient Italy are actually depicting Rama and other figures from the Indian epic Ramayana.
Here I want to make a simple comparison between the ancient Italian depiction of an armed warrior with bow and arrows with his right hand raised, to the most ancient Indian depiction of Rama that is currently known. On these two painted terracotta plaques from the sixth century BC that you see on the bottom left, we observe a heroic warrior who closely resembles the Indian Rama sculpture of the Gupta period that we see on the right side. So this character whom I have shown twice, because he appears on two different terracotta plaques with the bow and arrow in a scene from ancient Italy, is striding confidently like a leader with a solemn expression and powerful torso (in both scenes). He is holding a bow and arrows in his left hand in both scenes as well. And you also see the right hand raised, and more demonstratively on the second pose (in the second scene).
So what are the common features between this ancient Italian painting of a warrior who looks like Rama, and the actual sculpture of Rama from India in the Gupta period? In the book Connected Histories of India and Southeast Asia, on page 136, we have the description of this sculpture: They write that “Rama here is very much a warrior hero, wearing a long tunic and channavira cross-belt, holding a bow in his left hand, and a quiver full of arrows on his back. The big eyes, thick lips, prominent chin, and unadorned ears bear a serious and purposeful expression. Of utmost interest is his oversized right hand, held in a gesture of protection from fear (or what is known as abhaya in Sanskrit). He is represented as a divine hero in this frame, the exact context for which is difficult to tell as the rest of the terracotta composition is damaged and lost. Rama in abhaya-hasta (which is the right hand gesture of fearlessness) is rarely seen in sculptures of the 4th to 8th century period, which makes this an even more significant example.”
So if we compare back to the ancient Italian painting, we can see many features that are in common, including the serious and purposeful expression, the oversized right hand in a gesture of protection from fear, as well as the bow and arrows in the left hand (or at least the bow in the left hand). And he is also standing tall, very confidently like a warrior hero, as he should in both the ancient Italian and ancient Indian depictions. So, honestly it’s hard not to conclude that the ancient Italian painting is also a depiction of the Indian hero Rama.
This excerpt that I just quoted from Connected Histories of India and Southeast Asia: Icons, Narratives, Monuments, is actually part of the Chapter Seven of that book, which is titled “Epic Visions in Terracotta, Stone, and Stucco: Ramayana in Indian Sculpture, Beginnings to 8th Century CE (or Common Era).” So within the book that I just cited, we have that chapter (7), and on page 136 I quoted the description of Rama that is being depicted in this sculpture from the Gupta period. So the Los Angeles County Museum of Art is the location where this sculpture is kept, and they have also added some information that this warrior hero “is identified as Rama by an inscription.” It’s inscribed “in the late Brahmi script of the 3rd to 4th century AD, or Common Era. Given that it’s attributed to the circa 4th century, this is believed to be the earliest extant definitive representation of Rama,” according to the Los Angeles County Museum of Art.
And even more interestingly, in the book that I just cited on page 136 of Connected Histories of India and Southeast Asia, the author also adds: “For all these reasons (that they cite in terms of the description of it), the Los Angeles sculpture of Rama, or ‘LACMA Rama’, needs more careful attention than he has thus far received.” And I would argue that the Italian Campana plaques kept at the Louvre museum, which you see on the left, should also be getting more careful attention than they have thus far received. These painted plaques are actually five in number, with characters from two of them displayed on this slide. I would argue that each of these two characters is a Greco-Etruscan rendering in Italy of the Indian warrior hero Rama.
Superficially, the main difference that you may observe between the ancient Italian and Indian representations of Rama is the facial hair - the Italian one is bearded, whereas the Indian one has a shaven face. But if we look closer at the Italian painting, we see an additional figure that is clean shaven, has the wings of a divine hero or god, wears the same white clothes as the adjacent bearded figure, and has basically the same facial appearance except for the beard. Thus, the Italian artist is probably indicating that both men are the same person, Rama. In this Etruscan terracotta plaque, the wings on the back of Rama also signal his divinity or special powers of flight like the Greek god Hermes. Similarly, according to the book (Connected Histories of India and Southeast Asia) on the Rama terracotta sculpture from the Gupta period, Rama “is represented as a divine hero”. The Gupta kings viewed themselves as incarnations or representatives of Rama on earth; the Italian aristocrats who commissioned these terracotta plaques may have viewed Rama as a role model and a divine warrior, like Heracles.
So to summarize some of the key points here, the claim that the terracotta sculpture of Rama from the 4th century AD is the earliest definitive representation of Rama may have to be revised one day, if and when it is accepted that these 6th century BC painted terracotta plaques from ancient Italy are also depicting the Indian hero Rama. And the gap in time, of course, is quite large. It almost spans one thousand years, which is quite mind-boggling. I mean, if you look at the gap in the centuries from the 6th century BC to the 4th century AD, we are literally looking at ten centuries, or one thousand years, or one millennium. So it’s definitely an astonishing gap in time, but that should not deter us from recognizing the obvious parallels between these two works of art, from Italy and India.
Another important point made about the Rama terracotta sculpture from the 4th century of the Common Era is its lack of supporting characters that are depicted alongside the main hero. The book author of Connected Histories of India and Southeast Asia writes that “the exact context… is difficult to tell as the rest of the terracotta composition is damaged and lost.” Luckily, we have many more painted figures preserved in almost their original condition on these two Italian terracotta plaques, which seem to be identifiable as Sita and Laksmana. This identification would confirm the theory that this is an ancient Etruscan or Italian representation of the story of the Indian Ramayana.
“In the new age of warfare we cling to the outdated notion of the single hero able to carry out daring feats of courage on the battlefield… Peddling the myth of heroism is essential, maybe even more so now, to entice soldiers into war.” (pg. 86, War is a Force that Gives Us Meaning by Chris Hedges). In the same vein, Chris Hedges decries the unrealistic picture of “the Rambo heroics we are fed by the state and the entertainment industry.” (pg. 87). The generic cartoon character of G.I. Joe, an American military veteran, represents a national hero, or “a real American hero” (Duke), indicating that national identity is often tied to the symbol of the single, brave warrior who defends that nation’s values and culture. I also would like to add that the comic superhero Captain America is an obvious embodiment of the American military hero who saves the country.
Everyone knows that the name ‘America’ came first before Captain America showed up on the scene, but not everybody realizes that the name ‘Roma’ came first before the heroic Romulus showed up on the scene. We can thus connect ancient Roman national identity to the required sentiment of a singular founding hero, Romulus, who could perform amazing exploits in protecting and expanding the boundaries of Rome.
The concept of a single hero or king with immeasurable powers who acts as a role model for the nation is what underlies the Indian epic Ramayana and the foundation myth of Rome. The role model and the nation’s identity then become inextricably intertwined, which is why Rome is named after Romulus, according to the conventional story of ancient Italy. But the reality is that the imposition of national identity, national culture, or simply nationalism is what fueled the creation of the Romulus legend, while also masking the ignorance of the local population regarding foreign influences that led to the actual process of naming Rome in the Orientalizing and Archaic periods.
English author George Orwell, who rightly questioned the whole idea of national identity (“Do such things as ‘national cultures’ really exist?”, pg. 22, The English People), hints at this ignorance that one could point out in any civilization, modern or ancient. He writes: “Millions of English people willingly accept as their national emblem the bulldog, an animal noted for its obstinacy, ugliness, and impenetrable stupidity. They have a remarkable readiness to admit that foreigners are more ‘clever’ than themselves, and yet they feel that it would be an outrage against the laws of God and Nature for England to be ruled by foreigners.” (pgs. 24-26). In essence, Orwell is telling us that nationalism acts as a shield against foreign influence, and nationalists worship symbols of ignorance such as the bulldog because of their irrational fear of the unknown (‘ignorance is bliss’, as the saying goes).
The Loyal American Soldier exemplifies National Identity
Xenophobia is thus a natural consequence of nationalism. Nationalism also breeds a stubborn unwillingness to explore new or fresh perspectives on history. The entire preface of Cornell’s book (The Beginnings of Rome: Italy and Rome from the Bronze Age to the Punic Wars) literally appears to be dedicated to condemning this defining trait of Anglo-American scholars. He laments in a long monologue:
“Who could be so idle or apathetic as not to want to know how Rome grew from nothing to become the dominant power in Italy? When, how, and why did the city come into existence? Who were the Romans, and what were the secrets of their success? Such questions, one would have thought, would stimulate anyone endowed with even the most modest level of historical curiosity… What is surprising, and needs to be explained, is the fact that early Roman history has been largely ignored by scholars in the English-speaking world. This seems to be a curiously Anglo-Saxon phenomenon… Roman history before the Punic Wars is regarded as a marginal topic. It is hardly ever taught in school or university courses, and almost no one chooses it as a subject for research… The lack of any established tradition of scholarship on this subject in the English-speaking world remains a puzzle which I for one am not able to explain.” (pgs. xiv-xv)
The reason for wanting to know why Roma was Roma is that we all are fascinated by the iconic imagery of the twins suckling the she-wolf. It remains ‘the’ symbol of ancient Rome and Italy to this day (e.g. Siena’s tower in the world-famous Piazza del Campo), and we should care to find out what secrets lie behind it. Those secrets reveal our own collective history, as members of western, eastern, and global civilization. As brothers and sisters of the human race, let us be free to repudiate the bigoted Anglo-American intelligentsia.
Perhaps the Anglo-American intelligentsia should decipher the subconscious meaning of John Lennon’s lyrics in the Beatles’ song Hey Bulldog, written almost like an ode to Orwell’s English people: ‘Some kind of innocence is measured out in years… You don’t know what it’s like to listen to your fears. You can talk to me… Big man, walking in the park… Wigwam, frightened of the dark… Some kind of solitude is measured out in you… You think you know me, but you haven’t got a clue.’ One could envision an Etruscan from the past singing these lines to a classical historian in the western world to metaphorically describe the stubborn ignorance of modern scholars when encountering literary and archaeological evidence from or relating to sixth-century Rome and Etruria, especially Caere.
Cornell’s puzzlement at the lack of interest in early Rome can be explained if we are cognizant of the dearth of corresponding scholarship in the field of ancient Persian and Indian studies. Without understanding these two cultures and their connection to Greece and the Near Eastern Mediterranean region, we cannot understand early Rome. The Indo-Iranian civilization is one of the oldest in history and its shared heritage with Greece, culturally and linguistically, is often underestimated. The inherent superiority complex of Western Europe and North America, especially among white scholars of British descent, obstructs a concerted effort to attack the problems with the evidence about early Rome. We cannot just allow the so-called experts from Cambridge, Oxford, and the other prestigious universities in the English-speaking world to monopolize our perceptions about Rome’s beginnings. Faced with these complications, asking an outsider’s opinion, even if he is not a specialist in classics or ancient history, can help advance the field. Yes, the documentation of that uncertain time in the annals of classical historians is scarce. But Cornell does not accept this as an excuse to throw out centuries before the common era from the pages of our books: “The evidence is indeed extremely difficult, and problems of verification are acute, but it is incorrect to say that nothing can be known about how Rome began, or how it developed during the early centuries of its existence.” (pg. xv).
