Rome's She-Wolf Younger Than Its City

[Primus Pilus]

The icon of Rome's foundation, the Capitoline she-wolf, was crafted in the Middle Ages, not the Antiquities, according to a research into the statue

[M. Porcius Cato]

I feel like I've been told there's no Santa Claus.

[Ursus]

There is no Santa Claus??

[Primus Pilus]

Of course, just because that particular statue may not have originated in antiquity does not mean that the she-wolf was not a symbol of Rome in ancient times. They make a rather poorly supported leap in my opinion.

[WotWotius]

I was not really implying that. It merely stated that, due to its possible medieval origins, the statue in question was no longer the symbol of Ancient Rome.

 

But even so, I was a little surprised myself; that wolf crops up in almost every book I own on the Roman world.

[phil25]

The statue - which I have seen and as I recall is in the Capitoline Museum - certainly looks old. It has the same appearance and "feel" as some of the republican bronzes which survive. There is a "primitive feel to the stance and detail which has never struck me as particularly medieval. One of the legs also shows signs of a lightning strike, which supports the subjective appearance of antiquity.

 

I had always understood that the statue of the she-wolf was old but the "twins" feeding from her dugs were renaissance in origin.

 

Having not had time yet to read the article, I don't know whether the re-dating is subjective (ie based on visual assessment; or scientific/chemical, and thus more likely to be definitive.

 

Whatever, as the symbol of SPQR, that image will remain with me. If the Romans did not have that particular statue they surely had one not dissimilar.

 

Phil

[vopattes]

The article does not say that the single mold technique could not have been used in 5thBC (date claimed by museum). Would it be, therefore, an improbable sculpture unless from medieval times ?

 

I suppose that the dating of the statue may also re-question the dating of the symbolism.

 

When do we know that the symbol (represented or not by a statue) was used by the romans ?

Did romans use this symbol before the republic ?

[Pantagathus]

Did romans use this symbol before the republic ?

Oh yes... It is definitely present in the archaeological record of Archaic & Early Republican Rome.

 

Also consider that the Lupercalia was perhaps one of the most archaic of all religious festivals at Rome and most long lasting into the Christian era.

 

If the casting is from the Middle Ages, why does that have to undermine the importance of what came before? Surely there was an inspirational model. Think about Michelangelo's 'David'...

[Primus Pilus]

Did romans use this symbol before the republic ?

Oh yes... It is definitely present in the archaeological record of Archaic & Early Republican Rome.

 

Also consider that the Lupercalia was perhaps one of the most archaic of all religious festivals at Rome and most long lasting into the Christian era.

 

If the casting is from the Middle Ages, why does that have to undermine the importance of what came before? Surely there was an inspirational model. Think about Michelangelo's 'David'...

 

Indeed. Their conclusion, which ignores literary evidence of the she-wolf ideology, is full of enormous holes.

[DecimusCaesar]

It's strange considering that one of the most famous statues from Rome might not be genuinally ancient. The image is one of the most famous, frequently shown in books and TV shows about the Romans (there is a replica of it in I, Claudius I believe).

[phil25]

I assume that there is a film "prop" version which companies can hire. It was probably made for "Fall of the Roman Empire" in the early-60s (it appears in the Curia scenes), but possibly for Cleopatra (though I don't recall it there).

 

The "look" of many productions is similar because the same costumes/props are used. In his first scene in I CLAVDIVS, Tiberius wears the Prime Porta cuirass made for Christopher Plummer in "Fall". One can trace other armour through several films if one looks closely.

 

So it isn't necessarily that there is a concensus about the image of the She Wolf, it is just that art directors probably know more about other films than they do about the past.

 

Phil

[spittle]

Recycling materials for televisions productions is a huge business. I always get the feel of 'low budget' by the use of music from famous films being used on TV stuff. Ray Winstone's HENRY VIII had music from Gladiator and Braveheart recycled into it.

 

As for the Capitoline Wolf in I, CLAVDIVS. It appears above the exit to the Senate in several scenes.

 

AND, according to T J Cornell 'The Beginnings of Rome'

"There are good reasons for believing the story [Romulus and Remus] was current in Rome in the archaic age. the best evidense is the magnificient bronze statue of a she-wolf, now in the Palazzo dei Conservatori, which is undoubtedly archaic and probably dates from the sixth century BC.

 

Its figure 3, page 61....UNDOUBTEDLY....Apparently not?

Edited November 28, 2006 by spittle

[Eterna]

One statue does not prove that the wolf was not Rome's symbol. However trivial it may seem, Rome's mythical founding on April 21st,753 would give Rome an interesting "astrological mix. The sun in Taurus{the immovable object}, likely Aries=wolf rising{the irresistible force}, and the moon in {driven} Aquarius. Astronomers scoff & Astrologers disagree. But for those familiar with the latter. This combination does seem to fit the "Roman character." Any thoughts?

[Ursus]

Any thoughts?

 

I think it would have been cool if they had used the woodpecker, Mars' lesser known animal sigil ...

[phil25]

The loss of Roman "woodpeckers" at Carrhae doesn't sound quite the same, does it.

 

On the other hand in retrieving them Tiberius could have claimed to have got a "woody" or kept the roman "pecker" up, I suppose!!

 

In shame, for this irresistable post,

 

Phil