Etruscans

[Adelais Valerius]

We all know that Rome was not founded by Romulus after he killed his brother Remus, thats a simple myth created by the Romans because they despised the fact that their great city had once been ruled over by a foreign power(any good Roman would have been offended by the notion of such a thing).Rome had its beginnings as an Etruscan controlled city within Latium, and through Greek and Eastern influences, started to show promise as a city,especially after the defeat of the nearby city of Alba Longa within the 6th century. My question is, what happened to these Etruscan Kings that were ruling Rome? I know they were overthrown by rebellion, but what caused this rebellion? It was the Etruscanss who made Rome into an actual city(wanting to use its access to the tiber mainly, but it still helped it!). I guess my real question is what caused the rebellion that extricated these Kings from Rome?. This period is somewhat confusing to me to be honest.

[Ursus]

Etruscan power was waning. The Greek cities in the south of Italy had defeated them in battle.

 

Another one of those foundation myths was that the Etruscan king raped a virtuous Roman woman, inspiring the Roman nobles to avenge her honor. This is again probably mere poetry, but a rebellion of Roman aristocrats against a foreign king in conjunction with declining Etruscan power seems likely.

[M. Porcius Cato]

My question is, what happened to these Etruscan Kings that were ruling Rome? I know they were overthrown by rebellion, but what caused this rebellion? It was the Etruscanss who made Rome into an actual city(wanting to use its access to the tiber mainly, but it still helped it!). I guess my real question is what caused the rebellion that extricated these Kings from Rome?.

 

There are a number of competing theories.

 

Summarizing the reconstruction by Livy et al., Forsythe (A Critical History of Early Rome, p. 147) writes:

According to the ancient literary tradition, Rome's last king, Tarquinius Superbus (Tarquin the Proud), was a cruel tyrant. He murdered Servius Tullius, usurped royal power, oppressed the senate, and worked the Rome people to exhaustion by making them labor on the sewer system of the Cloaca Maxima which drained the runoff from the hills into the Tiber. He even used underhanded means to quell opposition throughtout Latium in order to make himself the leader of the Latin League. His downfall, however, resulted from the outrageoous conduct f his wicked son Sextus. His rape of the viertuous Lucretia and her consequent suicide so angered the Roman people that they rose up in revolt, banished the Tarquin royal family from Rome, and replaced the king with two annually elected consuls and a priest called the rex sacrorum, who held his office for life.

 

By a (suspiciously) remarkable coincidence, this revolt occurred in 510 BC, the same year the tyrant Hippias had been driven out of Athens (also stemming in part from a tyrant's botched love-affair). Also, in 304 it was established that 204 annual nails had been hammered in the cella wall of the Temple of Jupiter on the Capitol, implying that the temple had been dedicated in 509 or 508. Moreover, an inscription on the outside wall of the temple, taken as a foundation stone, named the official after whom the year was named--Marcus Horatius, the same name as one of consuls supposed to have held office in the second year of the Republic. (In fact, the Marcus Horatius named was a descendent who renovated the temple in 378.) Thus, the beginning of the Republic was based on a correctly calculated date combined with a case of mistaken identity.

 

Here's another reconstruction (quoting again from Forsythe, p. 148):

A. Alfoldi (1965, 72-84) has offered a compelling picture of the event that might have brought about the end of the Roman monarchy. Following in the footsteps of earlier modern critics olf the ancient tradition surrounding the beginning of the republic, Alfoldi has argued that the monarchy ended as the result of the capture of Rome by King Porsenna of Clusium. Tarquinius Superbus either could actually have been deposed by Porsenna, or he could have fled from Rome after Porsenna's defeat of the Romans and advance upon the city. Tarquin then took refuge among the Latins, while Porsenna used Rome as a bridgehead in an attempt to expand his control in Latium. This situation resulted in the battle of Aricia in 504 BC, in which the invading Etruscans, led by Porsenna's son Arruns and supported by the occupied city of Rome, fought against the other Latin states, which received important military assistance from Aristodemus of Cumae. When the latter were victorious, Porsenna withdrew from Rome, and the Romans were left to face alone a coalition of the other Latin states, who supported Tarquin's restoration as king. Eventually this standoff was resolved in the battle at Lake Regillus of either 499 (Livy 2.19-20) or 496 BC (Dion Hal 6.2.ff), in which Rome defeated the Latins or at least fought them to a draw, and Tarquinius Superbus went into exile at the court of Aristodemus, who was now tyrant of Cumae.