730 ROMA. its appellation, as we shall havp occasion to relate further on, was apain altered to that which it ever afterwards continued to bear ; yet one part of the southern portion of the hill still retained the name of Rupes Tiirpeia, from the vestal hav- ing; been buried on it. (Varr. L.L. v. § 41, 51U11.) Dionysius (ii. 40) adopted the account of Piso, who attributed the death of Tarpeia to a patriotic at- tempt to deceive the Sabines, in preference to that of Fabius, which brands her with disloyalty. The latter, however, seems to have obtained most currency among the Romans ; and Propertius even derives the name of the hill from her father, Tarpeius, who com- manded the Roman garrison, — "A duce Tarpeio mons est cognomen adeptus " (v. 4. 93),— whilst he brands the tomb of the vestal with infamy. (" Tarpeiae turpe sepulcrum," v. 4. 1). The obscure legend of the I'orta Pandana, which existed somewhere on the Capitol in the time of Varro {L.L. v. § 42), is also connected witii the story of Tai-peia; and Tatius is said to have stipulated, in the treaty which he made with Romulus, that this gate should always be left open. (Fest. p. 36.3, ami Paul. Diac. p. 220, IMull.) According to an incredible account in Solinus (i. 13), it was a gate of the old Saturnian city, and was ori- ginally called Porta Saturnia; nor is the version of Polyaenus more satisfactory {Stratag. viii. 35), who refers the story of the Porta Pandana to the treaty with the Gauls, by which the Romans en- gaged always to leave one gate open, but, in order to evade the consequences, built it in an inaccessible place. After peace had been concluded between Romulus and Tatius, they possessed two distinct but united cities, — the former reigning on the. Palatine, the latter on the Capitoline, and dwelling on the spot where the temple of Juno Moneta afterwards stood (Pint. Eom. 2; Sol. i. 21.) When Tacitus says, in the passage before cited, that Tatius added the Capitoline to the city, we are perhaps therefore to imderstand that he built upon it and made it habit- able, whilst previously it had been only a sort of military outpost. The valley between the two hills formed a kind of neutral ground, and served as a common market-place. The gate called Janualis, mentioned by Varro in the passage cited from him when treating of the Romulean gates, seems undoubt- edly to have belonged to the Sabine town. Niebuhr, who is followed by Bunsen {Beschr. vol. i. p. 145), is of opinion (^Hist. i. 292) that it was built by the two cities as a barrier of their common liberties ; that it was open in time of war in order that suc- cour might pass from one to the other, and shut during peace, either to prevent the quarrels which might arise from imrestricted intercourse, or as a token that the cities, though united, were distinct. Becker, on the other hand, denies that it ever was a gate at all, maintaining that it only got that name catachrestically, from the temple which it subse- quently formed being called " Porta Belli" (pp. 118, 119, and note 167). But there seems to be ample evidence that it was originally a gate. Varro, in the passage cited, evidently considered it as such ; and it is also mentioned by Macrobins as a real gate, though the situation which he assigns to it will hardly be allowed even by those who give the great- est extention to the walls of the Romulean city (" Cum bello Sabino — Romani portam, quae sub ra- dicibns collis Viminalis erat, quae postea ex eventu Janualis vocata est, claudere festinarent," Sat. i. 9). We may learn from Ovid, not only its real situ- ROiMA. ation, but also that it was the veiy gate which Tarpeia betrayed to the Sabines. The passage fixes its site so accurately, and consequently also that of the temple of Janus, — an important point in Roman topography, — that it is necessary to quote it at length : — " Presserat ora deus. Tunc sic ego nostra resolvo, Voce mea voces eliciente dei: Quum tot sint Jani cur stas sacratus in uno. Hie ubi templa foris juncta diiohus hahes ? llle manu mulcens propexam ad pectora barbam Protinus Oebalii retulit arma Tati, Utque levis custos, amiillis capta Sabinis, Ad summae Tatium duxerit arcis iter. Inde, velut nunc est, per quern descenditis, inqidi, Ardutis in valles etfora clivus erat. El jam contigerat portam, Saturnia cujus Dempserat oppositas insidiosa seras. Cum tanto veritus committere numine pugnan; Ipse meae movi callidus artis opus, Oraque, qua pollens ope sum, fontana reclusi Sumque repentinas ejaculatus aquas. Ante tamen calidis subjeci sulphura venis, Clauderet ut Tatio fervidns humor iter. Cujus ut utilitas pulsis jiercepta Sabinis, Quae fuerat, tuto reddita forma loco est. Ara mihi posita est, parvo conjuncta sacello. Haec adolet fiammis cum strue farra suis." (^Fast. i. 255. seq.) We see from these lines, that the gate attacked by the Sabines lay at the bottom of a path leading down from the Capitoline, which path still existed in the time of Ovid, and was situated between the forum of Caesar and the Forum Romanum. The gate was consequently at the bottom of the NE. slope of the Capitoline hill, a little to the N. of the present arch of Septimius Severus. We also learn that a small temple or sacellum was dedicated to Janus at this spot. Whether the ancient gate was incorporated in this temple, or whether it was pulled down, or whether the temple was erected by the side of the gate, cannot be determined; but at all events its former existence was commemorated by the title of Porta Janualis. It is no objection to Ovid's account, as far as the topographical question is concerned, that it differs from the one usually re- ceived, which represents the Sabines as successful through the treachery of Tarpeia, and not as repulsed through the intervention of Janus. He seems to have combined two diflerent legends ; but all that we are here concerned for is his accurate description of the site of the temple, and consequently of the gate. Its site is further confirmed by Procopius (B. G. i. 25. p. 122, Dind.), who mentions it as situated a little beyond the statues of the three Fates, as will appear in the second part of this article. The temple was dedicated lay the peace-loving Nuina, who made the opening and shutting of it the .sign of war and peace. (Liv. i. 19.) Niebuhr, therefore, besides assigning an inadmissible and even absurd meaning to this custom, has forestalled its date, when he mentions it as coming into use at the union of the two independent cities. After writing what precedes, the compiler of this article met with an essay by Dr. Th. Mommsen, published in the Annali deU Institiito for the year 1844 (vol. xvi.), and entitleil De Comitio Romano, in which that writer (p. 306, seq.) considers that he has irrefragablv established that the temple of
