Since the loca (places) of the Tiber-finis has been established by the tradition, I will try to extrapolate from this section some features attributable to the finis, as Livy records them. In this section, my research targets one event: the occupation or the possession of Rome beyond the opposite bank of the Tiber as finis. Specifically, I will consider a key argument – the connection of a river (Tiber) with specific places (Janiculum and Capitolium Hills) – which helps to define the concept of finis. In order to understand how the Tiber-finis was considered, I will focus attention on the adjoining of the Janiculum to Rome, which lay on the left bank of the Tiber. The willingness to occupy the Janiculum – and to consider it as part of the city – represents a true revolution in Roman conception about fines: both sides of a finis are seen as a unity. Although it has not been definitively proven that the Janiculum was inhabited at the time of Ancus, Livy’s narrative reveals the conjoining elements that made this annexation possible. The bridge as a means of connection is a key point both in the Livian account and in the reshaping of the concept of finis and is, nevertheless, crucial to my argument.
Although Livy acknowledges that the Janiculum was encompassed into the City by Ancus, this process was still unfinished at the time of Porsenna’s invasion (509 B.C.). Therefore, I disagree with Ogilvie’s somewhat radical belief that the “incorporation of the hill as a whole” was an exaggeration.458 It is merely the case that, at this crucial historical moment, Rome had obtained a permanent link with the Janiculum, but not its complete control. In this context, Livy’s legendary account of the first war against Veii in Romulus’ time can be read as a statement of the Roman
457
Besnier (1902) made an often repeated statement that the island is of the same tufa rock as the Capitoline (cf. Platner & Ashby 1929 s. ‘Capitoline Hill’). De Angelis d'Ossat (1944:77) shows a dismaying lack of evidence for this assertion, but gives his opinion that the island existed from prehistoric times and was of cardinal importance in making an early bridge possible (1944:88). The small island shown in old maps at the upper end of the Insula Tiberina was apparently formed by a mass of masonry which fell away from the bank (1944:81). Cf. Holland 1949:312.
458
Ogilvie 1965:137.
attitude towards the presence and the function of the Tiber.459 Once attacked by the Etruscans, the Romans had an entrepreneurial determination in crossing the river. This determination is also evident in the difference between the Roman and the Veientine military tactics: the latter would devastate and plunder Rome’s territory before returning to their own, without setting up any fort (…itaque non castris
positis, non exspectato hostium exercitu raptam ex agris praedam portantes Veios rediere).460 Livy in this case uses the term ager (agris) to indicate the Roman territory – a key point for the exploration of the term finis. In the first chapter, I underlined that the translation of fines (plural) is often combined with the notion of territory.[1.4.1] Through the use of this term, Livy again highlights Roman tactics and strategy: instead of remaining ensconced behind Rome’s river, “the Romans – not finding the enemy in their territory (agris) – ready and eager for a decisive struggle, crossed the Tiber” (“Romanus contra, postquam hostem in agris non
invenit, dimicationi ultimae instructus intentusque Tiberim transit”).461 Once again Livy relates those places with Ancus’ expansion, stating the connection between the King and the enlargement of their borders. Ancus’ expansionistic policy allows Livy the opportunity to emphasise this difference between agri and fines, in the process of Rome’s extension of her dominion.
Nec urbs tantum hoc rege creuit sed etiam ager finesque. Silua Maesia Veientibus adempta usque ad mare imperium prolatum et in ore Tiberis Ostia urbs condita, salinae circa factae, egregieque rebus bello gestis aedis Iovis Feretri amplificata.462
And this reign was a period of growth, not only for the City, but also for her lands and
fines. The Maesian Forest was taken from the Veientes, extending Rome’s dominion
clear to the sea; at the Tiber’s mouth the city of Ostia was founded, and salt-works were established near-by; while in recognition of signal success in war the temple of Jupiter Feretrius[3.3] was enlarged.
In the first phrase, Livy reports Rome’s expansion on three different levels: city (urbs), territory (ager) and fines. They are clearly three different layers, which form a sequence from the core to the periphery of the Roman domain. It is undeniable that
ager and fines are distinguishable and clearly not synonymous, representing two
different conceptions of space to Roman eyes. Moreover – besides this one aspect – Livy sums up in this key passage some other important aspects: a) the Silva 459 Liv. 1.15.1-3. 460 Liv. 1.15.2. 461 Liv. 1.15.2. 462 Liv. 1.33.9.
Maesa was probably part of the fines; b) the fines might also be connected with the
extended (prolatum) imperium; c) the foundation of the colony of Ostia Tiberis might be linked to the control of salt-works; d) the enlargement of the temple of Jupiter Feretrius was due to great victories and deeds, which some authors have linked with the extension of the fines.[3.8]
Livy presents other examples, in which finis and ager are in the same context: • Sita in Maesessum finibus est, Bastetanae gentis ager frugifer; argentum etiam incolae fodiunt.463
It is situated in the fines of the Maesesses, a Bastetanian tribe. Its land is fruitful; the inhabitants mine silver also.
• finium is ager Cassandrensium erat, longe fertilissimus omnis orae quam praeteruecti fuerant.464
These fines belonged to the territory of Cassandrea and was by far the most fertile of all the coast they had passed.
• [Fabii], qua Tuscus ager Romano adiacet, sua tuta omnia, infesta hostium vagantes
per utrumque finem fecere.465
but in all that region where the Tuscan territory marches with the Roman the Fabii afforded universal security to their own countrymen and vexation to the enemy, by ranging along the finis on both sides.
Fines have a precise spatial definition, which is not superimposable upon ager and
therefore cannot be translated as territory. At the moment, it is important to emphasise this difference. The last passage – on the Fabii – will be discussed later,[2.3.2] while the possibility of different territorial subdivision of the surrounding space will be analysed later.[4.2.3.1]