This learned, thought-provoking and original book offers a detailed analysis of the Roman foundation legend and a completely new interpretation of its principal element. T. P. Wiseman's contention is that Romulus's twin brother Remus was not an original part of the story, but was introduced at a relatively late stage; so far from symbolising some primordial feature of archaic Rome (which has hitherto been the standard interpretation), the twins motif reflects a historical development of the middle republic.

The idea of twin founders took hold, in Wiseman's view, only in the years around 300bc, when after centuries of struggle the plebeians finally achieved political equality with the patricians. This long-delayed recognition of plebeian rights explains the curious name (the e is short) - from Latin remorari, "to delay". Remus was "the latecomer".

The difficulty is that, in the received version of the story, Remus is killed before the foundation of the city takes place. There are many ways of answering the question: why twins? But if twins are required, why is one of them eliminated at the crucial moment? The problem is intractable because any plausible answer to the first question makes it impossible to answer the second. Wiseman's explanation is that Remus was written out of the script during the military crisis of 296bc, when the construction of a temple of Victory was accompanied by a human sacrifice to secure the prosperity and security of the state. The evidence for this alleged event is tenuous, however, and the idea that it inspired the elimination of Remus is implausible, if only because in the story the death of Remus is not a sacrifice, but an act of murder.

But the real value of this book lies not in its unorthodox interpretation of the twins, which Wiseman himself acknowledges is conjectural, but rather in its general approach. It clearly recognises that myths are not unchanging entities set in stone at some remote primordial stage, but are protean modes of representation that are constantly being reshaped in response to changing historical circumstances. Wiseman evidently believes that the function of myth is to underpin the institutions and rituals that bind society together; but he goes much further than most functionalists would in arguing that the Romans were permanently engaged in a conscious process of remythologising to meet changing political needs.

ÌÇÐÄVlog

To treat myths as deliberate artefacts may seem naive, but Wiseman's account of the mythopoeic process in Rome gains plausibility from the suggestion that the myths and legends of early Rome were continually re-enacted on the stage. The idea that the Romans of the middle republic learned about their own past from politically conscious theatrical performances is a brilliant insight; it has enough support from the meagre evidence to be convincing, and has added a new chapter to our understanding of how the Roman historical tradition was formed in the period before the development of literary historiography.

T. J. Cornell is professor of ancient history, University of Manchester.

ÌÇÐÄVlog