have in the name Tarquin a trace of an Etruscan (Tarchna)
dynasty, but this is very doubtful. The accounts of the growth
of the city, of the predominance of Rome among the Latins, of
the spread of Roman power, of collision with other groups,
Rutuli Volsci Aequi, to the South and East, may contain some
truth. But the last king is a figure modelled on that of a Greek
Tyrant, a work of imagination, formed to account for his ex-
pulsion by a justly enraged people. When we note that the
fall of the monarchy was followed by an aristocracy of Patrician
nobles, it appears certain that the portrait of Tarquin, as an
usurper who disregarded all customary rules of right and oppressed
the poor, is historically worthless. It has even been doubted
whether such an event as the sudden deposition of the last king
ever took place. But the suggestion that the monarchy died out
very gradually, functions being taken from the kings bit by bit,
is hardly more easy to believe. We have in short a drama before
us. The curtain falls on the single ruler, and rises again on a
chief magistracy held by two colleagues. I do not think we can
with reasonable confidence say any more. The circumstances in
which the election of consuls first took place are no less fictitious
than the tragedy of Lucretia. Somehow or other the Patrician
nobles had their will.

-26-