J. Gagé dismisses these assumptions as groundless speculations as no Jupiter Rex is attested and in accord with Roe D'Albret stresses that at Rome no presence of a Juno Regina is mentioned before Marcus Furius Camillus, while she is attested in many Etruscan and Latin towns. Before that time her Roman equivalent was Juno Moneta. Marcel Renard for his part considers her an ancient Roman figure since the title of the Veian Juno expresses a cultic reality that is close to and indeed presupposes the existence at Rome of an analogous character: as a rule it is the presence of an original local figure that may allow the introduction of the new one through evocatio. He agrees with Dumézil that we ignore whether the translation of the epithet is exhaustive and what Etruscan notion corresponded to the name "Regina" which itself is certainly an Italic title. This is the only instance of evocatio recorded by the annalistic tradition. However Renard considers Macrobius's authority reliable in his long list of "evocationes" on the grounds of an archaeological find at Isaura. Roe D'Albret underlines the role played by Camillus and sees a personal link between the deity and her magistrate. Similarly Dumézil has remarked the link of Camillus with Mater Matuta. In his relationship to the goddess he takes the place of the king of Veii. Camillus's devotion to female deities Mater Matuta and Fortuna and his contemporary vow of a new temple to both Matuta and Iuno Regina hint to a degree of identity between them: this assumption has by chance been supported by the discovery at Pyrgi of a bronze lamella which mentions together Uni and Thesan, the Etruscan Juno and Aurora, i.e. Mater Matuta. One can then suppose Camillus's simultaneous vow of the temples of the two goddesses should be seen in the light of their intrinsic association. Octavianus will repeat the same translation with the statue of the Juno of Perusia in consequence of a dream