Εμφανίζονται 100 (επί συνόλου 266) τίτλοι με αναζήτηση: Πληροφορίες για τον τόπο στην ευρύτερη περιοχή: "ΒΟΡΕΙΟΣ ΙΤΑΛΙΑ Περιοχή ΙΤΑΛΙΑ" .
ΡΑΒΕΝΑ (Πόλη) ΕΜΙΛΙΑ ΡΟΜΑΝΑ
Turismo del Comune di Ravenna
ΑΝΚΟΝΑ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΜΑΡΚΕ
Ancona or Ancon (AnkoW: Eth. Ankonios, and Ankonites, Steph. B., Anconitanus:
the form Ancon in Latin is chiefly poetical; but, according to Orelli, Cicero
uses Anconem for the ace. case), an important city of Picenum on the Adriatic
sea, still called Ancona. It was situated on a promontory which forms a remarkable
curve or elbow, so as to protect, and almost enclose its port, from which circumstance
it derived its Greek name of Ankon, the elbow. (Strab. v. p. 241; Mela, ii. 4;
Procop. B. G. ii. 13. p. 197.) Pliny, indeed, appears to regard it as named from
its position at the angle or elbow formed by the coast line at this point (in
ipso flectentis se orae cubito, iii. 13. s. 18), but this is probably erroneous.
The promontory on which the city itself is situated, is connected with a more
lofty mountain mass forming a bold headland, the Cumerus of Pliny, still known
as Monte Comero. Ancona was the only Greek colony on this part of the coast of
Italy, having been founded about 380 B.C. by Syracusan exiles, who fled hither
to avoid the tyranny of the elder Dionysius. (Strab.) Hence it is called Dorica
Ancon by Juvenal (iv. 40), and is mentioned by Scylax (§ 17, p. 6), who notices
only Greek cities. We have no account of its existence at an earlier period, for
though Pliny refers its foundation to the Siculi (see also Solin. 2. § 10), this
is probably a mere misconception of the fact that it was a colony from Sicily.
We learn nothing of its early history: but it appears to have rapidly risen into
a place of importance, owing to the excellence of its port (the only natural harbour
along this line of coast) and the great fertility of the adjoining country. (Strab.
l. c.; Plin. xiv. 6.) It was noted also for its purple dye, which, according to
Silius Italicus (viii. 438), was not inferior to those of Phoenicia or Africa.
The period at which it became subject to the Romans is uncertain, but it probably
followed the fate of the rest of Picenum: in B.C. 178 we find them making use
of it as a naval station against the Illyrians and Istrians. (Liv. xli. 1.) On
the outbreak of the Civil War it was occupied by Caesar as a place of importance,
immediately after he had passed the Rubicon; and we find it in later times serving
as the principal port for communication with the opposite coast of Dalmatia. (Caes.
B.C. i. 11; Cic. ad Att. vii. 1. 1, ad Farn. xvi. 12; Tac. Ann. iii. 9.) As early
as the time of C. Gracchus a part of its territory appears to have been assigned
to Roman colonists; and subsequently Antony established there two legions of veterans
which had served under J. Caesar. It probably first acquired at this time the
rank of a Roman colony, which we find it enjoying in the time of Pliny, and which
is commemorated in several extant inscriptions. (App. B.C. v. 23; Lib. Colon.
pp. 225, 227, 253; Gruter, pp. 451. 3, 465. 6; Zumpt, de Colon. p. 333.) It received
great benefits from Trajan, who improved its port by the construction of a new
mole, which still remains in good preservation. On it was erected, in honour of
the emperor, a triumphal arch, built entirely of white marble, which, both from
its perfect preservation and the lightness and elegance of its architecture, is
generally regarded as one of the most beautiful monuments of its class remaining
in Italy. Some remains of an amphitheatre may also be traced; and numerous inscriptions
attest the flourishing condition of Ancona under the Roman Empire. The temple
of Venus, celebrated both by Juvenal and Catullus (Juv. iv. 40; Catull. xxxvi.
13), has altogether disappeared; but it in all probability occupied the same site
as the modern cathedral, on the summit of the lofty hill that commands the whole
city and constitutes the remarkable headland from which it derives its name.
We find Ancona playing an important part during the contests of Belisarius
and Narses with the Goths in Italy. (Procop. B. G. ii. 11, 13, iii. 30, iv. 23.)
It afterwards became one of the chief cities of the Exarchate of Ravenna, and
continued throughout the Middle Ages, as it does at the present day, to be one
of the most flourishing and commercial cities of central Italy.
The annexed coin of .Ancona belongs to the period of the Greek colony:
it bears on the obverse the head of Venus, the tutelary deity of the city, on
the reverse a bent arm or elbow, in allusion to its name.
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited July 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΑΡΙΜΙΝΟΝ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΕΜΙΛΙΑ ΡΟΜΑΝΑ
Ariminum (Ariminon: Eth. Ariminensis: Rimini), one of the most important
and celebrated cities of Umbria, situated on the coast of the Adriatic, close
to the mouth of the river Ariminus, from which it derived its name (Fest. S. V.),
and only about 9 miles S. of the Rubicon which formed the boundary of Cisalpine
Gaul. Strabo tells us that it was originally an Umbrian city (v. p. 217.): it
must have passed into the hands of the Senonian Gauls during the time that they
possessed the whole of this tract between the Apennines and the sea: but we have
no mention of its name in history previous to the year B.C. 268, when the Romans,
who had expelled the Senones from all this part of Italy, established a colony
at Ariminum. (Liv. Epit. xv.; Eutrop. ii. 16; Vell. Pat. i. 14; Strab.) The position
of this new settlement, close to the extreme verge of Italy towards Cisalpine
Gaul, and just at the point where the last slopes of the Apennines descend to
the Adriatic and bound the great plains which extend from thence without interruption
to the Alps, rendered it a military post of the highest importance, and it was
justly considered as the key of Cisalpine Gaul on the one side, and of the eastern
coast of Italy on the other. (Strab. v. p. 226; Pol. iii. 61.) At the same time
its port at the mouth of the river maintained its communications by sea with the
S. of Italy, and at a later period with the countries on the opposite side of
the Adriatic.
The importance of Ariminum was still further increased by the opening
in B.C. 221 of the Via Flaminia which led from thence direct to Rome, and subsequently
of the Via Aemilia (B.C. 187) which established a direct communication with Placentia.
(Liv. Epit. xx. xxxix. 2.) Hence we find Ariminum repeatedly playing an important
part in Roman history. As early as B.C. 225 it was occupied by a Roman army during
the Gaulish war: in B.C. 218 it was the place upon which Sempronius directed his
legions in order to oppose Hannibal in Cisalpine Gaul; and throughout the Second
Punic War it was one of the points to which the Romans attached the greatest strategic
importance, and which they rarely failed to guard with a considerable army. (Pol.
ii. 23, iii. 61, 77; Liv. xxi. 51, xxiv. 44.) It is again mentioned as holding
a similar place during the Gallic war in B.C. 200, as well as in the civil wars
of Sulla and Marius, on which occasion it suffeared severely, for, having been
occupied by Carbo, it was vindictively plundered by Sulla. (Liv. xxxi. 10, 21;
Appian. B.C. i. 67, 87, 91; Cic. Verr. i. 1. 4) On the outbreak of hostilities
between Caesar and Pompey, it was the first object of the former to make himself
master of Ariminum, from whence he directed his subsequent operations both against
Etruria and Picenum. (Caes. B.C. i. 8, 11; Plut. Caes. 32; Cic. ad Farn. xvi.
1. 2; Appian. B.C. ii. 35.) So also we find it conspicuous during the wars of
Antonius and Octavius (Appian. B.C. iii. 46, v. 33); in the civil war between
Vitellius and Vespasian (Tan. Hist. iii. 41, 42); and again at a much later period
in the contest between Belisarius and the Goths. (Procop. B. G. ii. 10, 17, iii.
37, iv. 28.)
Nor was it only in a military point of view that Ariminum was of importance.
It seems to have been from the first a flourishing colony: and was one of the
eighteen which in B.C. 209, notwithstanding the severe pressure of the Second
Punic War, was still able to furnish its quota of men and money. (Liv. xxvii.
10.) It was indeed for a time reduced to a state of inferiority by Sulla, as a
punishment for the support it had afforded to his enemies. (Cic.pro Caec. 35:
for the various explanations which have been given of this much disputed passage
see Savigny, Vermischte Schriften, vol. i. p. 18, &c. and Marquardt, Handbuch
der Rom. Alterthiumer, vol. iii. p. 39--41.) But notwithstanding this, and the
heavy calamity which it had previously suffered at his hands, it appears to have
quickly revived, and is mentioned in B.C. 43 as one of the richest and most flourishing
cities of Italy. (Appian, B.C. iv. 3.) At that period its lands were portioned
out among the soldiers of the Triumvirs: but Augustus afterwards atoned for this
injustice by adorning it with many splendid public works, some of which are still
extant: and though we hear but little of it during the Roman empire, its continued
importance throughout that period, as well as its colonial rank, is attested by
innumerable inscriptions. (Orell. Inscr. 80, 3049, 3174, &c.; Plin. iii. 15. s.
20.) After the fall of the Western Empire it became one of the cities of the Pentapolis,
which continued subject to the Exarchs of Ravenna until the invasion of the Lombards
at the close of the 6th century.
Pliny tells us that Ariminum was situated between the two rivers Ariminius
and Aprusa. The former, at the mouth of which was situated the port of Ariminum
(Strab. v. p. 217) is now called the Marecchia, and flows under the walls of the
town on the N. side. The Aprusa is probably the trifling stream now called Ausa,
immediately S. of Rimini. In the new division of Italy under Augustus the limits
of the 8th region (Gallia Cispadana) were extended as far as the Ariminus, but
the city Ariminum seems to have been also included in it, though situated on the
S. side of that river. (Plin. l. c.; Ptol. iii. 1. § 22.) The modern city of Rimini
still retains two striking monuments of its ancient grandeur. The first is the
Roman bridge of five arches over the Ariminus by which the town is approached
on the N.: this is built entirely of marble and in the best style of architecture:
it was erected, as we learn from the inscription still remaining on it, by Augustus,
but completed by Tiberius: and is still, both from its perfect preservation and
the beauty of its construction, the most striking monument of its class which
remains in Italy. On the opposite side of the town the gate leading to Pesaro
is a triumphal arch, erected in honour of Augustus: it is built like the bridge,
of white marble, of the Corinthian order, and in a very pure style of architecture,
though partially disfigured by some later additions. (Eustace, Classical Tour,
vol. i. pp. 281, 282; Rampoldi, Diz. Corogr. vol. iii. p. 594. The inscriptions
are given by Muratori, p. 2006; and Orelli, 604.) A kind of pedestal in the centre
of the town, with a spurious inscription, pretends to be the Suggestum from which
Caesar harangued his troops at Ariminum, after the passage of the Rubicon.
The coins of Ariminum which bear the Latin legend Arim belong to the
period of the Roman colony.
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited July 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΑΣΚΟΥΛΟΝ ΠΙΚΕΝΟΝ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΜΑΡΚΕ
ΑΤΡΙΑ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΙΤΑΛΙΑ
Adria, Atria, Hadria, or Hatria (Adria or Atria). It is impossible
to establish any distinction between these forms, or to assign the one (as has
been done by several authors) to one city, and another to the other. The oldest
form appears to have been Hatria, which we find on coins, while Hadria is that
used in all inscriptions: some Mss. of Livy have Adria and others Atria. Pliny
tells us that Atria was the more ancient form, which was afterwards changed into
Adria but the Greeks seem to have early used Adria for the city, as well as Adrias
for the sea. A city of Cisalpine Gaul, situated between the Padus and the Athesis,
not far from their mouths, and still called Adria. It is now distant more than
14 miles from the sea, but was originally a sea-port of great celebrity. Its foundation
is ascribed to Diomed by Stephanus Byzantinus, and some other late writers: Justin
also (xx. 1), probably following Theopompus, calls it a city of Greek origin;
but these testimonies are far outweighed by those of the Roman writers, who agree
in describing it as an Etruscan colony. It was probably established at the same
period with their other settlements on the north side of the Apennines, and became,
from its position, the principal emporium for their trade with the Adriatic; by
which means it attained to so flourishing a condition, as to have given name to
the gulf, or portion of the sea in its immediate neighbourhood, from whence the
appellation was gradually extended to the whole of the inland sea still called
the Adriatic. To this period may also be ascribed the great canals and works which
facilitated its communications with the adjoining rivers, and through them with
the interior of Cisalpine Gaul, at the same time that they drained the marshes
which would otherwise have rendered it uninhabitable. (Liv. v. 33; Plin. iii.
16. s. 20; Strab. v. p. 214; Varro de L. L. v. 161; Festus, p. 13, ed. Muller;
Plut. Camill. 16.) Notwithstanding its early celebrity, we have scarcely any information
concerning its history; but the decline of its power and prosperity may reasonably
be ascribed to the conquest of the neighbouring countries by the Gauls, and to
the consequent neglect of the canals and streams in its neighbourhood. The increasing
commerce of the Greeks with the Adriatic probably contributed to the same result.
It has been supposed by some writers that it received, at different periods, Greek
colonies, one from Epidamnus and the other from Syracuse; but both statements
appear to rest upon misconceptions of the passages of Diodorus, from which they
are derived. (Diod. ix. Exc. Vat. p. 17, xv. 13; in both of which passages the
words ton Adrian certainly refer to the Adriatic sea or gulf, not to the city,
the name of which is always feminine.) The abundance of vases of Greek manufacture
found here, of precisely similar character with those of Nola and Vulci, sufficiently
attests a great amount of Greek intercourse and influence, but cannot be admitted
as any proof of a Greek colony, any more than in the parallel case of Vulci. (R.
Rochette in the Annali dell Inst. Arch. vol. vi. p. 292; Welcker, Vasi di Adria
in the Bullettino dell Inst. 1834, p. 134.) Under the Romans Adria appears never
to have been a place of much consequence. Strabo speaks of it as a small town,
communicating by a short navigation with the sea; and we learn from Tacitus (Hist.
iii. 12) that it was still accessible for the light Liburnian ships of war as
late as the time of Vitellius. After the fall of the Western Empire it was included
in the exarchate of Ravenna, but fell rapidly into decay during the middle ages,
though it never ceased to exist, and always continued an episcopal see. Since
the opening of new canals it has considerably revived, and has now a population
of 10,000 souls. Considerable remains of the ancient city have been discovered
a little to the south of the modern town towards Ravegnano; they are all of Roman
date, and comprise the ruins of a theatre, baths, mosaic pavements, and part of
the ancient walls, all which have been buried to a considerable depth under the
accumulations of alluvial soil., Of the numerous minor antiquities discovered
there, the most interesting are the vases already alluded to. (See Muller, Etrusker,
i. p. 229, and the authors there cited.) The coins ascribed to this city certainly
belong to Adria in Picenum.
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited July 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΑΥΓΟΥΣΤΑ ΒΑΓΙΕΝΗ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΙΤΑΛΙΑ
Augusta Vagiennorum (Augousta Bagiennon, Ptol.; an inscription, Orell.
76, has Aug. Bag. for Augusta Bagiennorum), the chief city of the Ligurian tribe
of the Vagienni, is mentioned both by Pliny and Ptolemy, and the former speaks
of it as a place of importance. (Plin. iii. 5. s. 7; Ptol. iii. 1. § 35.) But
though the name would lead us to suppose that it was a colony of Augustus, we
have no account of its foundation, nor do ancient authors afford any clue to its
position. It was placed by D'Anville at Vico, near Mondovi; but a local antiquarian,
Durandi, has satisfactorily proved that some Roman ruins still visible near Bene
(a considerable town of Piedmont, situated between the valleys of the Tanaro and
the Stura, about 12 miles from the site of Pollentia) are those of Augusta Vagiennorum.
They comprise the remains of an aqueduct, amphitheatre, baths, and other buildings,
and cover a considerable extent of ground. The name of Bene is itself probably
only a corruption of Bayienna, the form of the ancient name which is found in
documents of the middle ages. (Durandi, Dell' Augusta de' Vagienni, Torino, 1769;
Millin, Voy. en Piemont, vol. ii. p. 50.)
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited July 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΑΥΓΟΥΣΤΑ ΠΡΑΙΤΩΡΙΑ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΒΑΛΕ ΝΤ' ΑΟΣΤΑ
Augusta Praetoria (Augousta, Strab.; Augousta Praitopia, Ptol.), a
city of Cisalpine Gaul, in the territory of the Salassi, situated at the, foot
of the Alps, in the valley of the Duria Major: it is now called Aosta, and gives
to the whole valley of the Duria the name of Val d'Aosta. It was a Roman colony,
founded by Augustus, who, after the complete subjugation of the Salassians by
Terentius Varro, established here a body of 3,000 veterans. From the statement
of Strabo, that the colony was settled on the site of the camp of Varro, it would
appear that there was previously no town on this spot; but the importance of its
position at the point of junction of the two passes over the Pennine and Graian
Alps (the Great and Little St. Bernard) caused it quickly to rise to great prosperity,
and it soon became, what it has ever since continued, the capital of the whole
valley and surrounding region. (Strab. iv. p. 206; Dion Cass. liii. 25; Plin.
iii. 17. s. 21; Ptol. iii. 1. § 34.) According to Pliny it was the extreme point
of Italy towards the north, so that he reckons the length of that country ab Alpine
fine Praetoriae Augustae to Rhegium. (H. N. iii. 5. § 6.) The importance of Augusta
Praetoria under the Roman empire is sufficiently attested by its existing remains,
among which are those of a triumphal arch at the entrance of the town on the E.
side, of a very good style of architecture, and probably of the time of Augustus,
but which has lost its inscription. Besides this, there is another ancient gate,
now half buried by the accumulation of the soil; a fine Roman bridge, and some
remains of an amphitheatre; while numerous architectural fragments attest the
magnificence of the public buildings with which the city was once adorned. (Millin.
Voy. en Piemont, vol. ii. pp. 14--17.)
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited July 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΑΥΓΟΥΣΤΑ ΤΑΥΡΙΚΗ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΠΙΕΜΟΝΤΕ
Augusta Taurinorum (Augousta Taurinon, Ptol.: Torino or Turin), the
capital of the Ligurian tribe of the Taurini, was situated on the river Padus,
at its junction with the Duria Minor or Dora Riparia. It was at this point that
the Padus began to be navigable, and to this circumstance, combined with its position
on the line of high road leading from Mediolanum and Ticinum to the passage of
the Cottian Alps (Mont Genevre), the city doubtless owed its early importance.
It is probable that the chief city of the Taurini, which was taken by Hannibal
immediately after his descent into Italy (Polyb. iii. 60), and the name of which,
according to Appian (Annib. 5), was Taurasia, was the same that became a Roman
colony under Augustus, and received from him the name of Augusta. The only subsequent
mention of it in history is during the civil war between Otho and Vitellius, A.D.
69, when a considerable part of it was burnt by the soldiers of the latter (Tac.
Hist. ii. 66); but we learn both from Pliny and Tacitus, as well as from numerous
inscriptions, that it retained its colonial rank, and was a place of importance
under the Roman empire. (Plin. iii. 17. s. 21; Ptol. iii. 1. § 35; Gruter. Inscr.
pp. 458. 8, 495. 5; Maffei, Mus. Veron. pp. 209--233; Millin. Voy. en Piemont,
vol. i. p. 254.)
The name of Augusta seems to have been gradually dropped, and the
city itself came to be called by the name of the tribe to which it belonged: thus
we find it termed in the Itineraries simply Taurini, from whence comes its modern
name of Torino or Turin. It continued after the fall of the Roman empire to be
a place of importance, and became the capital of Piedmont, as it now is of the
kingdom of Sardinia. With the exception of the inscriptions which have been mentioned
above, it retains no vestiges of antiquity.
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited July 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΒΕΡΟΝΑ (Πόλη) ΒΕΝΕΤΟ
Verona (Ouerona, a, Ptol. iii. 1. § 31; Thueron, Strab. iv. p. 206,
v. p. 213; Berone, Procop. B.G. ii. 29, iii. 3, &c.; and Berona, Ib. iv. 33: Eth.
Veronensis: Verona), an important town in Gallia Transpadana, seated on the river
Athesis (Verona Athesi circumflua, Sil. It. viii. 595), and chiefly on its W.
bank. There is some difficulty in determining whether Verona was a city of the
Euganei or of the Cenomani, from the little knowledge which we possess of the
respective boundaries of those peoples, and from the confusion which prevails
upon the subject in ancient authors. By Ptolemy (l. c.), who does not mention
the Euganei, it is ascribed to the Cenomani; and Catullus (lxvii. 34), in a passage,
however, which has been banished by some editors as not genuine, Brixia, which
undoubtedly belonged to the Cenomani, is styled the mother city of Verona. Pliny,
on the other hand (iii. 19. s. 23), gives Verona partly to the Rhaeti and partly
to the Euganei, and Strabo (l. c.) attributes it to the former. Some have sought
a solution of this difficulty by assuming that the city belonged originally to
the Euganei, but was subsequently occupied by the Cenomani, referring to Livy,
v. 35. (Cf. Justin, xx. 5.) We know little or nothing of the early history of
Verona. Under the Roman dominion it became a colony with the surname of Augusta,
and one of the finest and most flourishing cities in that part of Italy (Tac.
H. iii. 8; Itin. Ant. p. 128; Strab. v. p. 213; Grut. Inscr. p. 166. 2.) The surrounding
country was exceedingly fruitful, producing good wine, excellent apples, and abundance
of spelt (alica, Plin. xviii. 11. s. 29, xiv. 1. s. 3, xv. 14. s. 14; Cassiod.
Var. xii. 4). The Rhaetian wine also is praised by Virgil. (G. ii. 94; cf. Strab.
iv. 206; Suet. Oct. 77.) The situation of Verona rendered it a great thoroughfare
and the centre of several highroads (Itin. Ant. pp. 128, 174, 275, 282; Itin.
Hier. p. 558.)
Verona was celebrated in history for the battle fought by Marius in
the Campi Raudii, in its neighbourhood, againt the Cimbri. (Vell. Pat. ii. 12;
Florus, iii. 3.) From an inscription still extant on one of its gates, now called
the Porta de' Borsari, the walls of Verona appear to have been newly erected in
the reign of the emperor Gallienus, A.D. 265. It was besieged by Constantine on
his march from Gaul to Rome, and, though obstinately defended by Ruricius Pompeianus,
obliged to surrender at discretion. (Paneg. Vet. ix. 9, sqq.) It was likewise
the scene of the victory of Theodoric over Odoacer. (Jornand. Get. 57.) Theodoric
made it one of his residences, and often held his court there: a representation
of his palace is still extant upon a seal. (Gibbon, Decl. and Fall, vol. v. p.
22, ed. Smith.) It was at Verona that the splendid wedding took place between
king Autharis and Theudelinda. (Procop. B. G. iii. 5; Paul. Diac. iii. 29.) But,
more than by all these events, Verona is illustrious as having been the birthplace
of Catullus (Ovid. Amos. iii. 15. 7; Mart. x. 103; Plin. xxxvi. 6. s. 7); though
it is exceedingly doubtful whether the remains of a villa on the Logo di Garda,
commonly called the villa of Catullus, could really have belonged to him. The
honour sometimes claimed for Verona of having given birth to the architect Vitruvius
Pollio arises from a mistaken interpretation of the inscription on the arch of
the Gavii, formerly existing at Verona, but pulled down in the year 1805. The
inscription related to the great architect's less celebrated namesake, Vitruvius
Cerdo. (Descriz. di Verona, pt. i. p. 86.) Some are of opinion that the elder
Pliny also was born at Verona, but it is more probable that he was a native of
Comum. In the life of him ascribed to the pen of Suetonius, he is styled Novocomensis;
and when he calls himself in his Preface the conterraneus of Catullus, that epithet
by no means necessarily implies that he was the fellow-citizen of the poet, but
rather that he was merely his fellow-countryman, or from the same province.
The amphitheatre at Verona is a very striking monument of antiquity.
Although not nearly so large as the Colosseum, it is in a much better state of
preservation, owing to the pains which have always been taken to keep it in repair.
It is also of a more costly material than the Roman amphitheatre; for whilst the
latter is built of travertino, that at Verona is of marble, from some quarries
in the neighbourhood. The substructions are of Roman brickwork. The date of its
erection cannot be ascertained, but it must undoubtedly have been posterior to
the time of Augustus. A great part of the external arcade was thrown down by an
earthquake in the year 1184. Its form is elliptical, the larger diameter being
513 feet externally and 248 internally; the smaller one, 410 feet externally and
147 feet internally. The banks or rows of seats are at present 45 in number, but,
from the repairs and alterations which the building has undergone, it is not certain
whether this was the original number. It is estimated that it would afford seats
for about 22,000 persons.
There are also a few remains of a Roman theatre, on the left bank
of the Adige, at the foot of the hill immediately under the castle of S. Pietro
It appears from two decrees of king Berengarius, dated in 895 and 913, that the
theatre was then regarded as of the highest antiquity, and had in great part gone
to ruin; on which account its destruction was allowed. (Descriz. di Verona, pt.
ii. p. 108, sqq.)
We have already alluded to the ancient gate called the Porta de' Borsari.
It is evidently older than the walls of Gallienus, the elevation of which in the
space of 8 months is recorded upon it; since a previous inscription has been erased
in order to make room for the new one. It is a double gate, of a very florid style
of architecture, concerning the merits of which architects have held widely different
opinions. The walls of Gallienus, to judge of them from the vestiges which still
remain, were of a construction sufficiently solid, notwithstanding the shortness
of the time in which they were erected. The other remains of antiquity at Verona,
as the Porta de' Leoni, the baths, &c., do not require any particular description
in this place.
The chief works on Verona and its antiquities are the splendid ones
of Count Scip. Maffei, entitled Verona Illustrata, and Mulseum Veronense. Onuphrius
Panvinius also described its remains (Antiq. Veron. lib. viii. Pat. 1668). Some
account of them will likewise be found in the Descrizione di Verona e della sua
Provincia, by Giovambatista da Pertico, 8vo. Verona, 1820.
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited September 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΚΟΡΤΩΝ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΤΟΣΚΑΝΗ
Cortona (Kortona, Ptol.: Eth. Cortonensis: Cortona), one of the most
ancient and powerful of the inland cities of Etruria, situated on a lofty hill
between Arretium and Clusium. It was distant only about 9 miles from the Lacus
Trasimenus. There is great confusion about its ancient name. The Greek legend
which represented it as founded by Dardanus, called it Corythus, a form frequently
used in consequence by the Latin poets. (Virg. Aen. iii. 167-170, vii. 206-210,
&c.; Sil. Ital. iv. 721, v. 122.) But there is little doubt that this was a mere
transplanting of a Greek tradition (Muller, Etrusker, vol. i. p. 277), and the
native name seems to have been Cortona, or some form closely resembling it. Dionysius
writes the name Croton, and says it was changed to Cortona (which he writes Kothornia,
probably an error of the MSS. for Korthonia), when it received a Roman colony.
Livy, however, calls it Cortona at a much earlier period, without any allusion
to its having changed its name. The confusion between Cor and Cro is so natural
that it is no wonder the Greeks should write it Kroton, even if the Roman form
was the correct one: but it is not improbable that the Etruscans, who did not
use the letter o, would have written the name Krvtvna, as they wrote Pupluna for
Populonium. (Dionys. i. 26; Steph. Byz. s. v. Kroton; Muller, l. c. pp. 268, 277.)
Polybius, however (iii. 82), writes the name Kurtonion, and there can be no doubt
that the Gortunaia, in Tyrrhenia, of Lycophron and Theopompus, the foundation
of which was ascribed by the latter to Ulysses, is merely a corruption of the
same name. (Lycophr. Alex. 806; Theopomp. ap. Tzetz. ad loc.)
All accounts agree in representing Cortona as one of the most ancient
cities of Etruria, and at a very early period one of the most powerful of the
confederation. Dionysius expressly tells us that it was originally an Umbrian
city, and was wrested from that people by the Pelasgians. (Dionys. i. 20.) It
is evidently to the Pelasgic city only that the legend of its foundation by Dardanus,
to which so prominent a place has been assigned by Virgil, can be referred: various
other legends also appear to point to the same connection, and may be considered
as proving that the Pelasgic character of the inhabitants was strongly marked
and recognised by the Greeks. But, notwithstanding the high authority of Niebuhr,
it seems impossible to admit the view of Dionysius, who refers to this city and
not to Creston in Thrace, the statement of Herodotus concerning the language spoken
by the Pelasgians in his day. (Herod. i. 57; Dionys. i. 29. On this much disputed
question compare Niebuhr, vol. i. p. 34, note 89; Muller, Etrusker, vol. i. p.
94-98; Lepsius, Tyrrhenische Pelasger, p. 18, &c.) Dionysius represents Cortona
as having been made by the Pelasgians a stronghold and centre of operations from
whence they gradually extended their arms over the rest of Etruria: and it is,
doubtless, with reference to this statement that Stephanus of Byzantium terms
it the metropolis of the Tyrrhenians. (Dionys. i. 20; Steph. Byz. s. v. Kroton.)
There are, indeed, circumstances which would lead us to infer that the dominion
of the Etruscans, properly so called (the Rasena), was also extended from Cortona,
or its neighbourhood, over the more southern parts of Etruria; and it would be
a natural surmise that Dionysius had made a confusion between the Pelasgian Tyrrhenians
and the Etruscans proper: but it seems more probable that both conquests may really
have emanated from the same quarter.
Important as is the part which Cortona bears in these early traditions,
it is singular how little we subsequently hear of it. There can be no doubt that
it was one of the twelve cities of the Etruscan confederation: and hence in B.C.
310 Livy speaks of Perusia, Cortona, and Arretium, as at that period. among the
chief cities of Etruria (ferme capita Etruriae populorum. Liv. ix. 37.) They on
this occasion obtained a peace for 30 years, which was soon broken; but the name
of Cortona is not again mentioned: and we have no account of the time at which
it fell under the subjection of Rome. In the Second Punic War it is incidentally
mentioned: Hannibal having marched beneath its walls, and laid waste its territory
just before the battle of the Thrasymenian Lake (Pol. iii. 82; Liv. xxii. 4),
but the inaccessible position of the city itself rendered it secure from attack.
At the same time the broad and fertile valley beneath it offered no obstacles
to the march of an army, and it is probably for this reason that we hear so little
of Cortona in history successive swarms of invaders having swept past it, without
caring to attack its almost impregnable position. We learn incidentally from Dionysius
(i. 26) that Cortona had received a Roman colony not long before his time: there
can be no doubt that this must be referred to the times of Sulla, and that it
was one of the cities of Etruria, which he repeopled after his devastation of
that country. (Zumpt, de Colon. p. 252.) It was not subsequently renewed, and
therefore does not figure in the lists either of Pliny or Ptolemy as a colony.
Both those authors, however, mention it among the towns of Etruria (Plin. iii.
5. s. 8; Ptol. iii. 1. § 48): but this is the last notice of its existence in
ancient times, though inscriptions prove it to have continued to subsist under
the Roman Empire. (Gori, Inscr. Etr. vol. ii. pp. 361-398.) It became an episcopal
see in the early ages of Christianity, and probably never ceased to exist, though
no trace of it is again found in history till the 13th century.
The modern city of Cortona (which is still the see of a bishop, with
about 5000 inhabitants) retains the site of the ancient one, on the summit of
a high hill, almost deserving to be termed a mountain, and extending from its
highest point down a steep slope facing towards the W., so that the gate at its
lowest extremity is about half way down the hill. The ancient city was of oblong
form, and about two miles in circumference; the circuit of its walls may be easily
traced, as the modern ones are for the most part based upon them, though at the
higher end of the city they enclosed a considerably wider space. They may be traced
in fragments more or less preserved almost entirely round the city, and are composed
of rectangular blocks of great size, arranged without much regularity, though
with more regard to horizontality and distinct courses than is observable in the
walls of Volterra or Populonia, and often joined with great nicety like the masonry
of Fiesole. The finest relic of this regular masonry at Cortona, and perhaps in
all Italy, is at a spot called Terra Mozza, outside the Fortress, at the highest
part of the city, where is a fragment 120 feet in length, composed of blocks of
enormous magnitude. They vary from 2 1/2 to 5 feet in height, and from 6 or 7
feet or 11 and 12 in length; and are sometimes as much or more in depth. The material
of which they are composed is a grey sandstone much resembling that of Fiesole.
(Dennis, Etruria, vol. ii. p, 436.) A few other fragments of Etruscan construction
similar to the above, are found within the walls of the city: but only one trifling
remnant of a Roman building. Outside the lower gate, on the slope of the hill,
is a curious monument called the Tanella di Pitagora (from the confusion commonly
made between Cortona and Crotona), which was in reality an Etruscan tomb, constructed
of vast blocks and slabs of stone, instead of being excavated in the rock, as
was their more common practice. A remarkable mound, commonly called Il Melone,
which stands at the foot of the hill near Camuscia, has been also proved by excavation
to be sepulchral. Numerous minor relics of antiquity have been discovered at Cortona,
and are preserved in the Museum there: this is more rich in bronzes than pottery,
and among the former is a bronze lamp of large size, which for beauty of workmanship
is considered to surpass all other specimens of this description of Etruscan art.
(Dennis, l. c. p. 442: who has given a full account of all the ancient remains
still visible at Cortona.)
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited August 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΛΟΡΕΤΟ (Πόλη) ΜΑΡΚΕ
Laurentum (Laurenton, Strab. et al.; Lorenton, Dion. Hal.: Eth. Lurentinos,
Laurentinus: Torre di Paterno), an ancient city of Latium, situated near the sea-coast
between Ostia and Lavinium, about 16 miles from Rome. It was represented by the
legendary history universally adopted by Roman writers as the ancient capital
of Latium, and the residence of king Latinus, at the time when Aeneas and the
Trojan colony landed in that country. All writers also concur in representing
the latter as first landing on the shores of the Laurentine territory. (Liv. i.
1; Dionys. i. 45, 53; Strab. v. p. 229; Appian. Rom. i. 1; Vict. Orig. Gent. Rom.
13; Virg. Aen. vii. 45, &c.) But the same legendary history related that after
the death of Latinus, the seat of government was transferred first to Lavinium,
and subsequently to Alba; hence we cannot wonder that, when Laurentum appears
in historical times, it holds but a very subordinate place, and appears to have
fallen at a very early period into a state of comparative insignificance. The
historical notices of the city are indeed extremely few and scanty; the most important
is the occurrence of its name (or that of the Laurentini at least), together with
those of Ardea, Antium, Circeii, and Tarracina, among the allies or dependants
of Rome, in the celebrated treaty of the Romans with Carthage in B.C. 509. (Pol.
iii. 22.) From this document we may infer that Laurentum was then still a place
of some consideration as a maritime town, though the proximity of the Roman port
and colony of Ostia must have tended much to its disadvantage. Dionysius tells
us that some of the Tarquins had retired to Laurentum on their expulsion from
Rome: and he subsequently notices the Laurentines among the cities which composed
the Latin League in B.C. 496. (Dionys. v. 54, 61.) We learn, also, from an incidental
notice in Livy, that they belonged to that confederacy, and retained, in consequence,
down to a late period the right of participating in the sacrifices on the Alban
Mount. (Liv. xxxvii. 3.) It is clear, therefore, that though no longer a powerful
or important city, Laurentum continued to retain its independent position down
to the great Latin War in B.C. 340. On that occasion the Laurentines are expressly
mentioned as having been the only people who took no share in the war; and, in
consequence, the treaty with them which previously existed was renewed without
alteration. (Liv. viii. 11.) From thenceforth (adds Livy) it is renewed always
from year to year on the 10th day of the Feriae Latinae. Thus, the poor and decayed
city of Laurentum continued down to the Augustan age to retain the nominal position
of an independent ally of the imperial Rome.
No further notice of it occurs in history during the Roman Republic.
Lucan appears to reckon it as one of the places that had fallen into decay in
consequence of the Civil Wars (vii. 394), but it is probable that it had long
before that dwindled into a very small place. The existence of a town of the name
( oppidum Laurentum ) is, however, attested by Mela, Strabo, and Pliny (Mel. ii.
4. § 9; Strab. v. p. 232; Plin. iii. 5. s. 9); and the sea-coast in its vicinity
was adorned with numerous villas, among which that of the younger Pliny was conspicuous.
(Plin. Ep. ii. 17.) It is remarkable that that author, in describing the situation
of his villa and its neighbourhood, makes no allusion to Laurentum itself, though
he mentions the neighbouring colony of Ostia, and a village or vicus immediately
adjoining his villa: this last may probably be the same which we find called in
an inscription Vicus Augustus Laurentium. (Grater, Inscr. p. 398, No. 7.) Hence,
it seems probable that Laurentum itself had fallen into a state of great Aecay;
and this must have been the cause that, shortly after, the two communities of
Laurentum and Lavinium were united into one municipal body, which assumed the
appellation of Lauro-Lavinium, and the inhabitants that of Lauro-Lavinates, or
Laurentes Lavinates. Sometimes, however, the united populus calls itself in inscriptions
simply Senatus populusque Laurens, and in one case we find mention of a Colonia
Augusta Laurentium. (Orell. Inscr. 124; Gruter, p. 484, No. 3.) Nevertheless it
is at least very doubtful whether there was any fresh colony established on the
site of the ancient Laurentum: the only one mentioned in the Liber Coloniarum
is that of Lauro-Lavinium, which was undoubtedly fixed at Lavinium (Pratica).The
existence of a place bearing the name of Laurentum, though probably a mere village,
down to the latter ages of the Empire, is, however, clearly proved by the Itineraries
and Tabula (Itin. Ant. p. 301; Tab. Peut.); and it appears from ecclesiastical
documents that the locality still retained its ancient name as late as the 8th
century (Anastas. Vit. Pontif. ap. Nibby, vol. ii. p. 201). From that time all
trace of it disappears, and the site seems to have been entirely forgotten.
Laurentum seems to have, from an early period, given name to an extensive
territory, extending from the mouth of the Tiber nearly, if not quite, to Ardea,
and forming a part of the broad littoral tract of Latium, which is distinguished
from the rest of that country by very marked natural characteristics. Hence, we
find the Laurentine territory much more frequently referred to than the city itself;
and the place where Aeneas is represented as landing is uniformly described as
in agro Laurenti; though we know from Virgil that he conceived the Trojans as
arriving and first establishing themselves at the mouth of the Tiber. But it is
clear that, previous to the foundation of Ostia, the territory of Laurentum was
considered to extend to that river. (Serv. ad Aen. vii. 661, xi. 316.) The name
of ager Laurens seems to have continued in common use to be applied, even under
the Roman Empire, to the whole district extending as far as the river Numicius,
so as to include Lavinium as well as Laurentum. It was, like the rest of this
part of Latium near the sea-coast, a sandy tract of no natural fertility, whence
Aeneas is represented as complaining that he had arrived in agrum macerrimum,
littorosissimumque. (Fab. Max. ap. Serv. ad Aen. i. 3.) In the immediate neighbourhood
of Laurentum were considerable marshes, while the tract a little further inland
was covered with wood, forming an extensive forest, known as the Silva Laurentina.
(Jul. Obseq. 24.) The existence of this at the time of the landing of Aeneas is
alluded to by Virgil (Aen. xi. 133, &c.). Under the Roman Empire it was a favourite
haunt of wild-boars, which grew to a large size, but were considered by epicures
to be of inferior flavour on account of the marshy character of the ground in
which they fed. (Virg. Aen. x. 709; Hor. Sat. ii. 4. 42; Martial, ix. 495.) Varro
also tells us that the orator Hortensius had a farm or villa in the Laurentine
district, with a park stocked with wild-boars, deer, and other game. (Varr. R.
R. iii. 13.) The existence of extensive marshes near Laurentum is noticed also
by Virgil (Aen. x. 107) as well as by Martial (x. 37. 5), and it is evident that
even in ancient times they rendered this tract of country unhealthy, though it
could not have suffered from malaria to the same extent as in modern times. The
villas which, according to Pliny, lined the shore, were built close to the sea,
and were probably frequented only in winter. At an earlier period, we are told
that Scipio and Laelius used to repair to the seaside on the Laurentine coast,
where they amused themselves by gathering shells and pebbles. (Cic. de Or. ii.
6; Val. Max. viii. 8. § 4.) On the other hand, the bay-trees (lauri) with which
the Silva Laurentina was said to abound were thought to have a beneficial effect
on the health, and on this account the emperor Commodus was advised to retire
to a villa near Laurentum during a pestilence at Rome. (Herodian. i. 12.) The
name of Laurentum itself was generally considered to be derived from the number
of these trees, though Virgil would derive it from a particular and celebrated
tree of the kind. (Vict. [p. 148] Orig. G. Rom.. 10; Varr. L. L. v. 152; Virg.
Aen. vii. 59.)
The precise site of Laurentum has been a subject of much doubt; though
it may be placed approximately without question between Ostia and Pratica, the
latter being clearly established as the site of Lavinium. It has been generally
fixed at Torre di Paterno, and Gell asserts positively that there is no other
position within the required limits where either ruins or the traces of ruins
exist, or where they can be supposed to have existed. The Itinerary gives the
distance of Laurentum from Rome at 16 M. P., which is somewhat less than the truth,
if we place it at Torre di Paterno, the latter being rather more than 17 M. P.
from Rome by the Via Laurentina; but the same remark applies to Lavinium also,
which is called in the Itinerary 16 miles from Rome, though it is full 18 miles
in real distance. On the other hand, the distance of 6 miles given in the Table
between Lavinium and Laurentum coincides well with the interval between Pratica
and Torre di Paterno. Nibby, who places Laurentum at Capo Cotto, considerably
nearer to Pratica, admits that there are no ruins on the site. Those at Torre
di Paterno are wholly of Roman and imperial times, and may perhaps indicate nothing
more than the site of a villa, though the traces of an aqueduct leading to it
prove that it must have been a place of some importance. There can indeed be no
doubt that the spot was a part of the dependencies of Laurentum under the Roman
Empire; though it may still be questioned whether it marks the actual site of
the ancient Latin city. (Gell, Top. of Rome, pp. 294 - 298; Nibby, Dintorni di
Roma, vol. ii. pp. 187 - 205; Abeken, Mittelitalien, p. 62; Bormann, Alt Latin.
Corographie, pp. 94 - 97.)
It is hardly necessary to notice the attempts which have been made
to determine the site of Pliny's Laurentine villa, of which he has left us a detailed
description, familiar to all scholars (Plin. Ep. ii. 17). As it appears from his
own account that it was only one of a series of villas which adorned this part
of the coast, and many of them probably of equal, if not greater, pretensions,
it is evidently idle to give the name to a mass of brick ruins which there is
nothing to identify. In their zeal to do this, antiquarians have overlooked the
circumstance that his villa was evidently close to the sea, which at once excludes
almost all the sites that have been suggested for it.
The road which led from Rome direct to Laurentum retained, down to a late
period, the name of Via Laurentina (Ovid, Fast. ii. 679; Val. Max. viii. 5. §
6.) It was only a branch of the Via Ostiensis, from which it diverged about 3
miles from the gates of Rome, and proceeded nearly in a direct line towards Torre
di Paterno. At about 10 miles from Rome it crossed a small brook or stream by
a bridge, which appears to have been called the Pons ad Decimum, and subsequently
Pons Decimus: hence the name of Decimo now given to a casale or farm a mile further
on; though this was situated at the 11th mile from Rome, as is proved by the discovery
on the spot of the Roman milestone, as well as by the measurement on the map.
Remains of the ancient pavement mark the course of the Via Laurentina both before
and after passing this bridge. (Nibby, Dintorni, vol. i. p. 539, vol. iii. p.
621.) Roman authors generally agree in stating that the place where the Trojans
first landed and established their camp was still called Troja (Liv. i. 1; Cato,
ap. Serv. ad Aen. i. 5; Fest. v. Troia, p. 367), and that it was in the Laurentine
territory; but Virgil is the only writer from whom we learn that it was on the
banks of the Tiber, near its mouth (Aen. vii. 30, ix. 469, 790, &c.). Hence it
must have been in the part of the ager Laurens which was assigned to Ostia after
the foundation, of the colony; and Servius is therefore correct in placing the
camp of the Trojans circa Ostiam. (Serv. ad Aen. vii. 31.) The name, however,
would appear to have been the only thing that marked the spot.
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited August 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΛΟΥΚΑ (Πόλη) ΤΟΣΚΑΝΗ
Luca (Louka, Strab., Ptol.: Eth. Lucensis: Lucca), a city of Etruria,
situated in a plain at the foot of the Apennines, near the left bank of the Ausar
(Serchio) about 12 miles from the sea, and 10 NE. of Pisae. Though Luca was included
within the limits of Etruria, as these were established in the time of Augustus
(Plin. iii. 5. s. 8; Ptol. iii. 1. § 47), it is very doubtful whether it was ever
an Etruscan town. No mention of it is found as such, and no Etruscan remains have
been discovered in its neighbourhood. But it is probable that the Etruscans at
one time extended their power over the level country at the foot of the Apennines,
from the Arnus to the Macra, leaving the Ligurians in possession only of the mountains,--and
at this period, therefore, Luca was probably subject to them. At a later period,
however, it had certainly fallen into the hands of the Ligurians, and being retaken
from them by the Romans, seems to have been commonly considered (until the reign
of Augustus) a Ligurian town. For this reason we find it comprised within the
province assigned to Caesar, which included Liguria as well as Cisalpine Gaul.
(Suet. Caes. 24.) The first mention of Luca in history is in B.C. 218, when Livy
tells us that the consul Sempronius retired there after his unsuccessful contest
with Hannibal. (Liv. xxi. 59.) It was, therefore, at this period certainly in
the hands of the Romans, though it would seem to have subsequently fallen again
into those of the Ligurians; but it is strange that during the long protracted
wars of the Romans with that people, we meet with no mention of Luca, though it
must have been of importance as a frontier town, especially in their wars with
the Apuani. The next notice of it is that of the establishment there of a Roman
colony in B.C. 177. (Vell. Pat. i. 15 ; Liv. xli. 13.) There is, indeed, some
difficulty with regard to this; the MSS. and editions of Livy vary between Luca
and Luna; but there is no such discrepancy in those of Velleius, and there seems
at least no reason to doubt the settlement of a Latin colony at Luca; while that
mentioned in Livy being a colonia civium, may, perhaps, with more probability,
be referred to Luna. (Madvig, de Colon. p. 287; Zumpt, de Colon. p. 349 ) That
at Luca became, in common with the other Latin colonies, a municipal town by virtue
of the Lex Julia (B.C. 49), and hence is termed by Cicero municipium Lucense.
(Cic. ad Fam. xiii. 1. 3) It appears to have been at this time a considerable
town, as we find it repeatedly selected by Caesar during his administration of
Gaul as the frontier town of his province, to which he repaired in order to consult
with his friends, or with the leaders of political parties at Rome. (Suet. Caes.
24 ; Plut. Caes. 21, Crass. 14, Pomp. 51; Cic. ad Fam. i. 9. 9). On one of these
occasions (in B.C. 56) there are said to have been more than 200 senators assembled
at Luca, including Pompey and Crassus, as well as Caesar himself. (Plut. l. c.;
Appian, B.C. ii. 17.) Luca would seem to have received a fresh colony before the
time of Pliny, probably under Augustus. (Plin. iii. 5. s. 8; Zumpt, de Colon.
p. 349.) We hear little of it under the Roman Empire; but it seems to have continued
to be a provincial town of some consideration: it was the point where the Via
Clodia, proceeding from Rome by Arretium, Florentia, and Pistoria, was met by
other roads from Parma and Pisae. (Plin. l. c.; Ptol. iii. 1. § 47; Itin. Ant.
pp. 283, 284, 289; Tab. Peut.) During the Gothic wars of Narses, Luca figures
as an important city and a strong fortress (Agath. B. G. i. 15), but it was not
till after the fall of the Lombard monarchy that it attained to the degree of
prosperity and importance that we find it enjoying during the middle ages. Lucca
is still a flourishing city, with 25,000 inhabitants: the only relics of antiquity
visible there are those of an amphitheatre, considerable part of which may still
be traced, now converted into a market-place called the Piazza del Mercato, and
some small remains of a theatre near the church of Sta. Maria di Corte Landini.
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited August 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΜΑΝΤΟΒΑ (Πόλη) ΛΟΜΒΑΡΔΙΑ
Mantua (Mantoua: Eth. Mantuanus: Mantova), a city of Cisalpine Gaul,
situated on the river Mincius, on an island formed by its waters, about 12 miles
above its confluence with the Padus. There seems no doubt that it was a very ancient
city, and existed long before the establishment of the Gauls in this part of Italy.
Virgil, who was naturally well acquainted with the traditions of his native place,
tells us that its population was a mixed race, but the bulk of the people were
of Etruscan origin; and Pliny even says that it was the only city beyond the Padus
which was still inhabited by an Etruscan people. (Virg. Aen. x. 201-203; Plin.
iii. 19. s. 23.) Virgil does not tell us what were the other national elements
of its population, and it is not easy to understand the exact meaning of his expression
that it consisted of three gentes, and that each gens comprised four populi; but
it seems certainly probable that this relates to the internal division of its
own territory and population, and has no reference (as Muller has supposed) to
the twelve cities founded by the Etruscans in the valley of the Padus. (Muller,
Etrusker, vol. i. p. 137; Niebuhr, vol. i. p. 296, note 757.) The Etruscan origin
of Mantua is confirmed by its name, which was in all probability derived from
that of the Etruscan divinity Mantus, though another tradition, adopted by Virgil
himself, seems to have deduced it from a prophetic nymph of the name of Manto.
(Serv. ad Aen. l. c.; Schol. Veron. ad loc. p. 103, ed. Keil.) According to one
of the oldest scholiasts on Virgil, both Verrius Flaccus and Caecina, in their
Etruscan histories, ascribed the foundation of Mantua to Tarchon himself, while
Virgil represents Ocnus, the son of Manto, as its founder. (Virg. Aen. x. 200;
Schol. Veron. l. c.) The only historical fact that can be considered as resulting
from all these statements is that Mantua really was an Etruscan settlement, and
that for some reason (probably from its peculiar and inaccessible situation) it
retained much of its Etruscan character long after this had disappeared in the
other cities of Cisalpine Gaul.
After the settlement of the Gauls in Northern Italy, Mantua was probably
included in the territory of the Cenomani (Ptol. iii. 1. § 31); but we find no
mention of its name in history, nor do we know at what period it passed under
the Roman dominion. From an incidental notice in Livy (xxiv. 10) during the Second
Punic War, we may probably infer that it was then on friendly terms with Rome,
as were the Cenomani and Veneti; and as its name is not mentioned during the subsequent
wars of the Romans in Cisalpine Gaul, it is probable that it passed gradually,
with the other towns of the Cenomani, from a state of alliance to one of dependence,
and ultimately of subjection. But even under the Roman dominion the name of Mantua
scarcely appears in history, and it is clear that it was far from possessing the
same relative importance in ancient times that it did in the middle ages, and
still retains. It was undoubtedly a municipal town, and is mentioned as such by
all the geographers, as well as in inscriptions, but both Strabo and Martial speak
of it as very inferior to the neighbouring city of Verona, in comparison with
which the latter terms it parva Mantua. (Strab. v. p. 213; Plin. iii. 19. s. 23;
Ptol. iii. 1. § 31; Martial, xiv. 195.) During the civil wars after the death
of Caesar, Mantua suffered the loss of a part of its territory, for Octavian having
assigned to his discharged soldiers the lands of the neighbouring Cremona, and
these having proved insufficient, a portion of the territory of Mantua was taken
to make up the necessary amount. (Virg. Ecl. ix. 28, Georg. ii. 198; Serv. ad
loc.) It was on this occasion that Virgil was expelled from his patrimonial estate,
which he however recovered by the favour of Augustus.
The chief celebrity of Mantua under the Roman Empire was undoubtedly
owing to its having been the birthplace of Virgil, who has, in consequence, celebrated
it in several passages of his works; and its name is noticed on the same account
by many of the later Roman poets. (Virg. Georg. iii. 12; Ovid, Amor. iii. 15.
7; Stat. Silv. iv. 2. 9 ; Sil. Ital. viii. 595; Martial, i. 62. 2, xiv. 195.)
According to Donatus, however, the actual birthplace of the poet was the village
of Andes in the territory of Mantua, and not the city itself. (Donat. Vit. Virg.
1; Hieron. Chron. ad ann. 1947.)
After the fall of the Roman Empire, Mantua appears to have become
a place of importance from its great strength as a fortress, arising from its
peculiar situation, surrounded on all sides by broad lakes or expanses of water,
formed by the stagnation of the river Mincius. It, however, fell into the hands
of the Lombards under Agilulf (P. Diac. iv. 29), and after the expulsion of that
people was governed by independent counts. In the middle ages it became one of
the most important cities of the N. of Italy; and is still a populous place, and
one of the strongest fortresses in Italy. It is still so completely surrounded
by the stagnant waters of the Mincio, that it is accessible only by causeways,
the shortest of which is 1000 feet in length.
Mantua was distant from Verona 25 miles; so that Procopius calls it
a day's journey from thence. (Procop. B. G. iii. 3.) It was situated on a line
of road given in the Tabula, which proceeded from Mediolanum, by Cremona and Bedriacum,
to Mantua, and thence to Hostilia, where it crossed the Padus, and thence proceeded
direct to Ravenna. (Tab. Peut.) Mantua was distant from Cremona by this road about
40 miles. It would appear from one of the minor poems ascribed to Virgil (Catalect.
8. 4), that this distance was frequently traversed by muleteers with light vehicles
in a single day.
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited August 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΜΑΣΑ (Πόλη) ΤΟΣΚΑΝΗ
Massa surnamed Massa Veternensis, a town of Etruria, situated about 12 miles from
the sea on a hill overlooking the wide plain of the Maremma: hence it is now called
Massa Marittima. In the middle ages it was a considerable city and the see of
a bishop; but it is not mentioned by any ancient author earlier than Ammianus
Marcellinus (xiv. 11. § 27), who tells us that it was the birthplace of the emperor
Constantius Gallus. From the epithet Veternensis, it would seem probable that
there was an Etruscan city of the name of Veternum in its neighbourhood; and,
according to Mr. Dennis, there are signs of an Etruscan population on a hill called
the Poggio di Vetreta, a little to the SE. of the modern town. (Dennis, Etruria,
vol. ii. p. 218.)
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited September 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΜΕΔΙΟΛΑΝΑ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΛΟΜΒΑΡΔΙΑ
Mediolanum (Mediolanon, Pol.; Mediolanion, Strab., Ptol.: Eth. Mediolanensis:
Milano, Milan), the chief city of the Insubres in Cisalpine Gaul, and for a long
period the capital of Cisalpine Gaul itself. It was situated about midway between
the rivers Ticinus and Addua, in a broad and fertile plain, about 28 miles from
the foot of the Alps at Comum, and the same distance from the Padus near Ticinum
(Pavia). All ancient writers concur in ascribing its foundation to the Gauls,
at the time when that people first established themselves in the plains of Northern
Italy. Livy, who has given the most detailed account of the settlement of the
Cisalpine Gauls, tells us it was founded by the Insubres, who called it after
a village of the same name in their native settlements in Transalpine Gaul (Liv.
v. 34; Strab. v. p. 213; Plin. iii. 17. s. 21; Justin. xx. 5.) There can be little
doubt that Strabo is correct in saying that, previous to the Roman conquest, it
was rather a village than a town, as were indeed all the other Gaulish settlements.
It was nevertheless the chief place of the Insubres, and is mentioned as such
several times in the history of the wars of that people with the Romans. Thus,
in the campaign of B.C. 222, after the battle of Clastidium, it was attacked and
taken by the Roman consuls Claudius Marcellus and Cn. Scipio. (Pol. ii. 34; Eutrop.
iii. 6; Oros. iv. 13.) On this occasion it was taken by assault with apparently
but little difficulty, and this confirms the statement of Strabo that it was an
open town. Again, in B.C. 194, a battle was fought near it, between the Roman
proconsul L. Valerius Flaccus and the combined forces of the Insubrians and Boians,
under a chief named Dorylacus, in which the Gauls are said to have lost 10,000
men. (Liv. xxxiv. 46.)
No other mention of Mediolanum occurs previous to the Roman conquest,
nor have we any precise account of the time at which it passed under the Roman
yoke, or that at which it was admitted to the Roman civitas. We can only infer
that it must have submitted, together with the rest of the Insubres, about 190
B.C.: its citizens doubtless received the Latin franchise, together with the other
Transpadane Gauls, in B.C. 89, and the full Roman franchise in B.C. 49. Mediolanum
thus passed into the condition of a Roman municipium, but it did not as yet enjoy
that degree of importance which it subsequently attained. Strabo calls it in his
time a considerable city (Polis axiologos, v. p. 213), and Tacitus reckons it
among the firmissima Transpadanae regionis municipia; but neither he nor Pliny
give any indication of its possessing any marked superiority over the other municipal
towns with which they associate its name. (Plin. iii, 17. s. 21; Ptol. iii. 1.
§ 33; Tac. Hist. i. 70.) It is evident, however, that under the Roman Empire it
increased rapidly in prosperity, and became not only the chief town of the Insubres,
but the most important city in Northern Italy. We learn from the younger Pliny
that it was a place where literature flourished, and young men from the neighbouring
towns were sent for their education. (Plin Ep. iv. 13.) It was the native place
of the emperor Didius Julianus, as well as of Septimius Geta. (Dion Cass. lxxiii.
11; Spartian. Did. Jul. 1, Get. 3.) At a later period, A.D. 268, it was there
that the usurper Aureolus took refuge after his defeat by Gallienus on the Addua,
and was for some time besieged by the emperor, till a sedition in his own camp
ended in the death of Gallienus, and his brother Valerianus. (Eutrop. ix. 11;
Treb. Poll. Gall. 14 ; Vict. Caes. 33, Epit. 33.) Shortly after Aureolus was compelled
to surrender the city to Claudius, who had been elected to succeed Gallienus,
and was put to death by order of the new emperor. (Treb. Poll. Claud. 5.)
But it was the establishment of the imperial residence at Mediolanum
that raised that city to the highest pitch of prosperity. Its central position,
which rendered it a peculiarly suitable head-quarters from which to watch the
movements of the barbarians, and the progress of the wars with them, whether in
Gaul, Germany, or Pannonia, was undoubtedly the cause of its selection for this
purpose. Augustus himself is said to have sometimes repaired to Mediolanum with
the same view (Suet. Aug. 20); and the constantly increasing dangers from these
quarters led subsequent emperors from time to time to follow his example; but
Maximian appears to have been the first of the Roman emperors who permanently
fixed his residence there (about A.D. 303) [p. 304] and thus at once raised it
to the dignity of the capital of Northern Italy. From this period the emperors
of the West made it their habitual abode (Eutrop. ix. 27; Zosim. ii. 10, 17, &c.),
until the increasing fear of the barbarians induced Honorius, in A.D. 404, to
take refuge in the inaccessible marshes of Ravenna. Maximian is said to have adorned
the city with many splendid public buildings (Vict. Caes. 39); and it was doubtless
at this period that it rose to the splendour and magnificence which, about the
middle of the fourth century, excited the admiration of the poet Ausonius, who
assigns it the sixth place among the cities of the empire. The houses are described
by him as numerous and elegantly built, corresponding to the cultivated manners
and cheerful character of the inhabitants. It was surrounded with a double range
of walls, enclosing an ample space for the buildings of the city. Among these
were conspicuous a circus, a theatre, many temples, the palace or residence of
the emperor, a mint; and baths, which bore the name of Herculean, in honour of
their founder Maximianus, and were so important as to give name to a whole quarter
of the city. The numerous porticoes which were attached to these and other public
buildings were adorned with marble statues ; and the whole aspect of the city,
if we may believe the poet, did not suffer by comparison with Rome. (Auson. Clar.
Urb. 5.)
The transference of the imperial court and residence to Ravenna must
have given a considerable shock to the prosperity of Mediolanum, though it continued
to be still regarded as the capital of Liguria (as Gallia Transpadana was now
called), and was the residence of the Consularis or Vicarius Italiae, to whose
jurisdiction the whole of Northern Italy was subject. (Libell. Provinc. p. 62;
Bocking, ad Not. Dign. ii. p. 442.) But a much more severe blow was inflicted
on the city in A.D. 452, when it was taken and plundered by Attila, who after
the fall of Aquileia carried his arms, almost without opposition, through the
whole region N. of the Po. (Jornand. Get. 42; Hist. Miscell. xv. p. 549.) Notwithstanding
this disaster, Mediolanum seems to have retained much of its former importance.
It was still regarded as the metropolis of Northern Italy, and after the fall
of the Western Empire, in A.D. 476, became the royal residence of the Gothic kings
Odoacer and Theodoric. Procopius indeed speaks of it in the sixth century as surpassing
all the other cities of the West in size and population, and inferior to Rome
alone. (Procop. B. G. ii. 8.) It was recovered with little difficulty by Belisarius,
but immediately besieged by the Goths under Uraia, the brother of Vitiges, who,
after a long siege, made himself again master of the city (A.D. 539), which he
is said to have utterly destroyed, putting all the male inhabitants, to the number
of 300,000, to the sword, and reducing the women to slavery. (Id. ib. 21.) It
is evident, however, that the expressions of Procopius on this occasion must be
greatly exaggerated, for, at the time of the invasion of the Lombards under Alboin
(A.D. 568), Mediolanum already reappears in little less than its former importance.
It was still the acknowledged capital of Liguria (P. Diac. Hist. Lang. ii. 15,
25); and, as the metropolitan see, appears to have retained this dignity under
the Lombard kings, though those monarchs transferred their royal residence to
Ticinum or Pavia. In the middle ages it rapidly rose again to prosperity; and,
though a second time destroyed by the emperor Frederic Barbarossa in 1162, quickly
recovered, and has continued down to the present day to be one of the most important
and flourishing cities of Italy.
The position of Milan, almost in the centre of the great plain of
Northern Italy, just about midway between the Alps and the Padus, appears to have
marked it in all ages as the natural capital of that extensive and fertile region.
Its ready communications with the Ticinus on the one side, and the Addua on the
other, in great measure supply the want which would otherwise have arisen from
its not being situated on a navigable river; and the fertile plain between these
two rivers is watered by the minor but still considerable streams of the Lambro
and Olona. The latter, which is not noticed by any ancient writer, flows under
the walls of Milan. The modern city contains few vestiges of its ancient splendour.
Of all the public buildings which excited the admiration of Ausonius (see above),
the only remains are the columns of a portico, 16 in number, and of the Corinthian
order, now attached to the church of S. Lorenzo, and supposed, with some probability,
to have been originally connected with the Thermae or baths erected by the emperor
Maximian. A single antique column, now standing in front of the ancient basilica
of Sant‘ Ambrogio, has been removed from some other site, and does not indicate
the existence of an ancient building on the spot, Numerous inscriptions have,
however, been discovered, and are still preserved in the museum at Milan. These
fully confirm the municipal importance of Mediolanum under the early Roman Empire;
while from one of them we learn the fact that the city, notwithstanding its flourishing
condition, received a colony under Hadrian, and assumed, in honour of that emperor,
the titles of Colonia Aelia Augusta. (Orell. Inscr. 1702, 1909, 3942, 4000, 4060,
&c.; Zumpt, de Colon. p. 409.)
Mediolanum was the central point from which all the highroads of Italy
N. of the Padus may be considered as radiating. The first and principal of these
was that which led by Laus Pompeia to Placentia, where it joined the Via Aemilia,
and thus became the direct line of route from Milan to Ravenna and Rome. Another
main line was that by Novaria and Vercellae to Eporedia and Augusta Praetoria,
which must have been the principal line of communication between Milan and Transalpine
Gaul. A third road led in a southerly direction to Ticinum (Pavia), from which
there were two lines; the one proceeding by Laumellum to Augusta Taurinorum, and
thence over the Cottian Alps into the southern provinces of Gaul; the other crossing
the Padus to Dertona, and thence across the Apennines to Genoa. A fourth line
was that to Comum, from whence there was a much frequented pass by the Lacus Larius,
and across the Rhaetian Alps into the valley of the Inn, thus opening a direct
and speedy communication with the Danube. Lastly, a great line of highway led
from Milan to Aquileia, passing through Bergomum, Brixia, Verona, Vicentia, Patavium,
Altinum, and Concordia. The details of all these routes are given in the Antonine
Itinerary and the Tabula Peutingeriana.
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited August 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΟΡΒΙΕΤΟ (Πόλη) ΟΥΜΒΡΙΑ
Urbs Vetus (Orvieto), a city of Etruria mentioned by Paulus Diaconus
(Hist. Lang. iv. 33) together with Balneum Regis (Bagnarea) in the same neighbourhood.
No mention of either name occurs in any writer before the fall of the Roman Empire,
but it is probable that the Urbiventum (Ourbibenton) of Procopius, which figures
in the Gothic Wars as a fortress of some importance, is the same place as the
Urbs Vetus of P. Diaconus. (Procop. B. G. ii. 20.) There is no doubt that the
modern name of Orvieto is derived from Urbs Vetus; but the latter is evidently
an appellation given in late times, and it is doubtful what was the original name
of the city thus designated. Niebuhr supposes it to be Salpinum, noticed by Livy
in B.C. 389 (Liv. v. 31; Niebuhr, vol. ii. p. 493), while Italian antiquaries
in general identify it with Herbanum. But both suggestions are mere conjectures.
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited September 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΠΑΡΜΑ (Πόλη) ΕΜΙΛΙΑ ΡΟΜΑΝΑ
Parma (Parma: Eth. Parmensis: Parma), a city of Gallia Cispadana,
situated on the Via Aemilia, at the distance of 19 M. P. from Regium Lepidum,
and 40 from Placentia. (Itin. Ant. p. 286.) It was about 15 miles distant from
the Padus, on the banks of a small stream. called the Parma, from which it probably
derived its name; and about 6 miles from the more considerable Tarus or Taro.
We find no mention of the name before the establishment of the Roman colony, though
it is very probable that there already existed a Gaulish town or village on the
spot: but in B.C. 183 after the complete subjugation of the Boii, and the construction
of the Via Aemilia, the Romans proceeded to strengthen their footing in this part
of Gaul by founding the colonies of Mutina and Parma, along the line of the newly
opened highway, which, in connection with the two previously existing colonies
of Bononia and Placentia, formed a continuous chain of Roman towns, from one end
to the other of the Via Aemilia. Parma was a colonia civium, its settlers retaining
their privileges as Roman citizens; it received in the first instance 2000 colonists,
each of whom obtained 8 jugera of land for his allotment. (Liv. xxxix. 55.) We
hear little of Parma for some time after this: it is mentioned incidentally in
B.C. 176, as the head-quarters of the proconsul C. Claudius (Id. xli. 1:7); but
appears to have suffered little from the wars with the Gauls and Ligurians; and
hence rose with rapidity to be a flourishing and prosperous town. But its name
is scarcely mentioned in history till the period of the Civil Wars, when it sustained
a severe blow, having in B.C. 43 taken a prominent part in favour of the senatorial
party against M. Antony, in consequence of which it was taken by that general,
and plundered in the most unsparing manner by his troops. (Cic. ad. Fam. x. 3.
3, xi. 13, a., xii. 5, Phil. xiv. 3, 4.) Cicero still calls it on this occasion
a Colonia, and there can be no doubt that it still retained that rank; but under
Augustus it received a fresh colony, from which it derived the title of Colonia
Julia Augusta, which we find it bearing in inscriptions. (Gruter, Inscr. p. 492.
5; Zumpt, de Colon. p. 354.) Pliny also styles it a Colonia, and there seems no
doubt that it continued under the Roman Empire to be, as it was in the time of
Strabo, one of the principal towns of this populous and flourishing part of Italy.
(Plin. iii. 15. s. 20; Strab. v. p. 216; Ptol. iii. 1. § 46; Phlegon, Macrob.
1.) But its name is scarcely mentioned in history: a proof perhaps of the tranquillity
that it enjoyed. Its territory was celebrated for the excellence of its wool,
which according to Martial was inferior only to that of Apulia. (Martial, xiv.
155; Colum. vii. 2. § 3.) In A.D. 377, a colony of Goths was settled by order
of Gratian in the territory of Parma, as well as the adjoining districts (Ammian.
xxxi. 9. § 4),- a proof that they were already suffering from a decay of the population;
and it is probable that it did not escape the general devastation of the province
of Aemilia by Attila. But it survived these calamities: it still bears a part
as an important town during the wars of Narses with the Goths and their allies,
and is noticed by P. Diaconus, as one of the wealthy cities of Aemilia after the
Lombard conquest. (Agath. B. G. i. 14-17; P. Diac. Hist. Lang. ii. 18.) It retained
its consideration throughout the middle ages, and is still a populous and flourishing
place with above 30,000 inhabitants, but has no remains of antiquity, except a
few inscriptions.
The Roman poet Cassius Parmensis would appear from his name to have
been a native of Parma, but there is no distinct testimony to this effect.
The Itinerary (p. 284) mentions a line of crossroad which proceeded
from Parma across the Apennines to Luca: this must have ascended the valley of
the Parma, or the adjoining one of the Tarus, as far as the main ridge, and and
thence descended the valley of the Macra to Luna. This passage, though little
frequented in modern times, is one of the main lines of natural communication
across this part of the Apennines, and is in all probability that followed by
Hannibal; on his advance into, Etruria.
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited August 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΠΑΤΑΒΙΟΝ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΠΑΝΤΟΒΑ
Patavium (Pataouion: Eth. Patavinus: Padova), one of the most ancient
and important cities of Venetia, situated on the river Medoacus (Brenta), about
30 miles from its mouth. According to a tradition recorded by Virgil, and universally
received in antiquity, it was founded by Antenor, who escaped thither after the
fall of Troy; and Livy, himself a native of the city, confirms this tradition,
though he does not mention the name of Patavium, but describes the whole nation
of the Veneti as having migrated to this part of Italy under the guidance of Antenor.
He identifies them with the Heneti, who were mentioned by Homer as a Paphlagonian
tribe. (Liv. i. 1; Virg. Aen. i. 247; Strab. v. p. 212; Mel. ii. 4. § 2; Solin.
2. § 10.) The national affinities of the Veneti are considered elsewhere. The
story of Antenor may safely be rejected as mythical; but we may infer from the
general accordance of ancient writers that Patavium itself was a Venetian city,
and apparently from an early period the capital or chief place of the nation.
We have very little information as to its history, before it became subject to
Rome, and we know only the general fact that it was at an early period an opulent
and flourishing city: Strabo even tells us that it could send into the field an
army of 120,000 men, but this is evidently an exaggeration, and probably refers
to the whole nation of the Veneti, of which it was the capital. (Strab. v. p.
213.) Whatever was the origin of the Veneti, there seems no doubt they were, a
people far more advanced in civilisation than the neighbouring Gauls, with whom
they were on terms of almost continual hostility. The vigilance rendered necessary
by the incursions of the Gauls stood them in stead on occasion of the unexpected
attack of Cleonymus the Lacedaemonian, who in B.C. 301 landed at the mouth of
the Medoacus, but was attacked by the Patavians, and the greater part of his forces
cut off. (Liv. x. 2.)
It was doubtless their continual hostility with the Gauls that led
the Venetians to become the allies of Rome, as soon as that power began to extend
its arms into Cisalpine Gaul. (Pol. ii. 23.) No special mention of Patavium occurs
during the wars that followed; and we are left to infer from analogy the steps
by which this independent city passed gradually under the dependence and protection
of Rome, till it ultimately became an ordinary municipal town. In B.C. 174 it
is clear that it still retained at least a semblance of independence, as we hear
that it was distracted with domestic dissensions, which the citizens appealed
to Rome to pacify, and the consul M. Aemilius was selected as deputy for the purpose.
(Liv. xli. 27.) But the prosperity of Patavium continued unbroken: for this it
was indebted as much to the manufacturing industry of its inhabitants as to the
natural fertility of its territory. The neighbouring hills furnished abundance
of wool of excellent quality; and this supplied the material for extensive woollen
manufactures, which seem to have been the staple article of the trade of Patavium,
that city supplying Rome in the time of Augustus with all the finer and more costly
kinds of carpets, hangings, &c. Besides these, however, it carried on many other
branches of manufactures also; and so great was the wealth arising from these
sources that, according to Strabo, Patavium was the only city of Italy, except
Rome, that could return to the census not less than 500 persons of fortunes entitling
them to equestrian rank, (Strab. iii. p. 169, v. pp. 213, 218.) We cannot wonder,
therefore, that both he and Mela speak of it as unquestionably the first city
in this part of Italy. (Id. v. p. 213; Mela, ii. 4. § 2.)
The Patavians had been fortunate in escaping the ravages of war. During
the Civil Wars their name is scarcely mentioned; but we learn from Cicero that
in B.C. 43 they took part with the senate against M. Antonius, and refused to
receive his emissaries. (Cic. Phil. xii. 4) It was probably in consequence of
this, that at a later period they were severely oppressed by the exactions of
Asinius Pollio. (Macrob. Sat. i. 11. § 22.) In A.D. 69 Patavium was occupied without
opposition by the generals of Vespasian, Primus, and Varus, during their advance
into Italy. (Tac. Hist. iii. 6.) From its good fortune in this respect there can
be no doubt that Patavium continued down to a late period of the Empire to be
a flourishing and wealthy city, though it seems to have been gradually eclipsed
by the increasing prosperity of Aquileia and Mediolanum. Hence Ausonius, writing
in the fourth century, does not even assign it a place in his Ordo Nobilium Urbium.
But its long period of prosperity was abruptly brought to a close. In A.D. 452
it felt the full fury of Attila, who, after the capture of Aquileia, which had
long resisted his arms, laid waste almost without opposition the remaining cities
of Venetia. He is said to have utterly destroyed and razed to the ground Patavium,
as well as Concordia and Altinum (P. Diac. Hist. Miscell. xv. p. 549); and, according
to a tradition, which, though not supported by contemporary evidence, is probably
well founded, it was on this occasion that a large number of fugitives from the
former city took refuge in the islands of the lagunes, and there founded the celebrated
city of Venice. (Gibbon, ch. 35, note 55.) But Patavium did not cease to exist,
and must have partially at least recovered from this calamity, alit is mentioned
as one of the chief towns of Venetia when that province was overrun by the Lombards
under Alboin, in A.D. 568. (P. Diac. Hist. Long. ii. 14.) It did not fall into
the hands of that people till near 40 years afterwards, when it was taken by Agilulf,
king of the Lombards, and burnt to the ground. (Id. iv. 24.) But it once more
rose from its ashes, and in the middle ages again became, as it has continued
ever since, one of the most considerable cities in this part of Italy, though
no longer enjoying its ancient preeminence.
It is probably owing to the calamities thus suffered by Patavium,
as well as to the earthquakes by which it has been repeatedly visited, that it
has now scarcely any relics of its ancient splendour, except a few inscriptions;
and even these are much less numerous than might have been expected. One of them
is preserved with great care in the town-hall as containing the name of T. Livius,
which has been supposed to refer to the great historian of the name, who, as is
well known, was a native of Patavium. But this is clearly a mistake; the inscription
in question refers only to an obscure freedman; nor is there the slightest foundation
for regarding the sarcophagus preserved with it as the tomb of the celebrated
historian. (Biogr. Dict. Vol. II. p. 790.) But at least the supposition was more
plausible than that which assigns another ancient sarcophagus (discovered in 1274,
and still preserved in the church of S. Lorenzo) as the sepulchre of Antenor!
Besides these sarcophagi and inscriptions, the foundations of ancient buildings
have been discovered in various parts of the modern city, but nothing now remains
above ground.
Patavium was the birthplace also of Thrasea Paetus, who was put to
death by Nero in A.D. 66. One of the causes of offence which he had given was
by assisting as a tragedian in certain games, which were celebrated at Patavium
every 30 years in honour of Antenor, a custom said to be derived from the Trojan
founders of the city. (Tac. Ann. xvi. 21; Dion Cass. lxii. 26.) We learn also
from Livy that in his time the memory of the defeat of the Spartan Cleonymus was
preserved by an annual mock fight on the river which flowed through the midst
of the town. (Liv. x. 2.)
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited August 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΠΕΡΟΥΤΖΙΑ (Πόλη) ΟΥΜΒΡΙΑ
Perusia (Perousia: Eth. Perusinus: Perugia), one of the most important
and powerful cities of Etruria, situated nearly on the eastern frontier of that
country, on a lofty hill on the right hank of the Tiber, and overlooking the lake
of Thrasymene which now derives from it the name of Lago di Perugia. It closely
adjoins the frontiers of Umbria, and hence the tradition reported by Servius,
that it was originally an Umbrian city, inhabited by the tribe called Sarsinates,
is at least a very probable one. (Serv. ad Aen. x. 201.) The same author has,
however, preserved to us another tradition, which ascribes the foundation of Perusia
to a hero named Auletes, the brother of Ocnus, the reputed founder of Mantua.
(Ib. x. 198.) Justin's assertion that it was of Achaean origin (xx. 1) may be
safely rejected as a mere fable; but whatever historical value may be attached
to the statements of Servius, it seems probable that Perusia, in common with the
other chief places in the same part of Etruria, was in the first instance an Umbrian
city, and subsequently passed into the hands of the Etruscans, under whom it rose
to be a powerful and important city, and one of the chief members of the Etruscan
confederacy. It is not till B.C. 310, when the Romans had carried their arms beyond
the Ciminian forest, that the name of Perusia is heard of in history; but we are
told that at that period it was one of the most powerful cities of Etruria. (Liv.
ix. 37.) The three neighbouring cities of Perusia, Cortona, and Arretium, on that
occasion united in concluding a peace with Rome for thirty years (Liv. l. c.;
Diod. xx. 35); but they seem to have broken it the very next year, and shared
in the great defeat of the Etruscans in general at the Vadimonian lake. This was
followed by another defeat under the walls of Perusia itself, which compelled
that city to sue for peace; but the statement that it surrendered at discretion,
and was occupied with a Roman garrison, is one of those obvious perversions of
the truth that occur so frequently in the Roman annals. (Liv. ix. 40.) When we
next meet with the name of Perusia, it is still as an independent and powerful
state, which in B.C. 295, in conjunction with Clusium, was able to renew the war
with Rome; and though their combined forces were defeated by Cn. Fulvius, the
Perusians took the lead in renewing the contest the next year. On this occasion
they were again defeated with heavy loss by Fabius, 4500 of their troops slain,
and above 1700 taken prisoners. (Id. x. 30, 31.) In consequence of this disaster
they were compelled before the close of the year to sue for peace, and, by the
payment of a large sum of money, obtained a truce for forty years, B.C. 294. (Id.
x. 37.) At this time Livy still calls the three cities of Perusia, Volsinii, and
Arretium (all of which made peace at. the same time) the three most powerful states
and chief cities of Etruria. (Id. l. c.)
We find no other mention of Perusia as an independent state; and we
have no explanation of the circumstances or terms under which it ultimately became
a dependency of Rome. But during the Second Punic War it figures among the allied
cities which then formed so important a part of the Roman power: its cohorts were
serving in her armies (Liv. xxiii. 17), and towards the end of the contest it
was one of the populi of Etruria which came forward with alacrity to furnish supplies
to the fleet of Scipio. Its contribution consisted of corn, and timber for shipbuilding.
(Id. xxviii. 45.) With this exception, we meet with no. other mention of Perusia
till near the close of the republican period, when it bore so conspicuous a part
in the civil war between Octavian and L. Antonius, in B.C. 41, as to give to that
contest the name of Bellum Perusinum. (Suet. Aug. 9; Tac. Ann. v. 1; Oros. vi.
18.) It was shortly after the outbreak of hostilities on that occasion that L.
Antonius, finding himself pressed, on all sides by three armies under Agrippa,
Salvidienus, and Octavian himself, threw himself into Perusia, trusting in the
great natural strength of the city to enable him to hold out till the arrival
of his generals, Ventidius and Asinius Pollio, to his relief. But whether from
disaffection or incapacity, these officers failed in coming to his support, and
Octavian surrounded the whole hill on which the city stands with strong lines
of circumvallation, so as to cut him off from all supplies, especially on the
side of the Tiber, on which Antonius had mainly relied. Famine soon made itself
felt in the city; the siege was protracted through the winter, and Ventidius was
foiled in an attempt to compel Octavian to raise it, and drew off his forces without
success. L. Antonius now made a desperate attempt to break through the enemy's
lines, but was repulsed with great slaughter, and found himself at length compelled
to capitulate. His own life was spared, as were those of most of the Roman nobles
who had accompanied him; but the chief citizens of Perusia itself were put to
death, the city given up to plunder, and an accidental conflagration having been
spread by the wind, ended by consuming the whole city. (Appian, B.C. v. 32-49;
Dion Cass. xlviii. 14; Vell. Pat. ii. 74; Flor. iv. 5; Suet. Aug. 14, 96.) A story
told by several writers of Octavian having sacrificed 300 of the prisoners at
an altar consecrated to the memory of Caesar, is in all probability a fiction,
or at least an exaggeration. (Dion Cass. l. c.; Suet. Aug. 15; Senec. de Clem.
i. 11 ; Merivale's Roman Empire, vol. iii. p. 227.)
Perusia was raised from its ashes again by Augustus, who settled a
fresh body of citizens there, and the city assumed in consequence the surname
of Augusta Perusia, which we find it bearing in inscriptions; but it did not obtain
the rank or title of a colony; and its territory was confined to the district
within a mile of the walls. (Dion Cass. xlviii. 14; Orell. Inscr. 93-95, 608.)
Notwithstanding this restriction, it appears to have speedily risen again into
a flourishing municipal town. It is noticed by Strabo as one of the chief towns
in the interior of Etruria, and its municipal consideration is attested by numerous
inscriptions. (Strab. v. p. 226; Plin. iii. 5. s. 8; Ptol. iii. 1. § 48; Tab.
Peut.; Orell. Inscr. 2531, 3739, 4038.) From one of these we learn that it acquired
under the Roman Empire the title of Colonia Vibia; but the origin of this is unknown,
though it is probable that it was derived from the emperor Trebonianus Gallus,
who appears to have bestowed some conspicuous benefits on the place. (Vermiglioli,
Iscriz. Perug. pp. 379-400; Zumpt, de Colon. p. 436.) The name of Perusia is not
again mentioned in history till after the fall of the Roman Empire, but its natural
strength of position rendered it a place of importance in the troubled times that
followed; and it figures conspicuously in the Gothic wars, when it is called by
Procopius a strong fortress and the chief city of Etruria. It was taken by Belisarius
in A.D. 537, and occupied with a strong garrison: in 547 it was besieged by Totila,
but held out against his arms for nearly two years, and did not surrender till
after Belisarius had quitted Italy. It was again recovered by Narses in 552. (Procop.
B. G i. 16, 17, iii. 6, 25, 35, iv. 33.) It is still mentioned by Paulus Diaconus
Hist. Lang. ii. 16) as one of the chief cities of Tuscia under the Lombards, and
in the middle ages became an independent republic. Perugia still continues a considerable
city, with 15,000 inhabitants, and is the capital of one of the provinces of the
Roman states.
The modern city of Perugia retains considerable vestiges of its ancient
grandeur. The most important of these are the remains of the walls, which agree
in character with those of Chiusi and Todi, being composed of long rectangular
blocks of travertine, of very regular masonry, wholly different from the ruder
and more massive walls of Cortona and Volterra It is a subject of much doubt whether
these walls belong to the Etruscan city, or are of later and Roman times. The
ancient gates, two of which still exist, must in all probability be referred to
the latter period. The most striking of these is that now known as the Arco d'Augusto,
from the inscription Augusta Perusia over the arch: this probably dates from the
restoration of the city under Augustus, though some writers would assign it to
a much more remote period. Another gate, known as the Porta Marzia, also retains
its ancient arch; while several others, though more or less modernised, are certainly
of ancient construction as high as the imposts. It is thus certain that the ancient
city was not more extensive than the modern one; but, like that, it occupied only
the summit of the hill, which is of very considerable elevation, and sends down
its roots and underfalls on the one side towards the Tiber, on the other towards
the lake of Thrasymene. Hence the lines of circumvallation drawn round the foot
of the hill by Octavian enclosed a space of 56 stadia, or 7 Roman miles (Appian,
B.C. v. 33), though the circuit of the city itself did not exceed 2 miles.
The chief remains of the ancient Etruscan city are the sepulchres
without the walls, many of which have been explored, and one - the family tomb
of the Volumnii - has been preserved in precisely the same state as when first
discovered. From the inscriptions, some of which are bilingual, we learn that
the family name was written in Etruscan Velimnas, which is rendered in Latin by
Volumnius. Other sepulchres appear to have belonged to the families whose names
assumed the Latin forms, Axia, Caesia, Petronia, Vettia, and Vibia. Another of
these tombs is remarkable for the careful construction and regular masonry of
its arched vault, on which is engraved an Etruscan inscription of considerable
length. But a far more important monument of that people is an inscription now
preserved in the museum at Perugia. which extends to forty-six lines in length,
and is the only considerable fragment of the language which has been preserved
to us. Numerous sarcophagi, urns, vases, and other relics from the various tombs,
are preserved in the same museum, as well as many inscriptions of the Roman period.
(Vermiglioli, Iscrizioni Perugine, 2 vols. 4to., Perugia, 1834; Id. Il Sepolcro
dei Volunni, 4to., Perugia, 1841; Dennis's Etruria, vol. ii. pp. 458-489.)
We learn from ancient authors that Juno was regarded as the tutelary
deity of Perusia till after the burning of the city in B.C. 40, when the temple
of Vulcan being the only edifice that escaped the conflagration, that deity was
adopted by the surviving citizens as their peculiar patron. (Dion Cass. xlviii.
14; Appian. B.C. v. 49.)
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited August 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΠΙΖΑ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΤΟΣΚΑΝΗ
Pisae (Pisai, Strab. Pol.; Pissai, Ptol.; Pissa, Lycophr.; Eth. Pisanus:
Pisa), an important city of Etruria, situated on the N. bank of the river Arnus,
a few miles from its mouth. All authors agree in representing it as a very ancient
city, but the accounts of its early history are very confused and uncertain. The
identity of its name with that of the city of Elis naturally led to the supposition
that the one was derived from the other; and hence the foundation of the Italian
Pisae was ascribed by some authors to Pelops himself (Plin. iii. 5. s. 8), while
others assigned it to a body of settlers from the Peloponnesian Pisa who had accompanied
Nestor to Troy, and on their return wandered to this part of Italy. (Strab. v.
p. 222; Serv. ad Aen. x. 179.) Epeius, the reputed founder of Metapontum, was,
according to some writers, that of Pisae also. (Serv. l. c.) The Elean, or Alphean,
origin of the city is generally adopted by the Roman poets. (Virg. Aen. x. 179;
Claudian, B. Gild. 483; Rutil. Itin. i. 565.) Cato, however, followed a different
tradition, and represented the city as founded by the Etruscans under Tarchon,
though the site was previously possessed by a people called the Teutanes, who
spoke a Greek dialect. (Cato, ap. Serv. l. c.) Virgil also calls it distinctly
an Etruscan city, though he derives its more remote origin from Elis; and the
tradition reported by Cato seems to prove at least that it was one of the cities
of which the Etruscans claimed to be the founders, and which must therefore have
been at one period a genuine Etruscan city. On the other hand, Dionysius mentions
it among the cities founded or occupied by the Pelasgi in conjunction with the
Aborigines (Dionys. i. 20); and there seems to be some reason to regard it as
one of the early Pelasigc settlements on the coast of Etruria, which fell at a
later period under the power of the Etruscans.
We know almost nothing of Pisae as an Etruscan city, nor are there
any remains of this period of its history. But Strabo still found vestiges of
its past greatness, and the tradition of its foundation by Tarchon seems to point
to it as one of the principal cities of Etruria. Its inhabitants were trained
to arms by frequent contests with their neighbours the Ligurians, while they appear
to have been one of the principal maritime powers among the Etruscans, and, like
most of their countrymen, combined the pursuits of commerce and piracy. (Strab.
v. p. 223.) We have no account of the period at which it became a dependency of
Rome; but the first historical mention of its name is in B.C. 225, when the consul
C. Atilius landed there with two legions from Sardinia, with which he shortly
after attacked and defeated the Gaulish army near Telamon. (Pol. ii. 27.) It is
clear therefore that Pisae was at this time already in alliance with Rome, and
probably on the same footing as the other dependent allies of the republic. Its
port seems to have been much frequented, and became a favourite point of departure
for the Roman fleets and armies whose destination was Gaul, Spain, or Liguria.
Thus it was from thence that the consul P. Scipio sailed to Massilia at the outbreak
of the Second Punic War (B.C. 218), and thither also that he returned on finding
that Hannibal had already crossed the Alps. (Pol. iii. 43, 56; Liv. xxi. 39.)
The long-continued wars of the Romans with the Ligurians added greatly to the
importance of Pisae, which became the frontier town of the Roman power, and the
customary head-quarters of the generals appointed to carry on the war. (Liv. xxxiii.
43, xxxv. 22, xl. 1, &c.) It was not, however, exempt from the evil consequences
incident to such a position. In B.C. 193 it was suddenly attacked and besieged
by an army of 40,000 Ligurians, and with difficulty rescued by the arrival of
the consul Minucius (Liv. xxxv. 3); and on several other occasions the Ligurians
laid waste its territory. Hence in B.C. 180 the Pisans themselves invited the
Romans to establish a colony in their territory, which was accordingly carried
out, the colonists obtaining Latin rights. (Liv. xl. 43.) From this time we hear
but little of Pisae; its colonial condition became merged like that of the other
coloniae Latinae, in that of a municipium by virtue of the Lex Julia (Fest. v.
Municipium): but it seems to have received a fresh colony under Augustus, as we
find it bearing the colonial title in a celebrated inscription which records the
funeral honours paid by the magistrates and senate of Pisae to the deceased grandchildren
of Augustus, C. and L. Caesar. (Orell. Inscr. 642, 643.) It is here termed Colonia
Obsequens Julia Pisana: Pliny also gives it the title of a colony (Plin. iii.
5 s. 8), and there seems no doubt that it was at this period one of the most flourishing
towns of Etruria. Strabo speaks of it as carrying on a considerable trade in timber
and marble from the neighbouring mountains, which were sent to Rome to be employed
there as building materials. Its territory was also very fertile, and produced
the fine kind of wheat called siligo, as well as excellent wine. (Strab. v. p.
223; Plin. xiv. 3. s. 4, xviii. 9. s. 20.) We have no account of the fortunes
of Pisae during the declining period of the Roman empire, but during the Gothic
wars of Narses it is still mentioned as a place of importance (Agath. B. G. i.
11), and in the middle ages rose rapidly to be one of the most flourishing commercial
cities of Italy.
There is no doubt that the ancient city stood on the same site with
the modern Pisa, but natural causes have produced such great changes in the locality,
that it would be difficult to recognise the site as described by Strabo, were
not the identity of the modern and ancient cities fully established. That author
(as well as Rutilius and other writers) describes the ancient city as situated
at the confluence of the rivers Arnus and Auser (Serchio), and distant only 20
stadia (2 1/2 miles) from the sea. (Strab. v. p. 222; Plin. iii. 8. s. 14; Rutil.
Itin. i. 565-570.) At the present day it is more than 6 miles from the sea, while
the Serchio does not flow into the Arno at all, but has a separate channel to
the sea, the two rivers being separated by a tract of 5 or 6 miles in width, formed
partly by the accumulation of alluvial soil from the rivers, partly by the sand
heaped up by the sea. There are no remains of the Etruscan city visible; it is
probable that all such, if they still exist, are buried to a considerable depth
by the alluvial soil. The only vestiges of Roman antiquity which remain are some
mean traces of baths, and two marble columns with composite capitals, probably
belonging to the vestibule of a temple of the age of the Antonines, now embedded
in the wall of the ruined church of S. Felice. (Dennis, Etruria, vol. ii. p. 89.)
But numerous sarcophagi of Roman date, some of them of very superior workmanship,
and some fragments of statues are preserved in the Campo Santo, as well as numerous
inscriptions, of which the most interesting are those already alluded to, recording
the honours paid by the colony to the deceased grandsons of Augustus. These have
been published with a learned and elaborate commentary by Cardinal Noris (Cenotaphia
Pisana, fol. Venet. 1681); as well as by Gori (Inscript. Etruriae, vol. ii. p.
10, &c.), and more recently by Haubold (Monumenta Legalia, p. 179) and Orelli
(l. c.).
The Maritime Itinerary mentions the Portus Pisanus as distinct from
Pisae itself, from which it was no less than 9 miles distant. (Itin. Marit. p.
501.) Rutilius also describes the port of Pisae, which was in his day still much
frequented and the scene of an active commerce, as at some distance from the city
itself. (Rutil. Itin. i. 531-540, 558-565, ii. 12.) But the exact site has been
a subject of much controversy. Cluverius and other writers placed it at the mouth
of the Arno, while Mannert and Mr. Dennis would transfer it to the now celebrated
port of Leghorn or Livorno. But this latter port is distant 10 miles from the
mouth of the Arno, and 14 from Pisa, which does not agree with the distance given
in the Maritime Itinerary; while the mouth of the Arno is too near Pisa, and it
is unlikely that the entrance of the river could ever have been available as a
harbour. Rutilius also describes the port (without any mention of the river) as
formed only by a natural bank of sea-weed, which afforded shelter to the vessels
that rode at anchor within it. Much the most probable view is that advocated by
a local writer (Targioni Tozzetti), that the ancient Portus Pisanus was situated
at a point between the mouth of the Arno and Leghorn, but considerably nearer
the latter city, near an old church of St. Stefano. The distance of this spot
agrees with that of the Itinerary, and it is certain from mediaeval documents
that the Porto Pisano, which in the middle ages served as the port of Pisa, when
it was a great and powerful republic, was situated somewhere in this neighbourhood.
(Targioni Tozzetti, Viaggi in Toscana, vol. ii. pp. 225-240, 378-420; Zumpt, ad
Rutil. i. 527.) Roman remains have also been found on the spot, and some ruins,
which may very well be those of the villa called Triturrita, described by Rutilius
as adjoining the port, designated in the Tabula as Turrita. (Rutil. Itin. i. 527;
Tab. Peut.) There is every probability that the Porto Pisano of the middle ages
occupied the same site with the Roman Portus Pisanus, which is mentioned by P.
Diaconus as still in use under the Lombard kings, and again by a Frankish chronicler
in the days of Charlemagne (P. Diac. Hist. Lang. vi. 61; Amoin. Rer. Franc. iv.
9); and there is no doubt that the mediaeval port was quite distinct from Livorno.
The latter city, which is now one of the most important trading places in Italy,
was in the 13th century an obscure village, and did not rise to consideration
till after the destruction of the Porto Pisano. But it seems probable that it
was occasionally used even in ancient times, and is the Labro noticed by Cicero
(ad Q. Fr. ii. 6) as a seaport near Pisae. It has been supposed also to be already
mentioned by Zosimus (v. 20) under the name of Liburnum; but there is really no
authority for this, or for the names of Portus Liburni, and Portus Herculis Liburni
employed by modern writers on ancient geography. The Antonine Itinerary, however,
gives a station Ad Herculem, which, as it is placed 12 miles from Pisae, could
not have been far from Leghorn. (Itin. Ant. p. 293.)
Pliny alludes to the existence of warm springs in the territory of
Pisae (ii. 103. s. 106). These are evidently the same now called the Bagni di
S. Giuliano, situated about 4 miles from the city, at the foot of the detached
group of Apennines, which divide the territory of Pisa from that of Lucca.
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited August 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΠΙΖΑΡΟΝ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΜΑΡΚΕ
Pisaurum (Pisauron: Eth. Pisaurensis: Pesaro), a considerable town
of Umbria, situated on the coast of the Adriatic, between Fanum Fortunae (Fano)
and Ariminum (Rimini). It was on the line of the Via Flaminia, 24 miles from Ariminum
(Itin. Ant. p. 126), at the mouth of the small river Pisaurus, from which it in
all probability derived its name. (Plin. iii. 14. s. 19.) This is now called the
Foglia. The site of Pisaurum, together with all the adjoining country, had been
originally included in the territory of the Galli Senones; but we have no account
of the existence of a Gaulish town of the name, and the first mention of Pisaurum
in history is that of the foundation of a Roman colony there. This took place
in B.C. 184, simultaneously with that of Potentia in Picenum, so that the same
triumvirs were charged with the settlement of both colonies. The settlers received
6 jugera each, and enjoyed the full rights of Roman citizens. (Liv, xxxix. 44;
Vell. Pat. i. 15 ; Madvig, de Colon. pp. 253, 286.) A few years later we hear
of the construction there of some public works, under the direction of the Roman
censors (Liv. xli. 27); but with this exception, we hear little of the new colony.
It seems, however, to have certainly been a prosperous place, and one of the most
considerable towns in this part of Italy. Hence, it was one of the places which
Caesar hastened to occupy with his advanced cohorts as soon as he had passed the
Rubicon, B.C. 49. (Caes. B.C. i. 11, 12; Cic. ad Fam. xvi. 1. 2) It is also repeatedly
alluded to by Cicero as a flourishing town (Cic. pro Sest. 4, Phil. xiii. 12);
hence it is impossible that the expression of Catullus, who calls it moribunda
sedes Pisauri (Carm. 81. 3), can refer to the condition of the town itself. It
would seem that its climate was reputed unhealthy, though this is not the case
at the present day. Pisaurum received a fresh body of military colonists, which
were settled there by M. Antonius; but suffered severely from an earthquake, which
seems to have destroyed a great part of the town, just before the battle of [p.
634] Actium, B.C. 31. (Plut. Ant. 60.) It appears, however, to have been restored,
and peopled with fresh colonists by Augustus, for we find it bearing in inscriptions
the titles of Colonia Julia Felix; and though Pliny does not give it the title
of a colony, its possession of that rank under the Empire is abundantly proved
by inscriptions. (Plin. ii. 14. s. 19; Orell. Inscr. 81, 3143, 3698, 4069, 4084.)
From the same authority we learn that it was a place of some trade, and that vessels
were built there, so that it had a Collegium Fabrorum Navalium. (Ib. 4084.) The
port was undoubtedly formed by the mouth of the river, which still affords a harbour
for small vessels. Its position on the great Flaminian Way also doubtless secured
to Pisaurum a certain share of prosperity as long as the Roman empire continued;
but it was always inferior to the neighbouring Fanum Fortunae. (Mel. ii. 4. §
5; Ptol. iii. 1. § 22; Itin. Ant. pp. 100, 126; Itin. Hier. p. 615; Tab. Peut.)
During the Gothic Wars Pisaurum was destroyed by Vitiges, but partially
restored by Belisarius (Procop. B. G. iii. 11); and rose again to prosperity under
the exarchate of Ravenna, and became one of the cities of the Pentapolis. (Geogr.
Rav. iv. 31; P. Diac. Hist. Lang. ii. 19.) The modern city of Pesaro is still
a flourishing place; but has no remains of antiquity, except numerous inscriptions,
which have been collected and published with a learned commentary by the Abate
Olivieri. (Marmora Pisaurensia, fol. Pisaur. 1738.)
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited August 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΡΑΒΕΝΑ (Πόλη) ΕΜΙΛΙΑ ΡΟΜΑΝΑ
Ravenna (Rhaouenna, Strab.; Rhabenna, Ptol. et al.: Eth. Ravennas-atis:
Ravenna), one of the most important cities of Gallia Cispadana, situated a short
distance from the sea-coast, at the southern extremity of the extensive range
of marshes and lagunes, which occupied the whole coast of Venetia from thence
to Altinum. (Strab. v. p. 213; Itin. Ant. p. 126.) It was 33 miles N. of Ariminum.
Though included within the limits of Cisalpine Gaul, according to the divisions
established in the days of Strabo and Pliny, it does not appear to have ever been
a Gaulish city. Strabo tells us that it was a Thessalian colony, which probably
meant that it was a Pelasgic settlement, and was connected with the traditions
that ascribed to the Pelasgi the foundation of the neighbouring city of Spina.
But they subsequently, according to the same writer, received a body of Umbrian
colonists, in order to maintain themselves against the growing power of the Etruscans,
and thus became an Umbrian city, to which people they continued to belong till.
they passed under the Roman government. (Strab. v. pp. 214, 217.) Pliny, on the
other hand, calls it a Sabine city,- a strange statement, which we are wholly
unable to explain. (Plin. iii. 15. s. 20.) It seems probable that it was really
an Umbrian settlement, and retained its national character, though, surrounded
by the Lingonian Gauls, until it received a Roman colony. No mention of the name
is found in history till a late period of the Roman Republic, but it appears to
have been then already a place of some consequence. In B.C. 82, during the civil
wars of Marius and Sulla, it was occupied by Metellus, the lieutenant of the latter,
who made it the point of departure from whence he carried on his operations. (Appian,
B.C. i. 89.) Again it was one of the places which was frequently visited by Caesar
during his command in Gaul, for the purpose of raising levies, and communicating
with his friends at Rome (Cic. ad Att. vii. 1, ad Fam. i. 9, viii. 1); and just
before the outbreak of the Civil War it was there that he established his head-quarters;
from whence he carried on negotiations with the senate, and from whence he ultimately
set out on his march to Ariminum. (Id. ib. ii. 32; Caes. B.C. i. 5; Suet. Caes.
30; Appian, B.C. ii. 32.) Its name again figures repeatedly in the civil wars
between Antony and Octavian, especially during the war of Perusia (Appian, B.C.
iii. 42, 97, v. 33, 50, &c.); and it is evident that it was already become one
of the most important towns in this part of Cisalpine Gaul.
It is uncertain at what period Ravenna received a Roman colony. Strabo
speaks of it as having in his time, as well as Ariminum, received a body of Roman
colonists (v. p. 217); but the date is not mentioned, and it certainly did not,
like Ariminum, pass into the condition of a regular Colonia, numerous inscriptions
being extant which give it the title of a Municipium. It is probable that the
settlement alluded to by Strabo took place under Augustus, and it is certain that
it was to that emperor that Ravenna was indebted for the importance which it subsequently
enjoyed during the whole period of the Roman Empire. The situation of the city
was very peculiar. It was surrounded on all sides by marshes, or rather lagunes,
analogous to those which now surround the city of Venice, and was built, like
that city, actually in the water, so that its houses and edifices were wholly
constructed on piles, and it was intersected in all directions by canals, which
were crossed either by bridges or ferries. The lagunes had a direct communication
with the sea, so that the canals were scoured every day by the flux and reflux
of the tides,-a circumstance to which Strabo attributes, no doubt with justice,
the healthiness of the city, which must otherwise have been uninhabitable from
malaria. (Strab. v. p. 213; Jornand. Get. 29; Sidon. Apoll. Epist. i. 5; Procop.
B. G. i. 1; Claudian, de VI. Cons. Hon. 495.) The old city had a small port at
the mouth of the river Bedesis, mentioned by Pliny as flowing under its walls
(Plin. iii. 15. s. 20).; but Augustus, having determined to make it the permanent
station of his fleet in the Adriatic, constructed a new and spacious port, which
is said to have been capable of containing 250 ships of war (Jornand. l. c.),
and was furnished with a celebrated Pharos or lighthouse to mark its entrance.
(Plin. xxxvi 12. s. 18.) This port was near 3 miles distant from the old city,
with which it was connected by a long causeway: a considerable town rapidly grew
up around it, which came to be known by the name of Portus Classis or simply Classis;
while between the two, but nearer to the city, there arose another suburb, scarcely
less extensive, which bore the name of Caesarea. (Jornand. l. c.; Sidon. Apoll.
l. c.; Procop. B. G. ii. 29; Geogr. Rav. iv. 31.) In addition to these works Augustus
constructed a canal, called from him the Fossa Augusta, by which a part of the
waters of the Padus were carried in a deep artificial channel under the very walls
of Ravenna and had their outlet at the port of Classis. (Plin. iii. 16. s. 20;
Jornand. l. c.)
From this time Ravenna continued to be the permanent station of the
Roman fleet which was destined to guard the Adriatic or Upper Sea, as Misenum
was of that on the Lower (Tac. Ann. iv. 5, Hist. ii. 100, iii. 6, 40; Suet. Aug.
49; Veget. de R. Mil. v. 1; Not. Dign. ii. p. 118); and it rose rapidly into one
of the most considerable cities of Italy. For the same reason it became an important
military post, and was often selected by the emperors as their head-quarters,
from which to watch or oppose the advance of their enemies into Italy. In A.D.
193 it was occupied by Severus in his march upon Rome against Didius Julian (Spartian,
Did. Jul. 6; Dion Cass. lxxiii. 17); and in 238 it was there that Pupienus was
engaged in assembling an army to oppose the advance of Maximin when he received
the news of the death of that emperor before Aquileia. (Herodian, viii. 6, 7;
Capit. Maximin. 24, 25, Max. et Balb. 11, 12.) Its strong and secluded position
also caused it to be selected as a frequent place of confinement for prisoners
of distinction, such as the son of the German chieftain Arminius, and Maroboduus,
chief of the Suevi. (Tac. Ann. i. 58, ii. 63; Suet. Tib. 20.) The same circumstances
at a later period led to its selection by the feeble and timid Honorius as the
place of his residence: his example was followed by his successors; and from the
year 404, when Honorius first established himself there, to the close of the Western
Empire, Ravenna continued to be the permanent imperial residence and the place
from whence all the laws and rescripts of the emperors were dated. (Jornand. Get.
29 ; Gibbon, c. 30.) Even before this period we are told that it was a very rich
and populous city, as well as of great strength (Zosim. ii. 10): it was the capital
of Picenum (as that name was then used) and the residence of the Consularis or
governor of that province. (Orell. Inscr. 3649; Backing, ad Not. Dign. ii. pp.
359, 443.) But the establishment of the imperial court there naturally added greatly
to its prosperity and splendour, while its inaccessible situation preserved it
from the calamities which at this period laid waste so many cities of Italy. Yet
Ravenna as a place of residence must always have had great disadvantages. Sidonius
Apollinaris, who visited it late in the fifth century, complains especially of
the want of fresh water, as well as the muddiness of the canals, the swarms of
gnats, and the croaking of frogs. (Sidon. Apoll. Ep. i. 5, 8.) Martial, at a much
earlier period, also alludes to the scarcity of fresh water, which he jestingly
asserts was so dear that a cistern was a more valuable property than a vineyard.
(Martial, iii. 56, 57.)
After the fall of the Western Empire Ravenna continued to be the capital
of the Gothic kings. Odoacer, who had taken refuge there after repeated defeats
by Theodoric, held out for near three years, but was at length compelled to surrender.
(Jornand. Get. 57; Cassiod. Chron. p. 649.) Theodoric himself established his
residence there, and his example was followed by his successors, until, in 539,
Vitiges was after a long siege compelled by famine to surrender the city to Belisarius.
(Procop. B. G. ii. 28 29.) It now became the residence of the governors who ruled
a part of Italy in the name of the Byzantine emperors, with the title of exarchs,
whence the whole of this province came to be known as the Exarchate of Ravenna.
The Byzantine governors were in a state of frequent hostility with the Lombard
kings, and were gradually stripped of a large portion of their dominions; but
Ravenna itself defied their arms for more than two centuries. It was besieged
by Liutprand about 750, and its important suburb of Classis totally destroyed
(P. Diac. vi. 49); but it was not till the reign of his successor Astolphus that
Ravenna itself fell into the hands of the Lombards. But the exact date, as well
as the circumstances of its final conquest, are uncertain. (Gibbon, c. 49.)
The situation of Ravenna at the present day presents no resemblance
to that described by ancient writers. Yet there is no doubt that the modern city
occupies the same site with the ancient one, and that the change is wholly due
to natural causes. The accumulation of alluvial deposits, brought down by the
rivers and driven back by the waves and tides, has gradually filled up the lagunes
that surrounded and canals that intersected the city; and the modern Ravenna stands
in a flat and fertile plain, at a distance of 4 miles from the sea, from which
it is separated by a broad sandy tract, covered in great part with a beautiful
forest of stone pines. Though Ravenna is one of the most interesting places in
Italy for its mediaeval and early Christian antiquities, it presents few remains
of the Roman period, and those for the most part belong to the declining years
of the Empire. A triumphal arch, known by the name of Porta Aurea, was destroyed
in 1585: it stood near the modern gate called Porta Adriana. Several of the ancient
basilicas date from the Roman period; as does also the sepulchral chapel containing
the tomb of Galla Placidia, the sister of Honorius, and mother of Valentinian
III. A portion of the palace of Theodoric still remains in its original state,
and the mausoleum of that monarch, just without the walls, is a monument of remarkable
character, though stripped of its external ornaments. An ancient basilica, still
called S. Apollinare in Classe, about 3 miles from the southern gate of the city,
preserves the memory and marks the site of the ancient port and suburb of Classis
; while another basilica, which subsisted down to the year 1553, bore the name
of S. Lorezo in Cesarea: and thus indicated the site of that important suburb.
It stood about a quarter of a mile from the south gate of the city, between the
walls and the bridge now called Ponte Nuovo. This bridge crosses the united streams
of the Ronco and Montone, two small rivers which previously held separate courses
to the sea, but were united into one and confined within an artificial channel
by Clement XII. in 1736. The Ronco, which is the southernmost of the two, is probably
the same with the Bedesis of Pliny; indeed Cluverius says that it was in his time
still called Bedeso. Hence the Montone must be identified with the Vitis of the
same author. The Anemo, which he places next in order, is clearly the same now
called the Amone or Lamone, which flows under the walls of Faenza. (Plin. iii.
15. s. 20; Cluver. Ital. p. 300.)
The natural causes which have produced these changes in the situation
and environs of Ravenna were undoubtedly in operation from an early period. Already
in the fifth century the original port constructed by Augustus was completely
filled up, and occupied by orchards. (Jornand. Get. 29.) But Ravenna at that period
had still a much frequented port, where the fleets of Belisarius and Narses could
ride at anchor. The port of Classis itself is now separated from the sea by a
strip of sandy and marshy plain about 2 miles broad, the greater part of which
is occupied by a forest of stone pines, which extends for many miles along the
sea-coast both to the S. and N. of Ravenna. The existence of this remarkable strip
of forest is attested as early as the fifth century, the name of Pineta being
already found in Jornandes, who tells us that Theodoric encamped there when he
besieged Odoacer in Ravenna. (Jornand. 57.) But it is probable that it has extended
its boundaries and shifted its position as the land has gradually gained upon
the sea.
The territory of Ravenna was always fertile, except the sandy strip
adjoining the sea, and produced abundance of wine of good quality, but it was
remarked that the vines quickly decayed. (Strab. v. p. 214; Plin. xiv. 2. s. 4.)
Its gardens also are noticed by Pliny as growing the finest asparagus, while the
adjoining sea was noted for the excellence of its turbot. (Plin. ix. 54. s. 79,
xix. 4. s. 19.)
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited September 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΤΕΡΓΕΣΤΗ (Πόλη) ΦΡΙΟΥΛΙ
Tergeste (Tergeste, Strab. Tergeston, Ptol.: Eth. Tergestinus: Trieste),
a city of Venetia or Istria, situated on a bay to which it gave the name of Tergestinus
Sinus, which forms the inner bight or extremity of the Adriatic sea towards the
N. It was very near the confines of Istria and Venetia, so that there is considerable
discrepancy between ancient authors as to which of these provinces it belonged,
both Strabo and Ptolemy reckoning it a city of Istria, while Pliny includes it
in the region of the Carni, which was comprised in Venetia. (Strab. v. p. 215,
vii. p. 314; Plin. iii. 18. s. 22; Ptol. iii. 1. § 27.) Mela on the contrary calls
it the boundary of Illyricum (ii. 4. § 3). From the time that the Formio, a river
which falls into the sea 6 miles S. of Trieste, became fixed as the boundary of
the provinces, there can be no doubt that Pliny's attribution is correct. It is
probable that Tergeste was originally a native town either of the Carni or Istrians,
but no mention is found of its name till after the Roman conquest, nor does it
appear to have risen into a place of importance until a later period. The first
historical mention of it is in B.C. 51, when we learn that it was taken and plundered
by a sudden incursion of the neighbouring barbarians (Caes. B. G. viii. 24; Appian,
Illyr. 18); but from the terms in which it is there noticed it is evident that
it was already a Roman town, and apparently had already received a Roman colony.
It was afterwards restored, and, to protect it for the future against similar
disasters, was fortified with a wall and towers by Octavian in B.C. 32. (Gruter,
Inscr. p. 266. 6.) It is certain that it enjoyed the rank of a Colonia from the
time of Augustus, and is styled such both by Pliny and Ptolemy. (Plin. iii. 18.
s. 22; Ptol. iii. 1. § 27.) That emperor also placed under the protection and
authority of the city the neighbouring barbarian tribes of the Carni and Catali,
and, by reducing to subjection their more formidable neighbours, the Iapodes,
laid the foundations of the prosperity of Tergeste. The growth of this was mainly
promoted by the advantages of its port, which is the only good harbour in this
part of the Adriatic; but it was apparently overshadowed by the greatness of the
neighbouring Aquileia, and Tergeste, though a considerable municipal town, never
rose in ancient times to a comumanding position. We even learn that in the reign
of Antoninus Pius the citizens obtained the admission of the Carni and Catali
- who had previously been mere subjects or dependents - to the Roman civitas,
in order that they might share the burthensome honours of the local magistracy.
(Orell. Inscr. 4040.) The inscription from which we learn this fact is one of
the most interesting municipal records preserved to us from ancient times, and
has been repeatedly published, especially with notes and illuistrations by C.
T. Zumpt (Decretum Municipale Tergestinum, 4to. Berol. 1837) and by Gottling (Funfzehn
Romische Urkunden, p. 75). No subsequent mention of Tergeste is found in history
under the Roman Empire; but it is certain that it continued to exist; and retained
its position as a considerable town throughout the middle ages. But it is only
within the last century that it has risen to the position that it now occupies
of one of the most populous and flourishing cities on the Adriatic. The only remains
of antiquity extant at Trieste are some portions of a Roman temple, built into
the modern cathedral, together with several inscriptions (including the celebrated
one already noticed) and some fragments of friezes, bas-reliefs, &c.
Tergeste is placed by the Itineraries at a distance of 24 miles from
Aquileia, on the line of road which followed the coast from that city into Istria.
(Itin. Ant., p. 270; Tab. Peut.) Pliny, less correctly, calls it. 33 miles from
that city (Plin. l. c.). The spacious gulf on which it was situated, called by
Pliny the Tergestinus Sinus, is still known as the Gulf of Trieste.
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited September 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΤΡΕΒΙΖΟ (Πόλη) ΒΕΝΕΤΟ
Tarvisium (Tarbision: Eth. Tarvisianus: Treviso), a town of Northern
Italy, in the province of Venetia, situated on the left bank of the river Silis
(Sele), about 15 miles from its mouth. The name is not mentioned by any of the
geographers, though Pliny speaks of the Silis as flowing ex montibus Tarvisanis,
in a manner that would lead us to suppose it to have been a municipal town (Plin.
iii. 18. s. 22), and this is confirmed by an inscription given by Muratori (Inscr.
p. 328). After the fall of the Western Empire it appears as a considerable city,
and is repeatedly noticed by Procopius during the Gothic Wars, as well as by Cassiodorus
and Paulus Diaconus. (Cassiod. Var. x. 27; Procop. B. G. ii. 29, iii. 1, 2; P.
Diac. Hist. Lang. ii. 12, iv. 3, v. 28, &c.) It retained this consideration throughout
the middle ages, and is still a flouishing city under the name of Treviso.
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited September 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΤΡΕΝΤΟ (Πόλη) ΤΡΕΝΤΙΝΟ
Tridentum or Tridente (Tridente: Trento or Trent), the capital of
the Tridentini in the south of Rhaetia, on the eastern bank of the Athesis, and
on the highroad from Verona to Veldidena. (Plin. iii. 23; Justin, xx. 5; it. Ant.
pp. 275, 281; Paul. Diac. i 2, iii. 9, iv. 42, v. 36; Flor. iii. 3; Ptol. iii.
1. § 31; Tab. Peut.) The town is said to have derived its name from the trident
of Neptune, which is still shown fixed in the wall of the ancient church of S.
Vigil. The place seems to have been made a Roman colony (Orelli, Inscript. Nos.
2183, 3744, 3905, 4823). Theodoric the Great surrounded Tridentum with a wall,
of which a considerable portion still exists. (Comp. Pallhausen, Beschreib. der
Rom. Heerstrasse von Verona nach Augsburg, p. 28, foll.; Benedetto Giovanelli,
Discorso sopra un‘ Iscrizione Trentina, Trento, 1824, and by the same author,
Trento, Citta d'Rezj e Colonia Romana, Trento, 1825.)
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited September 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΦΛΩΡΕΝΤΙΑ (Πόλη) ΤΟΣΚΑΝΗ
Florentia (Phlorentia, Ptol.: Eth. Florentinus: Florence; in Italian,
Firenze, but in old writers Fiorenza), a city of Etruria, situated on the river
Arnus, about 3 miles S. of Faesulae. Though celebrated in modern times as the
capital of Tuscany, and in the middle ages as an independent republic, it was
not a place of much note in antiquity. No trace of its existence is found in Etruscan
times; and it is probable that it derived its first origin as a town from the
Roman colony. The date of the establishment of this is not quite clear. We learn
from the Liber Coloniarum that a colony was settled there by the triumvirs after
the death of Caesar (Lib. Colon. p. 213); but there seems some reason to believe
that one had previously been established there by Sulla. There is indeed no direct
authority for this fact, any more than for that of the new town having been peopled
by emigrants who descended from the rocky heights of Faesulae to the fertile banks
of the Arnus; but both circumstances are in themselves probable enough, and have
a kind of traditionary authority which has been generally received by the Florentine
historians. (Niebuhr, vol. i. p. 135.) A passage of Florus also (iii. 21. § 27),
in which he enumerates Florentia (or, as some MSS. give the name, Fluentia) among
the towns sold by auction by order of Sulla, is only intelligible on the supposition
that its lands were divided among new colonists. (Zumpt, de Colon. p. 253.) But
he is certainly in error in reckoning Florentia at this time among the municipia
Italiae splendidissima: it could not have been a municipal town at all; and from
the absence of all notice of it during the campaign of the consul Antonius against
Catiline, in the immediate neighbourhood of Faesulae, it is evident that it was
not even then a place of any importance. But from the period of the colony of
the triumvirs it seems to have rapidly become a considerable and flourishing town,
though not retaining the title of a colony. The Florentini are mentioned by Tacitus
in the reign of Tiberius among the municipia which sent deputies to Rome to remonstrate
against the project of diverting the course of the Clanis from the Tiber into
the Arnus; a proceeding which they apprehended, probably not without reason, would
have the effect of flooding their town and territory. (Tac. Ann. i. 79.) We subsequently
find the Florentini noticed by Pliny among the municipal towns of Etruria; and
the name of Florentia is found in Ptolemy, as well as in the Itineraries. (Plin.
iii. 5. s. 8; Ptol. iii. 1. § 48; Itin. Ant. pp. 284, 285; Tab. Peut.) These scanty
notices are all that we hear of it previous to the fall of the Western empire;
but its municipal consideration during this period is further attested by inscriptions
(Orell. 686, 3711, 3713; Gori, Inscr. Etrur. vol. i.), as well as by the remains
of an amphitheatre still visible near the church of Sta. Croce. It is probable
that its favourable position in the centre of a beautiful and fertile plain on
the banks of the Arnus, and on the line of the great high road through the N.
of Tuscany, became the source of its prosperity; and it is clear that it rapidly
came to surpass its more ancient neighbour of Faesulae. In the Gothic Wars Florentia
already figures as a strong fortress, and one of the most important places in
Tuscany. (Procop. B. G. iii. 5, 6.)
The remains of the amphitheatre already noticed, which are in themselves
of little importance, are the only vestiges of Roman buildings remaining in the
city of Florence.
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited September 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΑΝΚΟΝΑ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΜΑΡΚΕ
or Ancon (Ankon). A town in Picenum, on the Adriatic Sea, lying
in a bend of the coast between two promontories, and hence called Ancon, or an
“elbow.” It was built by the Syracusans in the time of the elder Dionysius, B.C.
392. The Romans made it a colony. It possessed an excellent harbour, completed
by Trajan, and was one of the most important seaports of the Adriatic.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΑΡΙΜΙΝΟΝ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΕΜΙΛΙΑ ΡΟΜΑΝΑ
Now Rimini; a town in Umbria, at the mouth of the little river
Ariminus. It was originally inhabited by Umbrians and Pelasgians, was afterwards
in the possession of the Senones, and was colonized by the Romans in B.C. 268,
from which time it appears as a flourishing place. After leaving Cisalpine Gaul,
it was the first town on the eastern coast of Italy at which a person arrived
in Italia proper.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΑΤΡΙΑ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΙΤΑΛΙΑ
A city in Picenum about five miles from the Adriatic Sea. It is now called Atri. It was one of the eighteen Latin colonies which remained faithful to Rome at the time of Hannibal's invasion.
ΒΕΝΕΤΙΑ (Πόλη) ΒΟΡΕΙΟΣ ΙΤΑΛΙΑ
A district in the north of Italy, originally included under
the general name of Gallia Cisalpina, but made by Augustus the tenth regio of
Italy. It was bounded on the west by the river Athesis, which separated it from
Gallia Cisalpina; on the north by the Carnic Alps; on the east by the river Timavus,
which separated it from Istria; and on the south by the Adriatic Gulf. Its inhabitants,
the Veneti, frequently called Heneti (Henetoi) by the Greeks, were not an Italian
race, but their real origin is doubtful, as their language was certainly not Keltic.
Herodotus speaks of them as an Illyrian race, and this is probably a correct view.
In consequence of their hostility to the Keltic tribes in their neighbourhood,
they formed at an early period an alliance with Rome; and their country was defended
by the Romans against their dangerous enemies. On the conquest of the Cisalpine
Gauls, the Veneti likewise became included under the Roman dominions. The Veneti
continued to enjoy great prosperity down to the time of the Marcomannic wars,
in the reign of the emperor Aurelius; but from this time their country was frequently
devastated by the barbarians who invaded Italy; and at length, in the fifth century,
many of its inhabitants, to escape the ravages of the Huns under Attila, took
refuge in the islands off their coast, on which now stands the city of Venice.
The chief towns of Venetia in ancient times were Patavium, Altinum, and Aquileia.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΒΕΡΟΝΑ (Πόλη) ΒΕΝΕΤΟ
Now Verona; an important town in Gallia Cisalpina, on the river
Athesis. It was originally the capital of the Euganei, but subsequently belonged
to the Cenomani. At a still later time it was made a Roman colony, with the surname
Augusta; and under the Empire it was one of the largest and most flourishing towns
in the north of Italy. It was the birthplace of Catullus; and, according to some
accounts, of the elder Pliny. There are still many Roman remains at Verona, and
among others an amphitheatre in a good state of preservation.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΓΕΝΟΒΑ (Πόλη) ΛΙΓΥΡΙΑ
The modern Genoa, a thriving commercial town in Liguria, situated
at the extremity of the Ligurian Gulf (Gulf of Genoa), and subsequently a Roman
municipium. For some time during the Second Punic War it was held by Mago, the
Carthaginian. The place had no political importance before the Middle Ages, when
it was called Janua.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΙΒΡΕΑ (Πόλη) ΠΙΕΜΟΝΤΕ
The modern Ivrea, a town in Gallia Cisalpina, on the Duria, in the territory of the Salassi, colonized by the Romans, B.C. 100, to serve as a bulwark against the neighbouring Alpine tribes.
ΚΟΜΟ (Πόλη) ΛΟΜΒΑΡΔΙΑ
The modern Como; a town in Gallia Cisalpina, at the southern extremity of the west branch of the Lacus Larius (Lago di Como). It was originally a town of the Insubrian Gauls, and subsequently a Roman colony. It was the birthplace of the younger Pliny.
ΜΑΝΤΟΥΗ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΛΟΜΒΑΡΔΙΑ
A town in Gallia Transpadana, on an island in the river Mincius. It was not a place of importance; but is celebrated because Vergil, who was born at the neighbouring village of Andes, regarded Mantua as his birthplace.
ΜΟΝΤΕΝΑ (Πόλη) ΕΜΙΛΙΑ ΡΟΜΑΝΑ
Mutina, now Modena; an important town in Gallia Cispadana, originally a town of the Boii, and afterwards a Roman colony. It is celebrated in the history of the Civil War after Caesar's death. Decimus Brutus was besieged here by M. Antonius from December, B.C. 44 to April, 43; and under its walls the battles were fought in which the consuls Hirtius and Pansa perished. Hence this war is called the Bellum Mutinense.
The portion of Central Italy between the rivers Sapis in
the north and Nar in the south, the Apennines in the west, the Ager Gallicus
near Ariminum and the Ager Picens near Hadria in the east; in Augustus's division,
the sixth region of Italy, with about fifty important cities, after B.C. 220,
traversed by the Via Flaminia. It was able, at the time of the Second Punic
War, to muster 20,000 warriors against the Keltic foe. The name Ombrikoi (shorter
Ombroi) is first met in Herodotus as an undefined title for the Italic tribes
in the region of the Po, of which the Etruscans took possession. The ancients
derived the name from ombros, imber, making the people as old as the Deluge;
the Umbrian-Roman comedian Plautus, with more probable correctness, in a joke
connects the word with umbra. The name probably designated the tribes of the
western mountains from the standpoint of some of the Greeks.
Most nearly related to the Latins and the Sabellian tribes,
the Umbrians were the ruling race of Northern Italy until the Romans, in the
extension of their power, about B.C. 300, brought them also under their sway.
The Sarsinates were the last to submit to the Roman imperium in the year 266,
after a vain attempt to recover their freedom; the Sarsinate Plautus, who wrote
for the Roman stage even before 200, is so completely Latinized that his ancient
commentators had trouble to discover a single Umbrian word in his comedies.
The historical importance of the Umbrians, therefore, belongs to an undefined
period prior to the end of the fourth century B.C., when they formed a powerful
barrier for the Italic peoples against the tribes of another race pushing on
from the North. The elder Cato had placed the founding of the Umbrian city of
Ameria in the year B.C. 1133, fifty years after the fall of Troy, as calculated
by the Alexandrian scholars. Once subjugated by these strangers, or while still
contending with them for supremacy in the plain of the Po and beyond the Apennines,
the Umbrians had been more and more forced back, and at last confined to the
abovenamed position in the valleys east of the Apennines. There they had been
obliged to give place to the Kelts and Etruscans, who, to the last, were considered
by the Umbrians the chief enemies of their own name. Various Keltic tribes had
at different times pushed their way south through the plains of Lombardy into
Umbrian territory; the tomb of a Kelt, with Keltic and Roman inscriptions, was
found at Tuder in the heart of Umbria. This race is represented in the ritual
records of the Umbrians by the tribe of the Iapyds, which is not mentioned in
the Roman annals until the second century B.C. The other hereditary enemy was
the Etruscans. Not only did the Umbrians contend with Etruscans for the adjoining
lands of the Po region, where many settlements were alternately Umbrian and
Etruscan, but even in Etruria itself, many districts had been in the hands of
the Umbrians before they were driven out by the Etruscans; and before the onsets
of the Romans both nations made war against each other alternately to and fro
across the Tiber, which formed the boundary between their territories. Thus
the strongest barrier was set against the spread of the Umbrians to the north
and west. It is no wonder, then, that the Umbrians, hemmed in by Kelts and Etruscans,
were unable to offer any successful resistance to the conquering enemies of
their own line pressing upon them from the Nar, since we see them without unity
or centralized power, split up into a number of cities or States, which were
just as hostile to each other as to the national enemy, as the Iguvini towards
the Tadinates, the Sarsinates towards the rest of the Umbrians. The contrast
to the political ideas and discipline of the Romans is apparent also in the
contrasting application of an hereditary expression for their civil divisions.
While the Romans subordinated the tribus as a fractional part to the civitas,
with the Umbrians the trifu, i. e. the outlying country confederation belonging
to the city, stood above the tota, as they called the city organization, as
the essence of the State; e. g. the district of Iguvium or the tribus Sapinia
on the northern boundary of the land. As in Rome, consuls, so at the head of
Umbrian States we find marones, a word familiar through Vergil's cognomen.
The fact that we know a little more of the Umbrians, their
language and civilization, than the scanty and inexact records of the ancient
historians and geographers tell us, is due to the inscriptions on the monuments
which the soil of the land has preserved for modern times. It is true that the
smaller inscriptions from Asisium, Fulginia, Tuder, Ameria, including two dies
for coinage, only seven in number, and of limited extent, give little information;
but from the inscription of Assisi we may mention the mayor Propartis as the
ancestor of the Umbrian Callimachus, who in the last verse of his elegy on Maecenas
evidently makes an allusion to the etymology, clearer in that form, of his name
(in partes). Far richer and more valuable, in their extent almost unique in
Italian epigraphy, are the seven bronze tablets excavated in 1444 in the theatre
at Iguvium (now Gubbio) and still preserved at that place, written partly in
the Umbrian, partly in the Latin alphabet, but all in the Umbrian dialect. They
are the legacy of a religious brotherhood, which had at Iguvium nearly the same
importance as the Pontifical Collegium at Rome, and at all events far surpassed
the known Roman brotherhoods in weight and influence in the sacras of all the
communities. The Temple of Iupiter Apenninus on the heights at Iguvium was famous
in ancient times; but certain indications of the position of this temple and
cult are lacking in the tablets.
These tablets (Tabulae Iguvinae or Eugubinae) are the work
of the Fratres Atiedii, who have here set down their ritual and in addition
some decisions of their College. Of the ten great families for whose alliance
a sacrifice of pigs and goats is offered twice a year, the Atiedias familia
occupies the first place; the similarity of this name to the ethnic name of
the Umbrian city Attidium is certainly not accidental. The most mportant tablets
are I., VI., and VII., which describe the most essential sacrificial rites of
the ancient communities, the lustration of the sacred citadel (montem piare),
and the purification of the people (circumferre populum), from moment to moment
and with all the ceremonies and prayers-- Tablet I. briefly, VI. and VII. in
greater detail, just as among the Roman Fratres Arvales the protocols of the
rites are at first short, later more detailed and verbose. At the consecration
of the citadel a procession went from gate to gate, and before and behind each
gate a rich sacrifice was offered for the citadel and town of Iguvium. The celebration
was concluded with sacrifices of bullocks at the Temple of Iupiter and a deity
related to Iuno Curritis, which probably stood upon the citadel; the whole ceremony
occupied the greater part of the day. "Then the citadel shall be purified;
but if anything should be omitted, the officiating priest must observe the birds,
turn back at the first gate, and begin the sacred rite anew." Tablet II.
gives directions for a sacrifice improperly made and for the service of the
dead, and on the other side for the half-yearly family reunions; III. and IV.
add the ritual of the ambarvalia to the amburbium and ambilustrium described
in I., VI., and VII.; V. contains decrees of the College as to what the officiating
priest and the members of the society have to perform and to demand in regard
to the expenses necessary for the sacra, the sacrificial feast, the distribution
of the flesh, etc. As we possess no documents similar to these Umbrian remains
concerning Roman religion and religious observances, and least of all from the
time when the Roman cult was not yet permeated and adulterated by the Grecian,
the great importance of these monuments for all investigation of Roman as well
as of Italian ceremonial systems is self-evident. As the whole Roman literature,
frequently as it refers to auspices and other kindred terms, does not tell us
much of their nature, the arrangement of the temple, the methods and forms of
auspices, etc., as the beginning of the sixth Umbrian tablet, its statements
are necessarily the foundation for all scientific investigation of these questions.
The significance of the vacca honoraria in contrast to the hostiae piaculares
in the Roman Arval-rites had been shown in the Umbrian vittu vufru, before the
recently discovered record of the Roman secular festival under Augustus had
instructed even Roman antiquarians on the point.
But infinitely greater in value than the information which
these tablets contain is their linguistic importance, for we must not forget
that some light is shed by the language upon those periods of the people on
which history is silent, in so far as it interprets the origin of a race and
its connection with or opposition to other peoples. Although in the last century,
misled by the characters, scholars associated Umbrian and Etruscan, every one
knows, from the language, that these two races had nothing in common. This,
however, does not preclude the possibility that in consequence of centuries
of proximity each one borrowed features from the other, or both from a third;
as, e. g., the Umbrian-Italian words maron (city official) and vinu are found
also in Etruscan. This much at least is sure, on the other hand, that the Umbrians
received their writing and alphabet from the Etruscans. And this very point
throws still further light on primitive times. For while their language unites
the Umbrians with the Latins, Sabines, Samnites, and the smaller peoples of
Central Italy, so that we roughly class them all as Italic, the writing separates
the Umbrians from the Latins and Faliscans, and places them in a closer relation,
produced probably by longer living together, with the Samnites (Oscans), who,
together with the Umbrians, adopted the same Etruscan alphabet. In this alphabet,
to which the sign [Figure] for the Italic fricative f is peculiar, the character
for the vowel o was wanting (so in Umbrian puplum is written for poplom), as
were also the characters for medial g (for which Ikuvina and Ijuvina are written),
and d, which is supplied partly by t (tekuries for the Latin decuries). But
the Umbrians compensated for this by incorporating two new characters in their
alphabet, both modifications of an older r-sign, as the sound represented by
the first letter had really relationship with the r-sound. The second letter
was then arbitrarily formed in imitation of the first. The first is represented
in Latin writing by rs, in general etymologically corresponding to the Greek
d--e. g., persu, for poda, pedem; sometimes to l, as in karsitu for kaleito,
calato. The fact that the Latin transcription employed r as well as s indicates
a dental sound, such as the rubbing of the tongue between the teeth produces.
The other letter is , rendered s' in the Latin writing, etymologically corresponding
to k before i and e: fas'ia for Latin faciat, pas'e for Latin pace. This fact,
that the Umbrian, in agreement with the Romance languages, changes the original
guttural into the sibilant before light vowels, is the more remarkable since
in related dialects no trace of this is found, nor in Latin before the time
of Constantine. But this is one of many indications that important linguistic
processes of the Romance languages have their beginning in the far-distant past
of the Italic, but, pushed aside and restrained by the development and predominance
of literary Latin, only with its decadence after the time of the Antonines come
to the surface and into use again. The language of the Umbrians, as we know
it from the monuments, embraces approximately the second century B.C. The inscriptions
written in the Latin alphabet may be assigned on palaeographic and other grounds
to the time of Sulla , roughly to B.C. 100; those written in Umbrian characters,
therefore, tablets written from right to left as among the Etruscans, must be
as much older as is required for certain changes in the language, shown in later
tablets, to have become fixed. Among these changes the progress of rhotacism
in place of an original s is especially prominent, as e. g. in the older tablets
we find the genitive singular totas like sophias, paterfamilias, but in the
later, totar. From this difference we distinguish Old Umbrian, written in the
national alphabet, and New Umbrian, written in Latin; the former reaches scarcely
beyond the war with Hannibal, but may perhaps, as appears from the older tablets
(I. to V.), have been produced in different decades of the second century, since
even in them slight differences in language appear.
On the whole, the Umbrian more nearly resembles the Oscan
than the Latin, the reason for which has been already indicated in its phonology
(Umbr.-Osc. pantam, Lat. quantam), in inflection (nominative plural Umbr.-Osc.
viros, Lat. viri; Umbr.-Osc. frateer, Lat. fratres; fut. Umbr.Osc. fust, Lat.
erit, etc.), in vocabulary (Umbr.Osc. heriom, Lat. velle). The discoveries of
Oscan remains in recent years have confirmed the presumption of a very close
agreement between Oscans and Umbrians in matter as well as in language (e.g.
in the pentadic family order). But the Oscan gives the impression of a more
vigorous plant, as though unfolded in the sunlight of Magna Graecia. It has
more genuine, transparent, elegant forms, while with the Umbrians even their
language reflects the pressure of their political relations, narrowing and stunted.
All the diphthongs have disappeared (oktur, Lat. auctor, kvestur); the endings
are mangled (nome for nomen, emantu for emantur, etc.); in composition four
prepositions, appearing in Latin as ab, ad, an, and in, are reduced to the bare
a-vowel.
If we bring Latin into comparison, the Umbrian has most similarity
in its general structure with the Latin of two periods--the first, before it
had been elaborated on literary lines, the second after the decline of the literature
at its vulgarization and breaking up into provincial idioms. It is therefore
not probable that a national literature preceded or accompanied the Umbrian
which we know. Among the smaller tribes of Central Italy the Paeligni spoke
a dialect occupying a place about midway between Umbrian and Oscan; but in spite
of the greater separation in their positions, in historic times, the language
of the Volsci comes near to the Umbrian.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΠΑΤΑΒΙΟΝ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΠΑΝΤΟΒΑ
Now Padova or Padua. An ancient town of the Veneti in the north
of Italy, on the Medoacus Minor, and on the road from Mutina to Altinum, said
to have been founded by the Trojan Antenor. Under the Romans it was the most important
city in the north of Italy, and by its commerce and manufactures (of which its
woollen stuffs were the most celebrated) it attained great opulence. It is celebrated
as the birthplace of the historian Livy. Near Patavium were the Aquae Patavinae,
on which see Aponi Fons.
This text is cited July 2003 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΠΙΖΑ (Αρχαία πόλη) ΤΟΣΚΑΝΗ
Now Pisa. An ancient city of Etruria, and one of the twelve
cities of the confederation. It was situated at the confluence of the Arnus and
Ausar (Serchio), about six miles from the sea. According to some traditions, Pisae
was founded by the companions of Nestor , the inhabitants of Pisa, in Elis, who
were driven upon the coast of Italy on their return from Troy; whence the Roman
poets give the Etruscan town the surname of Alphea. In B.C. 180 it was made a
Latin colony. Its harbour, called Portus Pisanus, at the mouth of the Arnus (Arno),
was much used by the Romans.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΡΑΒΕΝΑ (Πόλη) ΕΜΙΛΙΑ ΡΟΜΑΝΑ
A town in Northern Italy, now Ravenna. An important place in
Gallia Cisalpina, on the river Bedesis, and about a mile from the sea, though
it is now about five miles in the interior, in consequence of the sea having receded
all along this coast. Ravenna was situated in the midst of marshes, and was only
accessible in one direction by land, probably by the road leading from Ariminum.
It was said to have been founded by Thessalians (Pelasgians), and afterwards to
have passed into the hands of the Umbrians, but it long remained an insignificant
place, and its greatness does not begin till the time of the empire, when Augustus
made it one of the two chief stations of the Roman fleet. Ravenna thus suddenly
became one of the most important places in the north of Italy. When the Roman
Empire was threatened by the barbarians, the emperors of the West took up their
residence at Ravenna, which, on account of its situation and fortifications, was
regarded as impregnable. After the downfall of the Western Empire, Theodoric also
made it the capital of his kingdom; and after the overthrow of the Gothic dominion
by Narses, it became the residence of the exarchs, or the governors of the Byzantine
Empire in Italy, till the Lombards took the town, A.D. 752. Ravenna is remarkable
for its possession of many fine specimens of early Christian art, which may be
studied here to great advantage.
This text is cited Oct 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
ΤΕΡΓΕΣΤΗ (Πόλη) ΦΡΙΟΥΛΙ
Now Trieste; a town of Istria, on a bay in the northeast of the Adriatic Gulf, called after it Tergestinus Sinus. It was made a Roman colony by Vespasian. For its use in a proverbial saying, see Theveste.
ΤΡΕΒΙΖΟ (Πόλη) ΒΕΝΕΤΟ
Now Treviso; a town of Venetia in the north of Italy, on the river Silis, which became the seat of a bishopric, and a place of importance in the Middle Ages.
ΦΛΩΡΕΝΤΙΑ (Πόλη) ΤΟΣΚΑΝΗ
The modern Firenze, or Florence; a town in Etruria, sprung from the ancient Fiesole, and subsequently a Roman colony, situated on the Arnus (Arno). The Florentini are mentioned by Tacitus as sending a deputation to Rome in A.D. 16. Its greatness as a city dates from the Middle Ages.
Λάβετε το καθημερινό newsletter με τα πιο σημαντικά νέα της τουριστικής βιομηχανίας.
Εγγραφείτε τώρα!
