Listed 16 sub titles with search on: Information about the place for wider area of: "UMBRIA Region ITALY" .
ORVIETO (Town) UMBRIA
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
PERUGIA (Town) UMBRIA
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
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
Receive our daily Newsletter with all the latest updates on the Greek Travel industry.
Subscribe now!
