Chapter XXXVII: Part II: The Middle Ages and the Reformation. A.D. 1381-1593 (36)

TRIĒRARCHĬA (τριήραρχια), one of the extraordinary war services or liturgies at Athens, the object of which was to provide for the equipment and maintenance of the ships of war belonging to the state. The persons who were charged with it were called trierarchs (τριήραρχοι), as being the captains of triremes, though the name was also applied to persons who bore the same charge in other vessels. It existed from very early times in connection with the forty-eight naucraries of Solon, and the fifty of Clisthenes: each of which corporations appears to have been obliged to equip and man a vessel. [NAUCRARIA.] Under the constitution of Clisthenes the ten tribes were at first severally charged with five vessels. This charge was of course superseded by the later forms of the hierarchy. The state furnished the ship, and either the whole or part of the ship’s rigging and furniture, and also pay and provisions for the sailors. The trierarchs were bound to keep in repair the ship and its furniture, and were frequently put to great expense in paying the sailors and supplying them with provisions, when the state did not supply sufficient money for the purpose. Moreover, some trierarchs, whether from ambitious or patriotic motives, put themselves to unnecessary expense in fitting out and rigging their ships, from which the state derived an advantage. The average expense of the trierarchy was 50 minae. In ancient times one person bore the whole charge of the trierarchy, afterwards it was customary for two persons to share it, who were then called _syntrierarchs_ (συντριήραρχοι). When this practice was first introduced is not known, but it was perhaps about the year 412 B.C., after the defeat of the Athenians in Sicily, when the union of two persons for the choregia was first permitted. The syntrierarchy, however, did not entirely supersede the older and single form, being only meant as a relief in case of emergency, when there was not a sufficient number of wealthy citizens to bear the expense singly. In the case of a syntrierarchy the two trierarchs commanded their vessel in turn, six months each, according as they agreed between themselves.--The third form of the trierarchy was connected with, or suggested by, the syntrierarchy. In B.C. 358, the Athenians were unable to procure a sufficient number of legally appointed trierarchs, and accordingly they summoned volunteers. This, however, was but a temporary expedient; and as the actual system was not adequate to the public wants, they determined to manage the trierarchy somewhat in the same way as the property-tax (_eisphora_), namely, by classes or symmoriae, according to the law of Periander passed in B.C. 358, and which was the primary and original enactment on the subject. With this view 1200 _synteleis_ (συντελεῖς) or partners were appointed, who were probably the wealthiest individuals of the state, according to the census or valuation. These were divided into 20 _symmoriae_ (συμμορίαι) or classes; out of which a number of persons (σώματα) joined for the equipment or rather the maintenance and management of a ship, under the title of a _synteleia_ (συντέλεια) or union. To every ship there was generally assigned a _synteleia_ of fifteen persons of different degrees of wealth, as we may suppose, so that four ships only were provided for by each symmoria of sixty persons. It appears, however, that before Demosthenes carried a new law on this subject (B.C. 340), it had been customary for _sixteen_ persons to unite in a synteleia or company for a ship, who bore the burden in equal shares. This being the case, it follows either that the members of the symmoriae had been by that time raised from 1200 to 1280, or that some alterations had taken place in their internal arrangements, of which no account has come down to us. The superintendence of the whole system was in the hands of the 300 wealthiest members, who were therefore called the “leaders of the symmoriae” (ἡγεμόνες τῶν συμμοριῶν), on whom the burdens of the trierarchy chiefly fell, or rather ought to have fallen. The services performed by individuals under this system appear to have been the same as before: the state still provided the ship’s tackle, and the only duty then of the trierarchs under this system was to keep their vessels in the same repair and order as they received them. But even from this they managed to escape: for the wealthiest members, who had to serve for their synteleia, let out their trierarchies for a talent, and received that amount from their partners (συντελεῖς), so that in reality they paid next to nothing, or, at any rate, not what they ought to have done, considering that the trierarchy was a ground of exemption from other liturgies.--To remedy these abuses Demosthenes carried a law when he was the ἐπιστάτης τοῦ ναυτικοῦ, or the superintendent of the Athenian navy, thereby introducing the _Fourth form_ of the trierarchy. The provisions of the law were as follows: The naval services required from every citizen were to depend upon and be proportional to his property, or rather to his taxable capital, as registered for the symmoriae of the property-tax, the rate being one trireme for every ten talents of taxable capital, up to three triremes and one auxiliary vessel (ὑπηρέσιον) for the largest properties; _i.e._ no person, however rich, could be required to furnish more. Those who had not ten talents in taxable capital were to club together in synteleiae till they had made up that amount. By this law great changes were effected. All persons paying taxes were rated in proportion to their property, so that the poor were benefited by it, and the state likewise: for, as Demosthenes says, those who had formerly contributed one-sixteenth to the trierarchy of one ship were now trierarchs of two, in which case they must either have served by proxy, or done duty in successive years. He adds, that the consequences were highly beneficial. We do not know the amount of property which rendered a man liable to serve a trierarchy or syntrierarchy, but we read of no instance of liability arising from a property of less value than 500 minae. The appointment to serve under the first and second forms of the trierarchy was made by the strategi, and in case any person was appointed to serve a trierarchy, and thought that any one else (not called upon) was better able to bear it than himself, he offered the latter an exchange of his property [ANTIDOSIS] subject to the burden of the trierarchy. In cases of extreme hardship, persons became suppliants to the people, or fled to the altar of Artemis at Munychia. If not ready in time, they were sometimes liable to imprisonment. On the contrary, whoever got his ship ready first was to be rewarded with the “crown of the trierarchy;” so that in this way considerable emulation and competition were produced. Moreover, the trierarchs were ὑπεύθυνοι, or liable to be called to account for their expenditure; though they applied their own property to the service of the state. It has been already stated that the trierarchy was a ground of exemption from the other liturgies, any of which, indeed, gave an exemption, from all the rest during the following year.

TRĬNUNDĬNUM. [NUNDINAE.]

TRIŌBŎLON (τριώβολον), the fee of three obols, which the Athenian dicasts received. [DICASTAE.]

TRĬPOS (τρίπους), a tripod, _i.e._ any utensil or article of furniture supported upon three feet. More especially (1) A three-legged table.--(2) A pot or caldron, used for boiling meat, and either raised upon a three-legged stand of bronze, or made with its three feet in the same piece.--(3) A bronze altar, not differing probably in its original form from the tall tripod caldron already described. It was from a tripod that the Pythian priestess at Delphi gave responses. [CORTINA.] The celebrity of this tripod produced innumerable imitations of it, which were made to be used in sacrifice, and still more frequently to be presented to the treasury both in that place and in many other Greek temples.

TRĬPŬDĬUM. [AUSPICIUM.]

TRIRĒMIS. [NAVIS.]

TRĬUMPHUS (θρίαμβος), a solemn procession, in which a victorious general entered the city in a chariot drawn by four horses. He was preceded by the captives and spoils taken in war, was followed by his troops, and after passing in state along the Via Sacra, ascended the Capitol to offer sacrifice in the temple of Jupiter. From the beginning of the republic down to the extinction of liberty a regular triumph (_justus triumphus_) was recognised as the summit of military glory, and was the cherished object of ambition to every Roman general. A triumph might be granted for successful achievements either by land or sea, but the latter were comparatively so rare that we shall for the present defer the consideration of the naval triumph. After any decisive battle had been won, or a province subdued by a series of successful operations, the imperator forwarded to the senate a laurel-wreathed dispatch (_literae laureatae_), containing an account of his exploits. If the intelligence proved satisfactory, the senate decreed a public thanksgiving. [SUPPLICATIO.] After the war was concluded, the general with his army repaired to Rome, or ordered his army to meet him there on a given day, but did not enter the city. A meeting of the senate was held without the walls, usually in the temple either of Bellona or Apollo, that he might have an opportunity of urging his pretensions in person, and these were then scrutinised and discussed with the most jealous care. The following rules were for the most part rigidly enforced, although the senate assumed the discretionary power of relaxing them in special cases. 1. That no one could be permitted to triumph unless he had held the office of dictator, of consul, or of praetor. The honours granted to Pompey, who triumphed in his 24th year (B.C. 81) before he had held any of the great offices of state, and again ten years afterwards, while still a simple eques, were altogether unprecedented. 2. That the magistrate should have been actually in office both when the victory was gained and when the triumph was to be celebrated. This regulation was insisted upon only during the earlier ages of the commonwealth. Its violation commenced with Q. Publilius Philo, the first person to whom the senate ever granted a _prorogatio imperii_ after the termination of a magistracy, and thenceforward proconsuls and propraetors were permitted to triumph without question. 3. That the war should have been prosecuted or the battle fought under the auspices and in the province and with the troops of the general seeking the triumph. Thus if a victory was gained by the legatus of a general who was absent from the army, the honour of it did not belong to the former, but to the latter, inasmuch as he had the auspices. 4. That at least 5000 of the enemy should have been slain in a single battle, that the advantage should have been positive, and not merely a compensation for some previous disaster, and that the loss on the part of the Romans should have been small compared with that of their adversaries. But still we find many instances of triumphs granted for general results, without reference to the numbers slain in any one engagement. 5. That the war should have been a legitimate contest against public foes, and not a civil contest. Hence Catulus celebrated no triumph over Lepidus, nor Antonius over Catiline, nor Cinna and Marius over their antagonists of the Sullan party, nor Caesar after Pharsalia; and when he did subsequently triumph after his victory over the sons of Pompey, it caused universal disgust. 6. That the dominion of the state should have been extended, and not merely something previously lost regained. The absolute acquisition of territory does not appear to have been essential. 7. That the war should have been brought to a conclusion and the province reduced to a state of peace, so as to permit of the army being withdrawn, the presence of the victorious soldiers being considered indispensable in a triumph. The senate claimed the exclusive right of deliberating upon all these points, and giving or withholding the honour sought, and they for the most part exercised the privilege without question, except in times of great political excitement. The sovereignty of the people, however, in this matter was asserted at a very early date, and a triumph is said to have been voted by the tribes to Valerius and Horatius, the consuls of B.C. 446, in direct opposition to the resolution of the fathers, and in a similar manner to C. Marcius Rutilus the first plebeian dictator, while L. Postumius Megellus, consul B.C. 294, celebrated a triumph, although resisted by the senate and seven out of the ten tribunes. Nay, more, we read of a certain Appius Claudius, consul B.C. 143, who having persisted in celebrating a triumph in defiance of both the senate and people, was accompanied by his daughter (or sister) Claudia, a vestal virgin, and by her interposition saved from being dragged from his chariot by a tribune. A disappointed general, however, seldom ventured to resort to such violent measures, but satisfied himself with going through the forms on the Alban Mount, a practice first introduced by C. Papirius Maso. If the senate gave their consent, they at the same time voted a sum of money towards defraying the necessary expenses, and one of the tribunes _ex auctoritate senatus_ applied for a plebiscitum to permit the imperator to retain his imperium on the day when he entered the city. This last form could not be dispensed with either in an ovation or a triumph, because the imperium conferred by the comitia curiata did not include the city itself, and when a general had once gone forth _paludatus_, his military power ceased as soon as he re-entered the gates, unless the general law had been previously suspended by a special enactment; and in this manner the resolution of the senate was, as it were, ratified by the plebs. For this reason no one desiring a triumph ever entered the city until the question was decided, since by so doing he would ipso facto have forfeited all claim. We have a remarkable example of this in the case of Cicero, who after his return from Cilicia lingered in the vicinity of Rome day after day, and dragged about his lictors from one place to another, without entering the city, in the vain hope of a triumph.--In later times these pageants were marshalled with extraordinary pomp and splendour, and presented a most gorgeous spectacle. Minute details would necessarily be different according to circumstances, but the general arrangements were as follows. The temples were all thrown open, garlands of flowers decorated every shrine and image, and incense smoked on every altar. Meanwhile the imperator called an assembly of his soldiers, delivered an oration commending their valour, and concluded by distributing rewards to the most distinguished, and a sum of money to each individual, the amount depending on the value of the spoils. He then ascended his triumphal car and advanced to the Porta Triumphalis, where he was met by the whole body of the senate headed by the magistrates. The procession then defiled in the following order. 1. The senate headed by the magistrates. 2. A body of trumpeters. 3. A train of carriages and frames laden with spoils, those articles which were especially remarkable either on account of their beauty or rarity being disposed in such a manner as to be seen distinctly by the crowd. Boards were borne aloft on fercula, on which were painted in large letters the names of vanquished nations and countries. Here, too, models were exhibited in ivory or wood of the cities and forts captured, and pictures of the mountains, rivers, and other great natural features of the subjugated region, with appropriate inscriptions. Gold and silver in coin or bullion, arms, weapons, and horse furniture of every description, statues, pictures, vases, and other works of art, precious stones, elaborately wrought and richly embroidered stuffs, and every object which could be regarded as valuable or curious. 4. A body of flute players. 5. The white bulls or oxen destined for sacrifice, with gilded horns, decorated with infulae and serta, attended by the slaughtering priests with their implements, and followed by the Camilli bearing in their hands paterae and other holy vessels and instruments. 6. Elephants or any other strange animals, natives of the conquered districts. 7. The arms and insignia of the leaders of the foe. 8. The leaders themselves, and such of their kindred as had been taken prisoners, followed by the whole band of inferior captives in fetters. 9. The coronae and other tributes of respect and gratitude bestowed on the imperator by allied kings and states. 10. The lictors of the imperator in single file, their fasces wreathed with laurel. 11. The imperator himself in a circular chariot of a peculiar form, drawn by four horses, which were sometimes, though rarely, white. He was attired in a gold-embroidered robe (_toga picta_) and flowered tunic (_tunica palmata_): he bore in his right hand a laurel bough, and in his left a sceptre; his brows were encircled with a wreath of Delphic laurel, in addition to which in ancient times, his body was painted bright red. He was accompanied in his chariot by his children of tender years, and sometimes by very dear or highly honoured friends, while behind him stood a public slave, holding over his head a golden Etruscan crown ornamented with jewels. The presence of a slave in such a place at such a time seems to have been intended to avert _invidia_ and the influence of the evil eye, and for the same purpose a fascinum, a little bell, and a scourge were attached to the vehicle. Tertullian tells us, that the slave ever and anon whispered in the ear of the imperator the warning words _Respice post te, hominem memento te_, but this statement is not confirmed by any earlier writer. 12. Behind the chariot or on the horses which drew it rode the grown-up sons of the imperator, together with the legati, the tribuni, and the equites, all on horseback. 13. The rear was brought up by the whole body of the infantry in marching order, their spears adorned with laurel, some shouting Io Triumphe, and singing hymns to the gods, while others proclaimed the praises of their leader or indulged in keen sarcasms and coarse ribaldry at his expense, for the most perfect freedom of speech was granted and exercised. Just as the pomp was ascending the Capitoline hill, some of the hostile chiefs were led aside into the adjoining prison and put to death, a custom so barbarous that we could scarcely believe that it existed in a civilised age, were it not attested by the most unquestionable evidence. Pompey, indeed, refrained from perpetrating this atrocity in his third triumph, and Aurelian on like occasion spared Zenobia, but these are quoted as exceptions to the general rule. When it was announced that these murders had been completed, the victims were then sacrificed, an offering from the spoils was presented to Jupiter, the laurel wreath was deposited in the lap of the god, the imperator was entertained at a public feast along with his friends in the temple, and returned home in the evening preceded by torches and pipes, and escorted by a crowd of citizens. The whole of the proceedings, generally speaking, were brought to a close in one day; but when the quantity of plunder was very great, and the troops very numerous, a longer period was required for the exhibition, and thus the triumph of Flaminius continued for three days in succession. But the glories of the imperator did not end with the show, nor even with his life. It was customary (we know not if the practice was invariable) to provide him at the public expense with a site for a house, such mansions being styled _triumphales domus_. After death his kindred were permitted to deposit his ashes within the walls, and laurel-wreathed statues standing erect in triumphal cars, displayed in the vestibulum of the family mansion, transmitted his fame to posterity.--A TRIUMPHUS NAVALIS appears to have differed in no respect from an ordinary triumph, except that it must have been upon a smaller scale, and would be characterised by the exhibition of beaks of ships and other nautical trophies. The earliest upon record was granted to C. Duillius, who laid the foundation of the supremacy of Rome by sea in the first Punic war; and so elated was he by his success, that during the rest of his life, whenever he returned home at night from supper, he caused flutes to sound and torches to be borne before him. A second naval triumph was celebrated by Lutatius Catulus for his victory off the Insulae Aegates, B.C. 241; a third by Q. Fabius Labeo, B.C. 189, over the Cretans; and a fourth by C. Octavius over King Perseus, without captives and without spoils.--TRIUMPHUS CASTRENSIS was a procession of the soldiers through the camp in honour of a tribunus or some officer inferior to the general, who had performed a brilliant exploit. After the extinction of freedom, the emperor being considered as the commander-in-chief of all the armies of the state, every military achievement was understood to be performed under his auspices, and hence, according to the forms of even the ancient constitution, he alone had a legitimate claim to a triumph. This principle was soon fully recognised and acted upon; for although Antonius had granted triumphs to his legati, and his example had been freely followed by Augustus in the early part of his career, yet after the year B.C. 14, he entirely discontinued the practice, and from that time forward triumphs were rarely, if ever, conceded to any except members of the imperial family. But to compensate in some degree for what was then taken away, the custom was introduced of bestowing what were termed _Triumphalia Ornamenta_, that is, permission to receive the titles bestowed upon and to appear in public with the robes worn by the imperatores of the commonwealth when they triumphed, and to bequeath to descendants triumphal statues. These _triumphalia ornamenta_ are said to have been first bestowed upon Agrippa or upon Tiberius, and ever after were a common mark of the favour of the prince.

TRĬUMVĬRI, or TRESVĬRI, were either ordinary magistrates or officers, or else extraordinary commissioners, who were frequently appointed at Rome to execute any public office. The following is a list of the most important of both classes.

1. TRIUMVIRI AGRO DIVIDUNDO. [TRIUMVIRI COLONIAE DEDUCENDAE.]

2. TRIUMVIRI CAPITALES were regular magistrates, first appointed about B.C. 292. They were elected by the people, the comitia being held by the praetor. They succeeded to many of the functions of the Quaestores Parricidii. [QUAESTOR.] It was their duty to inquire into all capital crimes, and to receive informations respecting such, and consequently they apprehended and committed to prison all criminals whom they detected. In conjunction with the aediles, they had to preserve the public peace, to prevent all unlawful assemblies, &c. They enforced the payment of fines due to the state. They had the care of public prisons, and carried into effect the sentence of the law upon criminals. In these points they resembled the magistracy of the Eleven at Athens.

4. TRIUMVIRI COLONIAE DEDUCENDAE were persons appointed to superintend the formation of a colony. They are spoken of under COLONIA, p. 99, _b_. Since they had besides to superintend the distribution of the land to the colonists, we find them also called _Triumviri Coloniae Deducendae Agroque Dividundo_, and sometimes simply _Triumviri Agro Dando_.

5. TRIUMVIRI EPULONES. [EPULONES.]

6. TRIUMVIRI EQUITUM TURMAS RECOGNOSCENDI, or LEGENDIS EQUITUM DECURIIS, were magistrates first appointed by Augustus to revise the lists of the equites, and to admit persons into the order. This was formerly part of the duties of the censors.

7. TRIUMVIRI MENSARII. [MENSARII.]

8. TRIUMVIRI MONETALES. [MONETA.]

9. TRIUMVIRI NOCTURNI were magistrates elected annually, whose chief duty it was to prevent fires by night, and for this purpose they had to go round the city during the night (_vigilias circumire_). If they neglected their duty they appear to have been accused before the people by the tribunes of the plebs. The time at which this office was instituted is unknown, but it must have been previously to the year B.C. 304. Augustus transferred their duties to the Praefectus Vigilum. [PRAEFECTUS VIGILUM.]

10. TRIUMVIRI REFICIENDIS AEDIBUS, extraordinary officers elected in the Comitia Tributa in the time of the second Punic war, were appointed for the purpose of repairing and rebuilding certain temples.

11. TRIUMVIRI REIPUBLICAE CONSTITUENDAE. When the supreme power was shared between Caesar (Octavianus), Antony, and Lepidus, they administered the affairs of the state under the title of _Triumviri Reipublicae Constituendae_. This office was conferred upon them in B.C. 43, for five years; and on the expiration of the term, in B.C. 38, was conferred upon them again, in B.C. 37, for five years more. The coalition between Julius Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus, in B.C. 60, is usually called the first triumvirate, and that between Octavianus, Antony, and Lepidus, the second; but it must be borne in mind that the former never bore the title of triumviri, nor were invested with any office under that name, whereas the latter were recognised as regular magistrates under the above-mentioned title.

12. TRIUMVIRI SACRIS CONQUIRENDIS DONISQUE PERSIGNANDIS, extraordinary officers elected in the Comitia Tributa in the time of the second Punic war, seem to have had to take care that all property given or consecrated to the gods was applied to that purpose.

13. TRIUMVIRI SENATUS LEGENDI were magistrates appointed by Augustus to admit persons into the senate. This was previously the duty of the censors.

TRŎCHUS (τροχός), a hoop. The Greek hoop was a bronze ring, and had sometimes bells attached to it. It was impelled by means of a hook with a wooden handle, called _clavis_, and ἐλατήρ. From the Greeks this custom passed to the Romans, who consequently adopted the Greek term. The following woodcuts from gems exhibit naked youths trundling the hoop by means of the hook or key. They are accompanied by the jar of oil and the laurel branch, the signs of effort and of victory.

TROJAE LŪDUS. [CIRCUS.]

TRŎPAEUM (τρόπαιον, _Att._ τροπαῖον), a trophy, a sign and memorial of victory, which was erected on the field of battle where the enemy had turned (τρέπω, τρόπη) to flight; and in case of a victory gained at sea, on the nearest land. The expression for raising or erecting a trophy is τροπαῖον στῆσαι or στήσασθαι, to which may be added ἀπὸ or κατὰ τῶν πολεμίων. When the battle was not decisive, or each party considered it had some claims to the victory, both erected trophies. Trophies usually consisted of the arms, shields, helmets, &c. of the enemy that were defeated; and these were placed on the trunk of a tree, which was fixed on some elevation. The trophy was consecrated to some divinity, with an inscription (ἐπίγραμμα), recording the names of the victors and of the defeated party; whence trophies were regarded as inviolable, which even the enemy were not permitted to remove. Sometimes, however, a people destroyed a trophy, if they considered that the enemy had erected it without sufficient cause. That rankling and hostile feelings might not be perpetuated by the continuance of a trophy, it seems to have been originally part of Greek international law that trophies should be made only of wood, and not of stone or metal, and that they should not be repaired when decayed. It was not, however, uncommon to erect trophies of metal. Pausanias speaks of several which he saw in Greece. The trophies erected to commemorate naval victories were usually ornamented with the beaks or acroteria of ships [ACROTERIUM; ROSTRA]; and were generally consecrated to Poseidon or Neptune. Sometimes a whole ship was placed as a trophy. The Romans, in early times, never erected any trophies on the field of battle, but carried home the spoils taken in battle, with which they decorated the public buildings, and also the private houses of individuals. [SPOLIA.] Subsequently, however, the Romans adopted the Greek practice of raising trophies on the field of battle. The first trophies of this kind were erected by Domitius Ahenobarbus and Fabius Maximus in B.C. 121, after their conquest of the Allobroges, when they built at the junction of the Rhone and the Isara towers of white stone, upon which trophies were placed adorned with the spoils of the enemy. Pompey also raised trophies on the Pyrenees after his victories in Spain; Julius Caesar did the same near Ziela, after his victory over Pharnaces; and Drusus, near the Elbe, to commemorate his victory over the Germans. Still, however, it was more common to erect some memorial of the victory at Rome than on the field of battle. The trophies raised by Marius to commemorate his victories over Jugurtha and the Cimbri and Teutoni, which were cast down by Sulla, and restored by Julius Caesar, must have been in the city. In the later times of the republic, and under the empire, the erection of triumphal arches was the most common way of commemorating a victory, many of which remain to the present day. [ARCUS.]

TROSSŬLI. [EQUITES, p. 157, _a_.]

TRŬA, _dim._ TRULLA (τορύνη), derived from τρύω, τόρω, &c., to perforate; a large and flat spoon or ladle, pierced with holes; a trowel. The annexed woodcut represents such a ladle. The _trulla vinaria_ seems to have been a species of colander [COLUM], used as a wine-strainer.

TRŬTĬNA (τρυτάνη), a general term, including both _libra_, a balance, and _statera_, a steelyard. Payments were originally made by weighing, not by counting. Hence a balance (_trutina_) was preserved in the temple of Saturn at Rome.

TŬBA (σάλπιγξ), a bronze trumpet, distinguished from the _cornu_ by being straight while the latter was curved. [CORNU.] The tuba was employed in war for signals of every description, at the games and public festivals, and also at the last rites to the dead: those who sounded the trumpet at funerals were termed _siticines_, and used an instrument of a peculiar form. The tones of the tuba are represented as of a harsh and fear-inspiring character. The invention of the tuba is usually ascribed by ancient writers to the Etruscans. It has been remarked that Homer never introduces the σάλπιγξ in his narrative except in comparisons, which leads us to infer that, although known in his time, it had been but recently introduced into Greece; and it is certain that, notwithstanding its eminently martial character, it was not until a late period used in the armies of the leading states. By the Greek tragedians its Tuscan origin is fully recognised. According to one account it was first fabricated for the Tyrrhenians by Athena, who in consequence was worshipped by the Argives under the title of Σάλπιγξ, while at Rome the _tubilustrium_, or purification of sacred trumpets, was performed on the last day of the Quinquatrus. [QUINQUATRUS.] There appears to have been no essential difference in form between the Greek and Roman or Tyrrhenian trumpets. Both were long, straight, bronze tubes, gradually increasing in diameter, and terminating in a bell-shaped aperture.

TŬBĬLUSTRIUM. [QUINQUATRUS.]

TULLIĀNUM. [CARCER.]

TŬMULTUĀRĬI. [TUMULTUS.]

TŬMULTUS, the name given to a sudden or dangerous war in Italy or Cisalpine Gaul, and the word was supposed by the ancients to be a contraction of _timor multus_. It was, however, sometimes applied to a sudden or dangerous war elsewhere; but this does not appear to have been a correct use of the word. Cicero says that there might be a war without a tumultus, but not a tumultus without a war; but it must be recollected that the word was also applied to any sudden alarm respecting a war; whence we find a tumultus often spoken of as of less importance than a war, because the results were of less consequence, though the fear might have been much greater than in a regular war. In the case of a tumultus there was a cessation from all business (_justitium_), and all citizens were obliged to enlist without regard being had to the exemptions (_vacationes_) from military service, which were enjoyed at other times. As there was not time to enlist the soldiers in the regular manner, the magistrate who was appointed to command the army displayed two banners (_vexilla_) from the Capitol, one red, to summon the infantry, and the other green, to summon the cavalry, and said, _Qui rempublicam salvam vult, me sequatur_. Those that assembled took the military oath together, instead of one by one, as was the usual practice, whence they were called _conjurati_, and their service _conjuratio_. Soldiers enlisted in this way were termed _Tumultuarii_ or _Subitarii_.

TŬNĬCA (χιτών, _dim._ χιτωνίσκος, χιτώνιον), an under-garment. (1) GREEK. The chiton was the only kind of ἔνδυμα, or under-garment worn by the Greeks. Of this there were two kinds, the Dorian and Ionian. The Dorian chiton, as worn by males, was a short woollen shirt, without sleeves; the Ionian was a long linen garment, with sleeves. The former seems to have been originally worn throughout the whole of Greece; the latter was brought over to Greece by the Ionians of Asia. The Ionic chiton was commonly worn at Athens by men during the Persian wars, but it appears to have entirely gone out of fashion for the male sex about the time of Pericles, from which time the Dorian chiton was the under-garment universally adopted by men through the whole of Greece. The distinction between the Doric and Ionic chiton still continued in the dress of women. The Spartan virgins only wore this one garment, and had no upper kind of clothing, whence it is sometimes called _Himation_ [PALLIUM] as well as _Chiton_. They appeared in the company of men without any further covering; but the married women never did so without wearing an upper garment. This Doric chiton was made, as stated above, of woollen stuff; it was without sleeves, and was fastened over both shoulders by clasps or buckles (πόρπαι, περόναι), which were often of considerable size. It was frequently so short as not to reach the knee. It was only joined together on one side, and on the other was left partly open or slit up (σχιστός χίτων), to allow a free motion of the limbs. The following cut represents an Amazon with a chiton of this kind: some parts of the figure appear incomplete, as the original is mutilated. The Ionic chiton, on the contrary, was a long and loose garment, reaching to the feet (ποδήρης), with wide sleeves (κόραι), and was usually made of linen. The sleeves, however, appear generally to have covered only the upper part of the arm; for in ancient works of art we seldom find the sleeve extending farther than the elbow, and sometimes not so far. The sleeves were sometimes slit up, and fastened together with an elegant row of brooches. The Ionic chiton, according to Herodotus, was originally a Carian dress, and passed over to Athens from Ionia, as has been already remarked. The women at Athens originally wore the Doric chiton, but were compelled to change it for the Ionic, after they had killed with the buckles or clasps of their dresses the single Athenian who had returned alive from the expedition against Aegina, because there were no buckles or clasps required in the Ionic dress. The preceding cut represents the Muse Thalia wearing an Ionic chiton. The peplum has fallen off her shoulders, and is held up by the left hand. Both kinds of dress were fastened round the middle with a girdle, and as the Ionic chiton was usually longer than the body, part of it was drawn up so that the dress might not reach farther than the feet, and the part which was so drawn up overhung or overlapped the girdle, and was called κόλπος.--There was a peculiar kind of dress, which seems to have been a species of double chiton, called _Diplois_ (διπλοΐς), _Diploidion_ (διπλοΐδιον), and _Hemidiploidion_ (ἡμιδιπλοΐδιον).

It appears not to have been a separate article of dress, but merely the upper part of the cloth forming the chiton, which was larger than was required for the ordinary chiton, and was therefore thrown over the front and back. The following cuts will give a clearer idea of the form of this garment than any description. Since the Diploidion was fastened over the shoulders by means of buckles or clasps, it was called _Epomis_ (ἐπωμίς), which is supposed by some writers to have been only the end of the garment fastened on the shoulder. The chiton was worn by men next their skin; but females were accustomed to wear a chemise (χιτώνιον) under their chiton. It was the practice among most of the Greeks to wear an himation, or outer garment, over the chiton, but frequently the chiton was worn alone. A person who wore only a chiton was called μονοχίτων (οἰοχίτων in Homer), an epithet given to the Spartan virgins. In the some way, a person who wore only an himation, or outer garment, was called ἀχίτων. The Athenian youths, in the earlier times, wore only the chiton, and when it became the fashion, in the Peloponnesian war, to wear an outer garment over it, it was regarded as a mark of effeminacy.--(2) ROMAN. The _Tunica_ of the Romans, like the Greek chiton, was a woollen under-garment, over which the toga was worn. It was the _Indumentum_ or _Indutus_, as opposed to the _Amictus_, the general term for the toga, pallium, or any other outer garment. [AMICTUS.] The Romans are said to have had no other clothing originally but the toga; and when the tunic was first introduced, it was merely a short garment without sleeves, and was called _Colobium_. It was considered a mark of effeminacy for men to wear tunics with long sleeves (_manicatae_) and reaching to the feet (_talares_). The tunic was girded (_cincta_) with a belt or girdle around the waist, but it was usually worn loose, without being girded, when a person was at home, or wished to be at his ease. Hence we find the terms _cinctus_, _praecinctus_, and _succinctus_, applied, like the Greek εὔζωνος, to an active and diligent person, and _discinctus_ to one who was idle or dissolute. The form of the tunic, as worn by men, is represented in many woodcuts in this work. In works of art it usually terminates a little above the knee; it has short sleeves, covering only the upper part of the arm, and is girded at the waist: the sleeves sometimes, though less frequently, extend to the hands.--Both sexes at Rome usually wore two tunics, an outer and an under, the latter of which was worn next the skin, and corresponds to our shirt and chemise. The under tunics were called _Subucula_ and _Indusium_, the former of which is supposed to be the name of the under tunic of the men, and the latter of that of the women: but this is not certain. The word _Interula_ was of later origin, and seems to have been applied equally to the under tunic of both sexes. It is doubtful whether the _Supparus_ or _Supparum_ was an outer or an under garment. Persons sometimes wore several tunics, as a protection against cold: Augustus wore four in the winter, besides a subucula. As the dress of a man usually consisted of an under tunic, an outer tunic, and the toga, so that of a woman, in like manner, consisted of an under tunic, an outer tunic, and the palla. The outer tunic of the Roman matron was properly called stola [STOLA], and is represented in the woodcut on p. 355; but the annexed woodcut, which represents a Roman empress in the character of Concordia, or Abundantia, gives a better idea of its form. Over the tunic or stola the palla is thrown in many folds, but the shape of the former is still distinctly shown. The tunics of women were larger and longer than those of men, and always had sleeves; but in ancient paintings and statues we seldom find the sleeves covering more than the upper part of the arm. Sometimes the tunics were adorned with golden ornaments called _Leria_. Poor people, who could not afford to purchase a toga, wore the tunic alone, whence we find the common people called _Tunicati_. A person who wore only his tunic was frequently called NUDUS. Respecting the clavus latus and the clavus angustus, worn on the tunics of the senators and equites respectively, see CLAVUS LATUS, CLAVUS ANGUSTUS. When a triumph was celebrated, the conqueror wore, together with an embroidered toga (_Toga picta_), a flowered tunic (_Tunica palmata_), also called _Tunica Jovis_, because it was taken from the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus. Tunics of this kind were sent as presents to foreign kings by the senate.

TŪRĬBŬLUM (θυμιατήριον), a censer. The Greeks and Romans, when they sacrificed, commonly took a little frankincense out of the ACERRA and let it fall upon the flaming altar. [ARA.] More rarely they used a censer, by means of which they burnt the incense in greater profusion, and which was in fact a small moveable grate or FOCULUS. The annexed cut shows the performance of both of these acts at the same time. Winckelmann supposes it to represent Livia, the wife, and Octavia, the sister of Augustus, sacrificing to Mars in gratitude for his safe return from Spain. The censer here represented has two handles for the purpose of carrying it from place to place, and it stands upon feet so that the air might be admitted underneath, and pass upwards through the fuel.

TURMA. [EXERCITUS, p. 166, b.]

TURRIS (πύργος), a tower. Moveable towers were among the most important engines used in storming a fortified place. They were generally made of beams and planks, and covered, at least on the three sides which were exposed to the besieged, with iron, not only for protection, but also to increase their weight, and thus make them steadier. They were also covered with raw hides and quilts, moistened, and sometimes with alum, to protect them from fire. Their height was such as to overtop the walls, towers, and all other fortifications of the besieged place. They were divided into stories (_tabulata_ or _tecta_), and hence they are called _turres contabulatae_. The sides of the towers were pierced with windows, of which there were several to each story. The use of the stories was to receive the engines of war (_tormenta_). They contained balistae and catapults, and slingers and archers were stationed in them, and on the tops of the towers. In the lowest story was a battering-ram [ARIES]; and in the middle one or more bridges (_pontes_) made of beams and planks, and protected at the sides by hurdles. Scaling-ladders (_scalae_) were also carried in the towers, and when the missiles had cleared the walls, these bridges and ladders enabled the besiegers to rush upon them. These towers were placed upon wheels (generally 6 or 8), that they might be brought up to the walls. These wheels were placed for security inside of the tower.

TŪTOR. [CURATOR.]

TYMPĂNUM (τύμπανον), a small drum carried in the hand. Of these, some resembled in all respects a modern tambourine with bells. Others presented a flat circular disk on the upper surface and swelled out beneath like a kettle-drum. Both forms are represented in the cuts below. Tympana were covered with the hides of oxen, or of asses; were beaten with a stick, or with the hand, and were much employed in all wild enthusiastic religious rites, especially the orgies of Bacchus and Cybele.--(2) A solid wheel without spokes, for heavy waggons, such as is shown in the cut on p. 298.

TỸRANNUS (τύραννος). In the heroic age all the governments in Greece were monarchical, the king uniting in himself the functions of the priest, the judge, and military chief. In the first two or three centuries following the Trojan war various causes were at work, which led to the abolition, or at least to the limitation, of the kingly power. Emigrations, extinctions of families, disasters in war, civil dissensions, may be reckoned among these causes. Hereditary monarchies became elective; the different functions of the king were distributed; he was called _Archon_ (ἄρχων), _Cosmus_ (κόσμος), or _Prytanis_ (πρύτανις), instead of _Basileus_ (βασιλεύς), and his character was changed no less than his name. Noble and wealthy families began to be considered on a footing of equality with royalty; and thus in process of time sprang up oligarchies or aristocracies, which most of the governments that succeeded the ancient monarchies were in point of fact, though not as yet called by such names. These oligarchies did not possess the elements of social happiness or stability. The principal families contended with each other for the greatest share of power, and were only unanimous in disregarding the rights of those whose station was beneath their own. The people, oppressed by the privileged classes, began to regret the loss of their old paternal form of government; and were ready to assist any one who would attempt to restore it. Thus were opportunities offered to ambitious and designing men to raise themselves, by starting up as the champions of popular right. Discontented nobles were soon found to prosecute schemes of this sort, and they had a greater chance of success, if descended from the ancient royal family. Pisistratus is an example; he was the more acceptable to the people of Athens, as being a descendant of the family of Codrus. Thus in many cities arose that species of monarchy which the Greeks called _tyrannis_ (τυραννίς), which meant only _a despotism_, or irresponsible dominion of one man; and which frequently was nothing more than a revival of the ancient government, and, though unaccompanied with any recognised hereditary title, or the reverence attached to old name and long prescription, was hailed by the lower orders of people as a good exchange, after suffering under the domination of the oligarchy. All _tyrannies_, however, were not so acceptable to the majority; and sometimes we find the nobles concurring in the elevation of a despot, to further their own interests. Thus the Syracusan _Gamori_, who had been expelled by the populace, on receiving the protection of Gelon, sovereign of Gela and Camarina, enabled him to take possession of Syracuse, and establish his kingdom there. Sometimes the conflicting parties in the state, by mutual consent, chose some eminent man, in whom they had confidence, to reconcile their dissensions; investing him with a sort of dictatorial power for that purpose, either for a limited period or otherwise. Such a person they called _Aesymnetes_ (αἰσυμνήτης). The _tyrannus_ must be distinguished, on the one hand, from the _aesymnetes_, inasmuch as he was not elected by general consent, but commonly owed his elevation to some violent movement or stratagem, such as the creation of a body-guard for him by the people, or the seizure of the citadel; and on the other hand, from the ancient king, whose right depended, not on usurpation, but on inheritance and traditionary acknowledgment. The power of a king might be more absolute than that of a _tyrant_; as Phidon of Argos is said to have made the royal prerogative greater than it was under his predecessors; yet he was still regarded as a king; for the difference between the two names depended on title and origin, and not on the manner in which the power was exercised. The name of _tyrant_ was originally so far from denoting a person who abused his power, or treated his subjects with cruelty, that Pisistratus is praised for the moderation of his government. Afterwards, when _tyrants_ themselves had become odious, the name also grew to be a word of reproach, just as _rex_ did among the Romans. Among the early _tyrants_ of Greece those most worthy of mention are: Clisthenes of Sicyon, grandfather of the Athenian Clisthenes, in whose family the government continued for a century since its establishment by Orthagoras, about B.C. 672; Cypselus of Corinth, who expelled the Bacchiadae, B.C. 656, and his son Periander, both remarkable for their cruelty; their dynasty lasted between seventy and eighty years; Procles of Epidaurus; Pantaleon of Pisa, who celebrated the thirty-fourth Olympiad, depriving the Eleans of the presidency; Theagenes of Megara, father-in-law to Cylon the Athenian; Pisistratus, whose sons were the last of the early _tyrants_ on the Grecian continent. In Sicily, where _tyranny_ most flourished, the principal were Phalaris of Agrigentum, who established his power in B.C. 568; Theron of Agrigentum; Gelon, already mentioned, who, in conjunction with Theron, defeated Hamilcar the Carthaginian, on the same day on which the battle of Salamis was fought; and Hieron, his brother: the last three celebrated by Pindar. The following also are worthy of notice: Polycrates of Samos; Lygdamis of Naxos; Histiaeus and Aristagoras of Miletus. Perhaps the last mentioned can hardly be classed among the _Greek tyrants_, as they were connected with the Persian monarchy. The general characteristics of a _tyranny_ were, that it was bound by no laws, and had no recognised limitation to its authority, however it might be restrained _in practice_ by the good disposition of the _tyrant_ himself, or by fear, or by the spirit of the age. It was commonly most odious to the wealthy and noble, whom the _tyrant_ looked upon with jealousy as a check upon his power, and whom he often sought to get rid of by sending them into exile or putting them to death. The _tyrant_ usually kept a body-guard of foreign mercenaries, by aid of whom he controlled the people at home; but he seldom ventured to make war, for fear of giving an opportunity to his subjects to revolt. The causes which led to the decline of _tyranny_ among the Greeks were partly the degeneracy of the _tyrants_ themselves, corrupted by power, indolence, flattery, and bad education; for even where the father set a good example, it was seldom followed by the son; partly the cruelties and excesses of particular men, which brought them all into disrepute; and partly the growing spirit of inquiry among the Greek people, who began to speculate upon political theories, and soon became discontented with a form of government, which had nothing in theory, and little in practice, to recommend it. Few dynasties lasted beyond the third generation. Most of the tyrannies, which flourished before the Persian war, are said to have been overthrown by the exertions of Sparta, jealous, probably, of any innovation upon the old Doric constitution, especially of any tendency to ameliorate the condition of the Periocci, and anxious to extend her own influence over the states of Greece by means of the benefits which she conferred. Upon the fall of _tyranny_, the various republican forms of government were established, the Dorian states generally favouring oligarchy, the Ionian democracy. Of the tyrants of a later period, the most celebrated are the two Dionysii. The corruption of the Syracusans, their intestine discords, and the fear of the Carthaginian invaders, led to the appointment of Dionysius to the chief military command, with unlimited powers; by means of which he raised himself to the throne, B.C. 406, and reigned for 38 years, leaving his son to succeed him. The younger Dionysius, far inferior in every respect to his father, was expelled by Dion, afterwards regained the throne, and was again expelled by Timoleon, who restored liberty to the various states of Sicily.

UDO, a sock of goat’s-hair or felt, worn by countrymen with the low boots called _perones_. [PERO.]

ULNA. [PES.]

UMBĬLĪCUS. [LIBER.]

UMBO. [CLIPEUS.]

UMBRĀCŬLUM, UMBELLA (σκιάδειον, σκιάδιον, σκιαδίσκη), a parasol, was used by Greek and Roman ladies as a protection against the sun. They seem not to have been carried generally by the ladies themselves, but by female slaves, who held them over their mistresses. The daughters of the aliens (μέτοικοι) at Athens had to carry parasols after the Athenian maidens at the Panathenaea, as is mentioned under HYDRIAPHORIA. The parasols of the ancients seem to have been exactly like our own parasols or umbrellas in form, and could be shut up and opened like ours. It was considered a mark of effeminacy for men to make use of parasols. The Roman ladies used them in the amphitheatre to defend themselves from the sun or some passing shower, when the wind or other circumstances did not allow the velarium to be extended. [AMPHITHEATRUM.] To hold a parasol over a lady was one of the common attentions of lovers, and it seems to have been very common to give parasols as presents. Instead of parasols, the Greek women in later times wore a kind of straw hat or bonnet, called _tholia_ (θολία). The Romans also wore a hat with a broad brim (_petasus_) as a protection against the sun.