Skip to content

Chapter XI: Part 11

Text size

Sicily, like most other countries which are surrounded by the sea on two sides, presents the physical character of two different countries. In Andalusia and Algarvia, the character of the animal and vegetable world up to the mountains is African; and, in like manner, the southern part of Sicily is completely African, and the palm-tree grows there as beautifully as in Tunis and Tripoli; but the country north of cape Heraeum is quite different.

If we except the south-western coast and the district about Leontini, Sicily is altogether a mountainous country. Mount Aetna is the real central knot of the island, and the highest mountains proceed from it in a north-eastern direction as far as cape Pelorus just opposite to Italy. The Heraean range likewise proceeds from Aetna in a western direction, while another chain extends southwards. This last range is considerably lower than the others, but still high enough to form the watershed between the eastern and western coast. In the part between Palermo and Messina, the mountains approach very close to the coast, so that often two places situated on the coast are not connected by a road, just as is the case in many parts of Liguria. Hence, during the wars of the Romans, we never find that the northern coast formed their scene of operation, which it is in all the wars on the south coast, for in this latter part there are roads, and armies can move. But on the northern coast there never was any communication either in the Punic wars or in those of the middle ages and modern times. It is of importance to know this in order to understand the history of the first Punic war.

AETNA is the highest mountain both of Italy and Sicily; it had only very few eruptions in antiquity, but they were sometimes of a violence which has never been equalled in modern times. According to Thucydides, the third eruption, after the settlement of the Greeks in Sicily, occurred in his own days, in the time of the Peloponnesian war. We need not, however, scrupulously insist on this number, for it is possible that all the eruptions were not recorded, and that there had been some at a time when no annals were yet kept. The eruptions of which we know, belong to Olympiads 70, 82,[60] and Olymp. 88, 3, or the sixth year of the Peloponnesian war. The greatest subsequent eruption in ancient times occurred after the death of Caesar. A still more terrible one is recorded by the earliest Byzantine writers of the age of the Greek emperor Anastasius or Zeno. During the eruption in the age of Caesar, the ashes are said to have been thrown as far as Peloponnesus and Africa, which is probably no exaggeration; but it seems scarcely possible that, in the reign of Anastasius, the ashes should have been carried as far as Constantinople, though it certainly is very difficult positively to assert anything about these powers of nature.

ERYX (monte S. Giuliano), situated in an isolated position on the western promontory, is a mountain of great historical interest. It is high, but a tame mountain, and is celebrated for its temple of Venus Erycina; but it has been immortalised in history by the defence of Hamilcar Barcas, who was blockaded there by the Romans for years, and maintained himself in spite of all difficulties: that defence is one of the greatest events in military history.

Whether Sicily derived the name _Trinacria_ from its three promontories, which seems to us very probable, or whether this is only apparent, and the name arose from a Siculian town of a similar name (Trinacia or Thrinacia), independently of the form of the island, is one of those questions, concerning which it is best to confess that they cannot be satisfactorily answered.

SYRACUSAE, at first probably SYRACUSA, was the greatest Greek city in Sicily. The plural form of the name probably did not come into use until the time when several towns were united in one great city; afterwards, during the decline of the language, it was again called Syracusa. There exists an abridgment of six books (from 21 to 26) of Diodorus Siculus, which was no doubt made in Sicily itself, but at a late period, for it already contains several modern Greek expressions, and among others, also the form Syracusa. Those of the Byzantine writers who did not want to write learnedly, likewise have the singular. It is well known that Syracuse was a Corinthian colony led out by the Bacchiad Archias; the first settlement was formed in the island of Ortygia (to which the modern Siragossa also is confined), for the sake of safety against the attacks of the inhabitants of the interior. It commenced its career as a commercial place; and this first colony was small like all the other Greek settlements, as, for example, Cyrene. The island in the Doric dialect was called νᾶσος, and the Romans also retained this name (_Nasos_), as we know from Cicero’s Verrine orations. A suburb of the name of _Achradina_ (from ἀχράς, the wild pear-tree) arose on the main land opposite the island. This suburb, which increased considerably, is the Syracuse of the middle period, that is, under the first Gelo and the first Hiero, until the time of the Peloponnesian war. Nasos then became the Acra, but Achradina alone was fortified. By the side of this latter, again two large suburbs arose, _Neapolis_ and _Tycha_; they seem to have commenced at two different gates, and perhaps ran parallel to each other, but were separated by a considerable intervening space. They, too, became important towns, so that Syracuse was a tetrapolis. The last two of these places which had not been fortified at all, or only feebly, were surrounded by Dionysius with a wall which he constructed at a distance of about three miles from the island. Above Syracuse there runs a range of hills, and you may easily understand its situation, by comparing it with the neighbourhood of Bonn, the plain extending between the Vorgebirge and the Rhine: the city must be conceived to be situated in the plain upon the Rhine, whence it gradually extends towards the Vorgebirge. These hills, which, just like our Vorgebirge, bound the plain stretching to the sea, were called _Epipolae_. They were from early times surmounted by forts, the object of which was to protect the district in the petty wars with the Siculians; during the Athenian war also they were very dangerous on account of the great enlargement of the city. Dionysius then fortified the city by building two mighty walls up the heights, so as to enclose those forts which now became citadels. The whole of the intermediate space between the walls, however, must not be imagined to have been covered with buildings, for between Neapolis and Tycha there were extensive tracts which can never have been built upon; the quarries also could not be built over, as is clear from the whole surface of the ground. But the circumference of the city was enormous.

The misfortunes of Syracuse are very painful: it was visited by such a succession of devastations that we can hardly understand how it could maintain itself: it must have possessed an unusual degree of vital power. I believe that its happiest period was the reign of the last Hiero, though the population may at that time already have been much smaller than it had been in the earlier prosperous periods. In the Hannibalian war, when the city was taken by the Romans, Neapolis and Tycha were completely destroyed, and the alleged mildness of Marcellus was of no avail, for the work of destruction was completed with barbarous fury. At the capture of Achradina, Marcellus ordered to spare the lives of the inhabitants, and not to carry away a free-born Syracusan into slavery. This is always praised as an act of great humanity; but a new fragment in the excerpts from Diodorus shows that this apparently humane order did not prevent the complete pillage of the city: the Syracusans were robbed of everything, and freedom alone was granted to them. But this gift rendered their condition worse even than that of slaves, who received at least some food from their masters, while the free men died of hunger, no person supplying them with anything. Thus it happened that many a free man gave himself out to be a slave in order to find a purchaser and food. This is probably the most fearful occurrence in all ancient history. After that time there existed in Neapolis and Tycha only a few isolated buildings and temples, and the population disappeared; even in Achradina only very few inhabitants appear to have remained, for in Cicero’s time the real population was again confined to the island of Nasos; the same appears to have been the condition of the city under the emperors, and at present it is still the same. Under Augustus a Roman colony was established there; still, however, the whole island of Sicily was so essentially Greek, that under the emperors it was always regarded as a part of Greece. Even at the time of the Norman conquest, in the eleventh century of our era, Greek and Arabic were the only languages spoken there.

Although the Syracusans are not among those Greeks who excite our sympathy for them in the highest degree, yet their history is one of the most melancholy in ancient times. The whole of Greek history is very saddening in its course, but none more so than that of Syracuse, and if we seriously contemplate it, it is heartrending. The Syracusans throughout show a lawlessness which rendered them incapable of governing themselves; their only salvation was a mild usurper, as, for example, the last Hiero; he was a mild and kindly man, although even he did things which make us shudder; but this was natural in the case of Greek usurpers. The history of Syracuse begins with an aristocratic form of government, the first settlers ruling over a considerable territory, and the ancient inhabitants having become serfs (κιλλικύριοι). Servitude afterwards disappears, and a demos is formed, which is increased by new settlers from all parts of Greece, and has to struggle with the lords of the soil (γάμοροι). Gelo, one of these lords, put himself at the head of the demos, and for the sake of appearances established a democracy, but set himself up as tyrant. Under Hiero, Syracuse was extremely prosperous; with him the tyrannis ceased and democracy was restored, but was found wanting as soon as it was put to the test, and a struggle gradually arose between the wealthy few and the multitude. During this struggle there arose Dionysius I., an ambitious man, not a benefactor of the people, though he was useful in several respects, for the people could not do without a ruler. He was succeeded by his unworthy son, quite a detestable person; it was now impossible to live without a usurper, but it was equally impossible to endure him. The distressing condition became worse in consequence of the unsuccessful undertaking of Dion, respecting whom Plato was so singularly mistaken, and whom he regarded in the light of his own ideal of what a man should be. Timoleon, a really great man, expelled Dionysius by force, and restored happiness and prosperity to the city for a period of twenty years. He ruled solely by his personal authority, and the people, for once, were grateful to him. After his death, fresh divisions arose, and Agathocles, a bold but oriental miscreant of unprincipled impudence, usurped the supreme power. Under his dominion of Syracuse became great and brilliant, but not prosperous: it was fearfully ill used; it became a den of robbers, and mercenaries of every description deluged the city with torrents of blood. Long protracted, and devastating internal wars then followed, after which came the more than fifty years’ reign of Hiero, during which Syracuse was confined to a small territory. It often ruled over the whole island; but the state of things was ever changing.

The population of Syracuse is estimated at 1,200,000 souls; and this number is adopted in a great many books, but it is quite inconceivable. The population of all Sicily at present amounts to from 1,600,000 to 1,700,000, and seventy or eighty years ago it was only 1,200,000. How then is it possible, that Syracuse alone should have had such a population of free men? Diodorus indeed speaks of thirty myriads, but they must be understood as the numbers in the Roman census, that is, as comprising not only the citizens of Syracuse, but including all the inhabitants of the towns which stood to Syracuse in the relation of isopolity. Hence we may assume that Syracuse itself, at the time of its highest prosperity, contained within its walls at the most 200,000 inhabitants, including both free men and slaves, and I should be surprised to find that it actually did amount to so much. You remember that Thebes, when it was destroyed by Alexander, contained only 30,000 persons of every age, rank, and sex. The statements about the population in antiquity are monstrously exaggerated; the numbers are not always fictitious, but are founded upon misunderstandings.

AGRIGENTUM (Ἀκράγας, according to the common derivation of such names, where ς is changed into _ntum_) was the second large city in Sicily. Plans of it are found in books of travel, and in Graevius’ Thesaurus; but nothing can be more erroneous than they are, for towns in the neighbourhood are represented as parts of Agrigentum, which they never were. It was a Rhodian colony, and was inferior in greatness to Syracuse alone. The population is said to have amounted to 200,000 souls; but the case is quite similar to that of Syracuse, as is clear from another statement, which mentions only 20,000. Both numbers may be correct, if we take the 20,000 as that of the real citizens, and the 200,000 as comprising all the isopolites of Agrigentum. But notwithstanding all this, the population of Sicily in ancient times was far larger than it is at present; its numbers in the towns of the island change with incredible rapidity. In the middle ages, Messina had 140,000 inhabitants; at the end of the seventeenth century, the ill-usage of the Spaniards reduced them to somewhat less than 100,000, and the plague brought them down to 90,000; afterwards, by the systematic oppression, the object of which was to crush Messina and to raise Palermo, they were reduced to 40,000; and before the earthquake their number amounted only to 25,000; at present it is said to be 70,000. Such is the vitality in those southern countries, and such are the changes in their population. In the north, too, fluctuations occur, but not to the same extent as in the south, where people have so few wants, and many can live in the open air without a cover for their heads until some favourable opportunity occurs. Immense ruins of Agrigentum still exist: it was situated on a hill and was visible from the sea at a great distance, whence Virgil says, _Arduus hic Acragas ostendit maxima longe moenia_. I have already directed your attention to the fact that _moenia_ signifies “large buildings in a city;” the walls of Agrigentum had nothing striking, and parts of them ran in the valley, so that Virgil cannot have alluded to them. The buildings of the city were not yet quite completed when they were destroyed in the Carthaginian war; they were much larger than those at Syracuse or any other of the Greek towns of Sicily. Before the war in Olymp. 93, Agrigentum was the wealthiest city in the island; but the stories of the riches of particular citizens, as, for example, of Gellias, which Diodorus relates after Timaeus, are quite fabulous, for Timaeus was credulous. In Olymp. 93, Agrigentum was taken and completely destroyed by the Carthaginians; the town was defended in the most unfortunate manner, or not defended at all: the Greek generals during that war were so wretched and senseless, that the Agrigentines had enough to do in trying to save themselves, leaving their city with all its treasures a prey to the enemy. It was afterwards restored indeed, but the new town was only a shadow of what it had been before. In consequence of the treaties by which Selinus was ceded to the Carthaginians, Agrigentum was re-united with the Greek part of Sicily, of which Syracuse, under Dionysius and Timoleon, was the capital. Afterwards the character of the wars between the Greeks and Carthaginians was no longer as destructive as it had been before, for Carthage was satisfied with subduing and ruling over the Greek towns. After the reign of Agathocles, Agrigentum again fell into the hands of the Carthaginians. In the first Punic war, it was taken by the Romans, and on that occasion one part of its inhabitants made their escape, while others perished or were sold as slaves. Towards the end of the Punic war, it was again implicated in an insurrection against the Romans, in consequence of which it became so desolate that the Romans, to prevent the complete extinction of the place, established there colonists from other Sicilian towns. Agrigentum is indeed mentioned in Cicero’s Verrine orations, but it is clear that it was quite an insignificant town; under the Roman emperors it remained in the same condition, and may have been of little more importance than the modern Girgenti. The gigantic ruins of the ancient city are situated on the plateau of the hill: the severest blow it ever received was that in Olymp. 93, and subsequent earthquakes also contributed to its destruction.

SELINUS, nearer the western promontory, was likewise a Dorian settlement. It was an extensive, wealthy, and important town at the time when the Carthaginians, after the unsuccessful attempt under Gelo, who confined them to their three factories, Motye, Panormus, and Soloeis, were expelled from all other parts of the island. But during the unfortunate Carthaginian war, by means of which Dionysius raised himself, it was the first town that was captured and destroyed. After that time, it is indeed still mentioned, and in fact never ceased to exist, but was never again incorporated with the Greek portion of Sicily. It remained subject to Carthage, as long as she had any possessions in the island, and then came into the hands of the Romans, but never acquired any importance.

GELA, likewise an ancient Dorian settlement, was abandoned by its Greek inhabitants during the Carthaginian war, and destroyed by the Carthaginians. Even before this, the place had several times changed its population: in the time of Gelo it was restored, but after the repeated destructions by its enemies, it recovered only partially. It received its death-blow shortly after the time of Agathocles, when Phintias, the tyrant of Agrigentum, transplanted its inhabitants to the town of Phintias, founded by himself.

CAMARINA experienced the same fate as Gela.

On the southern coast there existed, at different times, several Doric towns, as _Heraclea_ in the territory of Agrigentum, _Acrae_, and _Casmenae_, but they are of no importance.

NAXOS, the most ancient among the Chalcidian or Ionian settlements, was situated between mount Aetna and the Sicilian straits; it was in fact the earliest Greek colony in Sicily. It is doubtful whether Naxos was destroyed by Gelo or Hiero. During the great period of Sicilian history its name is not mentioned.

ZANCLE, afterwards MESSENE or MESSANA; the cause of this change of name is obscure. The story about Gorgus, the son of Aristomenes, and Manticlus, is untenable and chronologically impossible. Still, however, there must have been a mixture of Messenians which gave rise to the name. Samians, who had fled from their own country, treacherously took possession of the town in which they had been hospitably received. More than two hundred years later, their descendants were punished for the deed by the Campanian mercenaries of Agathocles, who butchered the inhabitants who had allowed them a passage through their town. After this time the place was always called Messana, while the inhabitants bore the name of Mamertines, which was the general designation for Oscan mercenaries. These Mamertines retained their Italian character, without becoming hellenised in any way; and even as late as the time of Verres we find them mentioned with their Oscan names, the praenomen and the nomen gentilicium. Their coins, however, have inscriptions in Greek characters, and I have no doubt that in the course of time the Mamertines also became hellenised. The Roman element in the western countries was powerful in regard to the Celts, Iberians and others; but it was unable to cope with the Greeks, against whom the Romans did not gain one inch; no Greek town ever became Latinised, unless all its inhabitants perished. Among non-Greek nations, such as the Pannonians, Dardanians, and the other tribes in those countries, the Latin language became predominant within an extremely short period. The name Mamertines remained in use until the time of the Roman emperors, but it then disappears, and the name Messana is again generally employed.

CATANA, likewise a considerable Chalcidian town, was situated near the river Simaethus, at the foot of mount Aetna. Hiero I. carried away the inhabitants, and founded a new town; but after his death everything was restored. After the time of the Athenian expedition, Catana was nearly always under the influence of Syracuse.

TAUROMENIUM, in the neighbourhood of Naxos between mount Aetna and Messana, was founded in the time of Timoleon. It was situated on mount Tauros, which was quite inaccessible. The derivation of its name ἀπὸ τῆς ἐπὶ τοῦ Ταύρου μονῆς is strange. With the exception of Phintias, it was the youngest of the Greek towns in Sicily. These late colonies are essentially different from the earlier ones: they had no oecistae and no institutions according to the ancient forms, but being the result of circumstances they did not observe the traditionary formalities. Tauromenium was very strong by its situation; and, in consequence of the nature of its locality, its ruins are more perfectly preserved than those of any other Greek city in Sicily. The splendid theatre was cut in a semicircle into the rock, and still exists in its ancient beauty. In the history of literature, Tauromenium is celebrated as the birth-place of the historian Timaeus, who, as we have learned only recently, spent the greater part of his long life of ninety years in exile at Athens, where in all probability he also died. The fifty years of his exile embrace the whole reign of Agathocles.

LEONTINI was situated at some distance from the coast. It is a mistake in translations and other books to call this town Leontium, a name which does not occur anywhere. Its original name must have been Λεοῦς, although this form is not found in the extant monuments either. As Messana was called Mamertini, from its Oscan inhabitants, so also in the case of Leontini, the name of the people was used as the name of the town. It was the chief place in the most fertile corn district of Sicily, and the _campi Leontini_ are often mentioned on this account. The town was destroyed by the Syracusans at least three times, but always recovered itself.

HIMERA, on the north coast, was a colony of Chalcidians mixed with Dorians, but in such a manner that the νόμιμα Χαλκιδικὰ prevailed. In Olymp. 93, it was destroyed by the Carthaginians. The town itself was never restored, but around some hot springs in the neighbourhood (θερμὰ Ἱμεραῖα) a small town of the name of _Therma_, or _Thermae_, arose, whose inhabitants were called _Thermitani_. This town is remarkable as the birth-place of Agathocles, who, though a monster, is yet an important person in history. Himera was one of the genuine ancient Greek colonies.

On the north coast between Himera and Messana, there were several Greek towns of uncertain origin, which were probably founded by neighbouring cities, and were afterwards inhabited by Greeks of all kinds. Places of this kind are _Cephaloedion_, _Mylae_, and _Calacte_; they are not of great importance, and I cannot here enter into any detail about them.

In the time of Thucydides there existed three Punic towns on the north-west coast of Sicily, viz., _Soloeis_, _Motye_, and _Panormus_. Motye was the principal place among them, and stood to Carthage in the same relation as Utica, Leptis, and others. About thirty years before the passage of Xerxes into Europe, at the time of the expulsion of Tarquin, the Carthaginians were already in possession of a province in Sicily; they then concluded a treaty with Rome, which has been preserved by Polybius. Ancient Greek history gives us no information about this, but rather makes it appear as if their attempt in the time of Gelo to establish themselves in Sicily had been the first; but the treaty with Rome is indubitable. The statement that the victory of Salamis, and that of Gelo over the Carthaginians at Himera, took place on the same day, a coincidence on which Herodotus lays great stress, is likewise untenable, for it is opposed to the account which we have in the Parian marbles from Timaeus. The origin of the fiction evidently lies in the desire to have a parallel. Gelo’s victory must be dated seven or nine years later than the time to which it is assigned by Diodorus. After that defeat, the Carthaginians always maintained themselves on the north-western coast, where no Greek town existed. When, in the course of time, the power of the Carthaginians had greatly increased, and when they displayed a love of conquest, the neighbouring town of Egesta threw itself into their arms. The Greeks in Sicily were, on the one hand, extremely careless, and on the other fool-hardy in giving provocation, and these circumstances gave rise to the unfortunate war with Carthage. In the second war with Dionysius, Motye, which until then, had been the chief place of the Carthaginians, was destroyed. They now built a new town, Olymp. 100, of the name of _Lilybaeum_: when it was taken by the Romans, it had existed about 150 years. It was the seat of the Carthaginian government, a regular Carthaginian eparchy being established in those parts, which is always called ἡ Φοινικικὴ ἐπαρχία. Bochart’s etymologies, from the Semitic languages, are often quite without foundation, but he explains the name Lilybaeum quite correctly as ללבי, that is, opposite to Libya. _Soloeis_ was an unimportant place.

PANORMUS became a great town under the dominion of the Carthaginians. It is strange that both Soloeis and Panormus are Greek names; the money coined in the latter place at the time of the Carthaginian dominion in Sicily, is likewise Greek, from which we must infer that Panormus was not a Punic colony like Lilybaeum. The natural advantages of its situation are very great: it has an excellent harbour, as even its name intimates, and its site is in a beautiful fertile plain on the coast, above which mount Hercte rises at the entrance of the harbour. This mountain was a very important post during the first Punic war.

LILYBAEUM remained an important place even under the Romans, though its name is afterwards but rarely mentioned. The Romans, for financial purposes, divided Sicily into two provinces, viz., Syracuse and Lilybaeum; they were governed by one praetor, but had different financial administrations, because the systems of taxation were different in the two parts. So long as Carthage existed, the Romans kept up Lilybaeum as a place of arms and a military port; but the place afterwards lost this importance, because its harbour was gradually filled with sand. It is at present known only for its excellent vineyards.

DREPANA, the modern Trapani, near Lilybaeum, was another strongly fortified port town of the Carthaginians, and is still of importance. All these places act a conspicuous part in the first Punic war.

EGESTA, or SEGESTA, was situated in the neighbourhood of Drepana. Thucydides says that its inhabitants were Trojans; and the unanimous voice of antiquity calls the Egestans and the Elymi, there and about mount Eryx, Trojans. I have explained my opinion on this point in my Roman History, and shewn that Trojans here means Tyrrhenians or Pelasgians, like those occupying the coasts of Italy and Sardinia. The name Trojans, therefore, seems to have been a general Pelasgian name, which was commonly applied to the Mysian Trojans, because they were the most important, just as the name Hellenes was commonly given to the people of Argos. All these nations were connected by religion and their common sanctuary of Samothrace, the Trojan character of which is undeniable. The Segestans are called by the Greeks barbarians, and they were certainly non-Greeks; but when we consider the ruins of their temples, which are not only grand but splendid, and are in no way inferior to the most beautiful Greek edifices; and when we see their coins, which equal the finest specimens made in Greece, we must confess that the word “barbarian” cannot be understood here in the same sense in which it is applied to Thracians, Getae, and Macedonians, who were not even able correctly to imitate the formation of Greek words. Afterwards, Segesta, like all the rest of the island, became completely hellenised; Cicero always calls the Siculi Greeks, and the names of the Segestans, wherever they occur in history, are Greek. Segesta was an unfortunate place, for it was the occasion of the deplorable expedition of the Athenians to Sicily, of which we can only lament the final issue. It would have been fortunate, if the Athenians had been able to carry it out with energy, for the fate of Greece would have taken a different direction. The Segestans have much to answer for to Sicily, to Greece, and to all the world, for they misled the Athenians by their delusive promises. After the defeat of the Athenians, the Chalcidian towns one by one concluded peace, and the Segestans, abandoned by every one, were obliged to throw themselves into the arms of the Carthaginians. Under their protection, the town was safe and prosperous for a period of about ninety years, until the time when the power of Agathocles reached its highest point. But when Agathocles was victorious for a time, it was taken by the sword, and treated like Magdeburg in the Thirty Years’ war. Afterwards a population again assembled there; in the first Punic war Segesta is mentioned again, and submits to the Romans under an appeal to its Trojan origin.

The towns in the interior of Sicily were originally partly Siculian and partly Sicanian, though it is now impossible to draw a line of demarcation between them. In the north, about mount Aetna as far as Henna, all the towns, such as Henna, Centuripa, Agyrion, Halesa, Aluntion, and many others, were probably Siculian. The Siculians, even after the time of Gelo, formed distinct states and had their own kings. Diodorus compiled his history in a most unsystematic manner: when he is engaged with the history of a nation, and it occurs to him, that he has dwelt upon it long enough, and that he has neglected another, he all at once breaks off and begins to discuss the latter. Such is the case in his history of Sicily: he is often very minute, relating the events of a nation year after year, but then he is for a time quite silent about it. After the time of Gelo and Hiero, we find a Siculian kingdom, under a prince called Ducetius, which was very dangerous to the Siceliots.[61] Afterwards we see the Siculians broken up into many small states, some of which were hellenised at a very early period. The power of the Greek tyrants often extended very far into the interior; and those of Syracuse at times ruled almost over the whole island; during such times, Greeks settled in all parts of it. These things are often mentioned only accidentally, as for example, in the case of Diodorus himself, who is called a Siceliot, though he belonged to a Siculian town. At that time the Siculian and Sicanian languages no longer existed and Greek was spoken everywhere.

HENNA, situated in the centre of the country, was the most important of all the Siculian towns. Henna, and not Enna, is the correct spelling, for so we find it on a very ancient Greek coin; and only later Latin ones have Enna, whereas all the good Latin MSS., such as the Codex Puteanus of Livy, as well as the inscriptions, have the H, as in _ordo populusque Hennensis_; in after-times the pronunciation was modified. I do not, however, mean to say, that if you find Enna in a poet, you must at once correct it into Henna, for such things depend upon authority; the ancients often pronounced a word with an aspiration, which we cannot accurately imitate, and which, therefore, has disappeared in Italian and other modern languages. Henna is celebrated as the central seat of the worship of Demeter and Persephone, which spread thence into Italy, and was also adopted by the Greeks. It was probably different from the worship of Demeter at Eleusis; but we cannot speak positively about this matter, and in my opinion, it is a mere waste of learning and ingenuity to institute inquiries about it.

CENTURIPA (_Centuripini_, Κεντόριπα), near the slope of mount Aetna, was the greatest town of the interior at the time of the Romans. In the age of Cicero, its citizens were the wealthiest in all Sicily. In the first Punic war, they had been enabled by circumstances, about which we have no information, to put themselves in an extremely favourable relation to the Romans; this had been done at a time when the other Siculian places had allowed themselves to be tempted to rise against Rome; and in consequence of this, Centuripa was honoured with great privileges. It derived special advantages from the extensive confiscations which were often made of whole districts. On such occasions, the Roman equites speculated to acquire large estates, and the Centuripans undertook as farmers (_aratores_), or agricultural speculators, the cultivation of large districts; the existence of such aratores is known from Cicero’s Verrine orations. Centuripa then remained the centre of Sicilian agriculture, probably until a very late period. _Agyrion_ was situated in the neighbourhood of Centuripa.

I have already said in general how Sicily became a desolate country. When many towns had already been destroyed in the wars of Agathocles, the first Punic war, which lasted twenty-four years, was extremely destructive, because it was carried on at the expense of that small country; the Syracusan kingdom alone, which was in the enjoyment of order and protection, was exempted. Then followed the second Punic war, and the senseless insurrection of the Syracusans and of nearly all the inhabitants of the island. They were punished by the Romans in such a manner, that all cultivation disappeared from the greater part of the island; the towns perished and were changed into large estates; the corn-fields in the interior were changed into pastures, on which large numbers of cattle and hosts of slaves were kept, while the free population was almost entirely extirpated. Hence the insurrection of Eunus, in the year of Rome 620; a war was then carried on with great exertion for years, and was not brought to a close until several Roman armies had been defeated. Thirty years later, a second similar Servile war broke out, which, though it did not last quite as long as the first, yet completely ruined several towns: the slaves took possession of the fortified places, and annihilated the free population. As regards the period of the Roman emperors, we only know that Augustus established colonies in some places, but the rest of the island was quite desolate, there being only some large estates and stations for post horses. The Regestum of pope Gregory the Great, which contains the last accounts of Sicily before it fell into the hands of barbarians, shows the island in this wretched condition. The Roman see possesses large estates in Sicily, and the correspondence with their stewards reveals to us the condition of the island and the nature of such estates: we see that the country was in a state of utter decay.

SARDINIA.

Sardinia fully confirms the observation regarding the identity of the physical character of countries on two sides of the same sea. There does not exist a more senseless notion than to imagine that rivers form the natural boundaries between two countries; the same physical features appear on both sides of a river: rivers are lines of communication, but mountains separate countries from one another. The Suabian and Bavarian races are separated by the range of the Vorarlberg. Sardinia, in its physical structure, belongs to Africa, if not wholly, at least its southern part as far as the mountains. This character shows itself both in the vegetation and in the animal life of the country: the _musimon_, an animal foreign to all the rest of Europe, is not found anywhere out of Africa except in Sardinia.[62] The character of the population also is African, whence Cicero, in his speech for Scaurus, says: _Afer aut Sardus sane, si ita se isti malunt nominari_. The island is not, like Sicily, traversed by lofty mountains; it is only in the northern part that the mountains reach any considerable height; the rest is only a hilly country; many parts of the coast are plains, extensive and low marshy districts, which may be termed savannahs, whence great quantities of salt are obtained there. The physical identity with Africa manifests itself also in another very important point: the opposite coasts of Sardinia and Africa are celebrated for their banks of coral, while they are not found near Sicily, Spain, or the Balearian islands.[63]

According to the most ancient tradition, the inhabitants of Sardinia were Tyrrhenians, who appear in various forms and personifications, in the story about Aristaeus, in the Iolai, and in many other ways. If Tyrrhenians did exist there, they can only have been settlers on the coasts, for a part of the inhabitants, such as the _Noraces_ and _Balari_, were certainly of Iberian origin, and belonged to the same race as the inhabitants of the Balearian islands. In regard to others again, it is equally certain that they were of Libyan origin, for they are stated to have resembled the Berbers in language, in bodily structure, complexion, and hair. The _Sardi Montani_, perhaps a mixture of Iberians and Libyans, were in later times confined to the mountains. These mountains, however, must not be conceived as Alps, for heights of a less lofty character were sufficient for those people to maintain themselves in them. The highlands of Scotland also do not contain any high mountains, they are only inaccessible, and yet the population has maintained itself there throughout all the changes of nations. The sea-coast was occupied at an early time by Punic colonies, which afterwards became masters of the island, with the exception of the interior, over which they exercised no other influence than that which a powerful nation on the coast always possesses over the other inhabitants. In like manner the Dutch did not rule over the interior of Ceylon, the prince of Candy being sovereign, though he was obliged to comply with the wishes of the Dutch whenever they insisted upon it. Such was the condition of Sardinia during the second Punic war, when we meet with Hampsicora and Hiostus as Sardinian princes. The Punic settlements consisted for the most part of Carthaginians mixed with Libyans, as the Carthaginians themselves were a mixed race (Λιβυφοίνικες), or with Greeks from Sicily and Magna Graecia. The Libyans must not be conceived as negroes: in their physical features they are not very unlike Europeans, and scarcely differ at all from southern Europeans, so that the mixture could take place without any difficulty. The mixture of the Libyphoenices with the Sardinians is attested by Cicero in an interesting fragment of his speech for Scaurus. The Punic language accordingly predominated everywhere on the coast, and all the known names of the Sardinians are Punic, e.g., _Aris_, genitive _Arinis_, which is nothing else than the Hebrew Aaron; so also Caralis and others. I said before, that Sardinia, near the coast, has extensive low grounds, which are, for the most part, marshy and unhealthy: this peculiarity, (_aër gravis_), which is still the reason of the scanty population of the island, was known even to the historians of antiquity; the country was very dangerous to the Roman soldiers, many of whom died there of fevers. This we see from Tacitus’ annals[64] to have been the case in the time of Tiberius, and such it continues to be at the present day; in most parts it is impossible to remove the unhealthy character of the land by cultivation.

There are still many Punic remains in Sardinia; but there also are a few Cyclopean walls, which can neither be ascribed to the Punians nor to the Sardinians of the interior, but must be Greek. They are minutely discussed in Millot’s description of Sardinia, which is a bad book, but contains valuable information about those Cyclopean walls. Timaeus spoke of ruins which were referred to the Iolai, the alleged ancient Greek colonists. Most of the antiquities that have been dug out of the ground, belong to the Roman period, but some also are Punic and have Punic inscriptions. Many belong to the rude barbarians of the interior, especially certain hideous and deformed idols resembling those of the Wends and American Indians.

There were no towns in the interior of Sardinia, the mountaineers living either in villages or caves; their dress consisted, as at present, of skins of the musimon (_mastrucae Sardorum_), forming a sort of fur jackets. They were very poor mountaineers, and the only booty the Romans made there consisted of slaves. In a letter of pope Gregory the Great, in his Regestum, a people of the name of _Barbaricini_ is mentioned in the interior, and this confirms the identity of the Sardinians with the Libyans, for Barbaricini is only a derivative form of Barbari, a name by which the Greeks and Romans designated more particularly the Berbers in Africa. During the Punic period there were, properly speaking, only three towns that were of any importance, viz., Caralis, Sulci, and Nora.

CARALIS, the modern Cágliari (not Cagliári, as it is commonly pronounced, for the inhabitants themselves say Cágliari), was the Carthaginian capital with an excellent harbour.

SULCI and NORA, likewise of Phoenician origin, are mentioned indeed in history, but were places of no particular importance. Considerable ruins of the Roman period are still found at Nora, and Caralis has what is called a beautiful ancient theatre. In the accounts I have seen of it, it is called so, but owing to the uncritical manner in which the subject is treated, I cannot say whether it is a real theatre or an amphitheatre.

Sardinia is still the country in which European civilisation and the change of manners resulting from it, have taken less root than in any part of Europe: those who regard civilisation as an evil, must consider Sardinia to be a paradise. In no country have witches been burnt at so recent a period, and the practice, perhaps, still prevails; the government has not yet been able to suppress the custom of taking revenge for bloodshed. The villages make war upon one another, and no one can travel with safety along the high roads, unless he purchase the protection of a party or a village, as in the East, or else he must acquire the rights of hospitality. According to the accounts we have of the condition of the island, we may imagine it to be something like that which certain persons call the golden period of the middle ages. But with all this barbarism, the greatest immorality prevails, especially among the priests. The country is in a perfect state of anarchy, being governed according to ancient privileges, which have never been changed at all; the country population is in a state of complete dissolution. When the island has an able governor, he can keep order only by the utmost rigour, without which he can do absolutely nothing. It is deplorable that, in these circumstances, the administration of the island is not entrusted to able men, the propriety of which I have often urged. I sometimes desired natives of Sardinia to come to me that I might examine their language, which is very peculiar; you cannot say that it is Italian, it contains indeed very much Latin, but much also that is quite foreign. The Sardinian mountaineers are said to have many words in their dialect which are radically different from all other European languages. As much information has at present been collected about the Berber language, my object was to question the natives and to examine their words to see whether they were Berber or Basque. But I could not succeed, the people were too timid and did not come. I have now placed my hope upon a friend, Count Castiglione, of Milan, a great linguist, who has studied the language of the Berbers; he may perhaps be more successful. The island, from the earliest times, always made the impression of a wild and ungenial country, which, poor as it was, was severely treated by the Carthaginians, for they are said to have forbidden the cultivation of grain, in order to compel the Sardinians to import their supplies from Spain and Africa. In like manner Spain, for a long time, would not tolerate the cultivation of European grain in her American possessions, and when at length she allowed it, she forbade the planting of olives and vines.

It was the universally established opinion among the ancients, that Sardinia was the largest island, and larger than Sicily. This opinion, though erroneous, is found in all ancient writers, and we cannot say what may have given rise to it.

CORSICA.

Whether _Corsica_ and the Greek name Κύρνος are etymologically connected with each other, must be left undecided; I for my part believe, that the resemblance of the first syllable in the two names is only accidental. Corsica was regarded by the ancients as still more wild, uninhabitable, unhealthy, and barbarous than Sardinia; it was inhabited partly by Ligurians and partly by Iberians, and its inhabitants maintained their independence till about the time of the first Punic war, when the Carthaginians seem to have established themselves in the island, at least near its magnificent harbours. It would indeed be inconceivable, if they had overlooked a harbour like that of S. Lorenzo. It is self-evident, however, that the inhabitants of the interior remained quite independent, for even the Genoese, though they lived so much nearer the island, were never able entirely to subdue them. At present it is, properly speaking, in a state of anarchy, though it is connected with the powerful monarchy of France; what, therefore, must have been its condition under the Carthaginians, whose dominion did not last long! At an earlier time the Phocaeans had attempted to settle at Alalia (Aleria), but had not succeeded. The Romans undertook an expedition to it as early as the first Punic war; but the only result of it was, that they expelled the Carthaginians, without they themselves being able to take possession of the island. It was not till a much later period that they subdued it, but they seem to have felt that it was not worth while to spend so much money and blood for the purpose of enabling themselves to remain there.

MARIANA and ALERIA are the only two towns of Corsica deserving to be noticed; both were Roman military colonies, the former founded by Marius, and the latter by Sulla. At the time of the Roman emperors, Corsica, like several islands in the Archipelago, served as a place to which condemned persons were exiled, _relegatio in insulam_.

Corsica is altogether a mountainous island, with the exception of a narrow tract of coast, which forms unhealthy lowlands with small rivers. The mountains are not high, and form one of the ramifications of the Apennines, but are very impassable and intricate.

HISPANIA.

The name Hispania, as Bochart correctly states, is in all probability of Punic origin, derived from צפן, _Sapan_, _Span_, from which, an _i_ being prefixed, _Ispania_, or _Hispania_, was formed. In southern as well as eastern languages, the pronunciation of an _s_, followed by a consonant, is facilitated by prefixing a vowel, whence _Scipio_, in ordinary life, is called _Iscipio_. You recollect the notion of the Greeks about the four parts of the world, according to which Hesperia was the western and Europe the northern part; in this division, Spain was a part of Hesperia. The Greeks called the people _Iberians_, the country _Iberia_, and the river _Iberus_. This name of the river must have been of native origin or have been used by the Carthaginians, for the Romans also employed it, though they called the people _Hispani_ and the country _Hispania_. We do not know by what name the people called themselves; it is possible that the Basque language may throw light upon it; but in the masterly treatise on that language by Baron Humboldt, nothing is said about this point. Afterwards, and in the Acts of the Apostles, the country was called _Spania_, and it may have borne this name generally among the Alexandrians and in the unjustly decried Hellenistic language. The Byzantine writers also call it so, unless they employ the correct name Iberia.

Spain is destined by nature, almost more than Italy, to form one compact state; no one can have a doubt about this, when looking at the three seas by which it is surrounded. Nevertheless, however, it did not become united as one whole till a late period, though this happened before the time of which we have written records; for there can be no doubt that previously it was divided into two distinct countries. On the one side, the Pyrenees formed its natural boundary towards Gaul (in the course of time, however, they were crossed, and the Iberians ruled over the country from the Garonne to the Rhone); but at an earlier period another natural boundary line was formed by the Sierra Morena, an extensive range of mountains, which, for a couple of centuries, formed the boundary between the Christian and Mahommedan parts of Spain. These same mountains, no doubt, also separated the Iberians from the Celts. The heights in the north of Spain, whence the Tagus, Durius, and Minius, flow towards the sea, and whence, on the other side, smaller rivers carry their waters towards the Ebro, were inhabited by Celts, who are also called _Celtiberians_. Other Celts bearing the name _Celtici_ dwelt in Algarbia and the Portuguese Estremadura, and others again inhabited the province Entre Douro e Minho in the north of Portugal. These three Celtic nations were quite isolated in Spain. The Celtiberians were not pure Celts, but as even their name indicates, a mixture of Celts and Iberians; but the Celts in Portugal are expressly stated to have been pure Celts. These latter attracted the attention even of the ancients, especially of the excellent Posidonius, who made so many correct observations, but allowed himself in this instance to be misled. He is of opinion that the Celts had immigrated into Spain, for he reasoned thus: as the Celts could migrate into Italy and across the Danube as far as the Dniepr, it was far less difficult for them to enter the neighbouring country of Spain. But such isolated parts of a nation cannot have arrived in a country by immigration; on the contrary, the Iberians appear extending themselves and in possession of Aquitania and Languedoc at a very early period; how then could the Celts, not being able to maintain the Pyrenees, have spread over the whole peninsula? It is probable, nay almost evident, that it was the Iberians that migrated and extended themselves, and this opinion agrees with the most ancient traditions of the Celts in Ammianus Marcellinus, according to which they were once masters of all the west of Europe, but were expelled from many parts. If we suppose that the Celts dwelt as far as the Sierra Morena, and that the Iberians, perhaps reinforced by their kinsmen from Africa, pressed them forward, this supposition would account for some Celtic ruins which are still extant, and the Celts may have capitulated in a manner similar to that described in the book of Joshua. As one part of England was occupied by Germans so completely as to destroy every trace of the ancient inhabitants, while elsewhere, as e.g., in Devonshire, the Britons, in large numbers, lived among the Germans and became mixed with them; so the Iberians expelled the ancient Celtic population, wherever the nature of the country did not protect it; but the Celts maintained themselves in the mountains between the Tagus and the Iberus, and the Iberians only subdued them, and then settled among them. In the course of time the two nations became amalgamated, and thus formed the Celtiberians, whose character, however, is essentially Iberian.

Comments

Log in to leave a comment.

Lectures on ancient ethnography and geography, volume 2 (of 2)Chapter XI: Part 11

0%37 min left in chapter