Chapter XIV: Part 14

The _Garamantes_ are placed too far to the south-east in our maps; they were the inhabitants of the modern Fezzan, and the present town of Germa was their capital, where Roman inscriptions are still found among the ruins. The dominion of the Romans in those parts, about which nothing is said by ancient geographers, belongs to the second century, when they extended their power in different directions, for under Trajan they entered far into the interior of Arabia, and in Nubia they advanced as far as Dongola, the surrounding tribes being too weak to offer effectual resistance. The distance between Tripoli and Fezzan is about forty days’ journey. The town of _Augila_, mentioned by Herodotus, in the country of the Nasamones, is called to this day Audyeelah or Eudyeelah; the name of the Nasamones themselves has not yet been re-discovered. Count Castiglione has written a very beautiful essay on those countries in the form of an appendix to his work entitled “Les Monnaies des Arabes frappées en Afrique.”

Herodotus divides Africa into four parts, the agricultural, the mountainous, the country of beasts of prey, and the desert. Beyond the river, Nigritae also are mentioned, but we must not imagine that either this name or that of the river Niger has anything to do with _niger_, black; it is the Punic _nahar_ which signifies “a river,” and shows the intercourse of the Carthaginians with those countries. The same fact has also been confirmed by the discovery of balls and staves of glass of exquisite beauty in those parts. The art of treating glass in such a manner as to include in a white glass a number of flowers, balls, and other objects, without injuring the outlines, is assuredly of Phoenician origin, and at present quite unknown. Some specimens of such glass are found in Italy, where it was partly employed to ornament rooms, and quite a similar piece of glasswork has been discovered in the tomb of a negro king in Guinea, whither it had evidently been exported from Carthage. Such pieces are said to have been used as ornaments for victors, and there is even a tradition among the negroes, that these glass ornaments have from time immemorial belonged to their sceptres. Servius states, that the Romans gave to the chiefs of the Berbers ornamented sticks instead of sceptres; the same custom still exists, but the sticks are not adorned with silver.

The name _Marmarica_ is derived from _mar_, salt, with a reduplication very frequent in those languages.

Among all the settlements on that Coast, CARTHAGE is by far the most illustrious. The situation and greatness of the city are described in the later excerpts from Diodorus of Sicily, in Strabo, and in Appian’s Punica. One point, however, must not be lost sight of in these descriptions, viz., the ancients assume that Carthage covered the peninsula which was connected with the mainland by the isthmus, and that the isthmus was cut off by means of a wall. But the fact is, that the whole of the peninsula was not occupied by the city, which, in that case, would have been immensely large. M. Humbert, a Dutch lieutenant, who was long engaged in the service of the pasha of Tunis, and was a good observer, discovered during his excavations, some years ago, the ruins of ancient Carthage and the walls by which it was surrounded. He made an excellent ground plan of those remains, which, however, has never been published, but exists only in MS. According to this plan, the peninsula contained two towns, the ancient Punic Carthage on the south side, perhaps not occupying one-half of the peninsula, and Roman Carthage on the other side towards Rome, which had been built by J. Caesar: lying under the curse of Scipio, the site of the ancient city could not be occupied by a new town. The remains of Roman Carthage are far more numerous than those of the more ancient city; the little that is to be seen of the latter consists of gigantic works about the harbour (Cothon).

Ancient Carthage consisted of two parts, viz., the city called _Bozra_ (the Greeks call it Βύρσα), and the suburb _Megara_, the Punic name of which was probably Magal. The remaining part of the peninsula may have been included under this name. These suburban districts were protected against the attacks of the barbarous Libyans by walls across the isthmus.[77] We must not imagine that there was a separate acra besides Byrsa, the elevation of which is insignificant, only the point containing the temple of Aesculapius may perhaps be compared to a real acra. According to Timaeus, Carthage was built thirty-seven[78] years before the commencement of the Olympiads; this may be regarded as a settled date, as we see from the work of Josephus against Apion, for the Phoenician authorities, which he followed, are thoroughly trustworthy, and perfectly agree with the books of Samuel and Kings in the Old Testament. The books of Judges are of later origin, and contain chronological impossibilities; but from the time of David we have contemporary and quite trustworthy history; some few erroneous dates are probably mere slips in writing. In the reigns of Manasseh and Amon there are a few incorrect statements, and I have shown where the mistake of from twenty to thirty years is probably concealed,[79] but I cannot say how the text is to be emended. After the first three centuries, Carthage had already acquired many possessions in Byzacene, that is, the country from the headland on the bay to the lesser Syrtis; in Sardinia, too, it exercised a powerful influence, and some Punic settlements already existed in Spain. But not long before that time, Carthage was still engaged in deadly war with the Libyans, and its rule certainly did not extend to the interior of Africa. The real greatness of the city lasted about 150 years, from about the close of the Peloponnesian to the commencement of the first Punic war.

UTICA (Atica, the Old Town, as opposed to Carthage, or New Town) was situated not far from Carthage. The simplicity and constant repetition of the Phoenician names show the want of poetry in that nation; the Greeks have an endless variety of names. _Utica_ and _Hippo_ are the two old towns on that coast; they were more ancient than Carthage, and independent of it, being sometimes even allied with it on equal terms. This honour they retained until the second Punic war; they also concluded treaties with full independence, but were virtually subject to Carthage. Hence in the war of Agathocles, both declared in his favour, and in the same manner they acted in the war of the mercenaries, until, in the end, they separated themselves entirely and joined the Romans, whence, notwithstanding their Punic origin, they remained _civitates foederatae_. It is interesting to observe, how easily Greek culture was engrafted upon those Punians; the Carthaginian senate, on one occasion, found it necessary to enact a law against it,[80] and at times Utica had a theatre, in which Greek plays, translated into Punic, were performed. Both St. Augustin and Apuleius (the latter was a native of Madaura in the interior) spoke Punic as their mother tongue, whence we see that the people throughout the province of Carthage spoke Punic, and that the language of the Amazirghs had become extinct. In some parts of the coast, Latin was spoken. When the Arabs conquered the country, the inhabitants still employed the Punic language, and the adoption of the Arabic was facilitated by the kindred nature of the two languages. The foreign elements in the languages of Tunis and Malta are probably derived from that of the Amazirghs; Latin also is mixed up with them.

The coast of _Byzacene_ is one of the most fertile in the world: the olive-tree, which is one of the richest blessings of the temperate zone, was, strange to say, not introduced into those parts until a late period, and that district is the only one in which the palm and the olive-tree grow side by side. In the earlier times, Carthage obtained its oil from Greece and Italy. The coast was studded with towns, just like the country of Cyrene. Notwithstanding the destruction of Carthage, those countries were perhaps never so well cultivated and so thickly peopled as under the Roman emperors, especially in the reign of Severus, as is attested by Tertullian, a contemporary writer, and by the immense number of ruins in the territory of Tunis.

_Zeugitana_ is the basin of the bay of Tunis. The southern part of the eastern coast of Tunis was called _Byzacion_, _Byzacene_ or _Byzacitis_. _Tunis_ deserves to be mentioned among the provincial towns on account of its subsequent importance, of which antiquity knows nothing.

The greater part of the Carthaginian territory was given by the Romans to Masinissa, who, by the most shameless usurpation, and by the support of the most faithless policy on the part of the Romans, endeavoured to make himself master of it; for after the second Punic war, the Carthaginians still possessed an extensive territory. Even before, Numidia had received nearly all the districts which had been conquered in war, such as Zama, and other places.

The Numidian kings resided at CIRTA, that is, “the town,” in the Punic language, which is another proof of the poverty of its nomenclature. This town rose to greatness under Masinissa, and still more under Micipsa, who drew into it a Greek colony, just as in the time of Louis XIV, French colonies were established in the north of Germany. The time of that colony belongs to the period in which Corinth was destroyed and the whole of Greece was devastated, and when the poor Greeks were scattered all over the earth. Under Constantine the Great, its name was changed into _Constantina_, and large Roman ruins still exist there. It was a Roman colony founded by P. Sitius of Nuceria, who assembled an army of Roman fugitives and Gauls that had served under the African princes, and received Cirta from Julius Caesar, after the conquest of Juba, as a place to settle in. It is, therefore, a colony of quite a peculiar kind, differing essentially from all other colonies.

AETHIOPIA, AEGYPTUS.

The Ethiopians, with the earliest Greeks, are the black people in the south-east and south-west, whence Indians and Ethiopians are synonymous, the southern Indians being black. I believe that the Indian peninsula was conquered by the Indians, and that the black race was subdued by them. Ethiopia, with the Greeks, is only a vague name for Africa. Its derivation from αἴθω is erroneous, but it is doubtful whether the nation had any special name by which it designated itself. We must, however, distinguish the _Leucaethiopes_, that is, the Fellatahs, or Fellahs, whom Ptolemy distinctly places on the Senegal, to which locality they are also assigned by the great D’Anville. The name Ethiopians was afterwards limited to the Abyssinian race and the tribes belonging to them, and these latter nations still call their country Ithopya, though we can hardly suppose the name to be of native origin. The excerpts from Agatharchides of Cnidos, a most excellent writer of the seventh century of Rome, who for a long time resided in Egypt, but does not call the nations by their own names, but only by appellatives, are very obscure, and have been entirely neglected. He gives information about nations which are found at present only in the innermost parts of Africa: he describes, e.g., the Hottentots and Bushmen, whom he calls Acridophagi, that is, eaters of grasshoppers, so that even those living in the distant south were noticed by him. The Hottentots cut out one of their testicles, a fact with which he was acquainted.

Ethiopia proper is highly remarkable in ancient history: in Scripture it is called Koosh, and its kings are distinguished from those of the Mauri. The country of these Mauri was in very ancient times a great state in the south of Egypt; its capital, _Meroe_, contrary to the express testimony of the ancients, has generally been placed too near Egypt; it was probably situated in the neighbourhood of Sennaar. The Meroites had a peculiar kind of civilisation; and there can be no doubt that the hieroglyphics, and all that we afterwards find as Egyptian civilisation, originated among them. At a very remote time they conquered Egypt; the ancients themselves trace to them the knowledge and religion of the Egyptians; they describe their monuments as Ethiopian, and all that can be made out by historical inquiry is confirmatory of this view. The southernmost monuments of Egypt, between the two cataracts, are the grandest and most ancient; then follows Thebes, and as we advance northward, the monuments become smaller and more insignificant. But monuments are found also higher up the river to the south of Meroe. The accounts in Diodorus about the condition of that city are perfectly credible and satisfactory. The Egyptians, like the Celtiberians, Celtoligyans and others, were a mixed people, in which one nation ruled while the other obeyed. In the Greek documents of Egypt, such as contracts, and the like, we find a singular custom, occasioned by the extremely small number of proper names: the notary, in order to prevent confusion, added a description of the persons concerned. Accordingly, we can clearly distinguish the different races, for we find such characteristics as short, yellow, flat nose, curly hair, and the like.[81] The most ancient idols resemble negroes, as, for example, the celebrated Isis of Elephantine. Among the mummies, too, there are a great many negro forms, faces altogether non-European, different both in their skulls and teeth; and this is another sign that Egypt was conquered by the Ethiopians, who settled among the conquered people. Champollion the younger is not only an honest man, but has no doubt discovered the truth. The most ancient documents we have, go back as far as the eighteenth dynasty of Manetho; and the seventeenth and eighteenth dynasties are probably the period when the yoke of the Hycsos was thrown off in consequence of this conquest. The original inhabitants were probably Libyans, who extended as far as lake Mareotis, for Mareotis is a Libyan name; and Egyptians, in the sense in which Herodotus understands the name, do not occur beyond the Canobian mouth of the Nile. The original inhabitants, therefore, may have been under the dominion of a Semitic race, which among the Egyptians bore the name of Hycsos, and was intensely hated by the later Egyptians. This expulsion of the Hycsos, which is so often represented on monuments, was the result of the establishment of the Kooshites in Upper Egypt, who thence also spread over Lower Egypt. The modern Egyptians have scarcely a trace left of the ancient physiognomy; their features are rather Libyan. The Copts have harsh and rude features, but they are just those of the Berbers, whence they are different from the Arabs and Syrians. The mummies which are brought to Europe belong to the higher castes, descended for the most part from Ethiopians—a race which has now disappeared: the great mass of the nation consisted of natives. The settlement of the Egyptian warriors (μάχιμοι) in the south of Meroe, of which Herodotus speaks, is nothing else but another instance of the confusion of the two poles in legends about migrations; arising from the fact that a tribe was found in those southern parts resembling the one ruling in Lower Egypt. The story, as it is related, is only ridiculous. This also accounts for the institution of castes, for wherever they exist they originate in conquest.

Upper and Lower Egypt differ most widely from each other: the former is a narrow and deep valley, which is but rarely overflowed by the river; Middle Egypt is more frequently exposed to inundations; and Lower Egypt, in antiquity, was put under water by every rising of the Nile; at present it is only the districts between the arms of the river and the neighbourhood of Damietta that are overflowed. This is accounted for by the circumstance that after every inundation the river leaves behind a stratum of mud, whereby the country is constantly raised: on the bank the different years may be traced by very thin strata, a fact which has been unjustly denied. In ancient times, the arms of the Nile were large rivers, while at present ships of some size cannot sail into any of the mouths of the river, because the bed has been so much elevated. But the surrounding country has been raised much more; for in the time of Herodotus all the towns were situated on hills rising above the ground which was usually inundated; but this is not the case now, the lower parts having been filled up, and the extensive marshes in the Delta having, for the most part, become arable land, while the ancient lakes are changed into marshes. Upper Egypt must have been irrigated by artificially raising the water. There is, moreover, this remarkable change in the climate of Egypt, that, while in Herodotus’ time it never rained in Upper Egypt, at present there are occasional showers, though never without violent thunderstorms.

THEBES was the ancient capital of Upper Egypt; but it had fallen from its greatness even before the Persian conquest, for Psammetichus, for the sake of commerce, had transferred the capital to Lower Egypt, and he was strong through the support of foreigners. From that time, Thebes was always in opposition to the rulers; it was eclipsed by Memphis, and afterwards by Sais, but it still regarded itself as the repository of ancient wisdom and as the venerable seat of religion. The city was greatly deserted and decayed; but there is no reason for doubting its immense magnitude; its ruins are gigantic, and its temples are as vast as cities. Thebes received its death-blow during the unfortunate rebellion against Ptolemy Physcon; under the Romans, too, it was frequently the centre of insurrection.

PTOLEMAIS, the next town after Thebes down the river, was founded by the first or second Ptolemy against the seditious disposition of the Thebans; it was a σύστημα Ἑλληνικὸν in the proper sense of the term, with Greek institutions, both public and private, and Greek was the language of the place. By means of this city, the Ptolemies endeavoured to keep Upper Egypt in subjection, while, on the other hand, they admitted colonisation to Alexandria for similar purposes, exercising their power from above through a number of local magistrates. In other respects, the Ptolemies did not favour Greek colonisation as much as the Seleucidae, for they confined it to Ptolemais and Alexandria.[82]

MEMPHIS never was comparable to Thebes in size and importance, for it contained only very few large buildings, of which at present no traces exist. All the buildings, such as royal palaces and the like, must have consisted of unburnt bricks. The city was large and populous, but it already represents a different state of things: the transfer of the capital to this place must be regarded as the epoch in which the pyramids were built, that is, as the age of Sesostris. Its citadel is called λευκὸν τεῖχος (_arx alba_, _murus albus_ is a wrong translation), just as the walls of Moscow had different colours, and as at Ecbatana the parapets of the different circles.[83]

SAIS, a still more recent capital, was built by Psammetichus and his successors, entirely with a view to be near the sea. In its vicinity were the _castra praetoria_ of the Ionians and Carians, by the aid of which those kings maintained their dominion.

ALEXANDRIA was, properly speaking, situated beyond the frontiers of Egypt, and it was only on the consideration that water of the Nile from the arm of Canobus flowed into lake Mareotis, that it could be said to belong to Egypt, for it stood in reality on Libyan ground. It had been a much frequented port even in the time of the Egyptian kings, being protected by the island of Pharos at the entrance of it; but the kings kept a garrison there for the purpose of preventing strangers from landing. The place had formerly been called _Rhacotis_. Alexander is justly praised for having perceived the advantages of the locality, which is so well fitted to form a point of communication between Africa, Europe, and Asia: he was not generally very fortunate in his choice of places. Alexandria was probably destined by him to be the capital of his empire, seeing he intended to conquer, at least, the north coast of Africa and southern Italy, and in general all countries so far as he was not checked by the temperate zone and his own ambition. Of the city founded by Alexander, every trace has disappeared, and all that remains belongs to the Roman period. The city rose with wonderful rapidity, and three distinct bodies of citizens were formed in it. The noblest consisted of Macedonians and Greeks, who, like Greek citizens, were divided into phylae and demi. The intention was that it should appear as a free city; and the Macedonians and Greeks were according to all appearance, not kept distinct. The second part, consisting of a numerous Jewish colony, formed a demos, enjoying civil, but no political, rights; these Jews were not allowed to dwell in three out of the five regions into which the city was divided. The third body, which in point of numbers was the largest, consisted of native Egyptians, who, however, were regarded almost as bondsmen, like the Lettonians and Esthonians at Reval and Riga. Cleomenes, by Alexander’s command the founder of Alexandria, was a wicked adventurer, but an able man. The city rose greatly even under the first Ptolemy; but it afterwards continued to increase in consequence of its extremely favourable situation. It was the legitimate staple of commerce, which had there its necessary centre; it was almost in the exclusive enjoyment of the trade with Egypt, Africa, Arabia, and India. Ptolemy Physcon destroyed the greater part of the Macedonian and Greek inhabitants. Caesar’s war was very destructive, for the struggle was carried on in the very streets of the city; and from that time the suburb in the island of Pharos remained deserted; at least under Tiberius it still was so. During the empire, Alexandria was the scene of several insurrections; the one occurring in the reign of Diocletian was fearful, but that emperor took such bloody revenge, that the city probably never recovered; and for a century afterwards the whole part called Bruchion was quite uninhabited. D’Anville has made a ground-plan of Alexandria.

The island of _Pharos_ was situated in front of the city, and between it and the coast there were excellent places for anchoring, which communicated with one another, but were separated by cliffs. The Ptolemies constructed a causeway across the narrow channel by means of draw-bridges. Thus arose the two harbours, the old and the new one, which are at present separated by a neck of land, but are much inferior to what they were in antiquity; they have been spoiled during a long period of barbarous neglect, and especially by throwing ballast overboard. The ships of the Mahommedans enter only the western port, which is the safer one. The island of Pharos contained the celebrated light-house, one of the improvements of an age in which the feelings and the heart had already become greatly deteriorated, but in which the mechanical arts had made considerable progress. Lucian, who often embellishes history, here also furnishes a story which is as absurd as it well can be. He says that Sostratus of Cnidus built this light-house, and that, against the will of Ptolemy, he caused his own name to be engraved under the inscription in praise of the king.[84] But according to Strabo, Sostratos was the king’s minister, and acquired the special favour of his sovereign by building the light-house at his own expense. The inscription, Σώστρατος Δεξιφανοῦς Κνίδιος θεοῖς σωτῆρσιν ὑπὲρ τῶν πλωιζομένων is quite in the style of the time; the θεοὶ σωτῆρες are Ptolemy and Berenice. The whole space between the harbour and lake Mareotis was occupied by the city of Alexandria, and in the time of Augustus a large suburb is said to have existed at a distance of thirty stadia from the city, in the direction of Canobus. Alexandria is a classical place in the history of nations and of literature: it was the residence of Eratosthenes, the first geographer we meet with in the history of the world.[85]

NAUCRATIS, below Sais in Lower Egypt, was a Greek settlement, under the supremacy of Egypt, nearly in the same manner in which Macao is a Portuguese town: Greeks dwelt there and had their own magistrate, or, so to speak, their own consul. Many authors are said to have been natives of the place; Phylarchus, e.g., is called Naucratites, but it was mere pedantry and affectation to speak of Naucratis instead of Alexandria as the Greek city.

The Egyptian towns generally had two names, one Egyptian and the other Greek; the native names are preserved in Coptic fragments, and have been made out by Champollion; a map also has been made with these names. The modern names are formed from the Arabic.

SOME MORE GREEK COLONIES.

PHASELIS, on the coast of Lycia, was a Doric colony; but the date of its foundation is unknown. The place deserves to be noticed as the frontier town between Greece and the barbarians, in what is commonly called the peace of Cimon. This peace probably never existed as a regular treaty of peace, but there certainly was a treaty between the Greeks and the satraps of Asia Minor, which the later Greeks, contrary to historical truth, extended into a peace.[86]

PAMPHYLIA is a country full of large and flourishing towns, of which we have numerous coins with a peculiar language, and an alphabet akin to the Greek; these coins have all the beauty of Greek art, and we may well ask, whether Greece ever had anything more beautiful. The Cilician coins, especially those of Tarsus, are of the same kind. We do not know to what race those people belonged; certain it is that they were not barbarians any more than the Lycians and Lydians. In regard to intellectual culture and political organisation, they were equal to the Greeks. Lycia had a very happy federative constitution, quite in the spirit and according to the principles of the Greeks.

CYPRUS.

The only Greek colonies in that eastern part of the sea occur in Cyprus; but we are not informed by any one author at what time they were established. The statement, that Teucer founded Salamis, refutes itself, and all the traditions about colonies referring to the Trojan times are worthless; they either mean generally that the colonies belong to a very early time, or they are inventions. We cannot now determine in what manner Salamis in Cyprus arose, and we are not in a condition to say as to whether the island of Salamis off the coast of Attica ever was sufficiently flourishing to send out colonies. The Greek settlements in Cyprus were connected with very great difficulties. We see this from the prophets, for their Chittim is no doubt Cyprus; subsequently the name became more extended, for in the books of Maccabees it also comprises Greece, including even Macedonia. Hence the name of _Citium_, the Phoenician capital of the island, is nothing else but Chittim. In the time of the prophets, the island was under the dominion of the Phoenician cities; and we may ask, how could Greeks establish themselves there? This question may be answered from the Old Testament and from the fragments of Berosus in Eusebius. It can have been no other period than that during which Nebuchadnezzar carried on his protracted wars in Phoenicia and Syria, and destroyed ancient Tyre, in consequence of which the Phoenicians were very much reduced. It is also possible that the somewhat earlier expeditions of Sanherib and Assarhaddon may have been the occasion. We know, from Berosus, that, in Olymp. 20, a Greek army landed in Cilicia, which is a sign of a commotion among the Greeks at that time, about which history furnishes no information. I connect these movements with the extensive emigration of the Greeks and Carians who entered the service of Psammetichus in Egypt. Accordingly, we may assume that the Greek settlements in Cyprus were founded between Olymp. 20 and 40; and we cannot wonder that, one hundred and twenty years later, during the war of Darius Hystaspis, the Greek towns of Cyprus had already become great.

The principal places, _Salamis_ and _Amathus_, were as purely Greek as the cities in Asia Minor; _Lapathos_ and others were smaller. In the time of Evagoras, after the Peloponnesian war, Salamis was the ruling city of the island, and in reality sovereign. _Soli_ is absurdly connected with Solon.

In later times, Greeks and Phoenicians lived peaceably together in the island. _Citium_ was the capital of the Phoenicians, and the native place of the philosopher Zeno. We have no information about the race of the native Cyprians; but, under the predominating influence of the two ruling nations, they became partly Hellenised and partly Punicised.

Cyprus is justly called by the ancients one of the most blessed countries in the world; there are but few parts of it which are unhealthy. Its rich copper mines and its timber were of particular importance to the ancients.

PHOENICIA.

The Phoenicians extended from the frontiers of the Philistines to those of Cilicia near Myriandros. It is an ancient tradition, that they had immigrated into that country from a distance, and this tradition is confirmed by its situation; it is quite clear that they cannot have been the original natives. Of the northern towns, it is quite certain, that they were colonies of those in the south. Would that we had their history, which was quite authentic up to a very remote period! They were a nation which had been pressed onward from the south towards the north. According to a tradition in Herodotus, they had come from the Red Sea, and according to another, from the Persian gulf. The latter of these, which has much engaged the attention of modern historians, is of no value at all. It would seem most probable, that they were one of those nations that were pressed onward by the emigration of the Hycsos.

FOOTNOTES

[1] _Hist. of Rome_, vol. i. p. 130.

[2] “Not _Junia Norbana_. Laws with two qualifying adjectives always had two authors, but our law originated with L. Junius Norbanus.” According to a more recent view, the Norbani belonged to the Vibii, and the name _Junia_ in our law is derived from M. Junius Silanus, who was consul in A.D. 19.—ED.

[3] _Hist. of Rome_, vol. i. p. 81, foll.

[4] Sismondi, _Hist. des Republ. Italiennes_, i. p. 249; but he explains the name to mean _la grande côte_; it moreover belongs to the ninth century as a surname of Grimoald II.—ED.

[5] _Hist. of Rome_, i. p. 194, note 560.

[6] _Hist. of Rome_, vol. i. p. 389, foll.

[7] “I am of opinion that this hill did not belong to the Aventine: I have heard this at Rome from a man, in whom I do not place much confidence; he may perhaps have read it somewhere: there is so much that is indifferent in books, that we often pass over that which is of importance because we imagine it to be indifferent.”

[8] _Lect. on Rom. Hist._, vol. i. p. 60, 3d edit.

[9] Respecting this flight of steps, however, see Urlichs in the _Beschreibung der Stadt Rom._ vol. iii. 2, p. 373, and the same author in his _Beschreib. Roms_, p. 256.

[10] v. § 153, ed. Müller, who, however, gives his own conjecture _ad muri speciem_ instead of the common reading _a muri parte_. The MSS. have _a muris partem_.—ED.

[11] In one set of notes, the following passage occurs on p. 53, after the word “necropolis,” line 17 from foot, and may perhaps be introduced here: “There was no road between the Aventine and the river; outside the Porta Collina, Esquilina, Caelimontana, and Carmentalis no enlargement of the city could take place.”—ED.

[12] Compare Bunsen in the _Beschreib. der Stadt Rom_, i. p. 646, foll.

[13] Some MSS. here have a name, which seems to suggest the _Porta Pia_. Bunsen says, “at the juncture of the street of the Porta Pia with the street of Porta Salara” (_Beschreib. d. Stadt Rom_, i. p. 625).—ED.

[14] See the _Beschreib. der Stadt Rom_, iii. 1. p. 490.

[15] Compare above, p. 58.

[16] I have supplied this name, the MSS. containing something which is evidently quite misunderstood.—ED.

[17] Comp. _Hist. of Rome_, vol. iii. p. 304, note 518.

[18] “I will mention only one example, to show how rich the Roman gildings were. In the Forum of Trajan the letters of an inscription were cut into the rock, and the letters themselves consisting of gilt metal were sunk into the openings. This is the method according to which the letters of inscriptions were generally put. In others the bronze letters were nailed to the wall, traces of which are still visible on the triumphal arch at Nismes, and French scholars have very ingeniously attempted from these holes of the nails to make out the whole inscription. In the Forum of Trajan a bronze letter has been found, the gilding of which was valued at a ducat; all the rest had of course been carried off as plunder.”

[19] See, however, the _Beschreib. d. Stadt Rom_, iii. 1. p. 22, foll.

[20] In one MS. the words “the Curia” are here added; is perhaps the Curia Julia meant?—ED.

[21] _Fast._ i. 707; some MSS. have Dionysius.—ED.

[22] _Calig._ 22. I owe this reference to the kindness of Professor Urlichs, who further observes: “Niebuhr was thinking of this passage, and combines two facts contained in it, for Suetonius does not expressly say, that the arch built by Caligula passed over the temple of Castor.”—ED.

[23] Bunsen in the _Beschreib. der Stadt Rom_, Pref. xl., iii. 2. p. 33.—ED.

[24] Compare Bunsen, _l. c._ Pref. p. xxiix.—ED.

[25] More accurately in 1257; comp. _Beschreib. d. Stadt. Rom_, i. p. 247.—ED.

[26] The so-called _Basis Capitolina_, Gruter, _Inscript._ CCL., reprinted in Becker’s _Handbuch d. Röm. Alterthümer_, vol. i. p. 717; compare Bunsen in the _Beschreib. d. Stadt Rom_, vol. i. p. 174.—ED.

[27] Livy, i. 35.

[28] “We still want a political history of Rome, which would show that a very great deal that is praiseworthy is to be said of many a pope.”

[29] Epist. xiii. 1.

[30] Muratori, _Antiq. Ital. med. aevi_, i., p. 101; the passage here quoted occurs in p. 108; Pertz, _Monum. Germ. Legum_, ii., p. 187, who assigns this _Ordo Coronationis_ to the year 1191; the book of Cencius, _Liber censuum Romanae Ecclesiae_, was written in 1192.—ED.

[31] See _Hist. of Rome_, vol. i., p. 204.

[32] Vol. ii. p. 507, foll.; comp. _Lect. on Rom. Hist._ vol. i. p. 248, 3d edit.—ED.

[33] Comp. _Lect. on Rom. Hist._, vol. i. p. 149, 3d edit, which passage belongs to the Lectures delivered in 1828-29. In the _Hist. of Rome_, vol. i. p. 101, and ii. p. 82, however, the Sabine origin of the Hernicans is considered more probable. The number forty also is connected with this view, because the number four is Sabine. I will therefore not suppress the fact, that most of my MSS. have _fourteen_ instead of _forty_, which may possibly contain a different combination, though I have been unable to divine what it can be.—ED.

[34] In the third vol. of the new edition; as for the special passages, see the Index to it.—ED.

[35] _Aen._ vii. 744.

[36] _Aen._ x. 708.

[37] Virgil, _Aen._ vii. 206.

[38] _Hist. of Rome_, vol. ii. p. 93, notes 194 and 195.—ED.

[39] Our authorities state 20,000; but Niebuhr seems to mean families, as only fathers of three children were admitted. Cicero, however, thinks that the _ager Campanus_ was not sufficient for more than 5000 persons. The most important passages relating to this subject are collected in Orelli, _Index Leg._ s.v., _Lex Julia Agraria_ p. 188.—ED.

[40] This is a mistake, or else an error in the MSS., for Nesis is mentioned by Cicero, _ad Att._ xvi. 1, 1; 3, 6; 4, 1; and by Seneca _Ep._ 53.—ED.

[41] “It is a great mistake to believe that a period must be better known the nearer it is to us. This is not the case in antiquity. There can be no doubt that, e.g., we know the internal condition of Rome in the time of Cicero much better than during the second century after Christ, when we know nothing but what can be gathered from Pliny’s letters. A merely mechanical mind imagines that a period about which nothing is written, had nothing worth knowing; but whoever has an eye for the remains of antiquity, sees distinctly what has existed. Thus, for example, the _monte testaccio_, _mons testaceus_ or _testarius_ at Rome is not mentioned anywhere until we come to the documents of the seventh and eighth centuries, and the most ridiculous pains have been taken to discover it at an earlier period. It is not mentioned in the Regionaria, hence, it is said, it must have arisen afterwards, about the period of the eighth century, when Rome was a desert. The matter can be explained very simply. Every one who has practised eyes, knows what is to be recognised in those thousands of shells; but there are antiquaries who can see nothing at all except what they read in books. The ancients made very little use of wooden vessels, they nearly always used pottery ware. This produced an enormous quantity of shells. It was thought inexpedient to throw them into the river, and there must have been some police regulation, that all shells should be thrown on one heap. I was on the spot when a wall was dug out, and it was found that the heaps of shells extended up to the very walls of the city. I caused the digging to be continued farther, and found shells everywhere. It must have been a marsh which was filled with shells to a depth of five feet. Under Honorius a wall was built to defend Rome against the barbarians; it has a double inscription, in one of which we read _egestis immensis ruderibus_. Under Augustus a regular police was instituted, and all shells were regularly thrown there. Now, imagine Rome with nearly a million of inhabitants; assuredly many carts were employed every day in carrying away the broken vessels, which were all thrown on one spot, and may have already filled the whole place. When Aurelian built his wall, a portion was perhaps thrown back, and this may have been the beginning of the hill. According to Andr. Fulvius, the wall of the city under pope Clement VII., at the commencement of the sixteenth century, was so much covered on both sides, that it was impossible to walk there: a road was then made, and part of the rubbish was carried to the Forum, which was filled with it. Such you must imagine the _rudera immensa egesta_ to have been. About the time of Honorius the wall had been cleared, not to have a hill outside, on which the Goths might have planted their engines to harass the city. He removed the rubbish on both sides, and thus raised an immense mound of shells. This explanation is as certain as if it were described in ancient authors, though not a single author speaks of it. Such also is the case with other phenomena which present themselves at Rome, and about which not one passage can be referred to.”

[42] Niebuhr was probably thinking of _Dial._ iv. 55, though Puteoli is not mentioned there, but Taurania, a place assumed to have existed in Campania.—ED.

[43] Comp. Seneca, _Epist._ 57.—ED.

[44] Comp. _Lect. on Rom. Hist._ vol. i. p. 348, foll., 3d edit.—ED.

[45] “I know that Greek inscriptions have also been discovered at Ravenna.”

[46] “I have adopted the ancient practice of calling the whole nation Sabellians, and the original tribe Sabines, because there is no instance of the Samnites, Marsians, etc., having been called Sabines, but only Sabellians.”

[47] Compare _Hist. of Rome_, vol. i. p. 64, foll.

[48] This is the date in the MSS., but it ought probably to be 1720.—ED.

[49] This alludes to the war between the Greeks and Turks in 1828.—ED.

[50] Il buon Braccio; _Hist. of Rome_, vol. iii. p. 415, note 713.

[51] “I mean the ancient one, whose scholia have now been discovered; for there also is another scholiast belonging to the middle ages, who is imperfect and bad, and belongs to the period of decay. The ancient one lived at the best period of Latin grammarians.”

[52] vii. 29 ed. Müller.

[53] “Pronounce _Arpīnum_, but _Arimĭnum_; I say this, because I have heard many otherwise good scholars say _Arimīnum_.”

[54] Comp. _Lect. on Rom. Hist._ vol. iii. p. 138.

[55] “Do not allow yourselves to be misguided by my occasionally departing from the regular division, for I follow the historical connection subsisting between the towns.”

[56] There is probably some mistake here; for what was said on that occasion is, that Greece ought not to be deprived of one of its eyes. It was Gelon, who, using a similar metaphor, spoke of “the spring being taken out of Greece,” when he was invited to take part in the war against the Persians (Herod. vii. 162).—ED.

[57] ix. 37.

[58] Comp. _Hist. of Rome_, vol. i. p. 34, note 89.

[59] The words in inverted commas have been supplied by me; comp. Ascon. _Comm. in Pison._, p. 3, ed. Orelli.—ED.

[60] These two dates occur in some MSS., but can scarcely be correct; the earlier eruption mentioned by Thucydides belongs to Olymp. 75, 2; and it seems impossible to ascertain the date of the first. Comp. Ullrich, _Beiträge zur Erklär. des Thukydides_, p. 92, foll.—ED.

[61] “The _Siculi_ were the natives, and the _Siceliots_ the Greeks who had settled in the island. Similarly the Romans sometimes distinguished between _Siculi_ and _Sicilienses_, but not by far as consistently as the Greeks, for no Greek ever confounded the two.”

[62] According to Berghaus, _Länder- und Völkerkunde_, iii. p. 404, it is found also in Corsica, Greece, and the Greek Archipelago.—ED.

[63] The more correct view is given by Berghaus, _l. c._ p. 460.—ED.

[64] ii. 85: _si ob gravitatem coeli interissent_.

[65] This name is only a conjecture of mine; one MS. has _Colero_.—ED.

[66] More correctly in 634, M. Porcio Catone, Q. Marcio Rege Coss. See _Vell. Pat._ i. 15.—ED.

[67] “Geography is a pleasant and easy study: the vivid representations it furnishes us of localities, often enable us clearly to understand an historical event; we often see, e.g., why a victory was not followed up, or how it might have been followed up. I do not like to set myself up as a pattern, but when I was a young man of your age, or even younger (I was scarcely seventeen years old), I read Strabo with the greatest attention. Whenever I had read a book, I endeavoured to reproduce it by writing down an abstract of it. It is not advisable to rely on books; and I therefore endeavoured to produce the substance in another form. Those who go through Strabo in this manner, even in their leisure hours, cannot fail to acquire a thorough knowledge of geography. Let those who have any taste for chorography read books of travel and similar works, as for example, Bory de St. Vincent, _Tableau de la peninsule de l’Ibérie_, or Alex. Laborde, _Tableau de l’Espagne_, which are especially valuable in assisting us to understand Livy’s account of the Spanish war. Strabo’s description of Spain is particularly excellent, but he is too often carried away by his learning and his desire to explain the Homeric poems; by reading his description you acquire an indelible and correct picture of Spain. A scholar must read the ancient authors systematically and repeatedly, sometimes with one particular object in view, and sometimes with another.”

[68] In Aristotle, _Probl._ xvii. 3: τοὺς ἀνθρώπους φησὶν Ἀλκμαίων διὰ τοῦτο ἀπόλλυσθαι, ὅτι οὐ δύνανται ἀρχὴν τῷ τέλει προσάψαι.

[69] See above, p. 33.

[70] Comp. _Kleine Schrift._ vol. i. p. 384.

[71] See, however, _Hist. of Rome_, vol. ii. p. 527.

[72] p. 2031, ed. Putsch.

[73] The restoration of the text here is uncertain, for towards the end of these Lectures the number of MSS. becomes smaller and smaller, and some of the best do not contain the last Lectures at all.—ED.

[74] “The _Cimmerians_ on the Euxine cannot be connected with these occurrences, for they belong to a period about two centuries earlier than that at which the Cymri can possibly have arrived in those parts.”

[75] _Kleine Schrift._, vol. i. p. 352, foll.

[76] According to some of the Fathers, he threw himself into the Euripus, because he had been unable to discover the law by which the currents of the sea were regulated.—ED.

[77] One MS. here has the addition “As Constantinople is by the wall S. Floriano.” Should it not be S. Romano?—ED.

[78] Should be thirty-eight; see _Hist. of Rome_, vol. i. p. 271.

[79] _Kleine Schrift._, vol. i. p. 209, note.

[80] Justin, xx. 5.

[81] Comp. _Lect. on Anc. Hist._ vol. i. p. 46, foll.

[82] Comp. _Lect. on Anc. Hist._ vol. iii. p. 298, note 3.

[83] Herod. i. 98.

[84] Lucian, _Quom. Hist. Conscrib. sit. 62_. “Lucian’s story about Herodotus is equally devoid of historical foundation.”

[85] It is certain that in the time of the Roman emperors, the Alexandrians pronounced Alexándreia, and they probably did so even under the Ptolemies; the Alexandrian dialect is in fact the root of the modern Greek.

[86] Comp. _Lect. on Ancient Hist._, vol. ii. p. 9.

INDEX.

Abantes, 176

Abdera, 212, 233

Abella, ii. 127

Aborigines, ii. 35, 147

Abruzzi, ii. 11

Abydos, 218, 235

Academia, 99

Acanthus, 231

Acarnanes, 125, 252

Acarnania, 142, 147 foll., 265

Acciajuoli, 107

Acerrae, ii. 127, 132

Achaei, 26, 150, 154

Achaean towns in Magna Graecia, ii. 189

Achaia, 28, 30, 33, 34, 37, 79 foll., 151

Achaia Phthiotis, 162, 164

Acharnae, 92, 110

Achelous, 144, 256

Acheron, 257

Acheruntia, ii. 159

Acherusian Lake, 256

Achradina, ii. 258

Achrida, 309

Acqua di Trevi, ii. 88

Acra, ii. 264

Acragas, ii. 261

Acridophagi, ii. 340

Acroceraunia, 255

Acrocorinthus, 45, 46

Actaea tellus, 42

Acte, 35, 42, 85

Actium, 152

Acusilaus, 11

Adjectives in _ius_ and _ianus_, ii. 84

Ad Martis, ii. 55

Aeas, see Aous.

Aedui, ii. 312, 317

Aegae, 80 _n._

Aegeae (in Macedonia), 278 foll., 290

Aegean sea, 182

Aegialea, Aegialos, 34, 36, 82

Aegina, 33, 45, 54, 64, 180, 183, 196;
temple of Zeus Hellenios and its sculptures, 55

Aegion, 80, 82

Aegira, 80

Aegirussa, 87

Aegyptus, 21; ii. 3

Aegyptus (the Nile), ii. 3

Aelian, 158

Aemilia, ii. 28

Aemonia or Haemonia, 132, 159, 160

Aenaria, ii. 135

Aenea, 252, 289

Aenianes, 142, 155, 172, 252

Aenos, 233

Aeolis, 145, 160, 206, 215 foll.

Aepy, 69

Aepys, 58

Aequani, ii. 123, 254

Aequi, ii. 4, 23, 119, 120

Aequi Falisci, ii. 229

Aequiculi, ii. 123, 254

Aequicus, ii. 254

Aequuli, ii. 123, 254

Aeschines, 19

Aeschylus, 119; ii. 8

Aesernia, ii. 164

Aethalia, ii. 220

Aethiopia, ii. 340

Aetna, ii. 256

Aetoli, 42, 77, 125, 137, 252, 254

Aetolia, 126, 136 foll., 252

Aetolian mountains, 157

Afri, ii. 334

Africa, ii. 327

Africanus, Julius, 51

Agamemnon’s kingdom, 33

Agatha, ii. 313

Agatharchides, ii. 340

Agathocles, 88; ii. 261, 266

Agger, the, of Servius Tullius, ii. 43, 48

Agiadae, 56

Agis, 58 _n._, 4

S. Agnolo, in Pescivendolo, 238 _n._ 2

Agora at Athens, 98;
in Piraeeus, 102

Agraei, 147, 270

Agrianes, 296

Agrigentum, ii. 255, 262

Agrimensores, ii. 229

Agrippa, ii. 57, 95

Agrippina, ii. 103

Agylla, 160; ii. 223

Agyrion, ii. 270, 272

Aix, ii. 315

Alabaster, ii. 220

Alalia, ii. 278

Alaric, 50

Alemanni, 306; ii. 57, 251

Alba, 115, 126

Alba Longa, ii. 107

Alba in Picenum, ii. 28

Alban hills, ii. 12

Albanese, 301; ii. 178

Albanus Lacus, ii. 12, 51

Albanus mons, ii. 38

Alberti, Battista, 7

Alcaeus, 56, 219

Alcmaeon, 148

Alcmaeon, the Pythagorean, ii. 296

Aleria, ii. 278

Aleuadae, 164

Alexander, son of Craterus, 49

Alexander, son of Philip, 198, 264

Alexander Aetolus, 144

Alexander Severus, ii. 57

Alexandria, 223, 233, 264; ii. 344

Alexandrian School, 160, 223

Alfaterna, ii. 143

Algarvia, ii. 255

Algidus, ii. 38, 121

Alis, 77, 252; comp. Elis.

Allifae, ii. 164

Allobroges, ii. 315

Alopeconnesus, 234, 235

Alpes, 284

Alpes Maritimae, ii. 11, 17

Alpes Cottiae, Graiae, Juliae Nepontiae, ii. 18;
Noricae Penninae, Raeticae, ii. 18

Alpes Apenninae, ii. 28

Alpes, a region of Italy, ii. 29

Alpis Cottia, Alpes Cottiae, region of Italy, ii. 29

Alpes Penninae, region of Italy, ii. 28

Alphabets, 302

Alpheus, 30

Alsium, ii. 223

Aluntium, ii. 270

Alyzia, 151, 152

Amalfi, ii. 167

Amantia, 306

Amasea, 20

Amastris, 250, 251

Amathus, ii. 349

Amazirgh, ii. 334

Ambracia, see Ampracia.

Amisus, 248, 249

Amiternum, ii. 149, 150

Ammianus Marcellinus, ii. 281

Amorgos, 190

Amphictyones, 129 foll., 252

Amphilochii, 147, 259, 263, 265, 269, 280

Amphipolis, 232, 286, 294

Amphipolis in Syria, 291

Amphissa, 124

Amphitheatrum, ii. 91

Amphitheatrum Castrense, ii. 93

Amphitheatrum Flavium, ii. 91

Amphitheatrum Statilii Tauri, ii. 91, 100

Amphitheatrum vivarium, ii. 93

Ampracia, 47, 138, 149, 263, 265, 270, 280, 307

Ampracian Gulf, 151

Ampurias, ii. 294

Amurath, 50

Amyclae, 58, 61

Anagnia, ii. 116

Anacreon, 211

Anactorion, 149, 152, 252

Anaphe, 190

Anas, ii. 283

Anauros, 160, 169

Anaxagoras, 212

Anaximander, 208

Anaximenes, 208

Ancon, 152; comp. Ancona.

Ancona, ii. 152

Andalusia, ii. 255

Andania, 69

Andros, 184, 187

S. Angelo, 63; comp. Malea.

S. Angelo in Pescaria, 238 _n._ 2

S. Angelo, castle of, ii. 101

Angli, 135

Anio, ii. 21

Anthedon, 117, 122

Anthemus, 289

Antibes, ii. 314

Anticyra, 133

Antigonea, 268

Antigonea, 73; comp. Mantinea.

Antigonids, 283

Antigonus Gonatas, 49

Antigonus Carystius, 307

Antioch, 234

Antiochus of Syracuse, ii. 188, 255

Antiparos, 186

Antipater, 292

Antipater’s poem on Corinth, 50

Antipolis, ii. 314

Antium, ii. 122

Antoninus, emperor, ii. 57

d’Anville, 9, 10, 18, 45 _n._, 168, 227, 257, 289; ii. 58, 127,
158, 340

Anxur, see Terracina.

Aones, 113

Aous, 307

Ἀπειρῶται, 252

Apelles, 210

Apennini montes, ii. 11, 18

Apia, 27

Apidanos, 160

Ἀπόκλητοι, 140

Apollo, temple of, at Gryneon, 216

Apollonia in Africa, ii. 330

Apollonia on the Aous, 273, 307; ii. 189

Apollonia in Thrace, 226

Apollonius Rhodius, 168, 175, 201, 271 _n._, ii. 328

Apollonius, tyrant of Cassandrea, 88

Appian, 304; ii. 30, 292, 336

Apricots, 252

Apuleius, 172; ii. 338

Apuli Daunii, ii. 170

Apuli Lucani, ii. 170

Apuli Teani, ii. 170

Apulia et Calabria, ii. 28

Apulia, 252; ii. 4, 5, 7, 12, 26, 154, 159, 168

Apulus, ii. 168

Aqua Appia, ii. 87

Aqua Claudia, ii. 88

Aqua crabra, ii. 50

Aqua damnata, ii. 50

Aqua Marcia, ii. 88

Aqua Virgo, ii. 88

Aquae Sextiae, ii. 315

Aquileia, ii. 248

Aquinum, ii. 127

Aquitani, ii. 313, 317

Aquitania, ii. 313

Arabic language, ii. 205, 206

Arachthos, 256, 307

Arae Philaenorum, ii. 330

Aragonese language, ii. 299

Araethyrea, 53; comp. Phlius.

Arar, ii. 316

Aratores, ii. 272

Aratus, 49, 53

Arausio, ii. 315

Arcades, 71, 75

Arcadia, 29, 30, 31, 33, 69, 70 foll.

Archaeanactidae, 246

Archelaus, 293

Archilochus, 183, 186

Archytas, ii. 186

Arctinus, 208

Ardea, ii. 109

Ardyaei, 300, 306, 311

Arelas, Arelate, ii. 315

Aremorica, ii. 318

Arena, ii. 46, 92

Areopagus, 96

Aretinus, 261 _n._ 2

Areus, Areas, 262 _n._

Arevaci, ii. 299

Ἀργεῖοι, 26

Argentum Oscense, ii. 295

Argolis, 29, 34, 37

Argos, 25, 30, 34, 36, 37 foll., 39, 161

Argos Amphilochicum, 166, 263, 266, 270, 307

Ἄργος Ἵππιον, see Arpi.

Argos in Orestis, 166, 269

Argos in Thessaly, 278

Argyripa, see Arpi.

Argyrocastro, 268

Aricia, ii. 115

Arimaspae, 208

Ariminum, ii. 26, 164 _n._, 241

Arion, 220

Arisba, 218

Aristides, Aelius, 20, 293 _n._

Aristodemus, 56

Aristodemus, tyrant of Elis, 88

Aristophanes, ii. 8

Aristoteles, 16, 23, 54, 78, 223, 255, 307; ii. 200, 296 _n._, 331

Aristoxenus, ii. 205

Arles, ii. 315

Armorica, ii. 25

Arnauts, 301

Arndt, E. M., ii. 10

Arne, 113, 160

Arno, ii. 21, 215

Arpi, ii. 170, 172

Arpinum, ii. 119, 124, 159

Arretium, ii. 163, 213, 227

Arretium, vases of, ii. 134

Arretium, vetus, fidens, Julium, ii. 227

Arrian, 118

Arsinoe, ii. 329

Artemidorus, ii. 283

Artyni, 43

Aruaci, ii. 299

Arverni, ii. 312, 316

Arx, ii. 48, 67

Asbestus, ii. 44

Asclepiadae, 204

Asculum, ii. 151

Asia, 22

Asine, 67, 69

Asinia gens, ii. 157

Asopus, 116

Aspetus, 261

Asphalt, springs of, 305

Aspropotamo, 145; comp. Achelous.

Assisium, ii. 233

Assos, 218

Astacos, 241

Asteria, 184

Astorga, ii. 302

Astures, ii. 301

Asturica, ii. 302

Ἄστυ, 93

Astypalaea, 195

Asylum, ii. 66

Atarneus, 223

Atella, ii. 127, 132

Athamania, 280 _n._ 2

Athenae, 55, 89, 93 foll.;
the city of Hadrian, 96, 99;
acropolis of, 97;
buildings, 100, 106;
population, 107;
allied with Aetolia, 143

Ἀθηνᾶ Πολιάς, temple of, 97

Athenaeus, 20, 54, 108; ii. 85, 205

Ἀθηναῖοι Βοιωτοί, 112

Ἀθηναῖος, 91

Athenians, 98; ii. 194

Athesis, ii. 246

Athos, 226, 229, 280

Atintanes, 269, 311

Atreids, 33

Atrium, ii. 77

Atrium Libertatis, ii. 77

Atrium Vestae, ii. 77

Attica, 84, 90 foll.

Atticus, T. Pomponius, 267, 272

Ἀττικός, Ἀττική, 91

Attius, 181

Audyeelah, ii. 335

Aufidus, ii. 22, 171

Augila, ii. 335

Augusta Taurinorum, ii. 252

Augusta Trevirorum, ii. 319