Chapter XIX: Appendix: Roman Britain (5)

[264] The sharpest criticism of the campaign is furnished by the detailed account of the Egyptian merchant as to the state of the Arabian coast from Leuce Come (el-Haura to the north of Janbô, the port of Medina) to the Catacecaumene island (Jebel Taik near Lôhaia). “Different peoples inhabit it, who speak languages partly somewhat different, partly wholly so. The inhabitants of the coast live in pens like the ‘fish-eaters’ on the opposite coast” (these pens he describes, c. 2, as isolated and built into the clefts of the rocks), “those of the interior in villages and pastoral companies; they are ill-disposed men speaking two languages, who plunder the seafarers that drift out of their course and drag the shipwrecked into slavery. For that reason they are constantly hunted by the viceroys and chief kings of Arabia; they are called Kanraites (or Kassanites). In general navigation on all this coast is dangerous, the shore is without harbours and inaccessible, with a troublesome surf, rocky and in general very bad. Therefore, when we sail into these waters, we keep to the middle and hasten to get to the Arabian territory at the island Catacecaumene; from thence onward the inhabitants are hospitable, and we meet with numerous flocks of sheep and camels.” The same region between the Roman and the Homeritic frontiers, and the same state of things are in the view of the Axomite king, when he writes: πέραν δὲ τῆς ἐρυθρᾶς θαλάσσης οἰκοῦντας Ἀρραβίτας καὶ Κιναιδοκολπίτας (comp. Ptolemaeus vi. 7, 20), στράτευμα ναυτικὸν καὶ πεζικὸν διαπεμψάμενος καὶ ὑποτάξας αὐτῶν τοὺς βασιλέας, φόρους τῆς γῆς τελεῖν ἐκέλευσα καὶ ὁδεύεσθαι μετ’ εἰρήνης καὶ πλέεσθαι, ἀπό τε Λευκῆς κώμης ἕως τῶν Σαβαίων χώρας ἐπολέμησα.

[265] These walls, built of rubble, form a circle of a mile in diameter. They are described by Arnaud (_l.c._, comp. p. 287, note 1).

[266] That the Oriental expedition of Gaius had Arabia as its goal, is stated expressly by Pliny (particularly _H. N._ xii. 14, 55, 56; comp. ii. 67, 168; vi. 27, 141, c. 28, 160; xxxii. 1, 10). That it was to set out from the mouth of the Euphrates, follows from the fact that the expedition to Armenia and the negotiations with the Parthians preceded it. For that reason the Collectanea of Juba as to the impending expedition were based upon the reports of the generals of Alexander as to their exploring of Arabia.

[267] Our only information as to this remarkable expedition has been preserved to us by the Egyptian captain, who about the year 75 has described his voyage on the coasts of the Red Sea. He knows (c. 26) the Adane of later writers, the modern Aden, as a village on the coast (κώμη παραθαλάσσιος), which belongs to the realm of Charibael, king of the Homerites, but was earlier a flourishing town, and was so termed (εὐδαίμων δ’ ἐπεκλήθη πρότερον οὖσα πόλις) because before the institution of the direct Indo-Egyptian traffic this place served as a mart: νῦν δὲ οὐ πρὸ πολλοῦ τῶν ἡμετέρων χρόνων Καῖσαρ αὐτὴν κατεστρέψατο. The last word can here only mean “destroy,” not, as more frequently, “subdue,” because the conversion of the town into a village is to be accounted for. For Καῖσαρ Schwanbeck (_Rhein. Mus. neue Folge_, vii. 353) has proposed Χαριβαήλ, C. Müller Ἰλασάρ (on account of Strabo, xvi. 4, 21, p. 782): neither is possible--not the latter, because this Arabian dynast ruled in a far remote district and could not possibly be presumed as well known; not the former, because Charibael was a contemporary of the writer, and there is here reported an incident which occurred before his time. We shall not take offence at the tradition, if we reflect what interest the Romans must have had in setting aside the Arabian mart between India and Egypt, and in bringing about direct intercourse. That the Roman accounts are silent as to this occurrence is in keeping with their habit; the expedition, which beyond doubt was executed by an Egyptian fleet and simply consisted in the destruction of a presumably defenceless place on the coast, would not be from a military point of view of any importance; about great commercial dealings the annalists gave themselves no concern, and generally the incidents in Egypt came still less than those in the other imperial provinces to the knowledge of the senate and therewith of the annalists. The naked designation Καῖσαρ, in which from the nature of the case the ruler then reigning is excluded, is probably to be explained from the circumstance that the reporting captain, while knowing doubtless the fact of the destruction by the Romans, knew not its date or author.--It is possible that to this the notice in Pliny (_H. N._ ii. 67, 168) is to be referred: _maiorem (oceani) partem et orientis victoriae magni Alexandri lustravere usque in Arabicum sinum, in quo res gerente C. Caesare Aug. f. signa navium ex Hispaniensibus naufragiis feruntur agnita_. Gaius did not reach Arabia (Plin. _H. N._ vi. 28, 160); but during the Armenian expedition a Roman squadron may very well have been conducted by one of his sub-commanders to this coast, in order to pave the way for the main expedition. That silence reigns elsewhere respecting it cannot surprise us. The Arabian expedition of Gaius had been so solemnly announced and then abandoned in so wretched a way, that loyal reporters had every reason to obliterate a fact which could not well be mentioned without also reporting the failure of the greater plan.

[268] The Egyptian merchant distinguishes the ἔνθεσμος βασιλεύς of the Homerites (c. 23) sharply from the τύραννοι, the tribal chiefs sometimes subordinate to him, sometimes independent (c. 14), and as sharply distinguishes these organised conditions from the lawlessness of the inhabitants of the desert (c. 2). If Strabo and Tacitus had had eyes as open for these things as that practical man had, we should have known somewhat more of antiquity.

[269] The war of Macrinus against the _Arabes eudaemones_ (_vita_, 12) and their envoys sent to Aurelian (_vita_, 33), who are named along with those of the Axomites, would prove their continued independence at that time, if these statements could be depended on.

[270] The king names himself, about the year 356 (p. 284, note 2), in a document (_C. I. Gr._ 5128) βασιλεὺς Ἀξωμιτῶν καὶ Ὁμηριτῶν καὶ τοῦ Ῥαειδὰν (castle in Sapphar, the capital of the Homerites; Dillmann, _Abh. der Berl. Akad._ 1878, p. 207) ... καὶ Σαβαειτῶν καὶ τοῦ Σιλεῆ (castle in Mariaba, the capital of the Sabaeans; Dillmann, _l.c._). With this agrees the contemporary mission of envoys _ad gentem Axumitarum et Homerita[rum]_ (_C. Th._ xii. 12, 2). As to the later state of things comp. especially Nonnosus (_fr. hist. Gr._ iv. p. 179, Müll.) and Procopius, _Hist. Pers._ i. 20.

[271] Aristides (_Or._ xlviii. p. 485, Dind.) names Coptos the Indian and Arabian entrepôt. In the romance of Xenophon the Ephesian (iv. 1), the Syrian robbers resort to Coptos, “for there a number of merchants pass through, who are travelling to Aethiopia and India.”

[272] Hadrian later constructed “the new Hadrian’s road” which led from his town Antinoopolis near Hermopolis, probably through the desert to Myos Hormos, and from Myos Hormos along the sea to Berenice, and provided it with cisterns, stations (σταθμοί), and forts (inscription in _Revue Archéol._ N. S. xxi. year 1870, p. 314). However there is no mention of this road subsequently, and it is a question whether it continued to subsist.

[273] This is nowhere expressly said, but it is clearly evident from the Periplus of the Egyptian. He speaks at numerous places of the intercourse of the non-Roman Africa with Arabia (c. 7, 8), and conversely of the Arabians with the non-Roman Africa (c. 17, 21, 31; and after him Ptolemaeus, i. 17, 6), and with Persia (c. 27, 33), and India (c. 21, 27, 49); as also of that of the Persians with India (c. 36), as well as of the Indian merchantmen with the non-Roman Africa (c. 14, 31, 32), and with Persia (c. 36) and Arabia (c. 32). But there is not a word indicating that these foreign merchants came to Berenice, Myos Hormos, or Leuce Come; indeed, when he remarks with reference to the most important mart of all this circle of traffic, Muza, that these merchants sail with their own ships to the African coast outside of the Straits of Bab El Mandeb (for that is for him τὸ πέραν), and to India, Egypt cannot possibly be absent by accident.

[274] In Bâmanghati (district Singhbhum) westward from Calcutta, a great treasure of gold coins of Roman emperors (Gordian and Constantine are named) is said to have come to light (Beglar, in Cunningham’s _Archaeological Survey of India_, vol. xiii. p. 72); but such an isolated find does not prove that regular intercourse extended so far. In Further India and China Roman coins have very seldom been found.

[275] The designation _Afer_ does not belong to this series. So far as we can follow it back in linguistic usage, it is never given to the Berber in contrast to other African stocks, but to every inhabitant of the Continent lying over against Sicily, and particularly also to the Phoenician; if it has designated a definite people at all, this can only have been that, with which the Romans here first and chiefly came into contact (comp. Suetonius, _vita Terent._). Reasons philological and real oppose themselves to our attempt in i. 162 {i. 154} to trace back the word to the name of the Hebrews; a satisfactory etymology has not yet been found for it.

[276] A good observer, Charles Tissot, (_Géogr. de la province romaine de l’Afrique_, i. p. 403) testifies that upwards of a third of the inhabitants of Morocco have fair or brown hair, and in the colony of the inhabitants of the Riff in Tangier two-thirds. The women made the impression on him of those of Berry and of Auvergne. _Sur les hauts sommets de la chaîne atlantique, d’après les renseignements qui m’ont été fournis, la population tout entière serait remarquablement blonde. Elle aurait les yeux bleus, gris ou “verts, comme ceux des chats,” pour reproduire l’expression même dont s’est servi le cheikh qui me renseignait._ The same phenomenon meets us in the mountain masses of Grand Kabylia and of the Aures, as well as on the Tunisian island Jerba and the Canary Islands. The Egyptian representations also show to us the Libu not red, like the Egyptians, but white, and with fair or brown hair.

[277] Cyprian, _Quod idola dii non sint_, c. 2: _Mauri manifeste reges suos colunt nec ullo velamento hoc nomen obtexunt_. Tertullian, _Apolog._ 24: _Mauretaniae (dei sunt) reguli sui_. _C. I. L._ viii., 8834: _Iemsali L. Percenius L. f. Stel. Rogatus v. (s. l. a.)_, found at Thubusuptu in the region of Sitifis, which place may well have belonged to the Numidian kingdom of Hiempsal. Thus the inscription also of Thubursicum (_C. I. L._ viii. n. 7* comp. _Eph. epigr._ v. p. 651, n. 1478) must have rather been badly copied than falsified. Still, in the year 70, it was alleged that in Mauretania a pretender to the throne had ascribed to himself the name of Juba (Tacitus, _Hist._ ii. 58).

[278] This is attested for the year 705 {49 B.C.} as regards both by Dio, xli. 42 (comp. Suetonius, _Caes._ 54). In the year 707 {47 B.C.} Bogud lends assistance to the Caesarian governor of Spain (_Bell. Alex._ 59, 60), and repels an incursion of the younger Gnaeus Pompeius (_Bell. Afric._ 23). Bocchus, in combination with P. Sittius, in the African war makes a successful diversion against Juba and conquers even the important Cirta (_Bell. Afr._ 23; Appian, ii. 96; Dio, xliii. 3). The two obtained in return from Caesar the territory of the prince Massinissa (Appian, iv. 54). In the second Spanish war Bogud appears in the army of Caesar (Dio, xliii. 36, 38); the statement that the son of Bocchus had served in the Pompeian army (Dio, _l. c._) must be a confusion, probably with Arabio the son of Massinissa, who certainly went to the sons of Pompeius (Appian, _l. c._). After Caesar’s death Arabio possessed himself afresh of his dominion (Appian, _l. c._), but after his death in the year 714 {40 B.C.} (Dio, xlviii. 22) the Caesarian arrangement must have again taken effect in its full extent. The bestowal on Bocchus and Sittius is probably to be understood to the effect that, in the western part of the former Numidian kingdom otherwise left to Bocchus, the colony of Cirta to be founded by Sittius was to be regarded as an independent Roman town, like Tingi subsequently in the kingdom of Mauretania.

[279] If, according to Dio, xl. 43, Caesar in the year 721 {33 B.C.} after the death of Bocchus, nominates no successor, but makes Mauretania a province, and then (li. 15) in the year 724 {30 B.C.}, on occasion of the end of the queen of Egypt, there is mention of the marriage of her daughter with Juba and his investiture with his father’s kingdom, and, lastly (liii. 26), under the year 729 {25 B.C.} there is reported Juba’s investiture with a portion of Gaetulia instead of his hereditary kingdom, as well as with the kingdoms of Bocchus and Bogud; only the last account confirmed by Strabo, xvii. 3, 7, p. 828, is correct. The first is at least incorrect in its way of apprehending the matter, as Mauretania evidently was not made a province in 721 {33 B.C.}, but only the investiture was held in abeyance for the time being; and the second partly anticipates, since Cleopatra, born before the triumph about 719 (_Eph. epigr._ i., p. 276), could not possibly be married in 724, and is partly mistaken, because Juba certainly never got back his paternal kingdom as such. If he had been king of Numidia before 729, and if it had been merely the extent of his kingdom that then underwent a change, he would have counted his years from the first installation and not merely from 729.

[280] That Balbus carried on this campaign as proconsul of Africa, is shown in particular by the triumphal Fasti; but the consul L. Cornelius of the year 732 must have been another person, since Balbus, according to Velleius ii. 51, obtained that consular governorship, _ex privato consularis_, _i.e._ without having filled a curule office. The nomination, therefore, cannot have taken place according to the usual arrangement by lot. To all appearance he fell into disgrace with Augustus for good reasons on account of his Spanish quaestorship (Drumann ii. 609), and was then, after the lapse of more than twenty years, sent, as an extraordinary measure, to Africa, on account of his undoubted aptitude for this specially difficult task.

[281] The tribes whom Tacitus names in his account of the war, far from clear, as always, in a geographical point of view, may be in some measure determined; and the position between the Leptitanian and the Cirtensian columns (_Ann._ iii. 74) points for the middle column to Theveste. The town of Thala (_Ann._ iii. 20) cannot possibly be sought above Ammaedara, but is probably the Thala of the Jugurthan war in the vicinity of Capsa. The last section of the war has its arena in western Mauretania about Auzia (iv. 25), and accordingly in Thubuscum (iv. 24) there lurks possibly Thubusuptu or Thubusuctu. The river Pagyda (_Ann._ iii. 20) is quite indefinable.

[282] Ptolemaeus, iv. 3, 23, puts the Musulamii southward from the Aures, and it is only in accord therewith that they are called in Tacitus ii. 52, dwellers beside the steppe and neighbours of the Mauri; later they are settled to the north and west of Theveste (_C. I. L._ viii. 270, 10667). The Nattabutes dwelt according to Ptolemaeus _l. c._ southward of the Musulamii; subsequently we find them to the south of Calama (_C. I. L._ viii. 484). In like manner the _Chellenses Numidae_, between Lares and Althiburus (_Eph. epigr._ V. n. 639), and the _conventus (civium Romanorum et) Numidarum qui Mascululae habitant_ (_ib._ n. 597), are probably Berber tribes transplanted from Numidia to the proconsular province.

[283] In the year 70 the troops of the two Mauretanias amounted together, in addition to militia levied in large numbers, to 5 alae and 19 cohortes (Tacitus, _Hist._ ii. 58), and so, if we reckon on the average every fourth as a double troop, to about 15,000 men. The regular army of Numidia was weaker rather than stronger.

[284] Inscription _C. I. L._ viii. 8369 of the year 129: _Termini positi inter Igilgilitanos, in quorum finibus kastellum Victoriae positum est, et Zimiz(es), ut sciant Zimizes non plus in usum se habere ex auctoritate M. Vetti Latronis pro(curatoris) Aug(usti) qua(m) in circuitu a muro kast(elli) p(edes)_ D. The _Zimises_ are placed by the Peutingerian map alongside of Igilgili to the westward.

[285] If the praefect of a cohort doing garrison duty in Numidia held the command at the same time over six Gaetulian tribes (_nationes_, _C. I. L._ v. 5267), men that were natives of Mauretania were employed as irregulars in the neighbouring province. Irregular Mauretanian horsemen frequently occur, especially in the later imperial period. Lusius Quietus under Trajan, a Moor and leader of a Moorish troop (Dio lxviii. 32), no Λίβυς ἐκ τῆς ὑπηκόου Λιβύης, ἀλλ’ ἐξ ἀδόξου καὶ ἀπῳκισμένης ἐσχατιᾶς (Themistius, _Or._ xvi p. 250 Dind.), was without doubt a Gaetulian sheikh, who served with his followers in the Roman army. That his home was formally independent of the empire, is not affirmed in the words of Themistius; the “subject-territory” is that with Roman organisation, the ἐσχατιά its border inhabited by dependent tribes.

[286] To the inscriptions, which prove this (_C. I. L._ viii. p. xviii. 747), falls now to be added the remarkable dedication of the leader of an expeditionary column from the year 174, found in the neighbourhood of Géryville (_Eph. epigr._ v. n. 1043).

[287] The _tumultus Gaetulicus_ (_C. I. L._ viii. 6958) was rather an insurrection than an invasion.

[288] Ptolemy certainly takes as boundary of the province of Caesarea the line above the Shott, and does not reckon Gaetulia as belonging to it; on the other hand he extends that of Tingis as far as the Great Atlas. Pliny v. 4, 30, numbers among the subject peoples of Africa “all Gaetulia as far as the Niger and the Ethiopian frontier,” which points nearly to Timbuctoo. The latter statement will accord with the official conception of the matter.

[289] Already in Nero’s time Calpurnius (_Egl._ iv. 40) terms the shore of Baetica _trucibus obnoxia Mauris_.--If under Pius the Moors were beaten off and driven back as far as and over the Atlas (_vita Pii_, 5; Pausanias viii. 43), the sending of troops at that time from Spain to the Tingitana (_C. I. L._ iii. 5212-5215) makes it probable that this attack of the Moors affected Baetica, and the troops of the Tarraconensis marching against these followed them over the straits. The probably contemporary activity of the Syrian legion at the Aures (p. 320) suggests moreover that this war extended also to Numidia.--The war with the Moors under Marcus (_vita Marci_, 21, 22; _vita Severi_, 2), had its scene essentially in Baetica and Lusitania.--A governor of Hither Spain under Severus had to fight with the “rebels” by water and by land (_C. I. L._ ii. 4114).--Under Alexander (_vita_, 58) there was fighting in the province of Tingi, but without mention of Spain in the case.--From the time of Aurelian (_vita Saturnini_, 9) there is mention of Mauro-Spanish conflicts. We cannot exactly determine the time of a sending of troops from Numidia to Spain and against the Mazices (_C. I. L._ viii. 2786), where presumably not the Mazices of the Caesariensis but those of the Tingitana on the Riff (Ptolem. iv. 1, 10), are meant; perhaps with this is connected the fact that Gaius Vallius Maximianus, as governor of Tingitana, achieved in the province Baetica (according to Hirschfeld, _Wiener Stud._ vi. 123, under Marcus and Commodus) a victory over the Moors and relieved towns besieged by them (_C. I. L._ ii. 1120, 2015); these events prove at least that the conflicts with the Moors on the Riff and the associates that flocked to them from the country lying behind did not cease. When the Baquates on the same coast besieged the pretty remote Cartenna (Tenes) in the Caesariensis (_C. I. L._ viii. 9663), they perhaps came by sea. Where the wars with the Moors under Hadrian (_vita_, 5, 12) and Commodus (_vita_, 13) took place is not known.

[290] More information than in the scanty accounts of Victor and Eutropius is supplied as to this war by the inscribed stones, _C. I. L._ viii. 2615, 8836, 9045, 9047. According to these the _Quinquegentiani_ may be followed out from Gallienus to Diocletian. The beginning is made by the Baquates who, designated as _Transtagnenses_, must have dwelt beyond the Shott. Four “kings” combine for an expedition. The most dreaded opponent is Faraxen with his _gentiles Fraxinenses_. Towns like Mileu in Numidia not far from Cirta and Auzia in the Caesariensis are attacked, and the citizens must in good part defend themselves against the enemy. After the end of the war Maximian constructs great magazines in Thubusuctu not far from Saldae. These fragmentary accounts give in some measure an insight into the relations of the time.

[291] Apart from the coins this is proved also by the inscriptions. According to the comparison, for which I am indebted to Herr Euting, the great mass of the old Punic inscriptions, that is, those written probably before the destruction of Carthage, falls to Carthage itself (about 2500), the rest to Hadrumetum (9), Thugga (the famous Phoenico-Berber one), Cirta (5), Iol-Caesarea (1). The new Punic occur most numerously in and around Carthage (30), and generally they are found not unfrequently in the proconsular province, also in Great Leptis (5) and on the islands of Girba (1) and Cossura (1); in Numidia, in and near Calama (23), and in Cirta (15); in Mauretania hitherto only in Portus Magnus (2).

[292] The coining in Africa ceases in the main after Tiberius, and thereafter, since African inscriptions from the first century after Christ are before us only in very small numbers, for a considerable period documents fail us. The coins of Babba in the Tingitana, going from Claudius down to Galba, have exclusively Latin legends; but the town was a colony. The Latin-Punic inscriptions of Great Leptis, _C. I. L._ viii. 7, and of Naraggara, _C. I. L._ viii. 4636, may doubtless belong to the time after Tiberius, but as bilingual tell rather for the view that, when they were set up, the Phoenician language was already degraded.

[293] From the expression in the epitome of Victor, that the emperor Severus was _Latinis litteris sufficienter instructus, Graecis sermonibus eruditus, Punica eloquentia promptior, quippe genitus apud Leptim_, we may not infer a Punic course of rhetoric in the Tripolis of that time; the late and inferior author has possibly given a scholastic version of the well-known notice.

[294] On the statement of the younger Arnobius, writing about 460 (_ad Psalm._ 104, p. 481 Migne: _Cham vero secundus filius Noe a Rhinocoruris usque Gadira habens linguas sermone Punico a parte Garamantum, Latino a parte boreae, barbarico a parte meridiani, Aethiopum et Aegyptiorum ac barbaris interioribus vario sermone numero viginti duabus linguis in patriis trecentis nonaginta et quattuor_), no reliance is to be placed, still less upon the nonsense of Procopius, _de bello Vand._ ii. 10, as to the Phoenician inscription and language in Tigisis. Authorities of this sort were hardly able to distinguish Berber and Punic.

[295] In a single place on the Little Syrtis the Phoenician may still have been spoken in the eleventh century (Movers, _Phön._ ii. 2, 478).

[296] More clearly than by the Latin inscriptions found in Africa, which begin too late to illustrate the state of things before the second century A.D., this is shown by the four contracts of _patronatus_ from the time of Tiberius, quoted in next note, concluded by two small places of the proconsular province Apisa maius and Siagu, and two others nowhere else mentioned, probably adjacent, Themetra and Thimiligi; according to which the statement of Strabo (xvii. 3, 15, p. 833) that at the beginning of the last war the Carthaginian territory numbered 300 towns, appears not at all incredible. In each of those four smaller places there were sufetes; even where the old and new Punic inscriptions name magistrates, there are regularly two sufetes. That these are comparatively frequent in the proconsular province, and elsewhere can only be pointed out in Calama, serves to show how much more strongly the Phoenician urban organisation was developed in the former.

[297] The contracts of _patronatus_ from the time of Caesar (_C. I. L._ viii. 10525), of Augustus (_ib._ 68 comp. 69), and Tiberius (_C. I. L._ v. 4919-4922), concluded by the _senatus populusque_ of African communities (_civitates_) of peregrine rights with Romans of rank, appear to have been entered into quite after the Roman fashion by the common council, which represents and binds the community.

[298] On the coin undoubtedly struck under Caesar (Müller _Num. de l’Afr._ ii. 149) with _Kar(thago) Veneris_ and _Aristo Mutumbal Ricoce suf(etes)_, the first two names are probably to be taken together as a Graeco-Phoenician double name, such as elsewhere is not rare (comp. _C. I. L._ v. 4922: _agente Celere Imilchonis Gulalsae filio sufete_). Since on the one hand sufetes cannot be assigned to a Roman colony, and on the other hand the conducting of such a colony to Carthage itself is well attested, Caesar himself must either have subsequently changed the form of founding the city, or the founding of the colony must have been carried into effect by the triumvirate as a posthumous ordinance of the dictator (as is hinted by Appian, _Pun._ 136). We may compare the fact that Curubis stands in the earlier time of Caesar under sufetes (_C. I. L._ viii. 10525), in the year 709 U.C. as a Caesarian colony under duoviri (_ib._ 977); yet the case is different, since this town did not, like Carthage, owe its existence to Caesar.

[299] For Africa and Numidia Pliny (_H. N._, v. 4, 29 f.) numbers in all 516 communities, among which are 6 colonies, 15 communities of Roman burgesses, 2 Latin towns (for the _oppidum stipendiarium_ must, according to the position which is given to it, have been also of Italian rights), the rest either Phoenician towns (_oppida_), among which were 30 free, or else Libyan tribes (_non civitates tantum, sed pleraeque etiam nationes iure dici possunt_). Whether these figures are to be referred to Vespasian’s time or to an earlier, is not ascertained; in any case they are not free from errors, for, besides the six colonies specially adduced, six are wanting (Assuras, Carpi, Clupea, Curubi, Hippo Diarrhytos, Neapolis), which are referable, partly with certainty partly with probability, to Caesar or Augustus.

[300] Pliny, v. 1, 2, says indeed only of Zulil or rather Zili _regum dicioni exempta et iura in Baeticam petere iussa_, and this might be connected with the transfer of this community to Baetica as _Iulia Traducta_ (Strabo, iii. 1, 8, p. 140). But probably Pliny gives this notice in the case of Zili alone, just because this is the first colony laid out beyond the imperial frontier which he names. The burgess of a Roman colony cannot possibly have had his forum of justice before the king of Mauretania.

[301] Frontinus in the well-known passage, p. 53 Lachm., respecting processes between the urban communities and private persons, or, as it may be, the emperor, appears not to presuppose state-districts _de iure_ independent and of a similar nature with urban territories--such as are incompatible with Roman law--but a _de facto_ refractory attitude of the great land-owner towards the community which makes him liable, _e.g._ for the furnishing of recruits or compulsory services, basing itself on the allegation that the piece of land made liable is not within the bounds of the community requiring the service.

[302] The technical designation _gens_ comes into prominence particularly in the fixed title of the _praefectus gentis Musulamiorum, etc._; but, as this is the lowest category of the independent commonwealth, the word is usually avoided in dedications (comp. _C. I. L._ viii. p. 1100) and _civitas_ put instead, a designation, which, like the _oppidum_ of Pliny foreign to the technical language (p. 331, note), includes in it all communities of non-Italian or Greek organisation. The nature of the _gens_ is described by the paraphrase (_C. I. L._ viii. 68) alternating with _civitas Gurzensis_ (_ib._ 69): _senatus populusque civitatium stipendiariorum pago Gurzenses_, that is, the “elders and community of the clans of tributary people in the village of Gurza.”

[303] When the designation _princeps_ (_C. I. L._ viii. p. 1102) is not merely enunciative but an official title, it appears throughout in communities which are neither themselves urban communities nor parts of such, and with special frequency in the case of the _gentes_. We may compare the “eleven first” (comp. _Eph. epigr._ v. n. 302, 521, 533) with the _seniores_ to be met with here and there. An evidence in support of both positions is given in the inscription _C. I. L._ viii. 7041: _Florus Labaeonis f. princeps et undecimprimus gentis Saboidum_. Recently at Bu Jelîda, a little westward of the great road between Carthage and Theveste, in a valley of the Jebel Rihan, and so in a quite civilised region, there have been found the remains of a Berber village, which calls itself on a monument of the time of Pius (still unprinted) _gens Bacchuiana_, and is under “eleven elders”; the names of gods (_Saturno Achaiaei [?] Aug[usio]_), like the names of men (_Candidus Braisamonis fil._), are half local, half Latin. In Calama the dating after the two sufetes and the _princeps_ (_C. I. L._ viii. 5306, comp. 5369) is remarkable; it appears that this probably Libyan community was first under a chief, and then obtained sufetes without the chief being dropped. It may readily be understood that our monuments do not give much information upon the _gentes_ and their organisation; in this field doubtless little was written on stone. Even the Libyan inscriptions belong, at least as regards the majority, to towns in part or wholly inhabited by Berbers; the bilingual inscriptions found at Tenelium (_C. I. L._ viii. p. 514), in Numidia westward from Bona in the Sheffia plain, the same place that has furnished till now most of the Berber stone inscriptions, show indeed in their Latin part Libyan names, _e.g._ _Chinidial Misicir_ f. and _Naddhsen Cotuzanis_ f., both from the clan (_tribu_) of the _Misiciri_ or _Misictri_; but one of these people, who has served in the Roman army and has acquired the Roman franchise, names himself in the Latin text _in civitate sua Tenelio flamen perpetuus_, according to which this place seems to have been organised like a town. If, therefore, success should ever attend the attempt to read and decipher the Berber inscriptions with certainty, they would hardly give us sufficient information as to the internal organisation of the Berber tribes.

[304] That the Gaetulian purple is to be referred to Juba is stated by Pliny, _H. N._ vi. 31, 201: _paucas (Mauretaniae insulas) constat esse ex adverso Autololum a Iuba repertas, in quibus Gaetulicam purpuram tinguere instituerat_; by these _insulae purpurariae_ (_ib._ 203) can only be meant Madeira. In fact the oldest mention of this purple is that in Horace, _Ep._ ii. 2, 181. Proofs are wanting as to the later duration of this manufacture, and, as the Roman rule did not extend to these islands, it is not probable, although from the _sagum purpurium_ of the tariff of Zarai (_C. I. L._ viii. 4508) we may infer Mauretanian manufactures of purple.

[305] The tariff of Zarai set up at the Numidian customs-frontier towards Mauretania (_C. I. L._ viii. 4508) from the year 202 gives a clear picture of the Mauretanian exports. Wine, figs, dates, sponges, are not wanting; but slaves, cattle of all sorts, woollen stuffs (_vestis Afra_), and leather wares play the chief part. The Description of the earth also from the time of Constantius says, c. 60, that Mauretania _vestem et mancipia negotiatur_.

[306] According to an epitaph found in Mactaris in the Byzacene (_Eph. epigr._ v. n. 279), a man of free birth there, after having been actively engaged in bringing in the harvests far around in Africa, first throughout twelve years as an ordinary reaper and then for another eleven as a foreman, purchased for himself with the savings of his pay a town and a country house, and became in his turn a member of council and burgomaster. His poetical epitaph shows, if not culture, at least pretensions to it. A development of life of this sort was in the Roman imperial period doubtless not so rare as it at first may seem, but probably occurred in Africa more frequently than elsewhere.

[307] How far our Latin texts of the Bible are to be referred to several translations originally different, or whether, as Lachmann assumed, the different recensions have proceeded from one and the same translation as a basis by means of manifold revision with the aid of the originals, are questions which can scarcely be definitely decided--for the present at least--in favour of either one or the other view. But that both Italians and Africans took part in this work--whether of translation or of correction--is proved by the famous words of Augustine, _de doctr. Christ._ ii. 15, 22, _in ipsis autem interpretationibus Itala ceteris praeferatur, nam est verborum tenacior cum perspicuitate sententiae_, over which great authorities have been perplexed, but certainly without reason. Bentley’s proposal, approved afresh of late (by Corssen, _Jahrb. für protestant. Theol._ vii. p. 507 f.), to change _Itala_ into _illa_ and _nam_ into _quae_, is inadmissible alike philologically and in substance. For the twofold change is destitute of all external probability, and besides _nam_ is protected by the copyist Isidorus, _Etym._ vi. 4, 2. The further objection that linguistic usage would require _Italica_, is not borne out (_e.g._ Sidonius and Iordanes as well as the inscriptions of later times, _C. I. L._ x. p. 1146, write _Italus_ by turns with _Italicus_), and the designation of a single translation as the most trustworthy on the whole is quite consistent with the advice to consult as many as possible; whereas by the change proposed an intelligent remark is converted into a meaningless commonplace. It is true that the Christian Church in Rome in the first three centuries made use throughout of the Greek language, and that we may not seek _there_ for the _Itali_ who took part in the Latin Bible. But that in Italy outside of Rome, especially in Upper Italy, the knowledge of Greek was not much more diffused than in Africa, is most clearly shown by the names of freedmen; and it is just to the non-Roman Italy that the designation used by Augustine points; while we may perhaps also call to mind the fact that Augustine was gained for Christianity by Ambrosius in Milan. The attempt to identify the traces of the recension called by Augustine _Itala_ in such remains as have survived of Bible translations before Jerome’s, will at all events hardly ever be successful; but still less will it admit of being proved that Africans only worked at the pre-Hieronymian Latin Bible texts. That they originated largely, perhaps for the most part, in Africa has certainly great probability. The contrast to the one _Itala_ can only in reason have been several _Afrae_; and the vulgar Latin, in which these texts are all of them written, is in full agreement with the vulgar Latin, as it was demonstrably spoken in Africa. At the same time we must doubtless not overlook the fact that we know the vulgar Latin in general principally from African sources, and that the proof of the restriction of any individual linguistic phenomenon to Africa is as necessary as it is for the most part unadduced. There existed side by side as well vulgarisms in general use as African provincialisms (comp. _Eph. epigr._ iv. p. 520, as to the cognomina in _-osus_); but that forms like _glorificare_, _nudificare_, _justificare_, belong to the second category, is by no means proved from the fact that we first meet with them in Africa, since analogous documents to those which we possess, _e.g._ for Carthage in the case of Tertullian, are wanting to us as regards Capua and Milan.

[308] The arguments of Mr. B. W. Henderson (_English Hist. Review_, 1903, 1-23) for a different advance seem to me to be based on a misconception of some of the evidence. Thus, there is no tile of Leg. ix. at Leicester, nor any trace yet noted of Leg. ii. Aug. at Cirencester or Gloucester.

INDEX

Abdagaeses, ii. 44.

Abgarus, of Edessa, ii. 46 (under Claudius), 68 (under Trajan),
78 (under Severus).

Abrinca, rivulet, i. 119 _n._

Achaeans, diet, i. 264.

Achaemenids, dynasty, ii. 2, 3, 10;
“seven houses,” 6.

Achaia, province, i. 255 f. _n._;
under the emperors, 260.

Acraephia, inscription, i. 265 _n._, 273 _n._

Actiads, i. 296 _n._

Actian games, i. 296 _n._

Adane, ii. 288 f.;
destroyed, 293 f. _n._

Adiabene, ii. 68, 78 _n._, 88.

_Adiabenicus_, ii. 78 _n._

Adminius, i. 174.

Adrianopolis, i. 307.

Adulis, ii. 280, 281, 282, 296.

Aedemon, ii. 313.

Aegium, diet of, ii. 264 _n._

Aeizanas, ii. 284 _n._

Aelana, ii. 288.

Aemilianus, Marcus Aemilius, i. 241.

Aemilianus, Egyptian tyrant, ii. 251.

Aethiopia and Aethiopians, ii. 275-278;
traffic, 278.

_Afer_, ii. 304 _n._

Africa, North, ii. 303;
Berber stock, 303-305;
Phoenician immigration, 306;
government of republic, 306 f.;
Caesar’s policy, 307 f.;
extent of Roman rule, 308 f.;
no strict frontier, 309;
province of, 310;
two Mauretanian kingdoms, 310 f.;
physical conformation, 314;
Africano-Numidian territory, 316 f.;
war against Tacfarinas and later conflicts, 317-320;
Roman civilisation in Mauretania, 320 f.;
continuance of Berber language, 325 f.;
of Phoenician, 326 f.;
coinage, 327 _n._;
Latin language, 329;
Phoenician urban organisation, 329;
transformed into Italian, 331;
number of towns, 331 _n._;
Italian colonists, 332;
large landed estates, 333 f.;
husbandry, 336;
corn supplied to Rome, 337;
oil and wine, 337 f.;
manufactures and commerce, 338 f.;
prosperity, 339;
roads, 339 f.;
introduction of camels, 340;
character and culture of people, 340 f.;
scholasticism, 342;
Christian literature, 343-345;
Latin Scriptures, 343 f. _n._

Agonistic institutes, i. 289 _n._

_Agonothesia_, i. 347 _n._, 348 _n._

Agricola, Gnaeus Julius, i. 182-184, 194.

Agrippa;
_see_ Herod Agrippa.

Agrippa, M. Vipsanius, in command on the Danube, i. 22;
transference of Ubii, 25;
combats in Gaul, 80.

Agrippa, Marcus Fonteius, i. 218.

Agrippina (Cologne), i. 119.

Ahenobarbus, Lucius Domitius, expedition to Elbe, i. 31;
dyke between Ems and Lower Rhine, 34.

Ahuramazda, ii. 10 f., 84.

Alamanni, war with, i. 161 f., 163;
raids, 166 f.

Alani, ii. 62 _n._, 64, 73, 74 _n._

Albani, ii. 72 f.

Alexander the Great, basing his empire on towns, not on tribes, ii. 120.

Alexander II. of Egypt, testament, ii. 232.

Alexander, son of Cleopatra, ii. 24, 25, 26;
installed king of Armenia, 33.

Alexander Severus, purchases peace in Germany, i. 162;
murder, 162; ii. 91;
character, 89 f.;
war with Ardashir, 90 _n._;
nicknamed “chief Rabbi,” 263.

Alexander of Abonoteichos, i. 350.

Alexander, Tiberius Julius, ii. 168, 204, 242 _n._, 246 _n._

Alexandria, in Egypt, under the Palmyrenes, ii. 107, 108 _n._, 250;
number and position of Jews, 165 _n._, 200 _n._, 267;
Jew-hunt, 192, 193 _n._;
deputations to Gaius, 193 f.;
“Greek city,” 235 f.;
chief priest of, 238;
exemptions and privileges, 240 _n._;
libraries, 246, 271;
chief officials, 248 _n._;
distribution of corn, 251 _n._;
Italian settlement in, 257;
mariners’ guilds, 257 _n._;
comparison with Antioch, 262;
Alexandrian Fronde, 263;
nicknames, 263;
tumults frequent and serious, 264 _n._, 265;
worship, 265 f., 266 _n._;
old cultus retaining its hold, 267;
learned world, 267 f.;
physicians and quacks, 268;
scholar-life, 269 f.;
Museum, 271 f., 272;
labours of erudition, 271 f.;
“jointure” of Greek science, 273;
camp in suburb of Nicopolis, 274.

Alexandria, in Troas, i. 326 f.

Alexandropolis, ii. 15.

Aliso, fortress, i. 34 f., 36;
defence by Caedicius, 48.

Allegorical interpretation, Jewish, ii. 168 f.

Allobroges, i. 87, 88 _n._, 91.

Alps, subjugation, i. 15;
military districts, 17 f.;
roads and colonies, 19.

Amasia, i. 331.

Amâzigh, ii. 303.

_Ambubaia_, ii. 133.

Amida, ii. 115.

Amisus, i. 331 f.

Amphictiony remodelled by Augustus, i. 254 _n._, 255 _n._

Amsivarii, i. 124.

Amyntas, i. 335 _n._; ii. 24, 37.

Ananias, ii. 102 f.

Ancyra, i. 341 _n._, 342 _n._

Anthedon, ii. 210.

Antigonea, ii. 127 _n._

Antigonus, son of Hyrcanus, ii. 175-178.

Antinoopolis, ii. 236, 237 _n._, 297 _n._

Antioch, earthquake at, ii. 68;
capture by the Persians (260), 101, 132;
and by Aurelian, 109;
creation of monarchic policy, 127;
capital of Syria, 127;
Daphne, 128;
water supply, and lighted streets, 129 _n._;
poverty of intellectual interests, 130;
paucity of inscriptions, 132;
exhibitions and games, 132;
races, 132 _n._;
immorality, 133;
dissolute cultus, 134;
fondness for ridicule, 134 f.;
support of pretenders, 134;
reception of, and capture by Nushirvan, 135;
Jew-hunt at, 219.

Antioch in Pisidia, i. 336 f.

Antiochus of Commagene, ii. 49, 53;
tomb of, 125;
his buildings at Athens, i. 278.

Antiochus Epiphanes, ii. 196.

Antipater the Idumaean, ii. 174-177.

Antoninus Pius: wall from Forth to Clyde, i. 187 _n._;
conflicts in Britain under, 188 _n._

Antonius, Marcus, ii. 22 f.;
position in 38 B.C., 23 f.;
his army, 24;
his aims, 24 f.;
children by Cleopatra, 26 _n._;
preparations for Parthian war, 26 f.;
temperament, 27;
Parthian war, 27 f.;
resistance in Atropatene, 29;
retreat, 30, 31;
last years in the East, 32;
dismisses Octavia seeking reconciliation, 33;
punishes those blamed for his miscarriage, 33;
attempt on Palmyra, 93;
government in Alexandria, 232.

Apamea in Phrygia, i. 327.

Apamea in Syria, ii. 136, 141.

Aper, Marcus, i. 113.

Apharban, ii. 114.

Apion, ii. 193, 194 _n._

Apocalypse of John: conception of Roman and Parthian empires as standing
side by side, ii. 1 _n._;
pseudo-Nero of, 64 f.;
directed against the worship of the emperors, 196, 197-199 _n._

Apollinaris, Gaius Sulpicius, ii. 342.

Apollo, Actian, i. 295 f.

Apollonia, i. 201 f., 299.

Apollonius of Tyana, i. 350.

Appian, historian, ii. 221 f., 223.

Appuleius of Madaura, ii. 341, 342.

Appuleius, Pseudo-, Dialogue of the gods quoted, ii. 266 _n._

Apri, i. 306.

Apronius, Lucius, i. 125.

Apulum, i. 228.

Aquae Sextiae, i. 78, 81.

Aquileia, i. 197 f., 231, 233.

Aquincum, i. 228;
contra-Aquincum, 249.

Aquitania, wars, i. 64, 80;
coins, 79 _n._;
province, 88;
cantons of, 96.

Arabia, ii. 13;
Roman, what it included, 143 f.;
institution of province by Trajan, 152;
west coast of, 284 f.;
Homerites, 286 f.;
Felix, 285, 289;
policy of Augustus, 290;
expedition of Gallus, 290 f.;
state of the coast, 291 _n._;
expedition of Gaius, 293 _n._;
injury to its commerce, 293.

Arachosia, ii. 13, 15.

Aradus, ii. 138 _n._

Aramaic language, ii. 164.

Arbela, ii. 4, 88.

Archaism, Greek, i. 282 _n._

Archelaus of Cappadocia, ii. 41.

Archelaus, son of Herod the Great, ii. 183 f.

Architecture, Syrian, ii. 156 f.

Ardashir (Artaxares), ii. 81 _n._, 83 _n._, 84, 85, 89 _n._, 91.

Arelate, i. 86, 89;
amphitheatre, 106.

Aretas, ii. 148 _n._, 149 f. _n._, 150 f.

Argentoratum, i. 119, 147, 159.

Ariarathes of Cappadocia, ii. 33.

Ariobarzanes, ii. 38, 39.

Aristobulus, of Chalcis, ii. 49.

Aristobulus, prince of Judaea, ii. 175 f.

Aristotle’s recommendation to Alexander, ii. 241.

Armenia, ii. 6, 19, 20, 33, 34, 35, 36, 40 f.;
Parthian appanage for second son, 51, 60;
Roman policy as to, 50-52;
subdued by Corbulo, 53 f.;
under Parthian prince vassal to Rome, 60 f.;
Roman province under Trajan, 67 f., 70 f.;
becomes again vassal-state, 72;
Parthian invasion, 74 f., 80 _n._, 89 f., 92, 102, 104, 112 _n._,
113, 114 _n._, 115 _n._

Arminius, i. 43;
defeat of Varus, 46 f.;
combats with Germanicus, 54;
attack on Maroboduus, 60 f.;
desertion of Inguiomerus, 61;
civil war and end, 62.

Arnobius, ii. 345.

Arrianus, Flavius, ii. 20 _n._, 73 _n._

Arsaces, founder of Parthian dynasty, ii. 3, 4, 6.

Arsaces, son of Artabanus, ii. 42.

Arsacids and their rule, ii. 3-12 _el._

Arsamosata, ii. 56, 59.

Arsinoe, ii. 280, 291 f.

Art, constructive, in Gaul, i. 115;
in Syria, ii. 156 f.

Artabanus (III.), king of the Parthians, ii. 40-45.

Artabanus (IV.), ii. 87 f.

Artageira, ii. 40.

Artavazdes of Armenia, ii. 28-33.

Artavazdes of Atropatene, ii. 28, 29, 32.

Artaxares;
_see_ Ardashir.

Artaxata, ii. 48, 53 f., 75.

Artaxes, ii. 33-38.

Artaxias of Armenia, ii. 42 f.

Asander, i. 312, 313 _n._

Ascalon, ii. 212.

Asia Minor: natives and colonists, i. 320;
Hellenism, 321 f.;
formation of new centres, 322;
provinces of, 323;
territories added to empire, 323 f.;
senatorial and imperial government, 323 f.;
changes in boundaries of provinces and vassal-states, 324 _n._;
municipal vanity, 328 _n._;
honorary Hellenism, 344;
leagues of Hellenism, 343, 344 _n._;
representatives, 344 _n._;
land-diets and land festivals, 344 f.;
provincial priests and Asiarchs, 345 f.;
superintendence of emperor-worship, 348;
system of religion, 350;
public safety, 350;
occupying force, 350 f.;
justice in, 352 _n._;
constitution of towns, 352 f.;
clubs, 353;
free autonomous communities, 354;
urban life, 354 f.;
prosperity, 354 f.;
defects of municipal administration, 357;
roads, 358 _n._;
trade, 359 f.;
commerce, 360;
supplies teachers and physicians to Italy, 361, 365;
literary activity, 362;
instruction, 362;
sophistic system, 362-366.

Asia, Roman: extent of province, i. 325;
coast-towns, 325 f.;
inland townships, 326 f.;
position under Romans, 327;
urban rivalries, 329 f.;
legions in, ii. 63.

Asiarchs, i. 345-347 _n._

Asklepios, i. 350.

Asoka, ii. 13, 14 _n._

Astarte, ii. 331.

Astingi, i. 237.

Astures, i. 65, 71.

Asturica Augusta, i. 66.

Athens: privileged position, i. 254, 258;
administration, 276 f.;
possessions, 277;
Hadrian’s grants, 277 f.;
street-riots, 279;
state of the language, 281, 282 _n._

Atropatene, ii. 6, 19, 28 f., 33 f., 38.

Attalia, i. 334.

Augusta Emerita, i. 64 _n._

Augusta Praetoria (Aosta), i. 19 f.

Augusta Vindelicorum, i. 19, 20, 154, 196 f.

Augustamnica, ii. 298.

Augustan History, falsification as to Postumus, i. 164 _n._

Augustodunum, seat of Gallic studies, i. 112 f.

Augustinus, Aurelius, picture of Carthage, ii. 341;
_Itala_, 343 _n._;
_Confessions_, 345.

Augustus, the Emperor: expedition against Alpine tribes, i. 16;
monument to, above Monaco, 17;
roads or colonies in Alps, 19 f.;
visit to Germany, 26;
German policy and motives for changing it, 56-59;
visits Spain, 64;
organisation of towns there, 68 f.;
organisation of the three Gauls, 84 f.;
restricted franchise of Gauls, 98;
altar at Lugudunum, 94;
altar for Germanic cantons, 35, 97, 118;
discharge of Batavian guards, 121;
project of connecting Rhine and Danube, 148;
projects as to Britain not carried out, 172;
reasons for and against its occupation, 172;
conviction of its necessity, 173 f.;
arrangements on the Danubian frontier, 195 f.;
Illyricum subdued, 201;
settlement of veterans in Dalmatia, 202;
his Amphictiony, 254 f.;
dealings with Greece, 261;
treatment of Athens, 277;
insurrection at, 279;
foundation and privileges of Nicopolis, 294 f.;
colonies in Macedonia, 301;
pacification of Cilicia and Pisidia, 335 f.;
diets and festivals for, in Asia Minor, 345;
cancels debtors’ claims there, 357;
decorum of, ii. 26 _n._;
first arrangements in East, 34 f.;
policy open to him, 36;
inadequate measures, 36 f.;
in Syria (20 B.C.), 37 f.;
mission of Gaius to East, 39;
Nicolaus Damascenus on his youth, 168;
treatment of the Jews, 171 f.;
dealing with Herod’s testament, 182, 184;
attitude towards Jewish worship, 187;
annexation of Egypt, 232 f., 239;
Egyptian titles, 244;
policy as to south-western Arabia, 290;
expedition of Gallus, 290 f.;
of Gaius, 293;
repression of piracy in Red Sea, 298;
colonisation in Mauretania, 333;
death, i. 50.

Aurelianus, defeats the Juthungi, i. 166;
combats with the Goths on Danube, 248 f.;
against the Palmyrenes, ii. 108 f.;
battle of Hemesa, 109 _n._, 110 _n._;
destruction of Palmyra, 111 _n._

Aurelius Antoninus, Marcus, Germany under, i. 160;
Chattan war, 161;
Roman wall in Britain attacked, 188;
Marcomanian war, 229 f.;
his qualities, 232;
progress of war, 232 f.;
takes name of Germanicus, 234;
terms laid down for the vanquished, 234;
second war, 235;
death, 235;
Parthian war under Marcus and Verus, ii. 74 f.;
embassy to China, 302.

Aures, ii. 317, 318, 320.

Ausonius, i. 109, 113, 114 _n._

Autonomy, idea of, ii. 120.

Autricum, i. 91.

Auzia, ii. 319, 325.

Aventicum, i. 129.

Avestâ, ii. 10.

Axidares, ii. 66 _n._

Axomis, kingdom of, ii. 281 _n._;
extent and development, 282 f.;
Rome and the Axomites, 284;
envoys to Arvidian, 284;
relation to piracy, 298.

Azania, ii. 289.

Bactra, ii. 14, 15 _n._, 18.

Bactro-Indian empire, ii. 14, 16 _n._

Baetica, i. 67;
towns with burgess-rights, 68;
exemption from levy, 73;
Moors in, ii. 324.

Bagradas, ii. 336.

Balbus, Lucius Cornelius, ii. 315 _n._

Ballomarius, i. 230 _n._

Bâmanghati, coins found at, ii. 301 _n._

Baquates, ii. 324, 325 _n._

Bar-Kokheba, Simon, ii. 224 _n._

Barley-wine, i. 108 _n._

Barsemias of Hatra, ii. 78.

Barygaza, ii. 16 _n._, 300.

Basil of Caesarea, i. 333.

Bassus, Caecilius, ii. 21 f.

Bassus, Publius Ventidius, ii. 23, 27.

Bastarnae, i. 12, 217, 238.

Batanaea, ii. 144;
_see_ Haurân.

Batavi, i. 26, 43, 97 _n._;
settlements and privileges, 120;
rising of Batavian auxiliaries, 129 f.;
Civilis, 130;
progress of the movement, 130 f.;
its consequences, 143 f.;
later attitude, 145.

Bato, the Dalmatian, i. 39, 41.

Bato, the Pannonian, i. 39-42.

Beads, glass, ii. 255.

Beer, i. 108.

Belatucadrus (Mars), i. 193.

Belgica, i. 85;
division of command, 118 _n._

Belus, ii. 266.

Berbers, ii. 302 f.;
type, 304, 305 _n._;
language, 325 f.;
organisation of _gentes_, 334 f.

Berenice, sister of Agrippa II., ii. 219.

Berenice, Trogodytic, ii. 280, 284 _n._, 286, 288, 297.

Beroe, i. 240.

Berytus, ii. 121;
Latin island in the East, 130;
factories in Italy, 139 _n._

Bescera, ii. 319.

Bessi, i. 12, 209 _n._

Bether, ii. 225.

Betriacum, i. 130, 143.

Biriparach, ii. 80.

Bithynia, i. 323, 324, 330;
Greek settlements in, 330 f.;
Hellenism of, 330 f.;
place in literature, 331;
Gothic raids, 245.

Bithyniarch, i. 346.

Blaesus, Quintus Junius, ii. 318.

Blemyes, ii. 250 _n._, 277 _n._, 278.

Bocchus, ii. 309, 310, 311 _n._

Boeotian league, i. 259, 265.

Bogud, ii. 308 f., 310, 311 _n._

Borani, i. 243, 245.

Bosporan kingdom, i. 242;
Greek towns of, 244, 312;
kings, 314 _n._;
extent of, 314 f.;
coins, 317 _n._, 318;
titles, 316 _n._;
military position, 316 f.;
court, 318;
trade and commerce, 319.

Bostra, ii. 95;
plain around, 144 f.;
legionary camp at, 153;
importance of, 155;
Hellenic basis, 155.

Boudicca, i. 179, 181.

Boule, the, in Egyptian cities, ii. 236 _n._

Bracara, i. 16.

Breuci, i. 23.

Brigantes, i. 178, 181, 182, 188.

Brigetio, i. 228.

Britain, Caesar’s expedition, i. 170;
designs of Augustus, 171;
reasons for and against occupation, 172 f.;
conviction of its necessity, 173 f.;
occasion for the war, 174;
arrangements for occupation, 174 _n._;
its course, 175 f.;
Roman towns, 176 f.;
resistance in West Britain, 177 f.;
national insurrection, 179 f.;
subjugation of the West, 180 f.;
of the North, 182;
Caledonia abandoned, 184;
grounds for this policy, 184 f.;
diversities of race, 185;
fortifying of northern frontier, 186 f.;
wars in second and third centuries, 188 f.;
Roman fleet, 189;
garrison and administration, 190;
taxation and levy, 190 f.;
communal organisation, 191;
prosperity, 192;
roads, 192;
Roman manners and culture, 193;
country houses, 194;
scholastic training, 194.

Brixia, i. 191.

Bructeri, i. 36, 51, 133, 145.

Burdigala, i. 113.

Burebista, i. 10, 216, 220, 309 f.

Burgundiones, i. 167.

Buri, i. 221, 224.

Burnum, i. 203.

Burrus, ii. 206.

Busiris, ii. 251.

Buthrotum, i. 295.

Byzacene, ii. 336.

Byzantium, i. 246, 292, 305, 306 _n._, 308.

Cabinet-secretary, imperial, ii. 272 f.

Cadusians, ii. 88 _n._

Caecina, Aulus, governor of Moesia, i. 40 f.;
march to the Ems, and retreat, 52 f.

Caedicius, Lucius, defence of Aliso, i. 48.

Caesar, Gaius Julius, measures for Dalmatian war, i. 7 f.;
Romanising of southern Gaul, 86;
policy as to cantons of Gaul, 92 f.;
Britannic expedition and aims, 170;
project of crossing Euphrates, ii. 22;
arrangements as to Judaea, 175 f.;
African policy, 307 f.;
Italian colonists in Africa, 332.

Caesar, Gaius, mission to East, ii. 38 f.;
meeting with Phraataces, 39;
early death, 40.

Caesaraugusta, i. 68.

Caesarea in Cappadocia, i. 332; ii. 101 f.

Caesarea (Iol), province of, ii. 313, 314, 321.

Caesarea Paneas, ii. 65, 147, 151.

Caesarea Stratonis, ii. 182, 186 f.;
insurrection, 205 f., 209 f.;
obtains Roman organisation, 218.

Caesarion, ii. 25 _n._, 26 _n._

Caesian Forest, i. 124.

Calama, ii. 319 _n._, 329 _n._, 335 _n._

Calceus Herculis, ii. 319.

Caledonia abandoned, i. 184;
probable grounds for this policy, 184 f.;
under Severus, 189.

Caligula, Gaius Caesar, incapable of serious plans, i. 172;
declines “great number” of statues, 291;
the East under, ii. 45;
pardons Aretas, 151;
treatment of Jews, 191 f.;
Jewish deputations to, 193 f.;
orders his effigy to be set up in the Temple, 195;
death, 195.

Callaecia, Roman, i. 63 f.;
separated from Lusitania, 65.

Callistus, ii. 102 _n._, 103.

Calybe, i. 303, 305 _n._

Camalodunum, i. 170, 171, 175, 176, 180, 192 f.

Camels in Africa, ii. 340.

Camunni, i. 15 f.

_Canabae_, i. 168.

Canal, Egyptian, ii. 279, 280, 297 f.

Canatha, ii. 147;
temple of Baalsamin, 156;
“Odeon,” 157.

Candace, ii. 275 _n._, 276, 277.

Cane, ii. 296.

Canius Rufus, i. 76.