the interior. The building of this place pre-supposes that Aetolia at
the time was a more extensive country, so that the more ancient towns
were situated too near the frontier. Its site cannot be mistaken. No
traveller has yet visited it, and I do not believe that any considerable
ruins are to be found unless excavations be made; inscriptions do not
exist there any more than in Epirus. It was about three miles distant
from the great lake, which is situated in the centre of Aetolia in a
hollow surrounded by mountains, and separates the waters of the Achelous
and Evenus. This lake, which is upwards of twenty-five English miles in
length and tolerably broad, now consists of several smaller lakes, which
are connected by marshes. Polybius calls it TRICHONIS, and it forms the
receptacle for the waters which flow from the neighbouring mountains and
are not carried off by the Evenus. Thermon was not fortified, but was an
open place like Sparta; Philip, the son of Demetrius, ravaged it twice,
without the Aetolians attempting to defend it. It was there that the
Aetolian people assembled and held their general diets: the hot springs
were another and still more direct temptation to build the place. Aetolia
is, in general, rich in hot sulphureous springs, and I here remind you
of what I said on a former occasion respecting the volcanic veins which
extend from the Corinthian gulf to Epirus, and especially to Thesprotia.
The account of Polybius does not enable us to say whether it was a
large city, but I am inclined to believe that it was not very important
as a town. It contained a temple of Apollo, government-buildings, and
extensive halls, probably adorned with works of art and other costly
decorations, being destined as places of meeting for the Παναιτώλιον.
These public buildings were set on fire by Philip. After this first
conflagration, they were restored by the inhabitants, but ten or twelve
years later they were destroyed a second time, and afterwards the place
is no longer mentioned.
The walls of the other towns noticed by Polybius still show that they
must have been very strong places; they were of considerable extent, but
as there are no inscriptions, it is very difficult to determine their
names, and it cannot be done without acting in an arbitrary manner.
According to Polybius, the Aetolians were joined by nations which
Thucydides still distinguishes from them; some of them are pure
Epirot tribes, such as the Amphilochians and Agraeans. I shall speak
of them afterwards when I come to Epirus, to which they belong, both
ethnographically and geographically. They were probably the first that
joined the Aetolians, although in the time of Pyrrhus they still belonged
to Epirus, to which they had been ceded by Macedonia.
ACARNANIA.
Acarnania is the country on the western bank of the Achelous. The
earliest notices of the Acarnanians in Thucydides down to those of the
latest times, exhibit them in constant collision with the more powerful
Aetolians, who endeavoured to unite them with themselves, and, as they
resisted, tried to destroy them. They are not mentioned in the Homeric
Catalogue; they regarded themselves as the youngest among the Greek
peoples, and set it forth as a merit of their own, that they had taken no
part in the expedition against the Trojans, the ancestors of the Romans.
But we must not infer too much from this: it is certain that at the time
when the Catalogue was composed, the interior, or principal part, of the
country was inhabited by Epirots, that is, Pelasgians, while the coast
was, in my opinion, occupied by Greeks. The people over whom Odysseus
ruled were certainly not confined to the little island of Ithaca; they
extended far and wide, and their common name was Cephallenians, which
also embraced those who lived on the ἤπειρος, that is, in Acarnania, on
the coast near the Echinades, in Leucas, and in the Echinades themselves.
In the ante-historic times they are mentioned under the name of the
Taphians, who afterwards disappear, but seem to have equalled the Minyans
in greatness and power. Whether, on the destruction of the empire of
Odysseus, the Cephallenians and Arcananians separated, whether they
gained strength to extend their dominion towards the interior, or whether
a Hellenic immigration peopled the country, are questions on which we
cannot decide. The last, however, is the most probable, and is supported
by the mythus about Alcmaeon, who is said to have gone to the Echinades;
but, however this may be, in the earliest times they are not mentioned
under the name Acarnanians. Herodotus speaks of Acarnanians (Ἀκαρνὴν
ἀνήρ) even before the time of the Persian wars, in which they took no
more part than the Aetolians: their distance seems to have separated them
from the rest of the Greeks, so as to prevent their having any share
in their doings. Afterwards, in the Peloponnesian war, they sided with
the Ionians against the Dorians, being the allies of the Athenians from
hatred of the Corinthians, who had established themselves on the coast
of Acarnania, had there founded the colonies of Leucas, Anactorion,
Alyzia, and the powerful town of Ambracia on the opposite coast, and were
severely oppressive to the Acarnanians. This induced the latter to seek
the assistance of the Athenians, which was effective, also, against the
Aetolians, and brought on the war against them. The Aetolians themselves
thereby became connected with the Ambraciots and the Dorians.
In this condition the Acarnanians remained until the time of the
Macedonian supremacy; but when the Macedonian empire gained consistency,
the Acarnanians thoughtlessly placed themselves under its protection.
Philip favored them greatly, and assigned to them Oeniadae, which had
previously belonged to the Achaeans, and also Leucas; whether the
latter place remained in their possession or not, we do not know. Fresh
hostilities now arose with the Aetolians, who were enemies of the
Macedonians. The severest blow was inflicted upon the Acarnanians in the
reign of Alexander of Epirus, the son of Pyrrhus, for their country was
divided between him and the Aetolians. The latter retained the possession
of the principal towns which they received; but at the time of the
disputes about the succession among the Aeacidae, the Epirot dominion
was shaken off, and the Acarnanians again threw themselves into the arms
of Macedonia. We must distinguish Acarnania in its earlier and in its
later condition: Acarnania in Polybius is considerably reduced on the
east near the Achelous, for it there possessed only Oeniadae, but on the
coast it was increased through the Corinthian colonies. In this condition
it remained, until, in the war between the Romans and Macedonians, its
population, having sided with the latter, had to suffer greatly. Leucas
was taken and separated from Acarnania. But although the Acarnanians
were pardoned by the Romans, they thenceforward completely disappear in
history.
The country forms no contrasts, and has no deep valleys with lakes like
Aetolia; it has no high mountains, but is a fertile hilly country, with
alluvial soil, though not to any great extent, on the coast and the
Achelous: the soil is throughout light and good. As regards the political
constitution of the Acarnanians, even Polybius speaks of the κοινὸν τῶν
Ἀκαρνάνων, so that they must have formed a regularly organised state, no
doubt with a common strategus. As far as their manners are concerned, the
same historian classes them among the less civilised tribes, for they
went about in arms. They did not, like the Aetolians, consist of tribes
that were essentially foreign to each other, but of kindred settlers in
towns. Nations which, like the Aetolians, are destined by nature to lead
a pastoral life, cannot have any important settlements in towns any more
than the little cantons of Switzerland; but Acarnania is a thoroughly
agricultural country, producing corn and olives, and towns accordingly
arose from the nature of circumstances; pastoral life prevailed only in
the mountains. These towns had no separate existence independently of
the common government of the state; each of them had no doubt its own
municipal freedom, but in their relation to foreign countries, they were
dependent. This is implied in the term τὸ κοινόν, Latin, _commune_.
In the Peloponnesian war, STRATOS was the capital of the country, but it
was taken by the Aetolians, to whom it belonged in the time of Polybius.
Its walls are still preserved, and they not only show that, as Thucydides
says, it was the largest town of Acarnania, but absolutely a large town
of an astonishing circumference. But these countries are so different
from those of the intellectual Greeks, that no ruins are found attesting
the existence of splendid buildings. Stratos is the only one among the
genuine Acarnanian towns, that deserves to be noticed.
OENIADAE, at the mouth of the Achelous, is often mentioned as an Achaean
town, and its true character is therefore a real puzzle. Xenophon calls
it Achaean, and Scylax of Caryanda applies the name Ἀχαιοί and Ἀχαία to
the whole coast from Cape Rhion as far as the Achelous, so that not only
Oeniadae, but the other coast-towns, as for example, the little Chalcis,
were connected with the Achaeans. Afterwards Oeniadae was taken by the
Aetolians; it recovered indeed its independence, but was then conquered
by the Acarnanians, and finally taken from them by the Romans. Whether on
this last occasion the Achaeans again established their claims, cannot
be ascertained. It is not impossible that it may have been an Achaean
colony, as we find another in Zacynthos.
The Corinthian colonies, the most remarkable of which were LEUCAS,
ANACTORION, ALYZIA, and ACTION, were separated from Acarnania proper at
an early period.
LEUCAS, according to the opinion of the Alexandrian grammarians, who
are great authorities in these matters, is mentioned in the Odyssey
and the Homeric Catalogue under the name of NERITON, and was at that
time still inhabited by Cephallenians. At a later period it was a Doric
settlement of Corinth, when this latter city founded colonies on the
Ambracian gulf, in Corcyra, and other islands, with a care which shows
that it intended to establish its maritime supremacy in those parts.
Those settlements belong partly to the period of the Bacchiadae, and
partly to that of Cypselus and Periander. Leucas was formerly connected
with the mainland by an isthmus, which was cut through by the Corinthians
when they established themselves there. Afterwards the isthmus was
sometimes restored and sometimes broken through; and these changes
frequently occur, even in the middle ages, for the rivers which flow
into the Ambracian gulf, carry with them as much mud as the Achelous,
and as Leucas was situated close to the shore, and was separated from
the mainland only by a very narrow channel, the mud there accumulated
by the current which is very strong in that part. This isthmus was very
inconvenient to the navigation of the Leucadians to the Ambracian gulf,
as they had to sail round the whole promontory; nothing therefore is more
natural than that the canal should have been re-opened from time to time.
The opinion of those who imagine that the isthmus was an artificially
constructed causeway is absurd, though it is quite conceivable that at
the time when the isthmus was uninterrupted, a road may have been made
upon it; but this has quite a different meaning. The name Leucas has a
double nominative, Leucas and Leucata, of which so many instances occur
in Latin in the case of Greek proper names,[64] as Croton and Crotona,
Ancon and Ancona, the latter of which is the genuine Latin form. It is
said that ὁ Λευκάτας was the rock of Leucas; but there is no foundation
for this, it is a mere expedient to get over a difficulty. On Cape Leucas
stood the temple of Apollo, and from its precipitous cliff Sappho and
others are said to have leapt into the sea because their passionate love
was not returned.
ANACTORION was a very small and insignificant place, as we see from the
notices about it during the Peloponnesian war, for it furnished only one
trireme.
ACTION can scarcely be called a town, and is remarkable only for the
battle fought there, and the temple of Apollo.
ALYZIA was likewise unimportant, and deserves to be noticed only as
a Corinthian colony, and as an example of the manner in which the
Corinthians detached the coast from Acarnania.
By the side of Action, on the spot afterwards occupied by Prevesa,
there arose NICOPOLIS, which was built by Augustus as a monument of his
victory. The Greek population was then so reduced, and the violence of
the Roman generals so truly oriental, that Augustus transplanted to
Nicopolis the nation of the Aetolians and most of the Acarnanians; for
I have no doubt that, to a certain extent, this was really the case.
Owing to its situation, the place was during the middle ages regarded
as a fortress, and new buildings were erected, whence the ancient ones
have for the most part disappeared. The ruins of Nicopolis however
are extensive, for Augustus adorned it with splendid buildings. The
Byzantine emperors defended it for a long time against the conquests of
the Bulgarians, who had subdued a great part of Epirus and the adjoining
countries of Greece. We cannot say at what time the name Nicopolis
disappears; in the tenth century it still existed, and is mentioned by
Constantine Porphyrogenitus.
THE CEPHALLENIAN ISLANDS.
Under this name, following the example of the Alexandrian grammarians,
we comprise those islands which in Homer form the empire of Odysseus,
namely, Ithaca, Cephallenia or Same, and Zacynthos; I have already
intimated that I have nothing to say about Dulichion. This empire of
Odysseus entirely disappears in our history. If we had Ephorus or ample
extracts from his work, we should be able to proceed more safely. The
Greeks had ancient records about many places and subjects connected with
their early history, as we see from Thucydides, but they cannot be called
history; Ephorus, however, anxiously endeavoured to collect them all, and
all that is quoted from them, is excellent. After the time of the Odyssey
those islands are scarcely mentioned at all. Cephallenia is noticed in
a passing remark at the time of the Peloponnesian war, Zacynthos too
is mentioned once, and in the war of the Romans and Aetolians they are
brought forward more particularly; Ithaca, on the other hand, does not
occur at all in ancient history. Mythology says, that after Odysseus
was slain by Telegonus, his own son by Circe, Telemachus and Penelope
quitted the island from fear of the vengeance of the relations of the
suitors. This statement when translated into history, means, that the
empire was completely broken up, and the dynasty of Odysseus disappeared.
As to ITHACA, we do not even know what was the name of its town; near the
port distinct traces of a town and Cyclopian walls are still visible;
and a modern English traveller, Sir William Gell, I do not know whether
in joke or in earnest, states that they are the remains of the palace of
Odysseus. It cannot be ascertained whether the island existed by itself,
or whether it was connected with Cephallenia.
CEPHALLENIA had four towns which are mentioned at the time of the
Peloponnesian war under the names of Pale, Cranii, Same, and Proni; they
were quite independent of one another and allied with Athens. In later
times we find them in the relation of sympolity with the Aetolians. The
name Cephallenia is of more recent origin, the island being, in early
times, called Same. During the Aetolian war, the Romans completely
subdued it on account of its situation, which was favourable to
navigation. Its inhabitants were notorious as pirates even in very early
times.
ZACYNTHOS (the Z must be pronounced as softly as possible), the
southernmost of these islands, is entirely of a volcanic nature, and
remarkable for its springs of naphtha; it has suffered much from
earthquakes, which have continued even in modern times. Otherwise it is a
real paradise, and must have been the same in antiquity: its fertility,
beauty, and climate are almost fabulous. During the Peloponnesian war,
it was taken by the Athenians; it is mentioned at that time as an
Achaean colony, so that the Achaeans must have established themselves
there as they did at Oeniadae, and thus extended the boundaries of their
own country. Afterwards it fell into the hands of the Macedonians, and
ultimately into those of the Romans. The Achaeans wanted to unite it
again with Peloponnesus, but Flamininus resisted them; but whether they,
nevertheless, carried their plan, is unknown, for all information is
wanting.
THESSALY.
The name Thessaly is used in two senses: in its proper sense, for
example in Scylax, it comprises the country of the ruling tribes of the
Thessalians dwelling within their natural boundaries, a circumstance of
which no notice at all is taken in our maps and geographical manuals.
In this sense Thessaly touches upon the sea only by a line of coast
thirty stadia in length, and the remaining coast which we are in the
habit of calling Thessalian, does not belong to it. In the ordinary or
wider sense, in which the name can be proved to have been used even
by Herodotus, Thessaly extended as far as the Aenianians and Malians,
perhaps even as far as the Dolopians, in the south. The tribes inhabiting
it, the Phthiotans, the Magnetes, Peraebi, and others, were subjects of
the Thessalians, and in so far the use of the name which comprises them
also is well founded, for they belonged to the state of the Thessalians.
In its narrower sense, Thessaly is the valley of the Peneus, which
is said, in Herodotus, to have once been one continuous lake, but
afterwards discharged its waters into the sea by breaking through the
heights between Ossa and Olympus. This clearly shews that the tradition
applies to the valley of the Peneus alone, for the valley south of mount
Othrys, for example, could not have been inundated, whereas the fertile
plains of Pherae about lake Boebeis as far as the Pagasaean gulf, from
which it is separated only by a few hills, may very easily have been
inundated. The statement, therefore, is evidently correct; its truth
may even now be seen, and the ancients judged correctly. However, to
refer the draining, which cannot have been the work of human hands, but
must have been effected by revolutions of the earth, to the historical
ages is a mistake, because we are accustomed to compress the events of
many centuries within the small space of our historical knowledge. The
opposite mistake consists in assuming, within the sphere of history,
longer intervals than really exist. The duration of a century seems to be
very short, but if we examine it more minutely, it is a long period for
historical changes. If, for example, we look at Germany and our ancestors
150 or 160 years ago, how different do we find them from ourselves in
their mode of living, in their ideas, their occupations, and maxims, and
that too in the highest as well as in the lowest classes of society!
People have imagined that Rome, from the time of Servius Tullius to that
of Cicero, remained in its forms essentially the same; but this is quite
impossible, and the difference must have been enormous. Even when we look
at nations which seem to admit of no change, for example, the Hindoos,
great differences are still manifest at different times: life is ever
changeable. I do not believe that this remark is superfluous; it is very
important to the historian to have it always present before his mind; it
is impossible successfully to treat of ancient history without a thorough
knowledge of modern history.
In its wider sense, Thessaly presents the immense contrasts of the
excellent plain (τὸ Θεσσαλικὸν πεδίον) and the mountains. On its western
side, we have mount PINDUS (now Mezzowo, probably a Wallachian name), the
highest of all the Greek mountains, which has only very few passes; that
of Gomphi, leading from Epirus into Thessaly, is the most convenient,
and very easy to defend, on account of the nature of the country. On the
south of the Peneus we have mount OTHRYS, a tame mountain, to use a Swiss
expression, which is, indeed, covered with wood, but is, nevertheless,
capable of being cultivated, and is used in some parts as pasture to a
very great height; it is a smiling and beautiful mountain, with excellent
underwood, whereas the higher parts of Pindus produce only firs. Pindus,
consisting only of rocks and forests, is a lofty mountain, and a
continuation of the great Illyrian SCARDUS, which extends from the Julian
Alps in Carniola, through Bosnia and Dalmatia, as far as Constantinople,
rising higher and higher, until, on the coast near Scutari, it reaches
its highest point, and forms its real central knot. Although Scardus is
not covered with snow all the year round, it is, at any rate, very close
to the region of perpetual snow; its ravines and summits are covered
with it during the greater part of the year. The mountain then suddenly
sinks down, and geographically, though not ethnographically, separates
Illyricum from Macedonia, and runs out into Pindus and Othrys. At this
point Pindus begins, which is joined in the east by mount Othrys. The
Dolopian and Aetolian mountains, for which no general names are mentioned
by the ancients, run parallel with mount Othrys, and mount Parnassus is
an off-shoot of them. On the southern frontier of Thessaly, in its widest
sense, we meet with mount OETA, which is not so much a mountain as a
series of separate hills; the name Oeta is not applicable to it in the
interior of the country; the pass of Thermopylae runs between its foot
and the Euboean sea. Oeta is a sublime mountain, and renowned in Greek
mythology on account of the death of Heracles.
In the north of the valley of the Peneus, a range of very high mountains,
some of which are not distinguished by particular names, extends towards
Olympus; a part of them is called by Livy _montes Cambunii_, but we
have no distinct information as to the extent to which this name is
applicable, though from our maps it would seem as if we had. These
mountains issue from the high ranges which, on the extreme borders of
Thessaly, in its widest sense, proceed from Macedonia, and form another
ramification of the Illyrian Scardus, terminating in mount OLYMPUS, which
towers far above the clouds, and is always covered with snow. Every
one knows that Olympus is the abode of the Homeric gods; but it is not
so generally known, that the Roman poets, Ennius, Virgil, and others,
when applying the name Olympus to the vault of heaven, confound Greek
mythology and Roman theology. The Greeks conceived the gods as dwelling
on the top of the mountain, while the Romans imagined that they lived
beyond the heavenly vault, whence Ennius has the expression _maxima porta
Olympi_, a conception quite foreign to the Greeks. I shall hereafter
explain why the Greeks called this mountain the centre of the earth, and
that, too, before Delphi was described in these terms; for it is strange
indeed, Olympus being properly beyond the boundaries of Greece.
Mount OSSA, opposite to Olympus, is not quite so high; the river Peneus
flows between these two mountains through the valley of Tempe into the
sea. This valley, τὰ Θεσσαλικὰ Τέμπη, was celebrated in antiquity for its
beauty. The ancients, on the whole, do not often speak of the beauties of
nature, for they are not sentimental; and if they do so, it is always in
reference to pleasing and smiling scenery. The description of Tempe in
Aelian, taken from Theopompus, is perhaps the most accurate we have in
any ancient writer. Dodwell also describes it as equally wonderful; it is
from four to five miles in length, and forms not a smooth and splendid
district with a luxuriant vegetation, but majestic scenery, resembling,
for example, that on the Eisak between Botzen and Brixen in the Tyrol,
or that grand scenery in the valley of the Inn: its beauty is manly and
sublime.