empties itself into the Adriatic; it is still, when swollen, very rapid
and raging, as it is described by Horace. Its fall is greatest near the
Apennines; it is not a fine river, and its waters are muddy with lime.
The seas surrounding Italy are: in the west, the _mare inferum_,
Τυρσηνικὴ θάλασσα, extending from the Ligurian gulf to Sicily; it is
called _mare Tyrrhenicum_ or _Tuscum_ only by Roman poets and by those
who affect to write learnedly. The Romans certainly did not call the
Adriatic _mare Hadriaticum_, but _mare superum_; the Greeks sometimes
call it Ἰόνιος κόλπος. The sea in the south-east of Italy had no special
name among the Romans, but the Greeks call it Ἰόνιος θάλασσα.
The bays of Tarentum and Liguria are sufficiently described by their
names.
Let us now proceed to the divisions of Italy. I shall first speak of the
most ancient ones, which arose with and through the nations themselves.
They are very variable, and I am afraid it will not be possible to make
their relations quite clear without being very minute.
In the earliest times, Italy may be conceived somewhat in the following
manner: southern Italy, from the line I have already mentioned as running
from mount Garganus across the country as far as the coast of Latium,
is the country of the Itali, who appear there as different tribes and
under different names. To the north of that line we have the country of
the Opicans, next that of the Sabellians, and to the north of them we
have the Umbrians; it is possible, that at the same early period the
Etruscans, who had come from the north, may have dwelt there, while the
whole coast on both sides, from Pisa as far as the Adriatic gulf, was
occupied by Pelasgian tribes. This form of Italy is the most ancient
of which we have any knowledge; we have nothing more definite during
the historical ages. In passing on to the time which we call the end of
regal power, or the beginning of the consulship, we find in the south
the Greek settlements scattered in an almost unbroken line from Tarentum
to Posidonia, in Apulia and Calabria, while Neapolis and Cumae occur
in Campania. The Oenotrian tribes are partly allied with, and partly
dependent on, those Greek colonies. The Oscans at that time probably
extended into Calabria, and occupied Apulia, Samnium, and Campania; the
Volscians and Aequians belonged to them. Whether these Oscan tribes were
in any way akin to the Pelasgians, is a question which it is difficult
to answer, though it is clear, that afterwards they became mixed and
amalgamated with them; for in Latium, for example, Oscans and Pelasgians
lived together. Next to them follow the Sabellian tribes from the
frontiers of Apulia, viz., the Picentians, Pelignians, Marrucinians,
Vestinians, Marsians, Frentanians, Sabines, etc., and they extend
down to Rome. The country north of them was occupied by the Umbrians,
inhabiting an extensive territory, though they were already a declining
people, having been broken by the Etruscans. These Etruscans were then
already in full possession of the country as far as the neighbourhood of
Rome, and on the other side they extended to the very summits of the Alps
in Raetia, and the Alpine tribes in the district of Graubündten belonged
to them: they were a great and mighty nation, occupying the whole of the
north of Italy. The north-east was inhabited by the Veneti, and in the
north-west the Ligurians extended as far as the Ticinus. But then the
Gauls invaded Italy, crushed some of the Ligurian tribes, overpowered and
annihilated the Etruscans on the Po, with the exception of a few places,
such as Mantua and Verona; they even advanced into Picenum, and ruled
over many tribes which were not expelled by them. All those who were
able to offer resistance remained, but all the others were extirpated;
wherever the Gauls appeared, they changed the country which they did not
occupy for themselves into a wilderness, and forests arose where formerly
agriculture had been flourishing. Hence, when subsequently the Romans
extended their dominion in those parts, they found the country a desert,
and as such it is described even by Polybius.
I shall not here enter into a description of the condition of Italy,
which was the result of the Roman conquest, for I should have to repeat
the same afterwards in giving you an account of the separate countries:
even a general outline would render it necessary to enter into great
detail. We shall at once pass on to the seventh century, as the period
of regular organisation, when the Sempronian laws completely fixed the
boundaries of Italy. Italy then extended as far as Ariminum, and on the
other side as far as the river Macra. The country north of those points
was in ordinary life called _Gallia Cispadana_, but it did not form a
province by itself, in the sense of a country regularly governed by
propraetors or proconsuls. Before the time of Augustus, and even during
the first years of his reign, Gallia Transpadana and Venetia were not
included in Italy, but were under a military administration, sometimes
united with Illyricum and sometimes with Gaul in the wider sense of the
name. Augustus first joined that country politically to Italy, as it had
long since become Latinised by the extraordinary influx of Romans from
Latium. This is quite surprising. The use of the Latin language seems to
have become universal with extraordinary rapidity, and sometimes even in
the short space of a single generation. It is remarkable how quickly such
a change takes place, while afterwards there occurred a stand-still, and
no further extension took place. In France the Latin language had spread
so rapidly in consequence of the Roman conquest, that, even at the time
when Pliny wrote, it generally prevailed in Provence as far as Lyons,
and the Gallic language had disappeared. From Sulpicius Severus and the
ecclesiastical fathers, we see that in the fifth century the Romanic was
the vernacular tongue in Gaul and not Celtic. This was the case from
Provence to Armorica, and during the period of the Frankish kings the
boundaries of the Romanic language were undoubtedly the same as they are
at present, and for centuries the language of Lower Britany has not lost
a single village. I do not mean to say, that the Celtic was everywhere
else quite extinct, but it was spoken very little, just as in some
villages of Lusatia, Wendish is spoken, of which the inhabitants of the
towns do not understand a word. Augustus, then, extended Italy in this
manner, because the northern parts had either already become Latinised,
or showed every symptom of soon becoming so.
Augustus divided Italy into eleven regions, and afterwards, in the third
century of our era, probably under Severus, this number was increased to
fifteen. Pliny has made the former the basis of his description, but the
latter is not found quite complete in any ancient author. A knowledge of
these divisions is of great importance in history, in order to understand
the notices of ancient writers, especially of the “Scriptores Historiae
Augustae.”
The regions of Augustus are:—1. _Latium_ and _Campania_, from the Tiber
to the Silarus, on the frontier of Lucania. 2. _Southern Samnium_,
_Beneventum_, the country of the _Hirpini_, _Apulia_ and _Calabria_.
3. _Lucania_ and _Bruttium_. 4. _Northern Samnium_ and the country of
the _Marsians_, _Marrucinians_, _Pelignians_, and _Vestinians_. 5.
_Picenum._ 6. _Umbria._ 7. _Etruria_, a name which remained customary
until the second century; but from that time and especially during the
third century, it was always called _Tuscia_, as _Tusci_ was always the
name of the inhabitants. Tuscia occurs neither in Cicero, nor in Livy,
nor in Ennius, nor in Cato. But in the reign of Constantine no scholar
ought to speak of Etruria. These are things which serve as hints to him
who understands them to indicate the time at which anything is written,
and which are stumbling blocks to those who are ignorant of them. When
at Rome, I had made such progress in these matters, that in looking at
a ruin, I could immediately discern to what century it belonged, and in
like manner a practised eye can, even without any statement of time or
place, discover whether coins are Thracian or Cilician and whether they
belong to the period before or after Alexander. Historical blunders are
quite as bad as grammatical ones; they are not indeed illogical, but they
grate upon well-trained ears and feelings, and create uneasiness. 8.
_Ariminum_, the legations of Urbino, Ferrara, and Romagna. 9. _Liguria_,
the country south of the river Po, from the borders of Etruria as far as
the Alps. 10. _Venetia_, and 11. _Regio transpadana_, from the Lago di
Garda to the Alps.
If we were to understand the later division into provinces according to
this scheme, we should misplace Liguria, for example, entirely, for that
country contained nothing of what had previously been comprised under the
same name. This later division, as I said before, was made in the third
century, probably in the reign of Severus. Paulus Diaconus furnishes
the best ground-work of this division, although he is very confused,
not enumerating the regions in any definite order. The fifteen regions,
according to his statement, are:—1. _Venetia et Histria_, as far as
the Benacus or Lago di Garda. 2. _Liguria_, the same country which was
formerly called Transpadana, from the Lago di Garda to the foot of the
Swiss Alps near mount St. Bernard; it was, therefore, on the north of the
Po, and only a small corner of it belonged to ancient Liguria. In this
sense we find the name used in the Codex Theodosianus and in Procopius.
Two _limites_ above Italy were then regarded as parts of Italy, which in
the time of Augustus did not yet belong to it, viz., 3. _Raetia prima_,
and 4. _Raetia secunda_; but their boundaries are not mentioned anywhere.
5. _Alpis Cottia_, or _Alpes Cottiae_, the ancient Liguria proper
as far as the frontiers of Tuscia; the name is transferred from the
Cottian Alps in the neighbourhood of mount Cenis and Susa to the whole
of ancient Liguria. 6. _Tuscia et Umbria_ (in the official style, for
otherwise people then wrote Thuscia). Thuscia is Tuscany, and the part
of Umbria, which was then called Umbria in a narrower sense, embraced
Assisi, Spello, Foligno, etc. 7. _Campania Aurelia._ Campania comprises
the whole region which Augustus called _Latium et Campania_, extending
from the Tiber to the Silarus. Hence the modern name of _Campagna di
Roma_, of which traces occur even in the writers of the western empire,
as in the expressions, _Campania Romana_, _Campania Romae_; in Servius
we read: _Gabii quondam oppidum Campaniae_, but this passage occurs in
one of those books (from the end of the fourth to the beginning of the
twelfth), of which it can be proved, that their present form belongs to
a much later time; the substance was composed in the fourth century, but
the form probably arose in the eighth century in the grammatical school
of Ravenna.
One hundred miles around Rome, the _provinciae suburbicariae_, must
be distinguished from Thuscia and Campania; they did not belong to
the regions, but were under the praefectus urbi, whence _Thuscia
suburbicaria_, subsequently the _Patrimonium D. Petri_, and _Campania
suburbicaria_ were opposed to _Campania Aurelia_, that is, the Campagna
di Lavoro. The name _Aurelia_ has not been understood by the few scholars
who have treated of this period; and wherever the name was found, the
strangest emendations have been attempted, because it was believed that
it was not the name of a province; but express testimony that it was a
province occurs in Boëthius and others. 8. _Lucania et Brittia._ We must
adhere to this corrupt ancient mode of spelling _Brittia_, for so it
occurs in MSS., in subscriptions, in the “Scriptores rei Agrariae,” in
the “Notitia imperii” and elsewhere.
Our guide now passes on to the Alpes Penninae. Wallis must, probably,
be regarded as a region, and also Aosta and Ivrea under the name of 9.
_Alpes Penninae_; Paulus Diaconus, however, calls them _Apenninae_, and
applies the name to some country of central Italy; but it can be proved
that such a province never existed. 10. _Aemilia_, between a part of the
Alpes Cottiae and Liguria, from Piacenza to Bologna. 11. _Flaminia_,
that is, Romagna, Ferrara, Pesaro, or the maritime district as far as
the Marca Ancona. 12. _Picenus_ (masculine, supply _ager_), the Marca
Ancona with some adjoining Sabellian districts. 13. _Valeria_, extending
from Tibur over the country of the Marsians, Pelignians, and perhaps,
also, the Marrucinians; this province is sometimes politically united
with Picenus, for Alba, the capital of Valeria, is also called, in the
imperial rescripts, _Alba in Piceno_. 14. _Samnium_, and 15. _Apulia et
Calabria_. Then come the islands Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica.
These provinces must be remembered in order to understand the history; if
a person does not know them, he cannot understand the new and differently
used names in Procopius and others. The names Aemilia, Valeria, Flaminia,
and Aurelia, were taken from the roads which bore them; Flaminia is the
district which Augustus had left without a name, perhaps the _regio
Ariminensis_. The Via Flaminia ran from Rome to Ariminum, and was thence
continued under the same name; and Scaurus afterwards continued it as
far as Piacenza under the name Aemilia. The Via Valeria led into the
interior; its originator is unknown, but it was perhaps Messalla, for
in the elegy of Tibullus on him, he is praised for having made roads;
earlier writers do not mention this road. Connected with this subject
is one of the most pleasing recollections of my life: I had just been
reading that elegy, when I was informed that a cross-road had been
discovered, unquestionably the same which is described by Tibullus; the
part of it which is laid open is preserved as beautifully, as if it had
been completed only this year. It is a road running through the midst of
Tivoli, and its pavement is so perfectly preserved that the stones have
scarcely removed the breadth of a knife’s back from one another; the
Romans built for eternity, and succeeded where the destructive hands of
barbarians did not interfere. The Aurelia must likewise have been a road,
though not a very ancient one, but probably made by M. Aurelius, or else
the name of the Via Domitiana was changed, in order to obliterate the
hateful recollection. Domitian raised splendid structures, but the hatred
with which he was looked upon, transferred many of them to others, as his
Forum was transferred to Nerva.
If we arrange the before-mentioned fifteen provinces, we first have, in
the north of the territory of Rome, _Thuscia_, in the south _Aurelia_,
and between them _Valeria_: on the other side, beginning in the south,
we have _Lucania et Brittia_, _Samnium_, _Picenus_, and behind Samnium
_Apulia et Calabria_; in the north, _Flaminia_, _Aemilia_; then from the
sea-coast the _Alpis Cottia_, including Genoa and Piedmont, _Liguria_,
_Alpes Penninae_, _Venetia et Istria_, and beyond Italy the two _Raetiae_.
The Codex Theodosianus contains an expression which is so peculiar, that
even the great Jacobus Gothofredus mistook it; we there read that some
laws were promulgated _per Italiam et Alpes_. _Italia_ here does not
denote the whole peninsula, but only Lombardy, while _Alpes_ signifies
the Cottian and Pennine Alps and the two Raetiae.
We shall now take up Italy according to its various countries, beginning
with
LATIUM,
the heart of Italy. I do not mean to say that Samnium might not equally
well have become the heart of the country, but history has willed
it otherwise. Latium is by its situation destined to exercise the
sovereignty, while that of Samnium is less favourable in this respect.
The name Latium was not always applied to the same extent of country; the
Greek name is ἡ Λατίνη, whereas τό Λάτιον is a later form copied from the
Latin, and properly signifies _jus Latii_, in which sense it is used, for
example, by Appian, who was a jurist. Latium received its name from the
people of the Lati or Latini; but in what sense the name was given to the
people, remains at least a controverted question.
I cannot, in these Lectures, always attempt to prove to you the
correctness of my views, and I have done so only in a few instances;
but where, owing to the multiplicity of the traditions, no definite
conclusion has been come to, or where I have not been able to arrive at
a settled conviction, I state to you what can be said for and against
it. What I am now going to state is my well-weighed conviction, and not
the result of an inquiry made to-day or yesterday. I commenced studying
the subject at a very early age, about thirty-five years ago; afterwards
I put it on one side for many years, because I was engaged in others,
and those the most practical occupations, in financial, commercial, and
exchange matters,—years which I do not regret, for I think that in them
I did some service to my contemporaries. But I never lost sight of my
favourite inquiries, for I cherished them in my walks, in my travels,
nay, in the midst of the confusion of war. One of the most important
inquiries, viz., that about the Slavonians and Sarmatians, I made in
the interior of Russia, when I had no books with me except a Latin
translation of Strabo. With this conviction I will at once lay before you
the results of my investigations; it would take several years, if I were
to attempt to refute the opinions of others: I shall give you that which
I honestly hold to be true and correct.
The extent of Latium was different at different times. In the earliest
ages, it cannot have been confined between the Tiber and the Liris, but
must have extended far beyond the Liris, perhaps as far as Cumae and
the frontiers of Italia in its narrowest sense. Such it appears in the
treaty between Rome and Carthage; this is evident from the words in
Polybius, where it is stipulated, that the Carthaginians should make no
conquests on the coast from Ostia to Terracina, which was subject to the
Romans. Latium therefore must have extended farther south; I will not
absolutely assert, that in the north also it extended beyond the Tiber.
As afterwards the whole of the sea coast was taken possession of by the
Volscians, the coast for a time did not belong to Latium, and even Antium
must have been separated from it. But Latium, in a narrower sense, is the
country of the thirty allied towns forming the Latin state during the
first period of the Roman republic, when the sea coast was separated from
it. This continued to be the extent of Latium until the end of the fourth
century of the city, when the maritime towns again united with Latium
and formed the great Latin league, which I have described in the first
edition of my history, and which, as I have only now discovered, was
formed in the year 397. Latium then extended as far as the Liris, but not
beyond it, for in the south of this river we find Campania, which during
the earliest times is never mentioned. During this period therefore,
the Volscians and Auruncans on the coast are likewise called Latins.
This meaning of the name afterwards changed again, and only a portion
of that country together with all the Latin colonies was termed _nomen
Latinum_, that is _gens Latina_, or _genus Latinum_, just as we have
_nomen Romanum_, _nomen Fabium_ in Livy. The Latin colonies consisted of
Romans, Latins, and Italicans; they became a single nation, which the
Romans planted all over Italy, and they rose to such importance as almost
to throw the ancient Latin towns into oblivion, so that at the time of
the Hannibalian war the name Latini signified the Latin colonies and the
few Latin towns which had belonged to the ancient confederacy and had
not yet obtained the Roman franchise. Their number continued to increase
until the lex Julia, which conferred the Roman franchise upon all of
them; Tibur and Praeneste also, the only remaining towns of the old Latin
confederacy, now received the franchise, and for the moment the Latini
ceased to exist. However, at Rome any gaps which arose, were immediately
filled up; when one generation became effete, another of new and vigorous
citizens was established in its place. C. Pompeius Strabo afterwards
conferred the _jus Latii_ upon the towns of Gallia Transpadana, and with
this wise and progressive measure introduced something quite different
from what had been customary before. These new Latins were levied for
the Roman legions, whereas the earlier ones had formed cohorts of their
own; the latter had been in the relation of isopolity, and by virtue of
the _jus municipii_ they might take the Roman franchise whenever they
pleased; but the new Latins in Gallia Transpadana could do this only
when they had held a municipal office in any of their own towns. They,
moreover, had no _connubium_: when a Roman married such a Latin woman,
his children were not Roman citizens. Sigonius is intolerable on this
subject, and so also most of the moderns. It is sad that our jurists
are not better philologers; I think that in questions of this kind an
intimate acquaintance with the ancient authors is indispensable. But on
the other hand, philologers ought to possess a very accurate knowledge
of Roman law.
This creation of Pompeius Strabo naturally produced two off-shoots. In
the first place, some people _extra Italiam positi_ now likewise obtained
the _jus Latii_, especially certain Spanish tribes and the inhabitants of
Provence, and all of them on the same footing as the Galli Transpadani.
You ought to know these rights of the Transpadani, because they belong
to the age of Cicero and Caesar, and are of interest in the history of
that period. Secondly, in the reign of Tiberius there was passed the
_Lex Junia Norbani_[2], which limited the manumission of slaves, and
provided regulations to effect a state of security for freedmen without
their obtaining the franchise. This is the later _Latinitas_, mentioned
in the law-books. The _lex Aelia Sentia_ had already established
similar limitations, to prevent slaves from becoming Roman citizens by
manumission; but these restrictions consisted in the formalities of the
law, which had grown obsolete, and were, in many instances, troublesome
and even injurious. The law had thus become unsettled. Formerly the
earlier Latins were not distinguished from the later ones; but the
ancient Latins had the _connubium_; all the Italians, in fact, had it,
and most certainly the Latins.