settlement of which we have any accurate information. In the Heracleae,
the island on which Gades was situated was called _Erythea_, and the
ancients say that it consisted of two islands, a circumstance which has
caused much difficulty to modern geographers, as it was impossible to
find the two islands. But no Andalusian would be puzzled by it. Cadiz,
together with Leon, now certainly forms one island, but originally Cadiz
was an island by itself, and its present union with Isla de Leon is the
consequence of a causeway, which was made at a time unknown to us, from
Gades to the larger island; this artificial causeway is discernible even
at the present day. Gades was a Phoenician settlement, independent of
Carthage, and as truly Punic as the latter city itself. But when the
prosperity of Carthage rose higher and higher, and when, at the same
time, that of the other Phoenician colonies was sinking more and more,
then Gades also was obliged to acknowledge the supremacy of Carthage.
Nothing is more natural and more in accordance with human passions and
feelings, than that this Punic city was more hostile to the Carthaginians
than any other place that had been subdued by them; we cannot, therefore,
be surprised at finding that, in the course of the second Punic war, its
hatred of Carthage led it to declare in favour of the Romans, as Utica
did afterwards. Hence Gades obtained very favourable terms from the
Romans, and remained a privileged city until the time of the emperors;
afterwards it received the Roman franchise. Cadiz is one of those places
which experienced scarcely any reverses of fortune in ancient times; and,
with the exception of the barbarous invasion of the Arabs, I do not know
that Cadiz was ever visited by a single misfortune.
Part of the coast of Granada was likewise occupied by Punians, for
MALACCA (the royal city) also was a Punic colony. Before the dominion of
the Carthaginians, the inhabitants were called _Bastuli_. Here, as well
as in Africa, the facility with which the Phoenicians became amalgamated
with foreign nations is very striking.
CARTHAGO (the modern _Carthagena_, properly _Cartha Chadta_ or New
Town) was the real capital of the Carthaginians in Spain, and its name
is as common as the Greek Neapolis. Notwithstanding its importance and
strength, the town was not as large as we are inclined to imagine; at the
time of its capture by Scipio, it appears small both in population and
circumference, if we compare it with other maritime cities and capitals.
It was founded by Hamilcar Barcas, who first established the dominion of
the Carthaginians in Spain, which, however, was not of long duration.
Though Gades and the towns on the coast of Granada were Punic, we must
not, on that account imagine that, previously to the time of Hamilcar
Barcas, the Carthaginians had a province there. Their influence, indeed,
was great even before; their commerce was extensive and lucrative,
the Spanish mines may have been chiefly worked by Punians, and Spain
was the recruiting place for their armies; but no part of Spain was a
Carthaginian province before the end of the first Punic war. It was the
great idea of Hamilcar Barcas richly to indemnify his country for the
loss of Sardinia and Sicily, an idea which no one was better qualified to
realise than he, by paralysing the Romans with determination, cunning,
and skill. The lately-discovered precious fragments from Diodorus throw
great light upon the admirable manner in which he carried this plan
into effect. Turdetania was subdued first, Hannibal then carried the
war almost as far as Salamanca, and the modern New Castile and Valencia
were subdued by him. These acquisitions, however, must not be regarded
as permanent conquests, the object of the Carthaginians being rather to
terrify the Spaniards and to accustom them to a feeling of dependence.
The Carthaginians were otherwise hard and hated masters, but the great
Hamilcar, his great successor Hasdrubal, and the great sons of Hamilcar,
founded the Carthaginian dominion in Spain in such a manner as to secure
to Carthage the attachment of the natives, a point in which the Romans
never succeeded. Much depended upon circumstances, the Carthaginians,
e.g., were less rigorous in observing the connubium than the Romans,
and Hannibal himself married a Spanish woman of Castulo, which shows
what liberty was allowed in this respect: when the commander-in-chief
of a province did this, we may easily imagine in what manner persons of
inferior rank acted. The Romans had no connubium at all with the natives.
If we proceed to the interior of Andalusia, we find the valley of
the Baetis to be one of the richest and most fertile countries in
Europe; it is still a paradise, and will ever remain so, in spite of
the devastations of war and the worst government. I know, from an
eye-witness, who saw the country in the years 1810 and 1811, that its
prosperity and high state of cultivation were altogether unchanged, and
quite as good as before.
HISPALIS (the Arabs call it _Iabilia_, whence the modern name _Sevilla_)
was the ancient capital of those parts. It does not act a prominent part
in history, and is not often mentioned; but we know that, notwithstanding
the greatness of Gades, it had its own importance, as sea ships sailed
up as far as Hispalis. In the time of the Romans, it seems to have risen
still higher in consequence of various favours conferred upon it.
CORDUBA was the real Roman capital of the province; it was, no doubt, an
ancient Spanish town with a Roman colony, which bears the strange name
of _Colonia Patricia Corduba_. It is as impossible for us to understand
what circumstance gave rise to this name, as it is to determine the
time at which the colony was founded. It was not a military colony,
nor can it have been founded before the year of the city 641, in which
year[66] Narbo, the first Roman colony out of Italy, was founded. This
event caused great sensation, for until then all attempts to establish
colonies in foreign countries had failed. Corduba, therefore, cannot have
been founded before the seventh century; and it perhaps belongs to the
time when Metellus had the command in Baetica. Corduba is destined by
nature to be a princely city; and it was the centre of Roman civilisation
and literature in those parts. It was not only the native place of the
Senecas, but it was so completely a Latin town, that _poetae Cordubenses_
were spoken of even in Cicero’s time; they were not indeed mentioned
with praise, but it was not their language that was censured; they were
deficient only in manner and in skill. In the history of literature,
Corduba is remarkable as the native place of the family of the Senecas;
it afterwards retained the same importance which it had during the first
century. It passed from the hands of the Romans into those of the Goths,
and lastly into those of the Arabs; but it is always honourably spoken of
as a distinguished city.
If I had time to dwell longer on this subject, I might relate to you
much that is of great interest about Baetica; but for the present I will
select only two localities.
SALTUS CASTULONENSIS, leading to Castulo, is exactly the same road across
the Sierra Morena, which leads to Andujar. In the history of the Roman
wars, it is very important, and again became so in 1808, when General
Dupont was obliged to surrender there.
MUNDA was situated in the mountains of Granada. It seems strange to us,
that the war between Caesar and the sons of Pompey was decided in those
parts, so near the coast at the extreme end of Spain; but if we consider
the nature of the locality, we cease to wonder: the country is strong
and fertile at the same time, so that the armies were not in danger of
suffering from want of provisions. This shews that the sons of Pompey
were wise in establishing themselves there.
The inhabitants of Baetica were called by the Romans _Turduli_ and
_Turdetani_. People generally distinguish between these two names, and I
believe that Strabo did so too; but I think that they are only intended
to indicate slight shades of difference between two people of the same
race.
The country of the _Edetani_ (the modern province of Valencia) had
VALENTIA for its capital. You remember my mentioning the fact that Roman
names of places were derived from verbs of which the meaning was a
favourable omen. Valentia is an instance of this, and another town of the
same name existed in Italy. Other names of the same kind are Pollentia,
Potentia, Florentia, Vincentia, Faventia, etc. The town of Valentia was a
Roman settlement; I do not believe that it was a colony, but it must have
been founded at an early time, for it is certainly mentioned in the war
of Sertorius. It is situated on the river Turia, which is celebrated in
antiquity for the glorious but unsuccessful battle of Sertorius.
The ancient town of SAETABIS, one of the largest manufacturing places of
Spain, was situated in the same district; a very fine kind of linen was
made there from flax grown in the country.
SAGUNTUS or SAGUNTUM (both forms are supported by authority), was
situated to the north of Valentia. It is well-known that this place
was the occasion of the second Punic war, and Polybius in speaking of
it makes a beautiful and correct observation respecting the difference
between the immediate occasion and the cause of a war. Saguntum was the
occasion, but certainly not the cause of the war. It is very singular
that not only Appian, whose geographical ignorance of Spain surpasses
everything, but even Roman authors almost universally assume Saguntum
to have been situated on the left side of the Ebro; this, however, is a
mistake, for it was situated on its right side, and at a considerable
distance from it to the south. According to one tradition, it was a
colony of Ardea, that is, a Tyrrhenian settlement and it is very probable
that there may have been a Tyrrhenian admixture; but according to others
it was an Achaean colony of Zacynthos: the resemblance of the name was
too tempting not to suggest the derivation. The Tyrrhenians are often
called Achivi, and as Zacynthos was Achivan, both things were mixed
together in this manner. It is much more credible that Saguntum was a
colony of Ardea, founded at a time when the Ardeatans were great and
powerful. Taraco, on the opposite side of the river, is likewise said
to have been a Tyrrhenian town. But admitting that the Saguntines were
originally Tyrrhenians, they certainly, in the course of time, became
complete Spaniards, as many other colonists identified themselves with
the natives; and the Saguntines, against whom Hannibal fought, were
Spaniards. It would lead too far here to speak of the fate of Saguntum,
and of the uncritical treatment of its history by Livy, and his strange
misconceptions. Livy, in this part of his work, probably followed
Caelius Antipater, and thereby spoiled the beginning of his third decad,
which is otherwise so excellent: his account of Saguntum is a childish
exaggeration, and well suited to a rhetorician like Caelius. Saguntum
was restored by the Romans, and remained a considerable town under the
empire; large ruins of an amphitheatre still exist near Murviedro.
We now come to the Iberus, into which several rivers from the north
discharge their waters; one of these, the _Sicoris_ (Segre), is a river
of some importance. The Romans acquired influence and formed connections
in the country between the Ebro and the Pyrenees about the same time
when Hamilcar was actively engaged in the south to extend the power of
Carthage; and the inhabitants of Catalonia, at least those on the coast,
had at that time already submitted to the Romans. As the power of the
Carthaginians was spreading in Spain, the Catalonians thought they could
protect themselves only by applying to some distant state which had no
armies in the neighbourhood, which levied no taxes, and to which they
had only to furnish troops in case of need. TARACO, properly the capital
of all Spain, was the chief city in fair Catalonia throughout the Roman
period; and from it _Hispania Taraconensis_, which embraced the greater
part of Spain, derived its name. After the time of the Hannibalian war
there were two _Hispaniae_, and one praetor resided at Carthagena, and
the other at Taraco. It was in its character of a capital that Taraco had
a temple of Roma and Augustus. It was a wealthy place, but afterwards
declined, and in the middle ages it was eclipsed by the neighbouring—
_Barcelona_, which, however, is not mentioned during the period of the
Roman republic, but only under the empire. Its ancient name is BARCINO;
the termination _no_ or _ino_ is of common occurrence, as for example, in
Ruscino, and seems to have been a dialectic peculiarity of those parts.
Barcelona, has an excellent harbour, and its situation is very strong on
account of the mountain which rises above the city. At the time of the
Visigoths, it surpassed Taragona in importance, but in ancient history it
does not occur.
On a more distant part of the coast, we meet with two Greek settlements,
EMPORIAE, from which the modern Ampurias has its name, and RHODE. The
latter is called a Rhodian colony; but Rhode, as well as Emporiae, was
probably a colony of Massilia, by whose support it was maintained.
The country between the Ebro and the Pyrenees was in ancient times
inhabited by many small tribes, as the Ilergetes, Lacetani, Cosetani,
etc.[67]
ILERDA, the modern Lerida on the Sicoris, is a town of great historical
importance in the interior of Catalonia. It is remarkable in the history
of Rome, and especially that of Caesar, who there compelled Afranius
and Petreius to capitulate. These events, which are interesting in
themselves, also show how an extraordinary man overcomes the most
difficult circumstances, and gains advantages even where all chances seem
to be against him.
OSCA (now Huesca), an ancient town farther inland, in Aragon, was, for
a long time the head-quarters of the great Sertorius. It must have been
a town of great importance to Spain, for the standard of the Spanish
coinage is called _argentum Oscense_.
We have thus rapidly passed along the whole coast from the Baetis to
the Pyrenees; but in the valley of the Ebro I have still to notice
CAESARAUGUSTA (Saragoza). Spain is the real country of the great and
flourishing military colonies of the Romans; Gaul had but few of them,
such as Cologne, which, however, was of a mixed character, as Germans
there dwelt together with the veterans. Cologne and Lyons were national
towns rather than real military colonies of the Romans; but those in
Spain were pure military colonies, differing from those of Italy in the
fact that the latter, with the exception of Placentia and Cremona, were
established in towns which had existed before, whereas those in Spain
consisted of newly-built towns. These foundations of towns belong to the
age of Augustus and his successors. Augustus evidently had a twofold
object in view, first to reward his veterans, and secondly to Romanise
the Spaniards. The population in those parts had been almost annihilated
during the unfortunate wars, and hence Augustus sent out whole legions
to establish themselves there. In this manner arose _Emerita Augusta_,
the modern Merida, which must have been an immensely large town, for it
contained the veterans of three legions. He gave them extensive estates,
so that the territory of the town must have been a whole province,
and the ancient inhabitants could not possibly till their lands. The
veterans became the lords of the soil. Caesaraugusta was a town of
this kind. Augustus was a distinguished man, whatever we may think of
him; in regard to intellect and talent we may rate him very low, and
I believe that he even deserves to be ranked lower than is generally
done; but he was a ruler of great ability; and the fact that the time
in which he lived was deplorable and full of confusion, must not induce
us to be unjust towards him. The age in which he lived was morally bad,
but the cause of this lay in the period which preceded it, just as the
horrors of the French revolution must be set down to the account of
those who had the power in their hands before it broke out; had these
men been better, the ferment of the dregs of the people would have met
with quite a different resistance. But the whole fabric was rotten and
in a state of dissolution. In like manner the age of Augustus was bad,
because it was the offspring of a bad and corrupt period. It was as
impossible to save the Roman republic, as it was to restore the republic
of Florence after the reign of Alexander de Medici. The men who had
conspired against Caesar may have been the best and noblest, but they
were extremely unwise, they ought to have taken into account the actual
circumstances. Alcmaeon, the profound Pythagorean, says, that men perish,
if they do not understand how to fit the beginning to the end.[68] This
is very frequently the case in history; and hence the noblest endeavours
often lead to unfortunate results. The regulations of Augustus for the
government of the state were, for the most part, extremely praiseworthy.
I do not mean to say that it was his object to lead the nation to what
is good and noble, or to ennoble their motives for action—in this he,
like many other statesmen, had no faith—but he wanted to prepare for his
subjects’ security an undisturbed existence, and outward prosperity; and
in this respect his efforts were well directed, and he did not regard
the Romans as slaves. In like manner, his regulations concerning the
provinces were very rational, and his colonies, among which Caesaraugusta
has immortalised his name more than any other, are proofs of the same
wisdom.
_Emerita Augusta_, _Pax Augusta_ (Badajoz), _Pax Julia_ (Beja, in
southern Portugal) are similar colonies in the interior. These are the
principal ones, for there are several more, which are less celebrated.
Vespasian afterwards continued the same system, whence several Spanish
places have the surname _Flavia_. They were, however, no longer
absolutely Roman colonies, but Spanish towns upon which he engrafted
military colonies. This lasted until the second century, and I remember
no colony of a more recent date than the reign of Trajan. _Legio_, the
modern Leon, was likewise such a military colony; even at present its
walls remind us of the form of a Roman camp, and all military colonies of
the Romans regularly had the form of a camp.
We shall pass through the country from west to east, but can consider it
only in masses. The westernmost people were the LUSITANIANS, occupying
a country somewhat different in extent from the modern kingdom of
Portugal, for it did not extend so far north, and in the south it did
not go beyond the frontier of Algarbia, but in the east, it extended
much farther into Spain. The Lusitanians were the most civilised among
all the Spanish nations. They do not seem to have been subdivided, but
to have formed one compact state with one national government, which,
however, does not appear to have had a high degree of intensity, as is
proved by the history of Viriathus. At the time when the Romans made
themselves masters of Spain, the Lusitanians distinguished themselves
by their perseverance and firmness; their valour is displayed in the
great undertaking of Viriathus for their liberty. Every one knows the
cruelty and faithlessness of Servius Galba, who induced them to enter
into a capitulation with the Romans, and then treacherously massacred the
greater part of them.
OLISIPO was even then the most important town in Lusitania. We may
assume, without any hesitation, that, under the Roman emperors, the
country enjoyed a far higher degree of prosperity than at present; Spain,
on the other hand, on its first appearance in history, is in a state
of great disorganisation. Owing to its situation, Olisipo was a great
emporium even under the Romans.
We pass over other Lusitanian places: I have already told you that two
Celtic tribes dwelt in the country of Portugal, the _Celtici_ in the
south near the frontier of Algarbia, and the _Celtae_ in the north
between the Douro and Minho.
The ORETANI occur on the Orospeda in Spain proper, north of the Sierra
Morena; but I will not mention all the tribes, I shall confine myself to
two which act a prominent part in ancient history, and the districts of
which must be known in order to understand the campaigns of Hannibal:
I allude to the CARPETANI and VACCAEI. The former dwelt about the
Tagus; although it is not expressly said, that _Toletum_ (Toledo) was
their capital, we must in all probability suppose it to have been their
central town. This town, owing to its central position, is destined
by nature to be a capital, and such we find it to have been under the
Goths. In the time of the Romans also it must have been a place of great
importance, though it is not mentioned as the seat of the praetor: this
is one of the obscure points in the history of the fourth and fifth
centuries. Afterwards, in the time of the Moors, it was the residence
of the governors and kaliphs, and subsequently of the kings of Castile,
until the seat of government was absurdly transferred to Madrid,
for Toledo has a much more splendid situation in a far more healthy
district. The _Carpetani_ (Καρπήσιοι) act a prominent part in the third
book of Polybius and in the twenty-first of Livy, for they offered a
brave resistance to the Carthaginians during their progress towards the
interior of the country.
The _Vaccaei_ dwelt on the Durius, and _Salmantica_, the modern
Salamanca, was their capital. This was the farthest point to which
Hannibal advanced in his campaigns. The Vaccaei, in their struggle
against the Romans, appear as one of the most heroic nations.
All these tribes were completely Iberian; but further east we reach
IDUBEDA, the mountains of Soria, a ramification of the Pyrenees
between the Tagus and Durius on the one hand, and the Iberus on the
other, and extending as far as the Sierra Morena, which separates
Aragon from Castile as completely as the Pyrenees separate Spain from
France. The language of the Aragonese is Provençal and quite foreign
to the Castilian. Those mountains were inhabited by four tribes, which
are of great celebrity in Roman history under the common name of the
CELTIBERIANS. The most important among them are the _Aruaci_ or _Arevaci_
and _Berones_; and their chief town was NUMANTIA, which has acquired
imperishable fame in history. The tribe to which Numantia belonged was
insignificant, and the town is an instance of a phenomenon which is
otherwise of rare occurrence in Spain, namely, it was independent of the
tribe to which it belonged. I have already stated, that the Celtiberians
must be regarded as Iberians, who subdued the Celts, though the latter
maintained themselves in the country. The Iberian character of pride and
perseverance shows itself most strikingly in them, because they were the
masters there, and in a most favourable situation, living among a subject
population upon which they could devolve the burdens of life. However
much accurate historical knowledge may be lost, yet it is certain that
the Celtiberians are one of the most respectable nations of antiquity,
_non sine laude nominandi_. During the Carthaginian period, they
preserved their liberty unimpaired; but when the Romans systematically
undertook the subjugation of Spain, they first came in contact with the
Celtiberians, who had formerly been on terms of friendship with them, and
had served in their armies as mercenaries. But when attempts were made
upon their liberty, they refused to listen to any terms of submission.
They were intelligent enough to look upon the war with the Romans as
a great misfortune; when, therefore, Tib. Gracchus, the father of the
illustrious tribunes, and a son of the Tib. Gracchus who had fallen at
Beneventum in the Hannibalian war, had the supreme command in Spain, the
Celtiberians, having confidence in his honesty, concluded peace with him
on terms which the weaker people could accept without disgracing itself,
and by which their existence was not so far degraded as to make death
preferable. They observed the peace conscientiously, but not so the
Romans, who, at last, under the second Scipio, succeeded in destroying
Numantia: that victory is a degradation to Scipio as much as, in the
reign of Tiberius, it was a degradation to the men who were obliged to
lend their names to pass disgraceful _senatus consulta_.
Some of the Celtiberian towns were protected only by their situation;
this was the case at Numantia, though certainly not with any reference
to Sparta on principle, for as the town had no more than 4000 armed
men, such a principle would have been ill suited to them, and it would
not assuredly have been any degradation to protect the town by means of
fortifications.