Part 12

In the second and third books of Livy, the Volscians and Aequians generally come in contact with each other on mount _Algidus_. There are different opinions as to what mountain is meant by this name; scholars commonly rely on a passage in the Itineraries, where a place _Algidus_ or _Algidum_ is mentioned. The district is now never visited, because it is the haunt of fearful robbers; however, after I had left Italy, a friend of mine visited and described the localities. Between the countries of the Latins and Hernicans, there was a high and cold table land, _locus algidus_, not hills in the proper sense, but a rugged district covered with wood (_ilex_). At present there remain but slight traces of that forest, which is a little to the north of Velitrae. As the Aequians and Volscians were contiguous there, they separated the Hernicans from the Romans and Latins, and thus were pernicious to the latter. According to these statements, you will have no difficulty in finding the situation of mount Algidus in your maps.

ANTIUM was a Volscian place; I do not mean to say that the whole population consisted of Volscians, but it had received a Volscian colony, which gave the prevailing name; as Virgil says, _Tusco de sanguine vires_, so we may say of Antium, _Volsco de sanguine vires_. In ancient times, Antium was an important maritime and commercial place, but also the haunt of pirates; afterwards it became a _colonia maritima_, that is, its inhabitants were bound to serve in maritime war, and on extraordinary emergencies; they had the Roman franchise, but not the right of voting. The place was greatly favoured, and in the course of time became the emporium of the whole Latin country; its harbour was much better than that of any of the other towns on the same coast, such as Laurentum and Lavinium, which had only road-steads. At a later time, it was artificially improved, a circumstance which had become necessary, for the mud of the Tiber, which was carried along the coast, filled up the harbour. Afterwards Antium was one of those places, in which the wealthy Roman nobles were fond of taking up their summer residence, especially during the first century after Christ. Nero changed it into a military colony, but of an irregular kind.

TERRACINA or ANXUR, was a large and ancient Tyrrhenian city; Anxur is acknowledged to be its Volscian name. Its double name alone leads to the supposition that the place had a mixed population.

ECETRAE, one of the central points of the Volscian population, must be looked for in the interior of the country, above the Pontine marshes, and not far from Ferentinum. It afterwards entirely disappears like so many other places in that district. I cannot explain this otherwise, than by supposing that the Romans have drawn a veil over the Samnite wars. The time when so many places were destroyed there, must have been that when the Samnites penetrated into the heart of Latium.

The Volscians, like the Aequians, belonged the Ausonian race, of which I have spoken in the general survey of the Italian nations. If you compare the names, you will find that the Opicans and Apulians were one and the same people, and that the names of the ancient Italian nations have undergone various changes without a difference in meaning. Thus the _Aequi_ are also called _Aequani_, _Aequuli_, and _Aequiculi_, all of which are one and the same name, just as _Graeci_ and _Graeculi_, and _Hispani_ and _Hispalli_, which were originally used without any difference of meaning. The Aequians and Volscians, as I said before, belonged to this Oscan or Ausonian race, to which Latin writers also give the name _Aurunci_, while the Greeks call them _Ausones_. The same name often has a general signification, and sometimes again it is applied only to a special part, just as _Thessalians_ sometimes signifies the inhabitants of the country of Thessaly, and sometimes the population of Cyzicus, Ravenna, and Agylla, without there being any necessity of thinking of colonisation. In the same manner, Auruncans or Opicans are both the name of the whole race, and at the same time the name of separate portions. This changeableness in the use of names renders the survey of the history of ancient nations difficult, as the ancients themselves never express an opinion on this twofold meaning, and as those whose works are extant, are often themselves in error about it.

The Volscians, thus regarded as a portion of the Ausonians or Auruncans, extended from the Apennines in the neighbourhood of Arpinum along the Liris, south of the Hernicans as far as the coast of Antium. But there can be no doubt that they dwelt farther east, and the migration of the Cascans and Priscans was certainly owing to a commotion among that race. The Aeneid contains many traces of the original population of Latium, as for example, when the poet says, _Memini Auruncos ita ferre senes_.[37]

I have already spoken of the Volscians on the coast, of Antium, Terracina, and of the Ecetrani, whose name is often mentioned in history, but whose town is not spoken of anywhere; from one passage of Livy[38] alone, it may be inferred that it was situated near Ferentinum: it is possible that it may have been taken from the Hernicans by the Volscians. The population of such towns must never be conceived to have been totally changed. The Gauls, and similar uncivilised nations, sometimes did extirpate the ancient population; but people like the Romans and Volscians only settled as colonists among a conquered population, taking a part of its territory for themselves, either for the purpose of cultivating it themselves or of changing the former owners into coloni. Such also was the case with the population of Antium, as I have already mentioned. In the second volume of my Roman History, I shall explain, what in Livy’s history is quite inconceivable, namely, how it happens that Antium appears as a thoroughly Volscian town, which can be accounted for only by the idea we form of the power of the Volscian colonists. Livy is not the only cause of the confusion, but the annalists of the seventh century also have their share in it. If we had but Fabius, we might safely say, that we required no further deductions to discover the ancient relation, which in his work was undoubtedly quite clear and obvious.

FUNDI and FORMIAE likewise belong to those Volscian towns established on ancient Tyrrhenian foundations; but ARPINUM, the birth-place of Marius and Cicero, is the most immortal among the Volscian towns. The present circumference of the walls shows that it was a large and strong place. This town, impelled by necessity, remained faithful to the Romans when they were hard pressed by the Samnites.

FREGELLAE is found in our maps in the vicinity of Arpinum, and not far from the Liris. It is remarkable in history, and its first occurrence in Livy throws considerable light upon the course of events. It was a Volscian town, and was destroyed by the Samnites; the Romans then, contrary to the ordinary Italian law of nations, sent a colony into it. The Samnites, who were allied with the Romans, denied their right to establish a colony there. This was one of the chief causes of the second Samnite war. The Samnites, however, were wrong in claiming it, for Fregellae was the key to the Via Latina, and hence the security of the Roman frontier demanded that the place should be in the hands of the Romans: to the Samnites it was a point of attack, to the Romans it was a means of defence; unless, therefore, the Samnites intended to make war upon the Romans, they were wrong in opposing its occupation by the Romans. Such circumstances must be taken into consideration, in deciding upon the justice or injustice of a question. It is difficult to comprehend how that town rose to such extraordinary power. Pyrrhus conquered it, and it suffered greatly; but from the last book of Livy we see that thousands of Sabellian families, Samnites, Pelignians, and others had settled there. This circumstance, however, was followed by consequences unfortunate for Fregellae. The numerical increase made the town proud, and during the disputes between the Latin colonies and Rome, it claimed to be at their head. Encouraged by the measures of the Gracchi, it obstinately demanded the franchise long before the Italicans came forward. On the whole, ancient history presents many parallels to modern history, sometimes they occur on a larger scale in antiquity and sometimes in modern times. The relation here alluded to is that of the Irish in their connection with England. When Ireland, in 1782, demanded its independence, the Anglicans in their claims against England, went far beyond the Roman Catholics and the other dissenters, and they alone gained advantages. A small parallel in comparison with the great one in antiquity occurs at Geneva, in the relation between the _bourgeoisie_ of the suburb St. Gervais to the _citoyens_ of the old town, where the _natifs_ had all the real power, while the _habitans_ possessed only very little. Fregellae, then, stood at the head of the Latin colonies, and looked with pride upon its power; its inhabitants believed that Rome would not allow matters to come to extremes, and if they should come to that, they counting the population of the Latin colonies found that they were stronger than Rome by many hundred thousands: they thought that they might oppose the Romans, degraded by freedmen and poverty, with an able force of free country people. But the result was quite different. Rome acted with cunning: the Italian allies had not yet made up their minds, and did not yet take part in the interests of the Latins, thinking that the Latin colonies would take care of themselves alone, and that, if it should come to a war, they would become reconciled with Rome, and leave the Italian allies to settle their affairs as best they could. Even the other colonies showed no common interest, perhaps because they were jealous of Fregellae, or they hesitated because they were so much scattered among the Umbrians, Etruscans, etc., and for that reason were wanting in courage. Fregellae thus stood alone: it was conquered and destroyed by L. Opimius, and never restored. Fabrataria, another colony, was established in its vicinity.

The Latin colonies, _Interamnium_, _Sora_, and _Casinum_, formed a complete chain of fortresses in the same district. It was partly before the outbreak of the second Samnite war, and partly during its progress, that the Romans were anxiously bent upon establishing fortified places; and these measures made them as secure as France was by its frontier fortresses. Their frontier was thus very effectually protected against the Samnites, for all those fortresses were planned with great sagacity. The Samnites, who, besides their unsatisfactory constitution, had no fortresses, were thus weak, and the Roman army could enter Samnium without meeting with any obstacle. They were not inferior to the Romans in bravery, but were nevertheless conquered by them, because they were not agreed as to the manner in which the war should be carried on. It is pitiable to see how the excellent people year after year became more unhappy, because they could not raise themselves above their traditionary prejudices, though their salvation depended upon it.

CAMPANIA.

This name has likewise different meanings. In the Roman sense, it is the country of the Campanians, as Samnium is the country of the Samnites; but the Campanians (on coins they are called _Capani_) are the inhabitants of Capa or Capua. In this sense Campania is a country of small extent, comprising Capua and the neighbouring places, Atella, Acerrae, Saticula, Calatia, Abella, Casilinum, Vulturnum, and Linternum. All these places were situated on the south of the Vulturnus, with the exception of Saticula; the _ager Falernus_, between the Vulturnus and Liris, however, likewise belonged to Campania. The Greeks, on the other hand, applied the name Campanians to all the nations of southern Italy belonging to the Oscan race, and this accounts for the fact that the name Campania was also used in a wider sense. This, however, occurs only in later times; and the extent of country which is marked Campania in all our maps, even in those of D’Anville, was not generally so designated until the time of Augustus. The name then embraced the whole country between the Vulturnus, the Liris, and the heights of the Apennines about Arpinum and Aquinum, so as to include Cales and Teanum,—in one word, all the Oscan tribes north of the Vulturnus as far as the frontier of the Volscians. I think I have already observed, in the account of the division of Italy into regions, that the expression _Campania Romae_ was used as early as the fourth or fifth century of our era; it is found in the abridgment of Servius, which, however, was made in the seventh century. The name Champagne has quite a different origin, probably from _campus_, a plain, whence _Campi Catalaunici_, which also comprise the foreign immigrants such as the Goths and others.

You must bear in mind this difference of meaning, in order that in reading the ancients, e.g., Livy, you may not fall into the mistake of believing that Campania is the name for the country which is so marked in our maps.

Advancing from the Liris, we come upon Ausonian tribes and CALES, which, according to Livy, was an Auruncian town. It was conquered by the Romans in the interval between the great Latin and the second Samnite war, and received a Roman colony.

TEANUM was a town of the Sidicines, likewise an Ausonian people. That northern district between the Vulturnus and the Liris, which did not extend as far as the mountains, is one of the most delightful and fertile countries; it is not, indeed, as productive as southern Campania, the _agri lugubres Campaniae_, the πεδία Φλεγραῖα, the coast country from Terracina to Gaeta and Formiae, where a man has the feeling as if he were in a paradise full of the most indescribable beauties—I was there in the month of March, when spring was already displaying all its loveliness; the summer, too, is not so scorching as in the neighbourhood of Rome, for the country is well watered, and that even in the middle of summer;—but the neighbourhood of Teanum is a most delightful hilly country, with a beauty and richness of trees which form a great contrast with those of Latium. This was the country of the Falernian and Classic wines. Teanum, according to Strabo, was a large town; but the present ruins do not show many traces of that greatness, though the silver coins which are found there show that Strabo is correct.

The LIRIS deserves the name of _taciturnus amnis_; it has no strong current, except in winter, when the heights are covered with snow. The VULTURNUS is quite different; descending from the neighbouring hills it has a strong current; but it is not a beautiful river, being extremely muddy. It is, however, a pleasure to see the active flow of its waters. On its banks was situated

CASILINUM, on the site of the modern Capua, which is celebrated for the extraordinary defence of the Praenestine cohort against Hannibal: the perseverance of a besieged town is always interesting, and excites veneration. The garrison murdered the Campanian inhabitants, that the provisions might last so much longer. Hannibal took the place, and after that time it is not often mentioned again. The situation on the Via Appia somewhat raised its importance in the time of the emperors; its means of subsistence, as was the case with all places on high roads, were derived from commerce.

If we compare the present condition of Italy with what it was in ancient times, say under Nero or at the time of Pliny, there can be no doubt that Rome itself is only a shadow of what it then was; I have calculated that its population then amounted to from 600,000 to 700,000 souls. But the territory around Rome was in those days far more desolate than it is now: it is at present more thickly peopled, better cultivated, and happier. Under the later emperors the country may have somewhat recovered; in the fourth century, previously to the plague under Gallienus, it may have had a larger population, and so also in the time of Theodosius. But I entirely agree with Hume, against Wallace, that the population of Italy in antiquity was far less numerous than at present, except in Rome itself. Naples was then only a country town, of about 20,000 or 30,000 inhabitants, while at present it has 400,000. But notwithstanding all this, Italy possessed incomparably more wealth than at present, so that a small town was of much greater importance than one at present with a far larger population; a third-rate town, for example, was illustrious for its works of art to a much greater extent than any modern town of any country.

The name CAPUA is now transferred to the town built upon the ruins of Casilinum; ancient Capua was destroyed by the Saracens during the Lombardic period: its ruins can still be recognised; and among them the remains of an amphitheatre are particularly remarkable; but no ancient Campanian ruins are found there. I never was there, because at the time the country was not safe, and there are no high roads in those parts: I was a whole month at Naples, but was too much engaged to go to Capua. The inhabitants of the district are reported to form a band of robbers, and many a one is said to have had sad experience there. Notorious districts of this kind, however, are different at different times: you may often go to such a place without exposing yourself to any particular danger, while at other times it would be madness to approach it. During my residence at Rome, e.g., it was impossible to visit mount Algidus, whereas at present I have no doubt whatever that a person may go there without any danger. Capua is regarded by the ancients as an Etruscan colony, but we have every reason for supposing that it never was Etruscan. There is, in all probability, some confusion here between Etruscan and Tyrrhenian, because the Etruscans occupied the country of the Tyrrhenians as far as the Tiber, and the name of the latter must have been confounded with the former; the other places on the coast, unless they were Greek, were likewise Tyrrhenian. The name of this Tyrrhenian Capua is compared by the ancient grammarians with _Campi_, the name of the Pelasgian Chaonians. The town was taken, about the middle of the third century of the Roman era, by the Oscans, who were pressed onward by the Sabellians. At that time the district was under the supremacy of Cumae. But the Oscans did not remain long in the undisturbed possession of the place; the Sabellians having once established themselves in Samnium, did not stop short there, but pressing onward, compelled the Oscans at Capua to enter into an arrangement with them, and to admit a portion of them as epoeci—a phenomenon not unusual in ancient times. But such an alliance was generally formed with faithless intentions, and either the ancient inhabitants murdered the conquerors, or the latter expelled the former: at Capua the Samnites made themselves masters of the city, but they seem either to have been expelled by the ancient population, or else to have become amalgamated with them. The Oscans had, perhaps, become a commonalty, and afterwards rose again; in the Roman period, at least, the Oscans are the ruling people at Capua. The greatness of the city is well known from Livy: it stood to Rome in the relation of isopolity; it had not submitted _in deditionem_, as is erroneously stated by Livy: its relation to Rome was the same as that of the ancient Latins, and as a compensation for the Roman conquests, it received an extension of its own territory. In these circumstances, Capua could with satisfaction look upon herself as the second city of Italy; but she was ambitious enough to wish to become the first, and with this view, faithlessly entered into an alliance with Hannibal against Rome, which was then in great distress, but had not broken its obligations towards Capua. We may say without hesitation, that Rome was generous towards Capua, and this was no trifling matter for Rome in its weakness: Rome then formed alliances which benefited other people. As Rome had grown and developed immensely, while the others had remained behind, and as Rome, nevertheless, acted towards them as before, we cannot help calling this generous, and the conduct of Capua unjust and ungrateful. A fearful judgment came upon Capua: it was not, indeed, destroyed, but the Campanians, especially the nobles, experienced a terrible fate. The city was afterwards again filled with all manner of people, and became a domain of the Roman republic. Subsequently, several unsuccessful attempts were made to establish a colony there, until J. Caesar founded one of 5000[39] Roman citizens. From this time forward Capua was a regular colony, and remained a respectable town as long as the Roman empire existed.

MINTURNAE, near the mouth of the Liris, and SINUESSA, belong to Campania in its wider sense; both are prominent places in the system of fortifications which the Romans carried out during the second Samnite war.

The FALERNIAN DISTRICT, between the Vulturnus and the Liris, probably derived its name from a destroyed town, Faleria.

The Oscan towns around Capua probably stood to that city in the same relation as Latium did to Rome. Among them I will notice ATELLA, between Capua and Naples, because the well-known _Atellanae_ originated there. These Atellane farces are truly analogous to the modern farcical comedies, the principal personage of which also appeared in the ancient Atellanae. In a very useful glossary of the Neapolitan dialect, I found it stated, that the buffoon (_pulcinella_) was a real jester who lived 200 years ago; but the fact is, that he has been the same through the course of many centuries from the first introduction of the Atellanae.

ACERRAE deserves to be mentioned on account of the cruelty of which Hannibal was guilty towards its senate—the only cruel act that can be really laid to his charge. The town was destroyed in the second Punic war, and the Romans did nothing to restore it, although it had been faithfully attached to their cause.