Produced by Melissa McDaniel, Brian Wilcox and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
book was produced from images made available by the
HathiTrust Digital Library.)






Transcriber's Notes: Italic text is marked _thus_. The original
accentuation, spelling and hyphenation has been retained. See further
Transcriber's Notes which follow the Index.




THE PROVINCES OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE

FROM CAESAR TO DIOCLETIAN

[Illustration: Printer's Mark]

MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED

LONDON · BOMBAY · CALCUTTA · MELBOURNE

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY

NEW YORK · BOSTON · CHICAGO · ATLANTA · SAN FRANCISCO

THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, LTD.

TORONTO




THE PROVINCES

OF THE

ROMAN EMPIRE

FROM CAESAR TO DIOCLETIAN

BY

THEODOR MOMMSEN

TRANSLATED

WITH THE AUTHOR'S SANCTION AND ADDITIONS

BY

WILLIAM P. DICKSON, D.D., LL.D.

PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW

VOL. I

_WITH EIGHT MAPS BY PROFESSOR KIEPERT_

MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED

ST. MARTIN'S STREET, LONDON

1909


_First Edition_ 1886

_Reprinted with corrections_ 1909


  TO
  LEOPOLD KRONECKER
  AND
  RICHARD SCHÖNE
  IN GRATEFUL REMEMBRANCE




PREFACE


A wish has often been expressed to me that the History of Rome might
be continued, and I have a desire to meet it, although it is difficult
for me, after an interval of thirty years, to take up again the thread
at the point where I had to let it drop. That the present portion does
not attach itself immediately to the preceding, is a matter of little
moment; the fifth volume would be just as much a fragment without the
sixth as the sixth now is without the fifth. Besides, I am of opinion
that, for the purposes of the cultured public, in whose minds this
History is intended to promote an intelligent conception of Roman
antiquity, other works may take the place of the Two Books, which
are still wanting between this (the Eighth) and the earlier ones,
more readily than a substitute can be found for that now issued. The
struggle of the Republicans in opposition to the monarchy erected by
Caesar, and the definitive establishment of the latter, are so well
presented in the accounts handed down to us from antiquity that every
delineation amounts essentially to a reproduction of their narrative.
The distinctive character of the monarchical rule and the fluctuations
of the monarchy, as well as the general relations of government
influenced by the personality of the individual rulers, which the
Seventh Book is destined to exhibit, have been at least subjected
to frequent handling. Of what is here furnished--the history of the
several provinces from the time of Caesar to that of Diocletian,--there
is, if I am not mistaken, no comprehensive survey anywhere accessible
to the public to which this work addresses itself; and it is owing,
as it seems to me, to the want of such a survey that the judgment of
that public as to the Roman imperial period is frequently incorrect
and unfair. No doubt such a separation of these special histories from
the general history of the empire, as is in my opinion a preliminary
requisite to the right understanding of the history of the imperial
period, cannot be carried out completely as regards various sections,
especially for the period from Gallienus to Diocletian; and in these
cases the general picture, which still remains to be given, will have
to supply what is wanting.

If an historical work in most cases acquires a more vivid clearness
by an accompanying map, this holds in an especial degree true of our
survey of the Empire of three Continents according to its provinces,
and but few of its readers can have in their hands maps adequate for
the purpose. These will accordingly be grateful, along with me, to
my friend Dr. Kiepert, for having, in the manner and with the limits
suggested by the contents of these volumes, annexed to them, first
of all, a sheet presenting a general outline of the _Orbis Romanus_,
which serves moreover in various respects to supply gaps in those that
follow, and, in succession, nine special maps of the several portions
of the empire drawn--with the exception of sheets 5, 7, 8, 9--on the
same scale. The ancient geographical names occurring in the volumes,
and the more important modern ones, are entered upon the maps; names
not mentioned in the volumes are appended only, in exceptional cases,
as landmarks for the reader's benefit. The mode of writing Greek names
followed in the book itself has been displaced by the Latinising
spelling--for the sake of uniformity--in several maps in which Latin
names preponderate. The sequence of the maps corresponds on the whole
to that of the book; only it seemed, out of regard for space, desirable
to present on the same sheet several provinces such as, _e.g._ Spain
and Africa.




PREFATORY NOTE


In the fifth volume of his _Roman History_, issued in 1885, Mommsen
described the Roman provinces as they were during the first three
centuries of our era. It has been called, by one specially qualified
to judge, Otto Hirschfeld, the best volume of the whole work. It is
indeed a wonderful book. Here Mommsen summed up with supreme mastery
a vast and multifarious mass of detail. Thousands of inscriptions
yielded up their secrets; all scattered archaeological discoveries
found recognition; the vast and dim areas of the provinces took
definite shape and colour. Now at length it became easy to discern
the true character of the Roman Empire. Our horizon broadened beyond
the backstairs of the Palatine and the benches of the Curia to the
wide lands north and east and south of the Mediterranean, and we began
to realise the achievements of the Empire--its long and peaceable
government of dominions extending into three continents, its gifts of
civilisation, language, and citizenship to almost all its subjects, its
creation of a stable and coherent order out of which rose the Europe of
to-day. The old theory of an age of despotism and decay was overthrown.
The believer in human nature could now feel confident that, whatever
their limitations and defects, the men of the Empire wrought for the
progress and happiness of the world.

The book was at once translated into English by, or at least
under the supervision of, the late Dr. W. P. Dickson, Professor of
Divinity in the University of Glasgow. Twenty-five years before,
the same translator had rendered the earlier volumes of the history
into English, and rendered them to the satisfaction of all readers.
The translation of the fifth volume was less happy. Its style was
difficult, and its errors--at least in some chapters--were numerous and
surprising. The ideal remedy for the evil would be a fresh version.
But the ideal is seldom attainable in published literature, and good
prose translations are particularly rare. When, therefore, the time
came to reprint the book, it seemed best not to let it again appear
as it was, but to attempt some revision, even though the existence of
stereotyped plates confined that revision within very narrow limits. I
have accordingly altered a large number of passages where Dr. Dickson's
rendering was unintelligible or inaccurate, and I have tried to take
account of the few changes which Mommsen himself introduced into the
original German down to the fifth and last edition of 1904. In doing
this I have had valuable help, which I desire to acknowledge, from Dr.
George Macdonald. That I have left many defects, both by accident and
by the exigencies of the stereotyped plates, is inevitable. But the
alterations run into several hundreds, and at any rate "the government
which prohibited voluntary fireworks" (freiwillige Feuerwehren), the
"tribes who dwelt in hurdles" (Hürden), and the "crescents which gave
the signal to run away" (Hörner), and some similar blots have vanished.
As the translation is intended for English readers, I have added some
notes on the chapter relating to Britain. It was far too large a
task to do the same for other chapters. But a few references may be
added here on two general questions. The results obtained by recent
excavations on the Germano-Raetian Limes (Chapter IV., pp. 152 foll.)
have been well summarised in E. Fabricius' _Die Besitznahme Badens
durch die Römer_ (Heidelberg, 1905), in an article by G. Lachenmaier
in the _Württembergische Vierteljahreshefte für Landesgeschichte_ for
1906, and in one by the late Professor Pelham in the _Transactions_ of
the Royal Historical Society, reprinted as Chapter IX. in his collected
papers (Clarendon Press, 1909). The student should also consult the
excellent _Berichte über die ... römisch-germ. Forschung_ for 1905-8,
edited by Dr. H. Dragendorff (Frankfurt, 1905-9). The problem of the
Hellenisation of Syria (Chapter X.) has been treated, with a solution
unfavourable to the Hellenic element, by Theodor Nöldeke in the
_Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft_ for 1885
(xxxix. 332), and the two views have been compared by Mitteis in his
_Reichsrecht und Volksrecht_ (Leipzig, 1891, pp. 25 foll.).

The maps are those prepared by the late Dr. Kiepert for the original
German. Modern and medieval names are printed in letters slanting
backwards; in Maps VIII. and IX. old Oriental names are included in
square brackets. The presence of a few German terminations or words on
some of the maps will, I hope, cause little trouble.

F. HAVERFIELD.




CONTENTS

BOOK EIGHTH

_THE PROVINCES AND PEOPLE, FROM CAESAR TO DIOCLETIAN_


                                                PAGE
  INTRODUCTION                                     3

CHAPTER I.

  THE NORTHERN FRONTIER OF ITALY                   7

CHAPTER II.

  SPAIN                                           63

CHAPTER III.

  THE GALLIC PROVINCES                            78

CHAPTER IV.

  ROMAN GERMANY AND THE FREE GERMANS             117

CHAPTER V.

  BRITAIN                                        170

CHAPTER VI.

  THE DANUBIAN LANDS AND THE WARS ON THE DANUBE  195

CHAPTER VII.

  GREEK EUROPE                                   252

CHAPTER VIII.

  ASIA MINOR                                     320

  MAPS                                    I. to VIII.

  INDEX                                 From Vol. II.




BOOK EIGHTH.

THE PROVINCES AND PEOPLE FROM CAESAR TO DIOCLETIAN.

Go through the world and converse with every one.

FIRDUSI.




INTRODUCTION.


The history of Rome under the Empire presents problems similar to those
encountered in the history of the earlier Republic.

Such information as may be directly obtained from literary tradition
is not merely without form and colour, but in fact for the most part
without substance. The list of the Roman monarchs is just about as
trustworthy and just about as instructive as that of the consuls of the
republic. The great crises that convulsed the state may be discerned in
outline; but we are not much better informed as to the Germanic wars
under the emperors Augustus and Marcus, than as to the wars with the
Samnites. The republican store of anecdote is very much more decorous
than its counterpart under the empire; but the tales told of Fabricius
and of the emperor Gaius are almost equally insipid and equally
mendacious. The internal development of the commonwealth is perhaps
exhibited in the traditional accounts more fully for the earlier
republic than for the imperial period; in the former case there is
preserved a picture--however bedimmed and falsified--of the changes of
political order that were brought at least to their ultimate issue in
the open Forum of Rome; in the latter case the arrangements are settled
in the imperial cabinet, and come before the public, as a rule, merely
in unimportant matters of form. We must take into account, moreover,
the vast extension of the sphere of rule, and the shifting of the vital
development from the centre to the circumference. The history of the
city of Rome widens out into that of the country of Italy, and the
latter into that of the Mediterranean world; and of what we are most
concerned to know, we learn the least. The Roman state of this epoch
resembles a mighty tree, the main stem of which, in the course of its
decay, is surrounded by vigorous offshoots pushing their way upwards.
The Roman senate and the Roman rulers soon came to be drawn from any
other region of the empire just as much as from Italy; the Quirites of
this epoch, who have become the nominal heirs of the world-subduing
legionaries, have nearly the same relation to the memories of the olden
time as our Knights of St. John have to Rhodes and Malta; and they look
upon their heritage as a right capable of being turned to profitable
account--as an endowment provided for the benefit of the poor that
shrink from work.

Any one who has recourse to the so-called authorities for the history
of this period--even the better among them--finds difficulty in
controlling his indignation at the telling of what deserved to be
suppressed, and at the suppression of what there was need to tell.
For this epoch was also one productive of great conceptions and
far-reaching action. Seldom has the government of the world been
conducted for so long a term in an orderly sequence; and the firm rules
of administration, which Caesar and Augustus traced out for their
successors, maintained their ground, on the whole, with remarkable
steadfastness notwithstanding all those changes of dynasties and of
dynasts, which assume more than due prominence in a tradition that
looks merely to such things, and dwindles erelong into mere biographies
of the emperors. The sharply-defined sections, which--under the current
conception, misled by the superficial character of such a basis--are
constituted by the change of rulers, pertain far more to the doings
of the court than to the history of the empire. The carrying out of
the Latin-Greek civilising process in the form of perfecting the
constitution of the urban community, and the gradual bringing of the
barbarian or at any rate alien elements into this circle, were tasks,
which, from their very nature, required centuries of steady activity
and calm self-development; and it constitutes the very grandeur of
these centuries that the work once planned and initiated found this
long period of time, and this prevalence of peace by land and sea, to
facilitate its progress. Old age has not the power to develop new
thoughts and display creative activity, nor has the government of the
Roman empire done so; but in its sphere, which those who belonged
to it were not far wrong in regarding as the world, it fostered the
peace and prosperity of the many nations united under its sway longer
and more completely than any other leading power has ever succeeded
in doing. It is in the agricultural towns of Africa, in the homes of
the vine-dressers on the Moselle, in the flourishing townships of the
Lycian mountains, and on the margin of the Syrian desert that the work
of the imperial period is to be sought and to be found. Even now there
are various regions of the East, as of the West, as regards which the
imperial period marks a climax of good government, very modest in
itself, but never withal attained before or since; and, if an angel of
the Lord were to strike the balance whether the domain ruled by Severus
Antoninus was governed with the greater intelligence and the greater
humanity at that time or in the present day, whether civilisation
and national prosperity generally have since that time advanced or
retrograded, it is very doubtful whether the decision would prove in
favour of the present. But, if we find that this was the case, we ask
of our surviving books for the most part in vain how it came to be
so. They no more give an answer to this question than the traditional
accounts of the earlier republic explain the mighty phenomenon of the
Rome, which, in the footsteps of Alexander, subdued and civilised the
world.

The one void as little admits of being filled up as the other. But it
seemed worth our making the attempt for once to turn away our eyes
from the pictures of the rulers with their bright or faded, and but
too often falsified, colours, as well as from the task of linking into
a semblance of chronological order fragments that do not fit each
other; and, instead of this, to collect and arrange such materials as
tradition and the monuments furnish for a description of the Roman
provincial government. It seemed worth while to collate the accounts
accidentally preserved by the one or by the other, to note traces of
the process of growth embedded in its results, and to view the general
institutions in their relation to the individual provinces, along with
the conditions given for each by the nature of the soil and of the
inhabitants, so as to work out by the imagination--which is the author
of all history as of all poetry--if not a complete picture, at any rate
a substitute for it.

In this attempt I have not sought to go beyond the epoch of
Diocletian. A summary glance, at the utmost, into the new government
which was then created may fitly form the keystone of this narrative;
to estimate it fully would require a separate narration and another
frame for its setting--an independent historical work, carried out in
the large spirit and with the comprehensive glance of Gibbon, but with
a more accurate understanding of details. Italy and its islands have
been excluded; for the account of these cannot be dissociated from
that of the general government of the empire. The external history,
as it is called, of the imperial period is dealt with as an integral
part of the provincial administration; what we should call imperial
wars were not carried on under the empire against those outside of
its pale, although the conflicts called forth by the rounding off, or
the defence, of the frontier sometimes assumed such proportions as
to make them seem wars between two powers similar in kind, and the
collapse of the Roman rule in the middle of the third century, which
for some decades seemed as though it were to become its definitive end,
grew out of the unhappy conduct of frontier-defence at several places
simultaneously. Our narrative opens with the great work of pushing
forward, and of regulating the frontier towards the north, which was
partly carried out and partly failed under Augustus. At other points
we bring together the events that occurred on each of the three chief
arenas for frontier-defence--the Rhine, the Danube, the Euphrates. The
remainder of the narrative is arranged according to provinces. Charms
of detail, pictures of feeling, sketches of character, it has none to
offer; it is allowable for the artist, but not for the historian, to
reproduce the features of Arminius. With self-denial this book has been
written; and with self-denial let it be read.




CHAPTER I.

THE NORTHERN FRONTIER OF ITALY.


[Sidenote: Northern boundary of the empire.]

The Roman Republic extended its territory chiefly by means of the sea
towards the west, south, and east: little was done towards extending
it in the direction, in which Italy and the two peninsulas dependent
upon it to the west and east are connected with the great mainland of
Europe. The region which lay behind Macedonia was not subject to the
Romans, nor yet even the northern slope of the Alps; only the inland
region behind the south coast of Gaul had been annexed by Caesar to
the empire. Looking to the position occupied by the empire in general,
this state of things could not be allowed to continue; the fact that
the inert and unstable rule of the aristocracy had been superseded
could not but tell with preeminent effect in this sphere of action.
Caesar had not charged the heirs of his dictatorial power with the
extension of Roman territory on the north slope of the Alps and on the
right bank of the Rhine so directly as with the conquest of Britain;
but in reality such an enlargement of the bounds suggested itself
far more naturally, and was more necessary, than the subduing of the
transmarine Celts, and we can readily understand why Augustus took
in hand the former and omitted the latter. The task was divided into
three great sections--the operations on the northern frontier of the
Graeco-Macedonian peninsula, in the region of the middle and lower
Danube, in Illyricum; those on the northern frontier of Italy itself,
in the region of the upper Danube, in Raetia and Noricum; lastly,
those on the right bank of the Rhine, in Germany. Though conducted
for the most part independently, the military political measures in
these regions had yet an inward connection; and, as they all had their
origin from the free initiative of the Roman government, they can only
be understood in their success or in their partial failure, when they
are looked at from a military and political point of view as a whole.
We shall, therefore, in our account of them, follow the connection of
place rather than the order of time; the structure, of which they are
but parts, is better viewed in its internal compactness than according
to the succession of the several buildings composing it.

[Sidenote: Dalmatian war.]

The prelude to this great aggregate of action was formed by the
measures which Caesar the Younger, so soon as he had his hands free
in Italy and Spain, undertook on the upper coasts of the Adriatic and
in the inland region adjacent to them. In the hundred and fifty years
that had elapsed since the founding of Aquileia, the Roman merchant
had doubtless from that centre possessed himself more and more of the
traffic; yet the state, directly as such, had made little progress.
Considerable trading settlements had been formed at the chief ports of
the Dalmatian coast, and also, on the road leading from Aquileia into
the valley of the Save, at Nauportus (Upper Laybach); Dalmatia, Bosnia,
Istria, and Carniola were deemed Roman territory, and the region along
the coast at least was actually subject; but the founding of towns in a
legal sense still remained to be done, quite as much as the subduing of
the inhospitable interior.

Here, however, another element had to be taken into account. In the
war between Caesar and Pompeius the native Dalmatians had as decidedly
taken part for the latter as the Roman settlers there had taken the
side of Caesar; even after the defeat of Pompeius at Pharsalus, and
after the Pompeian fleet had been driven from the Illyrian waters (iv.
456) {iv. 434.}, the natives continued their resistance with energy
and success. The brave and able Publius Vatinius, who had formerly
taken a very effective part in these conflicts, was sent with a strong
army to Illyricum, apparently in the year before Caesar's death,
and that merely as the vanguard of the main army, with which the
Dictator himself intended to follow in order to overthrow the Dacians,
who just then were putting forth their rising power (iv. 305) {iv.
291.}, and to regulate the state of affairs in the whole domain of
the Danube. The execution of this plan was precluded by the daggers
of the assassins. It was fortunate that the Dacians did not on their
part penetrate into Macedonia; Vatinius himself fought against the
Dalmatians unsuccessfully, and sustained severe losses. Thereafter,
when the republicans took up arms in the East, the Illyrian army joined
that of Brutus, and for a considerable time the Dalmatians remained
free from attack. After the overthrow of the republicans, Antonius, to
whom, in the partition of the empire, Macedonia had fallen, caused the
insubordinate Dardani in the north-west and the Parthini on the coast
(eastward from Durazzo) to be put to rout in the year 715 {39.}, when
the celebrated orator Gaius Asinius Pollio gained triumphal honours.
In Illyricum, which was under Caesar, nothing could be done so long as
the latter had to direct his whole power to the Sicilian war against
Sextus Pompeius; but after its successful termination Caesar personally
threw himself with vigour into this task. The small tribes from Doclea
(Cernagora), as far as the Iapydes (near Fiume), were in the first
campaign (719) {35.} either brought back to subjection or now for the
first time subdued. It was not a great war with pitched battles of
note, but the mountain-conflicts with the brave and desperate tribes,
and the capture of the strongholds furnished in part with Roman
appliances of war, formed no easy task; in none of his wars did Caesar
display to an equal extent his own energy and personal valour. After
the toilsome subjugation of the territory of the Iapydes, he marched
in the very same year along the valley of the Kulpa to the point where
it joins the Save; the strong place Siscia (Sziszek) situated at that
point, the chief place of arms of the Pannonians, against which the
Romans had never hitherto advanced with success, was now occupied and
destined as a basis for the war against the Dacians, which Caesar
purposed next to undertake. In the two following years (720, 721)
{34, 33.}, the Dalmatians, who had for a number of years been in arms
against the Romans, were forced to submit after the fall of their
fortress Promona (Promina, near Dernis, above Sebenico). Still more
important than these military successes was the work of peace, which
was carried on about the same time, and which they were intended to
secure. It was doubtless in these years that the ports along the
Istrian and Dalmatian coast, so far as they lay within the field of
Caesar's rule, Tergeste (Trieste), Pola, Iader (Zara), Salonae (near
Spalato), Narona (at the mouth of the Narenta), as well as Emona
(Laybach), beyond the Alps, on the route from Aquileia over the Julian
Alps to the Save, obtained, through Caesar's successor, some of them
town-walls, all of them town-rights. The places themselves had probably
all been already long in existence as Roman villages; but it was at any
rate of essential importance that they were now inserted on a footing
of equal privilege among the Italian _municipia_.

[Sidenote: Preparation for the Dacian war.]

The Dacian war was intended to follow; but the civil war stepped in
before it a second time. It summoned the ruler not to Illyricum, but
to the East, and the heavings of the great decisive struggle between
Caesar and Antonius reached even to the distant region of the Danube.
The people of the Dacians, united and purified by king Burebista
(Boerebistas, iv. 305) {iv. 291.}, now under king Cotiso, found itself
courted by the two antagonists--Caesar was even accused of having
sought the king's daughter in marriage, and having offered to him
in turn the hand of his five-year-old daughter Julia. It is easy to
understand how the Dacian should, in view of the invasion planned by
the father and ushered in by the son with the fortification of Siscia,
have attached himself to the side of Antonius; and had he done what
people in Rome feared--had he, while Caesar was fighting in the East,
penetrated from the north into defenceless Italy; or had Antonius, in
accordance with the proposal of the Dacians, sought the decision of the
struggle not in Epirus but in Macedonia, and drawn thither the Dacian
bands to help him, the fortunes of the war might perhaps have ended
otherwise. But neither the one nor the other took place; moreover,
at that very time the Dacian state, created by the vigorous hand of
Burebista, again went to pieces; internal troubles, perhaps also the
attacks from the north by the Germanic Bastarnae and by the Sarmatian
tribes that subsequently environed Dacia on all sides, prevented the
Dacians from interfering in the Roman civil war, in the decision of
which their future also was at stake.

Immediately after that war was decided, Caesar set himself to regulate
the state of things on the lower Danube. But, partly because the
Dacians themselves were no longer so much to be dreaded as formerly,
partly because Caesar now ruled no longer merely over Illyricum, but
over the whole Graeco-Macedonian peninsula, the latter became the
primary basis of the Roman operations. Let us picture to ourselves the
peoples, and the relations of the ruling powers, which Augustus found
there.

[Sidenote: Macedonian frontier.]

Macedonia had been for centuries a Roman province. As such, it did not
reach beyond Stobi to the north and the Rhodope mountains to the east;
but the range of Rome's power stretched far beyond the frontier proper
of the country, although varying in compass and not fixed in point of
form. Approximately the Romans seem to have been the leading power at
that time as far as the Haemus (Balkan), while the region beyond the
Balkan as far as the Danube had been possibly trodden by Roman troops,
but was by no means dependent on Rome.[1] Beyond the Rhodope mountains
the Thracian dynasts, who were neighbours to Macedonia, especially
those of the Odrysians (ii. 309) {ii. 290.}, to whom the greatest
portion of the south coast and a part of the coast of the Black Sea
were subject, had been brought by the expedition of Lucullus (iv. 41)
{iv. 39.} under the Roman protectorate; while the inhabitants of the
more inland territories, especially the Bessi on the upper Maritza,
were perhaps called subjects, but were not so, and their incursions
into the settled territory as well as retaliatory expeditions into
theirs were of constant occurrence. Thus, about the year 694 {60.},
Augustus' own father, Gaius Octavius, and in the year 711 {43.}, during
the preparations for the war against the triumvirs, Marcus Brutus had
fought against them. Another Thracian tribe, the Dentheletae (in the
district of Sofia), had, even in Cicero's time, on an incursion into
Macedonia, threatened to besiege its capital Thessalonica. With the
Dardani, the western neighbours of the Thracians, a branch of the
Illyrian family, who inhabited southern Servia and the district of
Prisrend, Curio, the predecessor in office of Lucullus, had fought
successfully; and ten years later Cicero's colleague in the consulate,
Gaius Antonius, unsuccessfully in the year 692 {62.}. Below the
Dardanian territory, again, there were settled close to the Danube
Thracian tribes, the once powerful but now reduced Triballi in the
valley of the Oescus (in the region of Plewna), and farther on, along
both banks of the Danube to its mouth, Dacians, or, as on the right
bank of the river they were usually called by the old national name
which was retained also by their Asiatic kinsmen, Mysians or Moesians,
probably in Burebista's time a part of his kingdom, now once more split
up into different principalities. But the most powerful people between
the Balkan and the Danube at that time were the Bastarnae. We have
already on several occasions met with this brave and numerous race,
the eastmost branch of the great Germanic family (ii. 308) {ii. 290.}.
Settled, strictly speaking, behind the Transdanubian Dacians beyond the
mountains which separate Transylvania from Moldavia, at the mouths of
the Danube and in the wide region from these to the Dniester, they were
themselves outside of the Roman sphere; but from their ranks especially
had both king Philip of Macedonia and king Mithridates of Pontus formed
their armies, and in this way the Romans had often already fought with
them. Now they had crossed the Danube in great masses, and established
themselves north of the Haemus; in so far as the Dacian war, as planned
by Cæsar the father and then by the son, had doubtless for its object
to gain the right bank of the lower Danube, it was not less directed
against them than against the Dacian Moesians on the right bank. The
Greek coast towns in the barbarian land, Odessus (near Varna), Tomis,
Istropolis, hard pressed by these movements of the nations surging
around them, were here as everywhere from the outset clients of the
Romans.

At the time of Caesar's dictatorship, when Burebista was at the height
of his power, the Dacians had executed that fearful devastating raid
along the coast as far down as Apollonia, the traces of which were not
yet obliterated after a century and a half. It may probably have been
this invasion that at first induced Caesar the elder to undertake the
Dacian war; and after that the son now ruled also over Macedonia, he
could not but feel himself under obligation to interfere here at once
and with energy. The defeat which Cicero's colleague, Antonius, had
sustained near Istropolis at the hands of the Bastarnae may be taken as
a proof that these Greeks needed once more the aid of the Romans.

[Sidenote: Subjugation of Moesia by Crassus.]

In fact soon after the battle of Actium (725) {29.} Marcus Licinius
Crassus, the grandson of him who had fallen at Carrhae, was sent by
Caesar to Macedonia as governor, and charged now to carry out the
campaign that had twice been hindered. The Bastarnae, who just then
had invaded Thrace, submitted without resistance, when Crassus had
them summoned to leave the Roman territory; but their retreat was not
sufficient for the Roman. He, on his part, crossed the Haemus,[2] at
the confluence of the Cibrus (Tzibritza) with the Danube, defeated the
enemy, whose king, Deldo, was left on the field of battle; and, with
the help of a Dacian prince adhering to the Romans, took prisoners all
that had escaped from the battle and sought shelter in a neighbouring
stronghold. Without offering further resistance the whole Moesian
territory submitted to the conqueror of the Bastarnae. These returned
next year to avenge the defeat which they had suffered; but they once
more succumbed, and, with them, such of the Moesian tribes as had again
taken up arms. Thus these enemies were once for all expelled from the
right bank of the Danube, and the latter was entirely subjected to
the Roman rule. At the same time the Thracians not hitherto subject
were chastised, the national shrine of Dionysos was taken from the
Bessi, and the administration of it was entrusted to the princes of
the Odrysians, who generally from that time, under the protection
of the Roman supreme power, exercised, or were assumed to exercise,
supremacy over the Thracian tribes south of the Haemus. The Greek
towns, moreover, on the coast of the Black Sea were placed under its
protection, and the rest of the conquered territory was assigned to
various vassal-princes, on whom devolved accordingly, in the first
instance, the protection of the frontier of the empire;[3] Rome had no
legions of her own left for these distant regions. Macedonia thereby
became an inland province, which had no further need of military
administration. The goal, which had been contemplated in those plans of
Dacian warfare, was attained.

Certainly this goal was merely a provisional one. But before Augustus
took in hand the definitive regulation of the northern frontier he
applied himself to reorganise the provinces already belonging to the
empire; more than ten years elapsed over the arrangement of things
in Spain, Gaul, Asia, and Syria. How, when what was needful in these
quarters was done, he set to work on his comprehensive task, we have
now to tell.

[Sidenote: Subjugation of the Alps.]

Italy, which bore sway over three continents, was still, we have
said, by no means absolutely master in her own house. The Alps, which
sheltered her on the north, were in all their extent, from one end
to the other, filled with small and but little civilised tribes of
Illyrian, Raetian, or Celtic nationality, whose territories in part
bordered closely on those of the great towns of the Transpadana--that
of the Trumpilini (Val Trompia) on the town of Brixia; that of the
Camunni (Val Camonica above the Lago d'Iseo) on the town of Bergomum;
that of the Salassi (Val d'Aosta) on Eporedia (Ivrea)--and whose
neighbourhood was by no means wont to be peaceful. Often enough
conquered and proclaimed at the Capitol as vanquished, these tribes, in
spite of the laurels of the men of note that triumphed over them, were
constantly plundering the farmers and the merchants of Upper Italy. The
mischief was not to be checked in earnest until the government resolved
to cross the Alpine chain and bring its northern slope also under their
power; for beyond doubt numbers of these depredators were constantly
streaming over the mountains to pillage the rich adjoining country. In
the direction of Gaul also similar work had to be done; the tribes in
the upper valley of the Rhone (Valais and Vaud) had indeed been subdued
by Caesar, but are also named among those that gave trouble to the
generals of his son. On the other side, the peaceful border-districts
of Gaul complained of the constant incursions of the Raeti. The
numerous expeditions arranged by Augustus on account of these evils do
not admit, or require, historical recital; they are not recorded in
the triumphal Fasti and do not fall under that head, but they gave to
Italy for the first time settled life in the north. We may mention the
subjugation of the already named Camunni in 738 {16.} by the governor
of Illyria, and that of certain Ligurian tribes in the region of Nice
in 740 {14.}, because they show how, even about the middle of the
Augustan age, these insubordinate tribes pressed directly upon Italy.
If the emperor subsequently, in the collective report on his imperial
administration, declared that violence had not been wrongfully employed
by him against any of these small tribes, this must be understood
to the effect that cessions of territory and change of abode were
demanded of them, and they resisted the demand; only the petty cantonal
union formed under king Cottius of Segusio (Susa) submitted without a
struggle to the new arrangement.

[Sidenote: Subjugation of the Raeti.]

The southern slopes and the valleys of the Alps formed the arena of
these conflicts. The establishment of the Romans on the north slope of
the mountains and in the adjoining country to the northward followed
in 739 {15.}. The two step-sons of Augustus reckoned as belonging to
the imperial house, Tiberius the subsequent emperor, and his brother
Drusus, were thereby introduced into the career of generalship for
which they were destined; very secure and very grateful were the
laurels put before them in prospect. Drusus penetrated from Italy up
the valley of the Adige into the Raetian mountains, and achieved here
a first victory; for the farther advance his brother, then governor of
Gaul, lent him a helping hand from Helvetia; on the lake of Constance
itself the Roman triremes defeated the boats of the Vindelici; on
the emperor's day, the 1st August 739 {15.}, in the vicinity of the
sources of the Danube, fought the last battle, whereby Raetia and
the land of the Vindelici--that is, the Tyrol, East Switzerland, and
Bavaria--became thenceforth constituent parts of the Roman empire. The
emperor Augustus had gone in person to Gaul to superintend the war and
the organisation of the new province. At the point where the Alps abut
on the Gulf of Genoa, on the height above Monaco, a monument commanding
a wide prospect of the Tyrrhene Sea, and not even yet wholly effaced,
was erected some years later by grateful Italy to the emperor Augustus,
because under his government all the Alpine tribes from the Upper to
the Lower Sea--the inscription enumerates forty-six of them--had been
brought under the power of the Roman people. It was no more than the
simple truth; and this war was what war ought to be--the guardian and
the guarantee of peace.

[Sidenote: Organisation of Raetia.]

A task more difficult doubtless than that of the war proper was
the organisation of the new territory; the more especially as
considerations of internal policy exerted to some extent a very
disturbing influence on it. Since, as things stood, the preponderance
of military power might not be located in Italy, the government had
to take care that the great military commands were removed as far
as possible from its immediate vicinity; indeed one of the motives
that conduced to the occupation of Raetia itself was the desire to
remove the command, which probably up to this time could not have
been dispensed with in Upper Italy itself, definitively away from
that region, as was thereupon actually done. It might most naturally
have been expected that there would be created on the north slope of
the Alps a great centre for the military posts indispensable in the
newly acquired territory; but a course the very opposite of this was
followed. Between Italy on the one hand, and the great commands on
the Rhine and Danube on the other, there was drawn a girdle of small
governorships, which were not merely all filled up by the emperor, but
were also filled up throughout with men not belonging to the senate.
Italy and the province of southern Gaul were separated by the three
small military districts of the Maritime Alps (department of the
Maritime Alps and the province of Cuneo), the Cottian Alps with Segusio
(Susa) as its chief town, and probably the Graian Alps (East Savoy).
Among these the second, administered by the already named cantonal
prince, Cottius, and his descendants for a time under the form of
clientship,[4] was of most importance, but they all possessed a certain
military power, and were primarily destined to maintain public safety
in the territory concerned, and above all on the important imperial
highways traversing it. The upper valley of the Rhone again--that
is, the Valais, and the newly conquered Raetia--were placed under a
commander of higher standing not in rank, but doubtless in power; a
corps, relatively speaking, considerable was here for the time being
indispensably requisite. In order, however, to provide for its being
diminished as far as possible, Raetia was in great measure depopulated
by the removal of its inhabitants. The circuit was closed by the
similarly organised province of Noricum, embracing the largest part of
what is now German Austria. This wide and fertile region had submitted
without substantial resistance to the Roman rule, probably in the form
of a dependent principality established in the first instance, but with
its prince erelong giving place to the imperial procurator, from whom,
for that matter, he did not essentially differ. Some, at all events,
of the Rhenish and Danubian legions had their fixed quarters in the
immediate neighbourhood, on the one hand of the Raetian frontier at
Vindonissa, on the other of the Norican frontier at Poetovio, obviously
to keep in check the adjoining province; but in that intermediate
region as little were there armies of the first rank with legions under
senatorial generals, as there were senatorial governors. The distrust
towards the corporation governing the state alongside of the emperor
finds very forcible expression in this arrangement.

[Sidenote: Roads and colonies in the Alps.]

Next to the protection of the peace of Italy the chief aim of this
organisation was to secure its communications with the north, which
were of not less urgent importance for traffic than in a military
point of view. With special energy Augustus took up this task; and he
doubtless deserved that his name should still live at the present day
in those of Aosta and Augsburg, perhaps also in that of the Julian
Alps. The old coast-road, which Augustus partly renewed, partly
constructed, from the Ligurian coast through Gaul and Spain to the
Atlantic Ocean, can only have served purposes of traffic. The road
also over the Cottian Alps, already opened up by Pompeius (iv. 28)
{iv. 27.}, was finished under Augustus by the already mentioned prince
of Susa, and named after him; in like manner a trading route, it
connects Italy, by way of Turin and Susa, with the commercial capital
of south Gaul, Arelate. But the military line proper--the direct
connection between Italy and the camps on the Rhine--led through the
valley of the Dora Baltea from Italy partly to Lyons the capital of
Gaul, partly to the Rhine. While the republic had confined itself
to bringing into its power the entrance of that valley by founding
Eporedia (Ivrea), Augustus possessed himself of it entirely by not
merely subjugating its inhabitants--the still restless Salassi, with
whom he had already fought during the Dalmatian war--but extirpating
them outright; 36,000 of them, including 8000 fighting men, were sold
under the hammer into slavery in the market-place of Eporedia, and
the purchasers were bound not to grant freedom to any of them within
twenty years. The camp itself, from which his general Varro Murena had
achieved their final defeat in 729 {25.}, became the fortress, which,
occupied by 3000 settlers taken from the imperial guard, was to secure
the communications--the town Augusta Praetoria, the modern Aosta,
whose walls and gates then erected are still standing. It commanded
subsequently two Alpine routes, as well that which led over the Graian
Alps or Little St. Bernard, along the upper Isère and the Rhone to
Lyons, as that which ran over the Poenine Alps, the Great St. Bernard,
to the valley of the Rhone and to the Lake of Geneva, and thence into
the valleys of the Aar and the Rhine. But it was for the first of these
roads that the town was designed, as it originally had only gates
leading east and west; nor could this be otherwise, for the fortress
was built ten years before the occupation of Raetia; in those years,
moreover, the later organisation of the camps on the Rhine was not yet
in existence, and the direct connection between the capitals of Italy
and Gaul was altogether of the foremost importance. In the direction
of the Danube we have already mentioned the laying out of Emona on the
upper Save, on the old trade-road from Aquileia over the Julian Alps
into the Pannonian territory. This road was at the same time the chief
artery for the military communication of Italy with the region of the
Danube. Lastly, with the conquest of Raetia was connected the opening
of the route which led from the last Italian town Tridentum (Trent),
up the Adige valley, to the newly established Augusta in the land of
the Vindelici, the modern Augsburg, and onward to the upper Danube.
Subsequently, when the son of the general who had first opened up this
region came to reign, this road received the name of the Claudian
highway.[5] It furnished the means of connection, indispensable from a
military point of view, between Raetia and Italy; but in consequence of
the comparatively small importance of the Raetian army, and doubtless
also in consequence of the more difficult communication, it never had
the same importance as the route of Aosta.

The Alpine passes and the north slope of the Alps were thus in
secure possession of the Romans. Beyond the Alps there stretched
to the east of the Rhine the land of the Germans; to the south of
the Danube that of the Pannonians and the Moesians. Here, too, soon
after the occupation of Raetia, the offensive was taken, and nearly
contemporaneously in both directions. Let us look first at what
occurred on the Danube.

[Sidenote: Erection of Illyricum.]

The Danubian region, to all appearance up to 727 {27.} administered
along with Upper Italy, became then, on the reorganisation of the
empire, an independent administrative district, Illyricum, under
a governor of its own. It consisted of Dalmatia, with the country
behind it, as far as the Drin--while the coast farther to the south
had for long belonged to the province of Macedonia--and of the Roman
possessions in the land of the Pannonians on the Save. The region
between the Haemus and the Danube as far as the Black Sea, which
Crassus had shortly before brought into dependence on the empire,
as well as Noricum and Raetia, stood in a relation of clientship to
Rome, and so did not belong as such to this province, but withal were
primarily dependent on the governor of Illyricum. Thrace, north of the
Haemus, still by no means pacified, fell, from a military point of
view, to the same district. It was a continued effect of the original
organisation, and one which subsisted down to a late period, that the
whole region of the Danube from Raetia to Moesia was comprehended
as a customs-district under the name Illyricum in the wider sense.
Legions were stationed only in Illyricum proper, in the other districts
there were probably no imperial troops at all, or at the utmost small
detachments; the chief command was held by the proconsul of the new
province coming from the senate; while the soldiers and officers were,
as a matter of course, imperial. It attests the serious character of
the offensive beginning after the conquest of Raetia, that in the first
instance the co-ruler Agrippa took over the command in the region
of the Danube, to whom the proconsul of Illyricum had to become _de
iure_ subordinate; and then, when Agrippa's sudden death in the spring
of 742 {12.} broke down this combination, Illyricum in the following
year passed into imperial administration, and the imperial generals
obtained the chief commands in it. Soon three military centres were
here formed, which thereupon brought about the administrative division
of the Danubian region into three parts. The small principalities
in the territory conquered by Crassus gave place to the province of
Moesia, the governor of which henceforth, in what is now Servia and
Bulgaria, guarded the frontier against the Dacians and Bastarnae.
In what had hitherto been the province of Illyricum, a part of the
legionaries was posted on the Kerka and the Cettina, to keep in check
the still troublesome Dalmatians. The chief force was stationed in
Pannonia, on what was then the boundary of the empire, the Save. This
distribution of the legions and organisation of the provinces cannot
be fixed with chronological precision; probably the serious wars which
were waged simultaneously against the Pannonians and the Thracians, of
which we have immediately to speak, led in the first instance to the
institution of the governorship of Moesia, and it was not till some
time later that the Dalmatian legions and those on the Save obtained
commanders-in-chief of their own.

[Sidenote: First Pannonian war of Tiberius.]

As the expeditions against the Pannonians and the Germans were, as it
were, a repetition of the Raetian campaign on a more extended scale,
so the leaders, who were put at their head with the title of imperial
legates, were the same--once more the two princes of the imperial
house, Tiberius, who, in the place of Agrippa, took up the command
in Illyricum, and Drusus, who went to the Rhine, both now no longer
inexperienced youths, but men in the prime of their years, and well
fitted to take in hand severe work.

Immediate pretexts for the waging of war in the region of the Danube
were not wanting. Marauders from Pannonia, and even from the peaceful
Noricum, carried pillage in the year 738 {16.} as far as Istria. Two
years thereafter the Illyrian provincials took up arms against their
masters, and, although they returned to obedience without offering
opposition when Agrippa took over the command in the autumn of 741
{13.}, yet immediately after his death the disturbances are alleged
to have begun afresh. We cannot say how far these Roman accounts
correspond to the truth; certainly the pushing forward of the Roman
frontier, required by the general political situation, formed the real
motive and aim of the war. As to the three campaigns of Tiberius in
Pannonia from 742 to 744 {12 to 10.} we are very imperfectly informed.
Their result was stated by the government as the establishment of
the Danube as the boundary for the province of Illyricum. That this
river was thenceforth looked upon in its whole course as the boundary
of Roman territory, is doubtless correct; but a subjugation in the
proper sense, or even an occupation, of the whole of this wide domain
by no means took place at that time. The chief resistance to Tiberius
was offered by the tribes already at an earlier date declared Roman,
especially by the Dalmatians; among those first effectively subdued
at that time, the most noted was that of the Pannonian Breuci on the
lower Save. The Roman armies, during these campaigns, probably did
not cross the Drave, and did not in any case transfer their standing
camp to the Danube. The region between the Save and Drave was at all
events occupied, and the headquarters of the Illyrian northern army
were transferred from Siscia on the Save to Poetovio (Pettau) on the
middle Drave, while in the Norican region recently occupied the Roman
garrisons reached as far as the Danube at Carnuntum (Petronell, near
Vienna), at that time the last Norican town towards the east. The wide
and vast region between the Drave and the Danube, which now forms
western Hungary, was to all appearance at that time not even militarily
occupied. This was in keeping with the whole plan of the offensive
operations that were begun; the object sought was to be in touch with
the Gallic army, and for the new imperial frontier in the north-east
the natural base was not Buda, but Vienna.

[Sidenote: Thracian war of Piso.]

Complementary in some measure to this Pannonian expedition of Tiberius
was that which was simultaneously undertaken against the Thracians by
Lucius Piso, perhaps the first governor that Moesia had of its own. The
two great neighbouring nations, the Illyrians and the Thracians, of
whom we shall treat more fully in a subsequent chapter, stood alike at
that time in need of subjugation. The tribes of inland Thrace showed
themselves still more obstinate than the Illyrians, and far from
subordinate to the kings set over them by Rome; in 738 {16.} a Roman
army had to advance thither and come to the help of the princes against
the Bessi. If we had more exact accounts of the conflicts waged in
the one quarter as in the other in the years 741 to 743 {13 to 11.},
the contemporary action of the Thracians and Illyrians would perhaps
appear as concerted. Certain it is that the mass of the Thracian tribes
south of the Haemus and presumably also those settled in Moesia took
part in this national war, and that the resistance of the Thracians
was not less obstinate than that of the Illyrians. It was for them at
the same time a religious war; the shrine of Dionysos,[6] taken from
the Bessi and assigned to the Odrysian princes well disposed to Rome,
was not forgotten; a priest of this Dionysos stood at the head of the
insurrection, and it was directed in the first instance against those
Odrysian princes. One of them was taken and put to death, the other
was driven away; the insurgents, in part armed and disciplined after
the Roman model, were victors in the first engagement over Piso, and
penetrated as far as Macedonia and into the Thracian Chersonese; fears
were entertained for Asia. Ultimately, however, Roman discipline
gained the superiority over these brave opponents; in several campaigns
Piso mastered the resistance, and the command of Moesia, instituted
either already on this occasion or soon afterwards on "the Thracian
shore," broke up the connection of the Daco-Thracian peoples, by
separating the tribes on the left bank of the Danube and their kinsmen
south of the Haemus from each other, and permanently secured the Roman
rule in the region of the lower Danube.

[Sidenote: Attack of the Germans.]

[Sidenote: Defeat of Lollius.]

The Germans still more than the Pannonians and the Thracians gave
the Romans occasion to feel that the existing state of things could
not permanently continue. The boundary of the empire since Caesar's
time had been the Rhine from the lake of Constance to its mouth (iv.
258) {iv. 247.}. It was not a demarcation of peoples, for already
of old in the north-east of Gaul the Celts had on various occasions
mingled with Germans, the Treveri and Nervii would at least gladly
have been Germans (iv. 244) {iv. 233.}, and on the middle Rhine
Caesar himself had provided settlements for the remnant of the hosts
of Ariovistus--Triboci (in Alsace) Nemetes (about Spires), Vangiones
(about Worms). Those Germans on the left of the Rhine indeed adhered
more firmly to the Roman rule than the Celtic cantons, and it was not
they that opened the gates of Gaul to their countrymen on the right
bank. But these, long accustomed to predatory raids over the river
and by no means forgetting the half successful attempts on several
occasions to settle there, came unbidden. The only Germanic tribe
beyond the Rhine, which already in Caesar's time had separated from
their countrymen and placed themselves under Roman protection, the
Ubii, had to give way before the hatred of their exasperated kinsmen
and to seek protection and new abodes on the Roman bank (716) {38.};
Agrippa, although personally present in Gaul, had not been able,
amidst the pressure of the Sicilian war then impending, to help
them otherwise, and had crossed the Rhine merely to effect their
transference. From this settlement of theirs our Cologne subsequently
grew up. Not merely were the Romans trading on the right bank of the
Rhine subjected to various injuries by the Germans, so that even in
729 {25.} an advance over the Rhine was executed, and Agrippa in 734
{20.} had to expel from Gaul Germanic hordes that had come thither from
the Rhine; but in 738 {16.} the further bank was affected by a more
general movement, which terminated in an invasion on a great scale. The
Sugambri on the Ruhr took the lead, and with them their neighbours the
Usipes on the north in the valley of the Lippe, and the Tencteri on the
south; they attacked the Roman traders sojourning among them and nailed
them to the cross, then crossed the Rhine, pillaged the Gallic cantons
far and wide, and, when the governor of Germany sent the legate Marcus
Lollius with the fifth legion against them, they first cut off its
cavalry and then put the legion itself to disgraceful flight, on which
occasion even its eagle fell into their hands. After all this they
returned unassailed to their homes. This miscarriage of the Roman army,
though not of importance in itself, was not to be despised in presence
of the Germanic movement and even of the troublesome feeling in Gaul;
Augustus himself went to the province attacked, and this occurrence
may possibly have been the immediate occasion for the adoption of that
great movement of offence, which, beginning with the Raetian war in 739
{15.}, led on to the campaigns of Tiberius in Illyricum and of Drusus
in Germany.

[Sidenote: German war of Drusus.]

Nero Claudius Drusus, born in 716 {38.} by Livia in the house of her
new husband, afterwards Augustus, and loved and treated by the latter
like a son--evil tongues said, as his son--the very image of manly
beauty and of winning grace in converse, a brave soldier and an able
general, a pronounced panegyrist, moreover, of the old republican
system, and in every respect the most popular prince of the imperial
house, took up, on the return of Augustus to Italy (741) {13.}, the
administration of Gaul and the chief command against the Germans,
whose subjugation was now contemplated in earnest. We have no adequate
means of knowing either the strength of the army then stationed on the
Rhine, or how matters stood with the Germans; this much only is clear
that the latter were not in a position suitably to meet the compact
attack. The region of the Neckar formerly possessed by the Helvetii
(iii. 182) {iii. 173.}, then for long a debateable border-land between
them and the Germans, lay desolate and dominated on the one side by the
recently subdued district of the Vindelici, on the other side by the
Germans friendly to Rome about Strassburg, Spires, and Worms. Farther
northward, in the region of the upper Main, were settled the Marcomani,
perhaps the most powerful of the Suebian tribes, but from of old at
enmity with the Germans of the middle Rhine. Northward of the Main
followed first in the Taunus the Chatti, farther down the Rhine the
already named Tencteri, Sugambri, and Usipes; behind them the powerful
Cherusci on the Weser, besides a number of tribes of secondary rank.
As it was these tribes on the middle Rhine, with the Sugambri at their
head, that had carried out that attack on Roman Gaul, the retaliatory
expedition of Drusus was directed mainly against them, and they too
combined for joint resistance to Drusus and for the institution of a
national army to be formed from the contingents of all these cantons.
The Frisian tribes, however, on the coast of the North Sea did not join
the movement, but persevered in their peculiar isolation.

It was the Germans who assumed the offensive. The Sugambri and their
allies again seized all the Romans whom they could lay hold of on their
bank, and nailed to the cross the centurions among them, twenty in
number. The allied tribes resolved once more to invade Gaul, and even
divided the spoil beforehand--the Sugambri were to obtain the people,
the Cherusci the horses, the Suebian tribes the gold and silver. So
they attempted in the beginning of 742 {12.} again to cross the Rhine,
and hoped for the support of the Germans on the left bank of the river,
and even for an insurrection of the Gallic cantons just at that time
excited by the unwonted matter of the census. But the young general
took his measures well; he nipped the movement in the Roman territory
before it was well set agoing, drove back the invaders even as they
were crossing the river, and then crossed the stream on his own part,
in order to lay waste the territory of the Usipes and Sugambri. This
was a repulse for the time; the plan of the war proper, designed on a
grander scale, started from the acquisition of the North Sea coast and
of the mouths of the Ems and the Elbe. The numerous and valiant tribe
of the Batavi in the delta of the Rhine was soon incorporated--to all
appearance, at that time and by amicable concert--in the Roman empire;
with its help a communication by water was established from the Rhine
to the Zuyder See, and from the latter to the North Sea, which opened
up for the Rhine-fleet a safer and shorter way to the mouths of the Ems
and Elbe. The Frisians on the north coast followed the example of the
Batavi and likewise submitted to the foreign rule. It was doubtless
still more the moderate policy than the military preponderance of
the Romans, which paved the way for them here; these tribes remained
almost wholly exempt from tribute, and were drawn upon for war-service
in a way which did not alarm, but allured them. From this basis the
expedition proceeded along the coast of the North Sea; in the open
sea the island of Burchanis (perhaps Borchum off East Friesland) was
taken by assault; on the Ems the fleet of boats of the Bructeri was
vanquished by the Roman fleet; Drusus reached as far as the Chauci
at the mouth of the Weser. The fleet indeed on its return homewards
encountered dangerous and unknown shallows, and, but for the Frisians
affording a safe escort to the shipwrecked army, it would have been
in a very critical position. Nevertheless, by this first campaign the
coast from the mouth of the Rhine to that of the Weser had been gained
for Rome.

[Sidenote: Death of Drusus.]

After the coast was thus acquired, the subjugation of the interior
began in the next year (743) {11.}. It was materially facilitated by
the dissensions among the Germans of the middle Rhine. For the attack
on Gaul attempted in the previous year the Chatti had not furnished
the promised contingent; in natural, but still far from politic, anger
the Sugambri had suddenly assailed the land of the Chatti with all
their force, and so their own territory as well as that of their
next neighbours on the Rhine was occupied without difficulty by the
Romans. The Chatti thereupon submitted to the enemies of their enemies
without resistance; nevertheless, they were directed to evacuate the
bank of the Rhine and to occupy instead of it that district which the
Sugambri had hitherto possessed. Not less did the powerful Cherusci
farther inland on the middle Weser succumb. The Chauci settled on the
lower stream were now assailed by land as they had been before by sea;
and thus the whole territory between the Rhine and Weser was taken
possession of, at least at the places of decisive military importance.
The return was, indeed, just as in the previous year, on the point
of being almost fatal; at Arbalo (site unknown) the Romans found
themselves surrounded on all sides in a narrow defile by the Germans
and deprived of their communications; but the firm discipline of the
legions, and the arrogant confidence of success withal on the part of
the Germans, changed the threatened defeat into a brilliant victory.[7]
In the next year (744) {10.} the Chatti revolted, indignant at the
loss of their old beautiful home; but now they for their part remained
alone, and were, after an obstinate resistance, and not without
considerable loss, subdued by the Romans (745) {9.}. The Marcomani on
the upper Main, who after the occupation of the territory of the Chatti
were next exposed to the attack, gave way before it, and retired into
the land of the Boii, the modern Bohemia, without interfering from
this point, where they were removed beyond the immediate sphere of
the Roman power, in the conflicts on the Rhine. In the whole region
between the Rhine and Weser the war was at an end. Drusus was able
in 745 {9.} to set foot on the right bank of the Weser in the canton
of the Cherusci, and to advance thence to the Elbe, which he did not
cross, and presumably was instructed not to do so. Several severe
combats took place; successful resistance was nowhere offered. But on
the return-march, which led apparently up the Saale and thence to
the Weser, a severe blow befell the Romans, not through the enemy but
through an incalculable misfortune. The general fell with his horse
and broke his thigh-bone; after thirty days of suffering he expired
in the distant land between the Saale and Weser,[8] which had never
before been trodden by a Roman army, in the arms of his brother who
had hastened thither from Rome, in the thirtieth year of his age and
in the full consciousness of his vigour and of his successes, long and
deeply lamented by his adherents and the whole people--perhaps to be
pronounced fortunate, because the gods granted to him to depart from
life young, and to escape the disillusions and embitterments which tell
most painfully on those highest in station, while his brilliant and
heroic figure continues still to live in the remembrance of the world.

[Sidenote: Continuance of the war by Tiberius.]

In the course of things, as a whole, the death of the able general
made--as might be expected--no change. His brother Tiberius arrived
early enough not merely to close his eyes, but also with his firm
hand to bring the army back and to carry on the conquest of Germany.
He commanded there during the two following years (746, 747) {8, 7.},
in the course of which there were no conflicts on a larger scale, but
the Roman troops showed themselves far and wide between the Rhine and
Elbe, and when Tiberius made the demand that all the countries should
formally acknowledge the Roman rule, and at the same time declared
that he could only accept that acknowledgment from all the cantons
simultaneously, they complied without exception; last of all the
Sugambri, for whom indeed there was no real peace. What progress in
a military point of view had been made, is shown by the expedition,
falling a little later, of Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus. The latter was
able, as governor of Illyricum, probably from Vindelicia as a basis,
to assign to a restless horde of Hermunduri settlements in the land
of the Marcomani itself; and on this expedition he reached as far as,
and beyond, the upper Elbe, without meeting with resistance.[9] The
Marcomani in Bohemia were completely isolated, and the rest of Germany
between the Rhine and Elbe was a Roman province--though still by no
means reduced to tranquillity.

[Sidenote: Camp on the left bank of the Rhine.]

Of the military-political organisation of Germany, as at that time
planned, we have but a very imperfect knowledge, because, on the
one hand, there is an utter want of accurate information as to the
arrangements made in earlier times to protect the Gallic eastern
frontier, and, on the other hand, those made by the two brothers were
in great part destroyed by the subsequent development of affairs.
There was no attempt to move the Roman frontier-guard away from the
Rhine; to this matters might perhaps come, but they had not yet done
so. Just as was the case in Illyricum at that time with the Danube,
the Elbe was doubtless the political boundary of the empire, but the
Rhine was the line of frontier-defence, and from the camps on the
Rhine the connections in rear ran to the great towns of Gaul and to
its ports.[10] The great headquarters during these campaigns was
what was afterwards named the "Old Camp," Castra vetera, (Birten near
Xanten), the first considerable height below Bonn on the left bank
of the Rhine, from a military point of view corresponding nearly to
the modern Wesel on the right. This place, occupied perhaps since
the beginning of the Roman rule on the Rhine, had been instituted by
Augustus as a stronghold for curbing Germany; and, if the fortress
was at all times the basis for the Roman defensive on the left bank
of the Rhine, it was not less well chosen for the invasion of the
right, situated, as it was, opposite to the mouth of the Lippe which
was navigable far up, and connected with the right bank by a strong
bridge. The counterpart to this "Old Camp," at the mouth of the Lippe
was probably formed by that at the mouth of the Main, Mogontiacum, the
modern Mentz, to all appearance a creation of Drusus; at least the
already mentioned cessions of territory imposed on the Chatti, as well
as the constructions in the Taunus to be mentioned further on, show
that Drusus clearly perceived the military importance of the line of
the Main, and thus also that of its key on the left bank of the Rhine.
If the legionary camp on the Aar was, as it would seem, instituted to
keep the Raeti and Vindelici to their obedience (p. 18), it may be
presumed to have been laid out about this time; but then it had merely
an outward connection with the Gallico-German military arrangements.
The legionary camp at Strassburg hardly reaches back to so early a
time. The line from Mentz to Wesel formed the basis of the Roman
military dispositions. That Drusus and Tiberius had--apart from the
Narbonese province which was then no longer imperial--the governorship
of all Gaul as well as the command of all the Rhenish legions, is an
ascertained point; apart from these princes, the civil administration
of Gaul may at that time perhaps have been separated from the command
of the troops on the Rhine, but scarcely was the latter thus early
divided into two co-ordinate commands.[11]

[Sidenote: Positions on the right bank of the Rhine.]

Correlative to these military arrangements on the left bank of the
Rhine were those adopted on the right. In the first place the Romans
took possession of the right bank itself. This step affected above all
the Sugambri, in whose case certainly retaliation for the captured
eagle and the crucified centurions contributed to it. The envoys sent
to declare their submission, the most eminent men of the nation,
were, at variance with the law of nations, treated as prisoners of
war, and perished miserably in the Italian fortresses. Of the mass of
the people, 40,000 were removed from their homes and settled in the
north of Gaul, where they subsequently, perhaps, meet us under the
name of the Cugerni. Only a small and harmless remnant of the powerful
tribe was allowed to remain in their old abodes. Suebian bands were
also transferred to Gaul, other tribes were pushed farther into the
interior, such as the Marsi and doubtless also the Chatti; on the
middle Rhine the native population of the right bank was everywhere
dislodged or at any rate weakened. Along this bank of the Rhine,
moreover, fortified posts, fifty in number, were instituted. In front
of Mogontiacum the territory taken from the Chatti, thenceforth the
canton of the Mattiaci near the modern Wiesbaden, was brought within
the Roman lines, and the height of Taunus strongly fortified.[12] But
above all the line of the Lippe was taken possession of from Vetera;
of the two military roads furnished at intervals of a day's march
with forts, on the two banks of the river, the one on the right bank
at least is as certainly the work of Drusus as the fortress of Aliso
in the district of the sources of the Lippe, probably the present
village of Elsen, not far from Paderborn,[13] is attested to have been
so. Moreover, there was the already mentioned canal from the mouth
of the Rhine to the Zuider See, and a dyke drawn by Lucius Domitius
Ahenobarbus through the marshy flat country between the Ems and the
lower Rhine--the so-called "long bridges." Besides, there were detached
Roman posts scattered through the whole region; such are subsequently
mentioned among the Frisians and the Chauci, and in this sense it may
be correct that the Roman garrisons reached as far as the Weser and
the Elbe. Lastly, the army encamped in winter, no doubt, on the Rhine;
but in summer, even though no expeditions properly so called were
undertaken, uniformly in the conquered country, as a rule near Aliso.

[Sidenote: Organisation of the province Germany.]

The Romans, however, did not make mere military arrangements in the
newly acquired domain. The Germans were urged, like other provincials,
to have law administered to them by the Roman governor, and the summer
expeditions of the general gradually developed into the usual judicial
circuits of the governor. The accusation and defence of the accused
took place in the Latin language; the Roman advocates and legal
assessors began, on the right as on the left side of the Rhine, their
operations, sorely felt everywhere, but here deeply exasperating to
the barbarians, who were unaccustomed to such things. Much was lacking
to the full carrying out of the provincial organisation; a formal
assessment of taxation, a regulated levy for the Roman army, were not
yet thought of. But as the new cantonal union had just been instituted
in Gaul in connection with the divine adoration of the monarch there
introduced, a similar arrangement was made also in the new Germany.
When Drusus consecrated for Gaul the altar of Augustus at Lyons, the
Germans last settled on the left bank of the Rhine, the Ubii, were not
received into this union; but in their chief place, which, as regards
position, was for Germany nearly what Lyons was for the three Gauls, a
similar altar for the Germanic cantons was erected, the priesthood of
which was, in the year 9, administered by the young Cheruscan prince
Segimundus, son of Segestes.

[Sidenote: Retirement of Tiberius from the chief command.]

Political differences, however, in the imperial family broke down or
interrupted the full military success. The discord between Tiberius and
his stepfather led to the former resigning the command in the beginning
of 748 {6.}. The dynastic interest did not allow comprehensive
military operations to be entrusted to other generals than princes
of the imperial house; and after the death of Agrippa and Drusus,
and the retirement of Tiberius, there were no able generals in that
house. Certainly in the ten years, when governors with the ordinary
powers bore sway in Illyricum and in Germany, the military operations
there may not have undergone so complete an interruption as they
appear to us to have done, seeing that tradition, with its courtly
colouring, does not in its report deal out equal measure to campaigns
conducted by, and to those conducted without, princes; but the arrest
laid on them was unmistakable, and this itself was a retrogression.
Ahenobarbus, who, in consequence of his alliance by marriage with the
imperial house--his wife was the daughter of a sister of Augustus--had
greater freedom of action than other officers, and who in his Illyrian
governorship had crossed the Elbe without encountering resistance,
afterwards as governor of Germany reaped no laurels there. Not merely
the exasperation, but the courage also, of the Germans was again
rising, and in the year 2 the country appears again in revolt, the
Cherusci and the Chauci under arms. Meanwhile at the imperial court
death had interposed, and the removal of the young sons of Augustus had
reconciled the latter and Tiberius.

[Sidenote: Tiberius once more commander in chief.]

Scarcely was this reconciliation sealed by his adoption as a son and
proclaimed (4), when Tiberius resumed the work where it had been broken
off, and once more in this and in the two following summers (5-6) led
the armies over the Rhine. It was a repetition of, and an advance upon,
the earlier campaigns. The Cherusci were brought back to allegiance
in the first campaign, the Chauci in the second; the Cannenefates,
adjoining the Batavi, and not inferior in bravery, the Bructeri,
settled in the region of the sources of the Lippe and on the Ems, and
various other cantons, submitted, as did also the powerful Langobardi,
here first mentioned, dwelling at that time between the Weser and Elbe.
The first campaign led over the Weser into the interior; in the second
at the Elbe itself the Roman legions confronted the Germanic general
levy on the other bank. From the year 4 to 5 the Roman army took up,
apparently for the first time, its winter quarters on German soil at
Aliso. All this was attained without any considerable conflicts; the
circumspect conduct of the war did not break resistance, but made it
impossible. This general aimed, not at unfruitful laurels, but at
lasting success. The naval expedition, too, was repeated; like the
first campaign of Drusus, the last of Tiberius was distinguished by the
navigating of the North Sea. But the Roman fleet this time advanced
farther; the whole coast of the North Sea, as far as the promontory of
the Cimbri, that is, the extremity of Jutland, was explored by it, and
it then, sailing up the Elbe, joined the land-army stationed on the
latter. The emperor had expressly forbidden the crossing of the river;
but the tribes beyond the Elbe--the Cimbri just named, in what is now
Jutland, the Charudes to the south of them, the powerful Semnones
between the Elbe and the Oder--were brought at least into relation to
the new neighbours.

[Sidenote: Campaign against Maroboduus.]

It might have been thought that the goal was reached. But one thing
was still wanting to the establishment of the iron ring which was to
surround the Great Germany; it was the establishment of a connection
between the middle Danube and the upper Elbe--the occupation of the old
home of the Boii, which with its mountain-cincture planted itself like
a gigantic fortress between Noricum and Germany. The king Maroboduus,
of noble Marcomanian lineage, but in his youth by prolonged residence
in Rome introduced to its firmer military and political organisation,
had after his return home--perhaps during the first campaign of Drusus
and the transmigration, thereby brought about, of the Marcomani from
the Main to the upper Elbe--not merely raised himself to be prince of
his people, but had also moulded his rule not after the loose fashion
of the Germanic kings, but, one might say, after the model of the
Augustan. Besides his own people, he ruled over the powerful tribe of
the Lugii (in what is now Silesia), and the body of his clients must
have extended over the whole region of the Elbe, as the Langobardi
and the Semnones are described as subject to him. Hitherto he had
observed entire neutrality in presence of the other Germans as of
the Romans. He gave perhaps to the fugitive enemies of the Romans an
asylum in his country, but he did not actively mingle in the strife,
not even when the Hermunduri had settlements assigned to them by the
Roman governor on Marcomanian territory (p. 31), and when the left
bank of the Elbe became subject to the Romans. He did not submit to
them, but he bore all these occurrences without interrupting, on that
account, his friendly relations with the Romans. By this certainly not
magnanimous and scarce even so much as prudent policy, he had gained
this much, that he was the last to be attacked; after the completely
successful Germanic campaigns in the years 4 and 5 his turn came. From
two sides--from Germany and Noricum--the Roman armies advanced against
the Bohemian mountain-circle; Gaius Sentius Saturninus, advanced up the
Main, clearing the dense forests from Spessart to the Fichtelgebirge
with axe and fire; while Tiberius in person, starting from Carnuntum,
where the Illyrian legions had encamped during the winter of the years
5-6, advanced against the Marcomani. The two armies, amounting together
to twelve legions, were even in number so superior as almost to double
that of their opponents, whose fighting force was estimated at 70,000
infantry and 4000 horsemen. The cautious strategy of the general seemed
on this occasion also to have quite ensured success, when a sudden
incident interrupted the farther advance of the Romans.

[Sidenote: Dalmato-Pannonian insurrection.]

The Dalmatian tribes and the Pannonians, at least of the region of the
Save, for a short time obeyed the Roman governors; but they bore the
new rule with an ever increasing grudge, above all on account of the
taxes, to which they were unaccustomed, and which were relentlessly
exacted. When Tiberius subsequently asked one of the leaders as to the
grounds of the revolt, he answered that it had taken place because the
Romans set not dogs and shepherds, but wolves, to guard their flocks.
Now the legions from Dalmatia were brought to the Danube, and the
men capable of arms were called out, in order to be sent thither to
reinforce the armies. These troops made a beginning, and took up arms
not for, but against, Rome. Their leader was one of the Daesitiatae
(around Serajevo), Bato. The example was followed by the Pannonians,
under the leadership of two Breuci, another Bato and Pinnes. All
Illyricum rose with unheard of rapidity and unanimity. The number
of the insurgent forces was estimated at 200,000 infantry and 9000
horsemen. The levy for the auxiliary troops, which had taken place more
especially among the Pannonians to a considerable extent, had diffused
more widely a knowledge of Roman warfare, along with the Roman language
and even Roman culture. Those who had served as Roman soldiers formed
now the nucleus of the insurrection.[14] The Roman citizens settled or
sojourning in large number in the insurgent regions, the merchants,
and above all, the soldiers, were everywhere seized and slain. The
independent tribes, as well as those of the provinces, entered into the
movement. The princes of the Thracians, entirely devoted to the Romans,
certainly brought their considerable and brave bands to the aid of the
Roman generals; but from the other bank of the Danube the Dacians, and
with them the Sarmatae, broke into Moesia. The whole wide region of the
Danube seemed to have conspired to put an abrupt end to the foreign
rule.

The insurgents were not disposed to await attack, but planned an
invasion of Macedonia, and even of Italy. The danger was serious; the
insurgents might, by crossing the Julian Alps, stand in a few days once
more before Aquileia and Tergeste--they had not yet forgotten the way
thither--and in ten days before Rome, as the emperor himself expressed
it in the senate, to make sure at all events of its assent to the
comprehensive and urgent military preparations. In the utmost haste
new forces were raised, and the towns more immediately threatened
were provided with garrisons; in like manner whatever troops could be
dispensed with were despatched to the threatened points. The first to
arrive at the spot was the governor of Moesia, Aulus Caecina Severus,
and with him the Thracian king Rhoemetalces; soon other troops followed
from the transmarine provinces. But above all Tiberius was obliged,
instead of penetrating into Bohemia, to return to Illyricum. Had the
insurgents waited till the Romans were engaged in the struggle with
Maroboduus, or had the latter made common cause with them, the position
might have been a very critical one for the Romans. But the former
broke loose too early, and the latter, faithful to his system of
neutrality, condescended just at this time to conclude peace with the
Romans on the basis of the _status quo_. Thus Tiberius had, no doubt,
to send back the Rhine-legions, because Germany could not possibly
be denuded of troops, but he could unite his Illyrian army with the
troops arriving from Moesia, Italy, and Syria, and employ it against
the insurgents. In fact the alarm was greater than the danger. The
Dalmatians, indeed, broke repeatedly into Macedonia and pillaged the
coast as far as Apollonia; but there was no invasion of Italy, and the
fire was soon confined to its original hearth.

Nevertheless, the work of the war was not easy; here, as everywhere,
the renewed overthrow of the subjects was more laborious than the
subjugation itself. Never in the Augustan period was such a body of
troops ever united under the same command; already in the first year of
the war the army of Tiberius consisted of ten legions along with the
corresponding auxiliary forces, and in addition numerous veterans who
had again joined of their own accord and other volunteers, together
about 120,000 men; later he had fifteen legions united under his
banners.[15] In the first campaign (6 A.D.) the contest was waged with
very varying fortune; the large places, like Siscia and Sirmium, were
successfully protected against the insurgents, but the Dalmatian Bato
fought as obstinately and in part successfully against the governor of
Pannonia, Marcus Valerius Messalla, the orator's son, as his Pannonian
namesake against Aulus Caecina governor of Moesia. The petty warfare
above all gave much trouble to the Roman troops. Nor did the following
year (7), in which along with Tiberius his nephew the young Germanicus
appeared on the scene of war, put an end to the ceaseless conflicts.
It was not till the third campaign (8) that the Romans succeeded in
subduing in the first instance the Pannonians, chiefly, as it would
seem, through the circumstance that their leader, gained over by the
Romans, induced his troops all and sundry to lay down their arms at
the river Bathinus, and surrendered his colleague in the supreme
command, Pinnes, to the Romans, for which he was recognised by them as
prince of the Breuci. Punishment indeed soon befell the traitor; his
Dalmatian namesake caught him and had him executed, and once more the
revolt blazed up among the Breuci; but it was speedily extinguished
again, and the Dalmatian was confined to the defence of his own home.
There Germanicus and other leaders of division had in this, as in
the following year (9), to sustain vehement conflicts in the several
cantons; in the latter year the Pirustae (on the borders of Epirus)
and the canton to which the leader himself belonged, the Daesitiatae,
were subdued, one bravely defended stronghold being reduced after
another. Once more in the course of the summer Tiberius himself took
the field, and set in motion all his fighting force against the remains
of the insurrection. Even Bato, shut up by the Roman army in the strong
Andetrium (Much, above Salonae), his last place of refuge, gave up
the cause as lost. He left the town, when he could not induce the
desperadoes to submit, and yielded himself to the victor, with whom he
found honourable treatment; he was relegated as a political prisoner
to Ravenna, where he died. Without their leader the troops still for
a time continued the vain struggle, till the Romans captured the fort
by assault--it is probably this day, the 3d August, that is recorded
in the Roman calendar as the anniversary of the victory achieved by
Tiberius in Illyricum.

[Sidenote: Dacian war of Lentulus.]

Retribution fell also on the Dacians beyond the Danube. Probably at
this time, after the Illyrian war was decided in favour of Rome, Gnaeus
Lentulus led a strong Roman army across the Danube, reached as far
as the Marisus (Marosch) and emphatically defeated them in their own
country, which was then for the first time trodden by a Roman army.
Fifty thousand captive Dacians were made to settle in Thrace.

Men of later times termed the "Batonian war" of the years 6-9 the most
severe which Rome had to sustain against an external foe since that of
Hannibal. It inflicted severe wounds on the Illyrian land; in Italy the
joy over the victory was boundless when the young Germanicus brought
the news of the decisive success to the capital. The exultation did not
last long; almost simultaneously with the news of this success there
came to Rome accounts of a defeat, such as reached the ears of Augustus
but once in his reign of fifty years--a defeat which was still more
significant in its consequences than in itself.

[Sidenote: Germanic rising.]

The state of things in the province of Germany has been already
set forth. The recoil which follows on any foreign rule with the
inevitableness of a natural event, and which had just set in in the
Illyrian land, was in preparation also among the cantons of the middle
Rhine. The remnants of the tribes settled immediately on the Rhine were
indeed quite discouraged; but those dwelling farther back, especially
the Cherusci, Chatti, Bructeri, Marsi, were less injuriously affected
and by no means powerless. As always in such cases, there was formed
in every canton a party of the compliant friends of the Romans, and
a national party preparing in secret a renewed rising. The soul of
the latter was a young man of twenty-six years, of the Cheruscan
princely house, Arminius son of Sigimer; he and his brother Flavus
had received from the emperor Augustus the gifts of Roman citizenship
and of equestrian rank,[16] and both had fought with distinction as
officers in the last Roman campaigns under Tiberius; the brother was
still serving in the Roman army and had established a home for himself
in Italy. Naturally Arminius also was regarded by the Romans as a man
specially to be trusted; the accusations, which his better informed
countryman Segestes brought forward against him, availed not to shake
this confidence in view of the well-known hostility subsisting between
the two. Of the further preparations we have no knowledge; that the
nobility and especially the noble youth took the side of the patriots,
was a matter of course, and found clear expression in the fact that
Segestes's own daughter, Thusnelda, in spite of the prohibition of her
father, married Arminius, while her brother Segimundus and Segestes's
brother Segimer, as well as his nephew Sesithacus, played a prominent
part in the insurrection. It had not a wide range, far less than that
of the Illyrian rising; it can scarcely in strictness be called a
Germanic revolt; the Batavi, the Frisii, the Chauci on the coast took
no part in it, as little such of the Suebian tribes as were under
Roman rule, still less king Maroboduus; in reality only those Germans
rose who had some years previously leagued themselves against Rome,
and against whom the offensive of Drusus was primarily directed. The
Illyrian rising doubtless promoted the ferment in Germany, but there
is no trace of any thread of connection between the two similar and
almost contemporary insurrections; had such a connection subsisted the
Germans would hardly have waited to strike till the Pannonian rising
had been overpowered and the very last strongholds in Dalmatia were
surrendering. Arminius was the brave and shrewd, and above all things
fortunate, leader in the conflict of despair over the lost national
independence--nothing less, but also nothing more.

[Sidenote: Varus.]

It was more the fault of the Romans than the merit of the insurgents,
if the plan of the latter succeeded. So far, certainly, the Illyrian
war had an effect on Germany. The able generals, and to all appearance
also the experienced troops, had been moved from the Rhine to the
Danube. The Germanic army was apparently not diminished, but the
greatest part of it consisted of new legions formed during the war.
Still worse was its position as to leaders. The governor, Publius
Quinctilius Varus,[17] was, no doubt, the husband of a niece of
the emperor, and a man of ill-acquired, but princely, wealth and
of princely arrogance, but inert in body and obtuse in mind, and
without any military gifts or experience--one of those many Romans in
high station who, in consequence of an adherence to the old mixture
of administrative functions with those of higher command, wore the
general's scarf after the model of Cicero. He knew not how to spare
nor yet to see through the new subjects; oppression and exaction were
practised, as had been the wont of his earlier governorship over the
patient Syria; the headquarters swarmed with advocates and clients;
and in grateful humility the conspirators especially received judgment
and justice at his hands, while the net was being drawn more and more
closely around the arrogant praetor.

The position of the army was what was then the normal one. There
were at least five legions in the province, two of which had their
winter-quarters at Mogontiacum, three in Vetera or else in Aliso.
The latter had taken up their summer encampment in the year 9 on the
Weser. The natural route of communication from the upper Lippe to the
Weser leads over the low chain of heights of the Osning and of the
Lippe Forest, which separates the valley of the Ems from that of the
Weser, through the Dören defile into the valley of the Werra, which
falls into the Weser at Rehme, not far from Minden. Here therefore,
approximately, the legions of Varus at that time were encamped. As a
matter of course this summer camp was connected with Aliso, the base of
the Roman position on the right bank of the Rhine, by a road supplied
with depots. The good season of the year came to its close, and they
were making ready for the return march, when the news came that a
neighbouring canton was in revolt; and Varus resolved, instead of
leading back the army by that depot-route, to take a circuit and by the
way to bring back the rebels to allegiance.[18] So they set out; the
army consisted, after numerous reductions, of three legions and nine
divisions of troops of the second class, together about 20,000 men.[19]
When the army had removed to a sufficient distance from its line of
communication, and penetrated far enough into the pathless country,
the confederates in the neighbouring cantons rose, cut down the small
divisions of troops stationed among them, and broke forth on all sides
from the defiles and woods against the army of Varus on its march.
Arminius and the most notable leaders of the patriots had remained
to the last moment at the Roman headquarters to make Varus secure.
On the very evening before the day on which the insurrection burst
forth they had supped in the general's tent with Varus; and Segestes,
when announcing the impending outbreak of the revolt, had adjured the
general to order the immediate arrest of himself as well as of the
accused, and to await the justification of his charge by the facts.
The confidence of Varus was not to be shaken. Arminius rode away from
table to the insurgents, and was next day before the ramparts of the
Roman camp. The military situation was neither better nor worse than
that of the army of Drusus before the battle at Arbalo, and than had,
under similar circumstances, often been the plight of Roman armies.
The communications were for the moment lost; the army, encumbered
with heavy baggage in a pathless country and at a bad rainy season in
autumn, was separated by several days' march from Aliso; the assailants
were beyond doubt far superior in number to the Romans. In such cases
it is the solid quality of the troops that is decisive; and, if the
decision here for once was unfavourable to the Romans, the result was
doubtless mostly due to the inexperience of the young soldiers, and
especially to the want of head and of courage in the general. After
the attack took place the Roman army continued its march, now beyond
doubt in the direction of Aliso, amidst constantly increasing pressure
and increasing demoralisation. Even the higher officers failed in part
to do their duty; one of them rode away from the field of battle
with all the cavalry, and left the infantry to sustain the conflict
alone. The first to despair utterly was the general himself; wounded
in the struggle, he put himself to death before the matter was finally
decided, so early indeed, that his followers still made an attempt
to burn the dead body and to withdraw it from being dishonoured by
the enemy. A number of the superior officers followed his example.
Then, when all was lost, the leader that was left surrendered, and
thereby put out of his own power what remained open to these last--an
honourable soldier's death. Thus perished the Germanic army in one of
the valleys of the mountain-range that bounds the region of Münster,
in the autumn of the year 9 A.D.[20] The eagles fell--all three of
them--into the enemy's hand. Not a division cut its way through, not
even those horsemen who had left their comrades in the lurch; only a
few who were isolated and dispersed were able to effect their escape.
The captives, especially the officers and the advocates, were fastened
to the cross, or buried alive, or bled under the sacrificial knife of
the German priests. The heads cut off were nailed as a token of victory
to the trees of the sacred grove. Far and wide the land rose against
the foreign rule; it was hoped that Maroboduus would join the movement;
the Roman posts and roads on the whole right bank of the Rhine fell
without further trouble into the power of the victors. Only in Aliso,
the brave commandant Lucius Caedicius, not an officer, but a veteran
soldier, offered a resolute resistance, and his archers were enabled
to make the encampment before the walls so annoying to the Germans,
who possessed no weapons for distant fighting, that they converted
the siege into a blockade. When the last stores of the besieged were
exhausted, and still no relief came, Caedicius broke out one dark
night; and this remnant of the army, though burdened with numerous
women and children, and suffering severe losses through the assaults of
the Germans, in reality ultimately reached the camp at Vetera. Thither
also the two legions stationed in Mentz under Lucius Nonius Asprenas
had gone on the news of the disaster. The resolute defence of Aliso,
and the rapid intervention of Asprenas, hindered the Germans from
following up the victory on the left bank of the Rhine, and perhaps the
Gauls from rising against Rome.

[Sidenote: Tiberius again on the Rhine.]

The defeat was soon compensated, in so far as the Rhine army was
immediately not simply made up to its strength, but considerably
reinforced. Tiberius once more took up the supreme command, and though
for the year following on the battle of Varus (10) the history of the
war had no combats to record, it is probable that arrangements were
then made for the occupation of the Rhine-frontier by eight legions,
and simultaneously for the division of this command into that of the
upper army, with Mentz as its headquarters, and that of the lower
with the headquarters at Vetera, an arrangement, as a whole, which
thereupon remained normal for centuries. It could not but be expected
that this increase of the army of the Rhine would be followed by the
energetic resumption of operations on the right bank. The Romano-German
conflict was not a conflict between two powers equal in the political
balance, in which the defeat of the one might justify the conclusion
of an unfavourable peace; it was the conflict of a great civilised
and organised state against a brave but, in a political and military
aspect, barbarous nation, in which the ultimate result was settled
from the first, and an isolated failure in the plan as sketched might
as little produce any change as the ship gives up its voyage because
a gust of wind drives it out of its course. But it was otherwise.
Tiberius, doubtless, went across the Rhine in the following year (11),
but this expedition did not resemble the former one. He remained during
the summer on that side, and celebrated the emperor's birthday there,
but the army kept to the immediate neighbourhood of the Rhine, and
of expeditions on the Weser and on the Elbe there was nothing said.
Evidently the object was only to show to the Germans that the Romans
still knew how to find the way into their country, and perhaps also to
make such arrangements on the right bank of the Rhine as the change of
policy required.

[Sidenote: Germanicus on the Rhine.]

The great command embracing both armies was retained, and retained
accordingly in the imperial house. Germanicus had already exercised it
in the year 11 along with Tiberius; in the following year (12), when
the administration of the consulate detained him in Rome, Tiberius
commanded alone on the Rhine; with the beginning of the year 13
Germanicus took up the sole command. The state of things was regarded
as one of war with the Germans; but these were years of inaction.[21]
The fiery and ambitious hereditary prince bore with reluctance the
constraint imposed on him, and we can understand how, as an officer,
he should not forget the three eagles in the hands of the enemy, and
how, as the son of Drusus, he should wish to re-erect his structure
that had been destroyed. Soon the opportunity presented itself, and he
took it. On the 19th August of the year 14, the emperor Augustus died.
The first change in the throne of the new monarchy did not pass over
without a crisis, and Germanicus had opportunity of proving by deeds to
his father that he was disposed to maintain allegiance to him. But at
the same time he found in it warrant for resuming, even unbidden, the
long-wished-for invasion of Germany; he declared that he had by this
fresh campaign to repress the not inconsiderable ferment that had been
called forth among the legions upon the change of sovereign. Whether
this was a real reason or a pretext we know not, and perhaps he did not
himself know. The commandant of the Rhine army could not be debarred
from crossing the frontier anywhere, and it always to a certain degree
depended on himself how far he should proceed against the Germans.
Perhaps too, he believed that he was acting in the spirit of the new
ruler, who had at least as much claim as his brother to the name of
conqueror of Germany, and whose announced appearance in the camp on the
Rhine might, doubtless, be conceived of, as though he were coming to
resume the conquest of Germany broken off at the bidding of Augustus.

[Sidenote: Renewed offensive.]

However this may be, the offensive beyond the Rhine began anew. Even
in the autumn of the year 14, Germanicus in person led detachments
of all the legions at Vetera over the Rhine, and penetrated up the
Lippe pretty far into the interior, laying waste the country far
and wide, putting to death the natives, and destroying the temples,
such as that of Tanfana held in high honour. Those assailed--chiefly
Bructeri, Tubantes, and Usipes,--sought to prepare the fate of Varus
for the crown-prince on his way home; but the attack recoiled before
the energetic bearing of the legions. As this advance met with no
censure, but on the contrary, thanks and marks of honour were decreed
to the general for it, he went farther. In the opening of the year
15 he assembled his main force, in the first instance on the middle
Rhine, and advanced in person from Mentz against the Chatti as far as
the upper confluents of the Weser, while the lower army, farther to
the north, attacked the Cherusci and the Marsi. There was a certain
justification for this proceeding in the fact that the Cherusci
favourably disposed towards Rome, who had, under the immediate
impression of the disaster of Varus, been obliged to join the patriots,
were now again at open variance with the much stronger national party,
and invoked the intervention of Germanicus. He was actually successful
in liberating Segestes, the friend of the Romans, when hard pressed
by his countrymen, and at the same time in getting possession of his
daughter, the wife of Arminius. Segestes' brother Segimerus, once the
leader of the patriots by the side of Arminius, submitted. The internal
dissensions of the Germans once more paved the way for the foreign
rule. In the very same year Germanicus undertook his main expedition
to the region of the Ems; Caecina marched from Vetera to the upper
Ems, while he in person went thither with the fleet from the mouth of
the Rhine; the cavalry moved along the coast through the territory
of the faithful Frisians. When reunited the Romans laid waste the
country of the Bructeri and the whole territory between the Ems and
Lippe, and thence made an expedition to the disastrous spot where, six
years before, the army of Varus had perished, to erect a monument to
their fallen comrades. On their farther advance the Roman cavalry were
allured by Arminius and the exasperated hosts of the patriots into an
ambush, and would have been destroyed had not the infantry come up and
prevented greater mischief. More serious dangers attended the return
homeward from the Ems, which followed at first the same routes as the
march thither.

[Sidenote: Retreat of Caecina.]

The cavalry arrived at the winter camp uninjured. Seeing that the fleet
was not sufficient for conveying the infantry of four legions, owing
to the difficulty of navigation--it was about the time of the autumnal
equinox--Germanicus disembarked two of them and made them return along
the shore; but inadequately acquainted with the ebbing and flowing of
the tide at this season of the year, they lost their baggage and ran
the risk of being drowned _en masse_. The retreat of the four legions
of Caecina from the Ems to the Rhine resembled exactly that of Varus;
indeed, the difficult, marshy country offered perhaps still greater
difficulties than the defiles of the wooded hills. The whole mass of
natives, with the two princes of the Cherusci, Arminius and his highly
esteemed uncle Inguiomerus, at their head, threw themselves on the
retreating troops in the sure hope of preparing for them the same fate,
and filled the morasses and woods all around. But the old general,
experienced in forty years' of war service, remained cool even in the
utmost peril, and kept his despairing and famishing men firmly in hand.
Yet even he might not perhaps have been able to avert the mischief but
for the circumstance that, after a successful attack during the march,
in which the Romans lost a great part of their cavalry and almost the
whole baggage, the Germans, sure of victory and eager for spoil, in
opposition to Arminius' advice, followed the other leader, and instead
of further surrounding the enemy, attempted directly to storm the
camp. Caecina allowed the Germans to come up to the ramparts, but then
burst forth from all posterns and gates with such vehemence upon the
assailants that they suffered a severe defeat, and in consequence of it
the further retreat took place without material hindrance. Those at
the Rhine had already given up the army as lost, and were on the point
of casting off the bridge at Vetera, to prevent the Germans at least
from penetrating into Gaul; it was only the resolute remonstrance of a
woman, the wife of Germanicus and daughter of Agrippa, which frustrated
the desperate and disgraceful resolve.

The resumption of the subjugation of Germany thus began not quite
successfully. The territory between the Rhine and Weser had indeed been
again trodden and traversed, but the Romans had no decisive results to
show, and the enormous loss in material, particularly in horses, was
sorely felt, so that, as in the times of Scipio, the towns of Italy and
of the western provinces took part in patriotic contributions to make
up for what was lost.

[Sidenote: Campaign of the year 16.]

For the next campaign (16) Germanicus changed his plan of warfare. He
attempted the subjugation of Germany on the basis of the North Sea
and the fleet, partly because the tribes on the coast, the Batavi,
Frisians, and Chauci, adhered more or less to the Romans, partly in
order to shorten the marches--in which much time was spent and much
loss incurred--from the Rhine to the Weser and Elbe and back again.
After he had employed this spring, like the previous one, for rapid
advances on the Main and on the Lippe, he, in the beginning of summer,
embarked his whole army at the mouth of the Rhine in the powerful
transport-fleet of 1000 sail which had meanwhile been made ready, and
actually arrived without loss at the mouth of the Ems, where the fleet
remained. Thence he advanced, as may be conjectured, up the Ems as far
as the mouth of the Haase, and then along the latter as far up as the
Werra-valley, and through this to the Weser. By this means the carrying
of the army, 80,000 strong, through the Teutoburg Forest, which was
attended with great difficulties, particularly as to provisions, was
avoided. A secure reserve for supplies was furnished in the camp
beside the fleet, and the Cherusci on the right bank of the Weser were
assailed in flank instead of in front. Here the Romans encountered the
levy _en masse_ of the Germans, again led by the two chiefs of the
patriot party, Arminius and Inguiomerus. What warlike resources were at
their disposal is shown by the fact that on two occasions, one shortly
after the other, in the Cheruscan country--first on the Weser itself
and then somewhat farther inland[22]--they fought in the open field
against the whole Roman army, and in both hardly contested the victory.
The latter certainly fell to the Romans, and of the German patriots a
considerable number were left on the fields of battle. No prisoners
were taken, and both sides fought with extreme exasperation. The second
tropaeum of Germanicus spoke of the overthrow of all the Germanic
tribes between the Rhine and Elbe; the son placed this campaign of
his alongside of the brilliant campaigns of his father, and reported
to Rome that in the next campaign he should have the subjugation of
Germany complete. But Arminius escaped, although wounded, and continued
still at the head of the patriots; and an unforeseen mischief marred
the success won by arms. On the return home, which the greater part of
the legions made by sea, the transport-fleet encountered the autumn
storms of the North Sea. The vessels were dashed on all sides upon the
islands of the North Sea, and as far as the British coasts. A great
portion were destroyed, and those that escaped had for the most part
to throw horses and baggage overboard, and to be glad of saving their
bare life. The loss of vessels was, as in the times of the Punic war,
equivalent to a defeat. Germanicus himself, cast adrift alone with the
admiral's ship on the desolate shore of the Chauci, was in despair at
this misfortune, and on the point of seeking his death in that ocean
the assistance of which he had at the beginning of this campaign
invoked so earnestly and so vainly. Doubtless afterwards the loss of
men proved not to be quite so great as it had at first appeared, and
some effective blows which the general, on his return to the Rhine,
inflicted on the nearest barbarians, raised the sunken courage of the
troops. But, taken as a whole, the campaign of the year 16, as compared
with that of the preceding year, ended in more brilliant victories
doubtless, but also in much more serious loss.

[Sidenote: The altered situation.]

The recall of Germanicus was at the same time the abolition of the
command-in-chief of the Rhenish army. The mere division of the command
put an end to the conduct of the war as heretofore pursued; the
circumstance that Germanicus was not merely recalled, but obtained no
successor, was tantamount to ordaining the defensive on the Rhine.
Thus the campaign of the year 16 was the last which the Romans waged
in order to subdue Germany and to transfer the boundary of the empire
from the Rhine to the Elbe. That this was the aim of the campaigns
of Germanicus is shown by their very course, and by the trophy that
celebrated the frontier of the Elbe. The re-establishment, too, of the
military works on the right bank of the Rhine, of the forts of the
Taunus, as well as of the stronghold of Aliso and the line connecting
it with Vetera, belonged only in part to such an occupation of the
right bank as was in keeping with the restricted plan of operations
after the battle of Varus; in fact it had a far wider scope. But the
designs of the general were not, or not quite, those of the emperor.
It is more than probable that Tiberius from the outset allowed rather
than sanctioned the enterprises of Germanicus on the Rhine, and it is
certain that he wished to put an end to them by recalling him in the
winter of 16-17. Beyond doubt, at the same time, a good part of what
had been attained was given up, and in particular the garrison was
withdrawn from Aliso. As Germanicus, even in the following year, found
not a stone left of the memorial of victory erected in the Teutoburg
Forest, so the results of his victories disappeared like a flash of
lightning into the water, and none of his successors continued the
building on this basis.

[Sidenote: Motives for the change of policy.]

If Augustus gave up the conquered Germany as lost after the battle of
Varus, and if Tiberius now, when the conquest had once more been taken
in hand, ordered it to be broken off, we are well entitled to ask, What
motives guided the two notable rulers in this course, and what was the
significance of these important events for the general policy of the
empire?

The battle of Varus is an enigma, not in a military but in a political
point of view--not in its course, but in its consequences. Augustus
was not wrong when he demanded back his lost legions, not from the
enemy nor from fate, but from the general; it was a disaster such as
unskilled leaders of division from time to time bring about for every
state. We have difficulty in conceiving that the destruction of an
army of 20,000 men without further direct military consequences should
have given a decisive turn to the policy at large of a judiciously
governed universal empire. And yet the two rulers bore that defeat
with a patience as unexampled as it was critical and hazardous for
the position of the government in relation to the army and to its
neighbours; they allowed the conclusion of peace with Maroboduus,
which, beyond doubt, was meant to be in strictness a mere armistice,
to become withal definitive, and made no further attempt to get the
upper valley of the Elbe into their hands. It must have been no easy
thing for Tiberius to see the collapse of the great structure begun in
concert with his brother, and after the latter's death almost completed
by himself; the energetic zeal with which, as soon as he had again
entered on the government, he took up the Germanic war which he had
begun ten years ago, enables us to measure what this self-denial must
have cost him. If, nevertheless, the self-denial was persevered in not
merely by Augustus, but also after his death by Tiberius himself, there
is no other reason to be found for it than that they recognised the
plans pursued by them for twenty years for the changing of the boundary
to the north as incapable of execution, and the subjugation and mastery
of the region between the Rhine and the Elbe appeared to them to
transcend the resources of the empire.

[Sidenote: The Elbe frontier.]

If the previous boundary of the empire ran from the middle Danube up to
its source and to the upper Rhine, and thence down that river, it was,
at all events, materially shortened and improved by being shifted to
the Elbe, which in its head-waters approaches the middle Danube, and
to its course throughout; in which case, probably, besides the evident
military gain, there came into view also the political consideration
that the keeping of the great commands as far as possible remote from
Rome and Italy was one of the leading maxims of the Augustan policy,
and an army of the Elbe would hardly have played such a part in the
further development of Rome as the armies of the Rhine but too soon
undertook. The preliminary conditions to this end, the overthrow of
the Germanic patriot-party and of the Suebian king in Bohemia, were no
easy tasks; nevertheless they had already once stood on the verge of
succeeding, and with a right conduct of the war these results could
not fail to be reached. But it was another question whether, after
the institution of the Elbe frontier, the troops could be withdrawn
from the intervening region; this question had been raised in a very
serious way for the Roman government by the Dalmato-Pannonian war. If
the mere impending movement of the Roman Danube-army into Bohemia had
called forth a popular rising in Illyricum, that was only put down
by the exertion of all their military resources after a four years'
conflict, this wide region might not be left to itself either at the
time or for many years to come. Similar, doubtless, was the state of
the case on the Rhine. The Roman public was wont, indeed, to boast
that the state held all Gaul in subjection by means of the garrison at
Lyons 1200 strong; but the government could not forget that the two
great armies on the Rhine not merely warded off the Germans, but also
had a very material bearing on the Gallic cantons that were not at all
distinguished by submissiveness. Stationed on the Weser or even on the
Elbe, they would not have rendered this service in equal measure; and
to keep both the Rhine and the Elbe occupied was beyond their power.

[Sidenote: And its abandonment.]

Thus Augustus might well come to the conclusion that with the strength
of the army as it then stood--considerably increased indeed of late,
but still far below the measure of what was really requisite--that
great regulation of the frontier was not practicable; the question was
thus converted from a military one into one of internal policy, and
especially into one of finance. Neither Augustus nor Tiberius ventured
to increase still further the expense of the army. We may blame them
for not doing so. The paralysing double blow of the Illyrian and the
Germanic insurrections with their grave disasters, the great age and
the enfeebled vigour of the ruler, the increasing disinclination of
Tiberius for initiating any fresh and great undertaking, and above all
any deviation from the policy of Augustus, doubtless co-operated to
induce this result, and did so, perhaps, to the injury of the state.
By the demeanour of Germanicus, not to be approved but easily to be
explained, we perceive how keenly the soldiers and the youth felt
the abandonment of the new province of Germany. In the poor attempt
to retain, at least nominally, the lost Germany with the help of the
two German cantons on the left of the Rhine, and in the ambiguous and
uncertain words with which Augustus himself in his account of the case
lays or forgoes claim to Germany as Roman, we discern how perplexed was
the attitude of the government towards public opinion in this matter.
The grasping at the frontier of the Elbe was a mighty, perhaps a too
bold stroke, undertaken possibly by Augustus--who did not generally
soar so high--only after years of hesitation, and doubtless not without
the determining influence of the younger stepson who was in closest
intercourse with him. But to retrace too bold a step is, as a rule, not
a mending of the mistake, but a second mistake. The monarchy had need
of warlike honour unstained and of unconditional warlike success, in
quite another way than the former burgomaster-government; the absence
of the numbers 17, 18, and 19--never filled up since the battle of
Varus--in the roll of regiments, was little in keeping with military
prestige, and the peace with Maroboduus, on the basis of the _status
quo_, could not be construed by the most loyal rhetoric into a success.
The assumption that Germanicus began those far-reaching enterprises
in opposition to the strict orders of his government is forbidden by
his whole political position; but the reproach that he made use of his
double position, as supreme commander of the first army of the Rhine
and as future successor to the throne, in order to carry out at his own
hand his politico-military plans, is one from which he can as little
be exempted as the emperor from the no less grave reproach of having
started back perhaps from the forming, or perhaps only from the clear
expression and the sharp execution, of his own resolves. If Tiberius
at least allowed the resumption of the offensive, he must have felt
how much was to be said for a more vigorous policy; he may perhaps,
as over-considerate people do, have left the decision, so to speak,
to destiny, till at length the repeated and severe misfortunes of the
crown-prince once more justified the policy of despair. It was not easy
for the government to bid an army halt which had brought back two of
the three lost eagles; but it was done. Whatever may have been the real
and the personal motives, we stand here at a turning-point in national
destinies. History, too, has its flow and its ebb; here, after the tide
of Roman sway over the world has attained its height, the ebb sets in.
Northward of Italy the Roman rule had for a few years reached as far as
the Elbe; since the battle of Varus its bounds were the Rhine and the
Danube. A legend--but an old one--relates that the first conqueror of
Germany, Drusus, on his last campaign at the Elbe, saw a vision of a
gigantic female figure of Germanic mould, that called to him in his own
language the word "Back!" The word was not spoken, but it was fulfilled.

[Sidenote: Germans against Germans.]

Nevertheless the defeat of the Augustan policy, as the peace with
Maroboduus and the sufferance of the Teutoburg disaster may well be
termed, was hardly a victory of the Germans. After the battle with
Varus the hope must doubtless have passed through the minds of the
best, that a certain union of the nation would accrue from the glorious
victory of the Cherusci and their allies, and from the retiring of the
enemy in the west as in the south. Perhaps in these very crises the
feeling of unity may have dawned on the Saxons and Suebians formerly
confronting each other as strangers. The fact that the Saxons sent
from the battle-field the head of Varus to the king of the Suebians,
can be nothing but the savage expression of the thought that the hour
had come for all Germans to throw themselves in joint onset upon
the Roman empire, and thus to secure the frontier and the freedom
of their land, as they could alone be secured, by striking down the
hereditary foe in his own home. But the cultured man and the politic
king accepted the gift of the insurgents only in order to forward the
head to the emperor Augustus for burial; he did nothing for, but also
nothing against, the Romans, and persevered unshaken in his neutrality.
Immediately after the death of Augustus there were fears at Rome of
the Marcomani invading Raetia, but apparently without cause; and when
Germanicus thereupon resumed the offensive against the Germans from
the Rhine, the mighty king of the Marcomani looked on inactive. This
policy of finesse or of cowardice dug its own grave amidst a Germanic
world fiercely excited, and drunk with patriotic successes and hopes.
The more remote Suebian tribes but loosely connected with the empire,
the Semnones, Langobardi, and Gothones, declared off from the king,
and made common cause with the Saxon patriots; it is not improbable
that the considerable forces, which were evidently at the disposal of
Arminius and Inguiomerus in the conflicts with Germanicus, flowed to
them in great part from these quarters.

[Sidenote: Fall of Maroboduus.]

Soon afterwards, when the Roman attack was suddenly broken off, the
patriots turned (17) to assail Maroboduus, perhaps to assail the kingly
office in general, at least as the latter administered it on the Roman
model.[23] But even among themselves divisions had set in; the two
nearly related Cheruscan princes, who in the last struggles had led
the patriots, if not victoriously, at any rate bravely and honourably,
and had hitherto constantly fought shoulder to shoulder, no longer
stood together in this war. The uncle Inguiomerus no longer tolerated
his being second to his nephew, and at the outbreak of the war passed
to the side of Maroboduus. Thus matters came to a decisive battle
between Germans and Germans, nay, between the same tribes; for Suebi
as well as Cherusci fought in both armies. Long the conflict wavered;
both armies had learned from the Roman tactics, and on both sides the
passion and the exasperation were alike. Arminius did not achieve a
victory properly so called, but his antagonist left to him the field of
battle; and, as Maroboduus seemed to have fared the worst, those who
had hitherto adhered to him left him, and he found himself confined to
his own kingdom. When he asked for Roman aid against his overpowerful
countrymen, Tiberius reminded him of his attitude after the battle of
Varus, and replied that now the Romans in turn would remain neutral.
His fate was rapidly decided. In the very following year (18) he was
surprised in his royal abode itself by a prince of the Gothones,
Catualda, to whom he had formerly given personal offence, and who had
thereupon revolted from him with the other non-Bohemian Suebi; and,
abandoned by his own people, he with difficulty made his escape to the
Romans, who granted to him the asylum which he sought--he died many
years afterwards, as a Roman pensioner, at Ravenna.

[Sidenote: End of Arminius.]

Thus the opponents as well as the rivals of Arminius had become
refugees, and the Germanic nation looked to none else than to him. But
this greatness was his danger and his destruction. His own countrymen,
especially his own clan, accused him of going the way of Maroboduus
and of desiring to be not merely the first, but also the lord and
the king of the Germans--whether with reason or not, and whether, if
he wished this, he did not perhaps wish what was right, who can say?
The result was a civil war between him and these representatives of
popular freedom; two years after the banishment of Maroboduus he too,
like Caesar, fell by the dagger of nobles of republican sentiments
near to his person. His wife Thusnelda and his son born in captivity,
Thumelicus, on whom he had never set eyes, marched at the triumph of
Germanicus (26th May, 17) among the other Germans of rank, in chains
to the Capitol; the old Segestes was for his fidelity to the Romans
provided with a place of honour, whence he might look on at the
public entry of his daughter and his grandson. They all died within
the Roman empire; with Maroboduus the wife and son of his antagonist
met in the exile of Ravenna. When Tiberius remarked at the recall of
Germanicus that there was no need to wage war against the Germans, and
that they would of themselves take care to do what was requisite for
Rome, he knew his adversaries; in this, at all events, history has
pronounced him right. But to the high-spirited man who, at the age of
six-and-twenty, had released his Saxon home from the Italian foreign
rule, who thereafter had been general as well as soldier in a seven
years' struggle for that freedom regained, who had staked not merely
person and life, but also wife and child for his nation, to fall at the
age of thirty-seven by an assassin's hand--to this man his people gave,
what it was in their power to give, an eternal monument in heroic song.




Footnotes.


[1: Dio, li. 23, expressly says this as to the year 725: τέως μὲν
οὖν ταῦτ᾿ ἐποίουν (_i.e._ so long as the Bastarnae attacked only
the Triballi--near Oescus in Lower Moesia, and the Dardani in Upper
Moesia), οὐδὲν σφίσι πρᾶγμα πρὸς τοὺς Ῥωμαίους ἦν· ἐπεὶ δὲ τόν τε
Αἷμον ὑπερέβησαν καὶ τὴν Θρᾴκην τὴν Δενθελητῶν ἔνσπονδον αὐτοῖς οὖσαν
κατέδραμον κ. τ. λ. The allies in Moesia, of whom Dio, xxxviii. 10
speaks, are the coast towns.]

[2: When Dio says (li. 23): τὴν Σεγετικὴν καλουμένην προσεποίησατο
καὶ ἐς τὴν Μυσίδα ἐνέβαλε, the town spoken of, doubtless, can only be
Serdica, the modern Sofia, on the upper Oescus, the key to the Moesian
country.]

[3: After the campaign of Crassus the conquered land was probably
organised in such a way that the coast went to the Thracian kingdom, as
Zippel has shown (_Röm. Illyricum_, p. 243), and the western portion
was, just like Thrace, assigned in fief to the native princes, in
place of one of whom must have come the _praefectus civitatium Moesiae
et Triballiae_ (_C. I. L._ v. 1838), who was still acting under
Tiberius. The usual assumption that Moesia was at first combined with
Illyricum, rests only on the circumstance that in the enumeration of
the provinces apportioned in the year 727 between emperor and senate
in Dio, liii. 12 it is not named, and so was contained in "Dalmatia."
But this enumeration does not extend at all to the vassal-states and
the procuratorial provinces, and so far all is in due keeping with
our assumption. On the other hand, weighty arguments tell against the
usual hypothesis. Had Moesia been originally a part of the province
of Illyricum, it would have retained this name; for on the division
of a province the name was usually retained, and only a defining
epithet added. But the appellation Illyricum, which Dio doubtless
reproduces _l.c._, was always in this connection restricted to the
upper (Dalmatia) and the lower (Pannonia). Moreover, if Moesia was a
part of Illyricum, there was no room left for that Prefect of Moesia
and Triballia, or in other words for his kingly predecessor. Lastly,
it is far from probable that in 727 {27.} a command of such extent and
importance should have been entrusted to a single senatorial governor.
On the other hand, everything admits of easy explanation, if small
client-states arose in Moesia after the war of Crassus; these were as
such from the outset under the emperor, and, as the senate did not take
part in their successive annexation and conversion into a governorship,
this might easily be unnoticed in the Annals. It was completed in or
before the year 743 {11.}, seeing that the governor, L. Calpurnius
Piso then waging war against the Thracians, to whom Dio (liv. 34)
erroneously assigns the province of Pamphylia, can only have had as his
province Pannonia or Moesia, and, as at that time Tiberius was acting
as legate in Pannonia, there is left for him only Moesia. In 6 A.D.
there certainly appears an imperial governor of Moesia.]

[4: The official title of Cottius was not king, like that of his
father Donnus, but "president of the cantonal union" (_praefectus
civitatium_), as he is named on the still standing arch of Susa
erected by him in honour of Augustus in the year 745-6 {9-8.}. But the
position was beyond doubt held for life, and, under reservation of the
superior's right to confirm it, also hereditary; so far therefore the
union was certainly a principality, as it is usually so termed.]

[5: We know this road only in the shape which the emperor Claudius, the
son of the constructor, gave to it; originally, of course, it cannot
have been called _via Claudia_, but only _via Augusta_, and we can
hardly regard as its terminus in Italy Altinum, in the neighbourhood
of the modern Venice, since, under Augustus, all the imperial roads
still led to Rome. That the road ran through the upper Adige valley is
shown by the milestone found at Meran (_C. I. L._ v. 8003); that it led
to the Danube, is attested; the connection of the making of this road
with the founding of Augusta Vindelicum, though this was at first only
a market-village (_forum_), is more than probable (_C. I. L._ iii. p.
711); in what way Augsburg and the Danube were reached from Meran we
do not know. Subsequently the road was rectified, so as to leave the
Adige at Bautzen, and to lead up the Eisach valley over the Brenner to
Augsburg.]

[6: The locality "in which the Bessi honour the god Dionysos," and
which Crassus took from them and gave to the Odrysians (Dio, li.
25), is certainly the same _Liberi patris lucus_, in which Alexander
sacrificed, and the father of Augustus, _cum per secreta Thraciae
exercitum duceret_, asked the oracle respecting his son (Suetonius,
_Aug._ 94), and which Herodotus already mentions (ii. III; compare
Euripides, _Hec._ 1267) as an oracular shrine placed under the
protection of the Bessi. Certainly it is to be sought northwards of
Rhodope; it has not yet been discovered.]

[7: That the battle at Arbalo (Plin. _H.N._ xi. 17, 55) belongs to this
year, is shown by Obsequens, 72, and so the narrative in Dio, liv. 33,
applies to it.]

[8: That the fall of Drusus took place in the region of the Saale
we may be allowed to infer from Strabo, vii. 1, 3, p. 291, although
he only says that he perished on the march between Salas and Rhine,
and the identification of the Salas with the Saale rests solely on
the resemblance of name. From the scene of the mishap he was then
transported as far as the summer camp (Seneca, _Cons. ad Marciam_
3: _ipsis illum hostibus aegrum cum veneratione et pace mutua
prosequentibus nec optare quod expediebat audentibus_), and in that
camp he died (Sueton., _Claud._ 1). This camp lay in the heart of
the barbarian land (Valerius Max. v. 5, 3) and not very far from the
battlefield of Varus (Tacitus, _Ann._ ii. 7, where the _vetus ara
Druso sita_ is certainly to be referred to the place where he died);
we may be allowed to seek it in the region of the Weser. The dead body
was then conveyed to the winter-camp (Dio, lv. 2) and there burnt;
this spot was regarded, according to Roman usage, also as the place
of burial, although the depositing of the ashes took place in Rome,
and to this is to be referred the _honorarius tumulus_ with the annual
obsequies (Sueton. _l.c._). Probably we have to seek for this place
at Vetera. When a later author (Eutropius, vii. 13) speaks of the
_monumentum_ of Drusus at Mentz, this is doubtless not the tomb, but
the elsewhere mentioned Tropaeum (Florus, ii. 30: _Marcomanorum spoliis
et insignibus quendam editum tumulum in tropaei modum excoluit_).]

[9: What we learn from Dio, lv. 10, partly confirmed by Tacitus, _Ann._
iv. 44, cannot be apprehended otherwise. Noricum and Raetia must have
been put under this governor as an exceptional measure, or the course
of operations induced him to pass beyond the limit of his governorship.
The assumption that he marched through Bohemia itself, which would
involve still greater difficulties, is not required by the narrative.]

[10: To a connection in rear of the camp on the Rhine with the port
Boulogne we might perhaps take the much disputed notice of Florus, ii.
30, to refer: _Bonnam_ (or _Bormam_) _et Gessoriacum pontibus iunxit
classibusque firmavit_, with which is to be compared the mention by the
same author of forts on the Maas. Bonn may reasonably have been at that
time the station of the Rhine-fleet; Boulogne was in later times still
a fleet-station. Drusus might well have occasion to make the shortest
and safest land-route between the two stations for the fleet available
for transport, though the writer, probably bent on striking effect,
awakens by his pointed mode of expression conceptions which cannot be
in that form correct.]

[11: As to the administrative partition of Gaul there is, apart from
the separation of the Narbonensis, an utter absence of accounts,
because it rested only on imperial ordinances, and nothing in reference
to it came into the records of the senate. But the first information of
the existence of separate Upper and Lower German commands is furnished
by the campaigns of Germanicus, and the battle of Varus can hardly
be understood under that assumption; here, doubtless, the _hiberna
inferiora_ appear, viz. that of Vetera (Velleius, ii. 120), and the
counterpart to it, the _superiora_, can only have been formed by that
of Mentz; but this was not under a colleague of Varus, but under his
nephew, who was thus subordinate to him in command. Probably the
partition only took place, in consequence of the defeat, in the last
years of Augustus.]

[12: The _praesidium_ constructed by Drusus _in monte Tauno_ (Tacitus,
_Ann._ i. 56), and the φρούριον ἐν Χάττοις παρ' αὐτῷ τῷ Ῥήνῳ associated
with Aliso (Dio, liv. 33), are probably identical, and the special
position of the canton of the Mattiaci is evidently connected with the
construction of Mogontiacum.]

[13: That the "fort at the confluence of the Lupias and the Helison,"
in Dio, liv. 33, is identical with the oftener mentioned Aliso, and
this must be sought on the upper Lippe, is subject to no doubt; and
that the Roman winter-camp at the sources of the Lippe (_ad caput
Lupiae_, Velleius, ii. 205), the only one of the kind, so far as we
know, on German ground, is to be sought just there, is at least very
probable. That the two Roman roads running along the Lippe, and their
fortified places of bivouac, led at least as far as the region of
Lippstadt, the researches of Hölzermann in particular have shown.
The upper Lippe has only one confluent of note, the Alme, and as the
village of Elsen lies not far from where the Alme falls into the
Lippe, some weight may be here assigned to the similarity of name. To
the view, supported among others by Schmidt, which places Aliso at
the confluence of the Glenne (and Liese) with the Lippe, the chief
objection is that the camp _ad caput Lupiae_ must then have been
different from Aliso, and in general this point lies too far from the
line of the Weser, while from Elsen the route leads directly through
the Dören defile into the Werra valley. Schmidt, who does not adhere to
the identification of Aliso and Elsen, remarks generally (_Westfälische
Zeitschrift für Gesch. und Alterthumskunde_, xx. p. 259), that the
heights of Weser (not far from Elsen), and generally the left margin of
the valley of the Alme, are the centre of a semicircle formed by the
mountains in front, and this highlying, dry region, allowing an exact
look-out as far as the mountains, which covers the whole country of the
Lippe and is itself covered in front by the Alme, is well adapted for
the starting-point of a march towards the Weser.]

[14: This and not more is what Velleius says (ii. 110): _in omnibus
Pannoniis non disciplinae_ (= military training) _tantummodo, sed
linguae quoque notitia Romanae, plerisque etiam litterarum usus et
familiaris animorum erat exercitatio_. These are the same phenomena as
are met with in the case of the Cheruscan princes, only in increased
measure; and they are quite intelligible when we bear in mind the
Pannonian and Breucian _alae_ and _cohortes_ raised by Augustus.]

[15: If we assume that of the twelve legions who were on the march
against Maroboduus (Tacitus, _Ann._ ii. 46), as many as we find
soon after in Germany, that is, five, went to form the army there,
the Illyrian army of Tiberius numbered seven, and the number of ten
(Velleius, ii. 113) may fairly be referred to the contingents from
Moesia and Italy, that of fifteen to the contingents from Egypt or
Syria, and to the further levies in Italy, whence the newly raised
legions went no doubt to Germany, but those thereby relieved went to
the army of Tiberius. Velleius (ii. 112) speaks inaccurately, at the
very beginning of the war, of five legions brought up by A. Caecina
and Plautius Silvanus _ex transmarinis provinciis_; firstly, the
transmarine troops could not be at once on the spot, and secondly, the
legions of Caecina were of course the Moesian. Comp. my commentary on
the _Mon. Ancyr._ 2d ed. p. 71.]

[16: Velleius (ii. 118) says so; _adsiduus militiae nostrae prioris
comes, iure etiam civitatis Romanae eius equestres consequens gradus_;
which coincides with the _ductor popularium_ of Tacitus, _Ann._ ii. 10.
Such officers must have been of no infrequent occurrence at this time;
thus, there fought in the third campaign of Drusus _inter primores
Chumstinctus et Avectius tribuni ex civitate Nerviorum_ (Liv. _Ep._
141), and under Germanicus Chariovalda _dux Batavorum_ (Tac. _Ann._ ii.
11).]

[17: The effigy of Varus is shown on a copper coin of the African town
Achulla, struck under his proconsulate of Africa in the year 747-8,
B.C. 7-6 (L. Müller, _Num. de l'ancienne Afrique_, ii. p. 44, comp. p.
52). The base which once supported the statue erected to him by the
town of Pergamus has again been brought to light by the excavations
there; the subscription runs: ὁ δῆμος [ἐτίμησεν] Πόπλιον Κοινκτίλιον
Σέξτου υἱὸν Οὐάρ[ον] πάσης ἀρετῆ[ς ἕνεκα].]

[18: The report of Dio, the only one which hands down to us a
somewhat connected view of this catastrophe, explains the course
of it sufficiently, if we only take further into account--what Dio
certainly does not bring into prominence--the general relation of the
summer and winter camps, and thereby answer the question justly put by
Ranke (_Weltgeschichte_, iii. 2, 275), how the whole army could have
marched against a local insurrection. The narrative of Florus by no
means rests on sources originally different, as that scholar assumes,
but simply on the dramatic accumulation of motives for action, such
as is characteristic of all historians of this type. The peaceful
dispensing of justice by Varus and the storming of the camp are both
known to the better tradition, and that in their causal connection.
The ridiculous representation of the Germans breaking in at all the
gates into the camp, while Varus is sitting on the judgment-seat and
the herald is summoning the parties before him, is not tradition, but
a picture manufactured from it. That this is in utter antagonism to
the description by Tacitus of the three bivouacs, as well as to sound
reason, is obvious.]

[19: The normal strength of the three _alae_ and the six _cohortes_ is
not to be calculated exactly, inasmuch as among them there may have
been double divisions (_miliariae_); but the army cannot have numbered
much over 20,000 men. On the other hand, there appears no reason for
assuming a material difference of the effective strength from the
normal. The numerous detachments which are mentioned (Dio, lvi. 19)
serve to account for the comparatively small number of the _auxilia_,
which were always by preference employed for this duty.]

[20: As Germanicus, coming from the Ems, lays waste the territory
between the Ems and Lippe, that is, the region of Münster, and not
far from it lies the _Teutoburgiensis saltus_, where Varus's army
perished (Tacitus, _Ann._ i. 61), it is most natural to understand this
description, which does not suit the flat Münster region, of the range
bounding the Münster region on the north-east, the Osning; but it may
also be deemed applicable to the Wiehen mountains somewhat farther to
the north, parallel with the Osning, and stretching from Minden to the
source of the Hunte. We do not know at what point on the Weser the
summer camp stood; but in accordance with the position of Aliso near
Paderborn, and with the connections subsisting between this and the
Weser, it was probably somewhere near Minden. The direction of the
march on the return may have been any other excepting only the nearest
way to Aliso; and the catastrophe consequently occurred not on the
military line of communication between Minden and Paderborn itself,
but at a greater or less distance from it. Varus may have marched from
Minden somewhat in the direction of Osnabrück, then after the attack
have attempted from thence to reach Paderborn, and have met with his
end on this march in one of those two ranges of hills. For centuries
there have been found in the district of Venne at the source of the
Hunte a surprisingly large number of Roman gold, silver, and copper
coins, such as circulated in the time of Augustus, while later coins
hardly occur there at all (comp. the proofs in Paul Höfer, _der Feldzug
des Germanicus im Jahre 16_, Gotha, 1884, p. 82, f.) The coins thus
found cannot belong to one store of coins on account of their scattered
occurrence and of the difference of metals, nor to a centre of traffic
on account of their proximity as regards time; they look quite like
the leavings of a great extirpated army, and the accounts before us as
to the battle of Varus may be reconciled with this locality. As to the
year of the catastrophe there should never have been any dispute; the
shifting of it to the year 10 is a mere mistake. The season of the year
is in some measure determined by the fact that between the arrangement
to celebrate the Illyrian victory and the arrival of the unfortunate
news in Rome there lay only five days, and that arrangement probably
had in view the victory of 3d Aug., though it did not immediately
follow on the latter. Accordingly the defeat must have taken place
somewhere in September or October, which also accords with the
circumstance that the last march of Varus was evidently the march back
from the summer to the winter camp.]

[21: Tacitus, _Ann._ i. 9, and Dio, lvi. 26, attest the continuance
of the state of war; but nothing at all is reported from the nominal
campaigns of the summers of 12, 13, and 14, and the expedition of the
autumn of 14 appears as the first undertaken by Germanicus. It is true
that Germanicus had been proclaimed as Imperator probably even in the
lifetime of Augustus (_Mon. Ancyr._ p. 17); but there is nothing to
hinder our referring this to the campaign of the year 11, in which
Germanicus commanded with proconsular power alongside of Tiberius (Dio,
lvi. 25). In the year 12 he was in Rome for the administration of the
consulate, which he retained throughout the year, and which was still
at that time treated in earnest; this explains why Tiberius, as has now
been proved (Hermann Schulz, _Quaest. Ovidianae_, Greifswald, 1883, p.
15), still went to Germany in the year 12, and resigned his Rhenish
command only at the beginning of the year 13, on the celebration of the
Pannonian victory.]

[22: The hypothesis of Schmidt (_Westfäl. Zeitschrift_, xx. p.
301)--that the first battle was fought on the Idistavisian field
somewhere near Bückeburg, and the second, on account of the morasses
mentioned on the occasion, perhaps on the Steinhudersee, near the
village of Bergkirchen, which lies to the south of this--will not be
far removed from the truth, and may at least help us to realise the
matter. In this, as in most of the accounts of battles by Tacitus, we
must despair of reaching an assured result.]

[23: The statement of Tacitus (_Ann._ ii. 45), that this was properly
a war of the republicans against the monarchists, is probably not free
from a wish to transfer Hellenico-Roman views to the very different
Germanic world. So far as the war had an ethico-political tendency, it
would be called forth not by the _nomen regis_, as Tacitus says, but by
the _certum imperium visque regia_ of Velleius (ii. 108).]




CHAPTER II.

SPAIN.


[Sidenote: Conclusion of the conquest.]

The accidents of external policy caused the Romans to establish
themselves on the Pyrenaean peninsula earlier than in any other part of
the transmarine mainland, and to institute there two standing commands.
There, too, the republic had not, as in Gaul and Illyricum, confined
itself to subduing the coasts of the Italian sea, but had rather from
the outset, after the precedent of the Barcides, contemplated the
conquest of the whole peninsula. With the Lusitanians (in Portugal
and Estremadura) the Romans had fought from the time that they called
themselves masters of Spain; the "more remote province" had been
instituted, strictly speaking, against these tribes and simultaneously
with the "nearer" one; the Callaeci (Gallicia) became subject to the
Romans a century before the battle of Actium; shortly before that
battle the subsequent dictator Caesar had, in his first campaign,
carried the Roman arms as far as Brigantium (Corunna), and consolidated
afresh the annexation of this region to the more remote province. Then,
in the years between the death of Caesar and the sole rule of Augustus,
there was unceasing warfare in the north of Spain; no fewer than six
governors in this short time won triumphs there, and perhaps the
subjugation of the northern slope of the Pyrenees was effected chiefly
in this epoch.[24] The wars with the cognate Aquitanians on the north
side of the mountains, which fall within the same epoch, and the last
of which was victoriously ended in the year 727 { 27.}, must stand in
connection with these events. On the reorganising of the administrative
arrangements in 727 {27.} the peninsula went to Augustus, because
there was a prospect of extensive military operations there, and it
needed a permanent garrison. Although the southern third of the more
remote province, thenceforth named from the river Baetis (Guadalquivir)
was soon given back to the government of the senate,[25] by far the
greater portion of the peninsula remained constantly under imperial
administration, including the greater part of the more remote province,
Lusitania and Callaecia,[26] and the whole of the large nearer one.
Immediately after the institution of the new supreme control Augustus
resorted in person to Spain, with a view, in his two years' stay (728,
729) {26, 25.}, to organise the new administration, and to direct the
occupation of the portions of the country not yet subject. This he did
from Tarraco as his headquarters, and it was at that time that the seat
of government of the nearer province was transferred from New Carthage
to Tarraco, after which town this province is thenceforth usually
named. While it appeared necessary on the one hand not to remove the
seat of administration from the coast, the new capital on the other
hand commanded the region of the Ebro and the communications with the
north-west and the Pyrenees. Against the Astures (in the provinces of
Asturias and Leon), and above all, the Cantabri (in the Basque country
and the province of Santander), who obstinately held out in these
mountains and overran the neighbouring cantons, a warfare attended by
difficulties and heavy losses was prolonged--with interruptions, which
the Romans called victories--for eight years, till at length Agrippa
succeeded in breaking down the open resistance by destroying the
mountain towns and transplanting their inhabitants to the valleys.

[Sidenote: Military organisation in the North-west.]

If, as the emperor Augustus says, from his time the coast of the
ocean from Cadiz to the mouth of the Elbe obeyed the Romans, the
obedience in this corner of it was far from voluntary and little to
be trusted. Matters were still apparently far from having reached a
proper pacification in north-western Spain. There is still mention
in Nero's time of war-expeditions against the Asturians. A still
clearer tale is told by the occupation of the country, as Augustus
arranged it. Callaecia was separated from Lusitania and united with
the Tarraconensian province, to concentrate in one hand the chief
command in northern Spain. Not merely was this province then the
only one which, without bordering on an enemy's country, obtained a
legionary military command, but no fewer than three legions[27] were
directed thither by Augustus--two to Asturia, one to Cantabria; and,
in spite of the military pressure in Germany and in Illyricum, this
occupying force was not diminished. The headquarters were established
between the old metropolis of Asturia, Lancia, and the new Asturica
Augusta (Astorga) in Leon that still at present bears its name. With
this strong occupation of the north-west is probably connected the
construction of roads undertaken there to a considerable extent in
the earlier imperial period, although we are not able to demonstrate
the connection in detail, seeing that the allocation of these troops
in the Augustan age is unknown to us. Thus there was established by
Augustus and Tiberius for the capital of Collaecia, Bracara (Braga),
a connection with Asturica, that is, with the great headquarters, and
not less with the neighbouring towns to the north, north-east, and
south. Tiberius made similar constructions in the territory of the
Vascones and in Cantabria.[28] Gradually the occupying force could be
diminished, and under Claudius one legion, under Nero a second, could
be employed elsewhere. But these were regarded only as drafted off, and
still at the beginning of the reign of Vespasian the Spanish garrison
had resumed its earlier strength; it was reduced, in the strict sense,
only by the Flavian emperors, by Vespasian to two, by Domitian to one
legion. From thence down to the time of Diocletian a single legion,
the Seventh Gemina, and a certain number of auxiliary contingents
garrisoned Leon.

No province under the monarchy was less affected by outward or by
inward wars than this land of the far west. While at this epoch the
commanderships of the troops assumed, as it were, the positions of
competing parties, the Spanish army played throughout a secondary part
in that respect; it was only as helper of his colleague that Galba
entered into the civil war, and mere accident carried him to the first
place. The force holding the north-west of the Peninsula, which even
after its reduction still strikes us as comparatively strong, leads
us to infer that this region had not been completely obedient even in
the second and third centuries; but we are unable to state anything
definite as to the employment of the Spanish legion within the province
which it held in occupation. The struggle against the Cantabrians had
been waged with the help of vessels of war; subsequently the Romans had
no occasion to institute a permanent naval station there. It is not
till the period after Diocletian that we find the Pyrenaean peninsula,
like the Italian and the Graeco-Macedonian, without a standing garrison.

[Sidenote: Incursions of the Moors.]

That the province of Baetica was, at least after the beginning of the
second century, visited on various occasions from the opposite coast
by the Moors--the pirates of Rîf--we shall have to set forth in detail
when we survey the affairs of Africa. We may presume that this serves
to explain why, although in the senatorial provinces elsewhere imperial
troops were not wont to be stationed, by way of exception Italica (near
Seville) was provided with a division of the legion of Leon.[29] But
it chiefly devolved on the command stationed in the province of Tingi
(Tangier) to protect the rich south of Spain from these incursions.
Still it happened that towns like Italica and Singili (not far from
Antequera) were besieged by the pirates.

[Sidenote: Introduction of Italian municipal law.]

If preparation was anywhere made by the republic for the great
all-significant work of the imperial period--the Romanising of the
West--it was in Spain. Peaceful intercourse carried forward what
the sword had begun; Roman silver money was paramount in Spain long
before it circulated elsewhere outside of Italy; and the mines, the
culture of the vine and olive, and the relations of traffic produced
a constant influx of Italian elements to the coast, particularly in
the south-west. New Carthage, the creation of the Barcides, and from
its origin down to the Augustan age the capital of the Hither province
and the first trading port of Spain, embraced already in the seventh
century a numerous Roman population; Carteia, opposite to the present
Gibraltar, founded a generation before the age of the Gracchi, was the
first transmarine civic community with a population of Roman origin
(iii. 4) {iii. 4.}; the old and renowned sister-town of Carthage,
Gades, the modern Cadiz, was the first foreign town out of Italy,
that adopted Roman law and Roman language (iv. 573) {iv. 543.}. While
thus along the greatest part of the coast of the Mediterranean the
old indigenous as well as the Phoenician civilisation had already,
under the republic, conformed to the ways and habits of the ruling
people, in no province under the imperial period was Romanising so
energetically promoted on the part of the ruling power as in Spain.
First of all the southern half of Baetica, between the Baetis and the
Mediterranean, obtained, partly already under the republic or through
Caesar, partly in the years 739 and 740 {15 and 14.} through Augustus,
a stately series of communities with full Roman citizenship, which here
occupy not the coast especially, but above all the interior, headed
by Hispalis (Seville) and Corduba (Cordova) with colonial rights,
Italica (near Seville) and Gades (Cadiz) with municipal rights. In
southern Lusitania, too, we meet with a series of equally privileged
towns, particularly Olisipo (Lisbon), Pax Julia (Beja), and the colony
of veterans founded by Augustus during his abode in Spain and made
the capital of this province, Emerita (Merida). In the Tarraconensis
the burgess-towns are found predominantly on the coast--Carthago
Nova, Ilici (Elche), Valentia, Dertosa (Tortosa), Tarraco, Barcino
(Barcelona); in the interior only the colony in the Ebro valley,
Caesaraugusta (Saragossa), is conspicuous. In all Spain under Augustus
there were numbered fifty communities with full citizenship; nearly
fifty others had up to this time received Latin rights, and stood as
to inward organisation on a par with the burgess-communities. Among
the rest the emperor Vespasian likewise introduced the Latin municipal
organisation on occasion of the general imperial census instituted by
him in the year 74. The bestowal of burgess-rights was neither then,
nor generally in the better imperial period, extended much further than
it had been carried in the time of Augustus;[30] as to which probably
the chief regulative consideration was the restricted right of levy in
regard to those who were citizens of the empire.

[Sidenote: Romanising of the Iberians.]

The indigenous population of Spain, which thus became partly mixed up
with Italian settlers, partly led towards Italian habits and language,
nowhere emerges so as to be clearly recognised in the history of the
imperial period. Probably that stock, whose remains and whose language
maintain their ground up to the present day in the mountains of Biscay,
Guipuscoa, and Navarre, once filled the whole peninsula, as the Berbers
filled the region of north Africa. Their language, different from the
Indo-Germanic, and destitute of flexion like that of the Finns and
Mongols, proves their original independence; and their most important
memorials, the coins, in the first century of the Roman rule in Spain
embrace the peninsula, with the exception of the south coast from Cadiz
to Granada, where the Phoenician language then prevailed, and of the
region northward of the mouth of the Tagus and westward of the sources
of the Ebro, which was then probably to a large extent practically
independent, and certainly was utterly uncivilised. In this Iberian
territory the south-Spanish writing is clearly distinguished from
that of the north province; but not less clearly both are branches of
one stock. The Phoenician immigration here confined itself to still
narrower bounds than in Africa, and the Celtic mixture did not modify
the general uniformity of the national development in a way that we
can recognise. But the conflicts of the Romans with the Iberians belong
mainly to the republican epoch, and have been formerly described (ii.
221 f.) {ii. 209 f.}. After the already mentioned last passages of arms
under the first dynasty, the Iberians vanish wholly out of sight. To
the question, how far they became Romanised in the imperial period,
the information that has come to us gives no satisfactory answer. That
in the intercourse with their former masters they would have always
occasion to make use of the Roman language, needs no proof; but under
the influence of Rome the national language and the national writing
disappear even from public use within their own communities. Already in
the last century of the republic the native coinage, which at first was
to a large extent allowed, had become in the main set aside; from the
imperial period there is no Spanish civic coin with other than a Latin
legend.[31]

[Sidenote: Language.]

Like the Roman dress, the Roman language was largely diffused even
among those Spaniards who had not Italian burgess-rights, and the
government favoured the _de facto_ Romanising of the land.[32] When
Augustus died the Roman language and habits prevailed in Andalusia,
Granada, Murcia, Valencia, Catalonia, Aragon; and a good part of this
is to be accounted for not by colonising but by Romanising. By the
ordinance of Vespasian previously mentioned the native language was
restricted _de jure_ to private intercourse. That it held its ground
in this, is proved by its existence at the present day; what is now
confined to the mountains, which neither the Goths nor the Arabs ever
occupied, must in the Roman period certainly have extended over a great
part of Spain, especially the north-west. Nevertheless Romanising
certainly set in very much earlier and more strongly in Spain than in
Africa; monuments with native writing from the imperial period can be
pointed to in Africa in fair number, hardly at all in Spain; and the
Berber language at present still prevails over half of north Africa,
the Iberian only in the narrow valleys of the Basques. It could not
be otherwise, partly because in Spain Roman civilisation emerged much
earlier and much more vigorously than in Africa, partly because the
natives had not in the former as in the latter the free tribes to fall
back upon.

[Sidenote: The Spanish community.]

The native communal constitution of the Iberians was not perceptibly
to our view different from the Gallic. From the first Spain, like
the Celtic country on either side of the Alps, was broken up into
cantonal districts; the Vaccaei and the Cantabri were hardly in any
essential respect distinguished from the Cenomani of the Transpadana
and the Remi of Belgica. The fact that on the Spanish coins struck in
the earlier epoch of the Roman rule it is predominantly not the towns
that are named, but the cantons,--not Tarraco but the Cassetani, not
Saguntum but the Arsenses--shows, still more clearly than the history
of the wars of the time, that in Spain too there once subsisted larger
cantonal unions. But the conquering Romans did not treat these unions
everywhere in like fashion. The Transalpine cantons remained even
under Roman rule political commonwealths; the Spanish were, like the
Cisalpine, simply geographical conceptions. As the district of the
Cenomani is nothing but a collective expression for the territories of
Brixia, Bergomum, and so forth, so the Asturians consist of twenty-two
politically independent communities, which to all appearance do
not legally concern each other more than the towns of Brixia and
Bergomum.[33] Of these communities the Tarraconensian province numbered
in the Augustan age 293, in the middle of the second century 275. Here,
therefore, the old canton-unions were broken up. This course was hardly
determined by the consideration that the compactness of the Vettones
and the Cantabri seemed more hazardous for the unity of the empire
than that of the Sequani and the Treveri; the distinction doubtless
was chiefly based on the diversity of the time and of the form of
conquest. The region on the Guadalquivir became Roman a century and a
half earlier than the banks of the Loire and the Seine; the time when
the foundation of the Spanish organisation was laid was not so very far
from the epoch at which the Samnite confederacy was dissolved. There
the spirit of the old republic prevailed; in Gaul the freer and gentler
view of Caesar. The smaller and powerless districts, which after the
dissolution of the unions became the pillars of political unity--the
small cantons or clans--became changed in course of time, here as
everywhere into towns. The beginnings of urban development, even
outside of the communities that attained Italian rights, go far back
into the republican, perhaps into the pre-Roman, time; subsequently
the general bestowal of Latin rights by Vespasian must have made this
conversion general or very nearly so.[34] In reality there were among
the 293 Augustan communities of the province of Tarraco 114, and among
the 275 of the second century only twenty-seven, that were not urban
communities.

[Sidenote: Levy.]

Of the position of Spain in the imperial administration little is to be
said. In the levy the Spanish provinces played a prominent part. The
legions doing garrison-duty there were probably from the beginning of
the principate raised chiefly in the country itself; when afterwards on
the one hand the occupying force was diminished, and on the other hand
the levy was more and more restricted to the garrison-district proper,
Baetica, sharing in this respect the lot of Italy, enjoyed the dubious
blessing of being totally excluded from military service. The auxiliary
levy, to which especially the districts that lagged behind as regards
urban development were subjected, was carried out on a great scale in
Lusitania, Callaecia, Asturia, and not less in the whole of northern
and inland Spain; Augustus, whose father had formed even his body-guard
of Spaniards, recruited in none of the territories subject to him
(setting aside Belgica) so largely as in Spain.

For the finances of the state this rich country was beyond doubt one of
the most secure and most productive sources; but we have no detailed
information transmitted to us.

[Sidenote: Trade and commerce.]

The importance of the traffic of these provinces admits of being
inferred in some measure from the careful provision of the government
for the Spanish roads. Between the Pyrenees and Tarraco there have been
found Roman milestones even from the last times of the republic, such
as no other province of the West exhibits. We have already remarked
that Augustus and Tiberius promoted road-making in Spain mainly for
military reasons; but the road formed by Augustus at Carthago Nova can
only have been constructed on account of traffic, and it was traffic
mainly that was served by the imperial highway named after him, and
partly regulated, partly constructed anew by him. This road, continuing
the Italo-Gallic coast-road and crossing the Pyrenees at the Pass of
Puycerda, went thence to Tarraco, then pretty closely followed the
coast by way of Valentia as far as the mouth of the Jucar, but thence
made right across the interior for the valley of the Baetis,[35] then
ran from the arch of Augustus--which marked the boundary of the two
provinces, and with which a new numbering of the miles began--through
the province Baetica to the mouth of the river, and thus connected
Rome with the ocean. This was certainly the only imperial highway in
Spain. Afterwards the government did not do much for the roads of
Spain; the communes, to which these were soon in the main entrusted,
appear, so far as we see, to have provided everywhere--apart from the
tableland of the interior--communications to such an extent as was
required by the state of culture in the province. For, mountainous as
Spain is and not without steppes and waste land, it is yet one of the
most productive countries of the earth, both through the abundance
of the fruits of the soil and through its riches of wine and oil and
metals. To this were early added manufactures, especially in iron wares
and in woollen and linen fabrics. In the valuations under Augustus
no Roman burgess-community, Patavium excepted, had such a number of
rich people to show as the Spanish Gades with its great merchants
spread throughout the world; and in keeping with this was the refined
luxury of manners, the castanet-players who were here at home, and the
Gaditanian songs, which circulated, like those of Alexandria, among
the elegant Romans. The nearness of Italy, and the easy and cheap
intercourse by sea, gave at this epoch, especially to the Spanish south
and east coasts, the opportunity of bringing their rich produce to the
first market of the world, and probably with no country in the world
did Rome pursue so extensive and constant a traffic on a great scale as
with Spain.

That Roman civilisation pervaded Spain earlier and more powerfully
than any other province, is confirmed by evidence on various sides,
especially in respect to religion and to literature.

[Sidenote: Religious rites.]

It is true that in the territory that was still at a later period
Iberian, and remained tolerably free from immigration--in Lusitania,
Callaecia, Asturia--the native gods, with their singular names, ending
mostly in -icus and -ecus, such as Endovellicus, Eaecus, Vagodonnaegus,
and the like, maintained their ground still even under the principate
at the old seats. But not a single votive stone has been found in all
Baetica, which might not quite as well have been set up in Italy. And
the same holds true of Tarraconensis proper, only that isolated traces
are met with on the upper Douro of the worship of Celtic gods.[36] No
other province shows an equally energetic Romanising in matters of
ritual.

[Sidenote: The Spaniards in Latin literature.]

Cicero mentions the Latin poets at Corduba only to censure them; and
the Augustan age of literature was still in the main the work of
Italians, though individual provincials helped in it, and among others
the learned librarian of the emperor, the philologue Hyginus, was born
as a bondsman in Spain. But thenceforward the Spaniards undertook in
it almost the part, if not of leader, at any rate of schoolmaster. The
natives of Corduba, Marcus Porcius Latro, the teacher and the model
of Ovid, and his countryman and friend in youth, Annaeus Seneca,--both
only about a decade younger than Horace, but for a considerable time
employed in their native town as teachers of eloquence, before they
transferred their activity in that character to Rome--were the true
and proper representatives of the school-rhetoric that took the place
of the republican freedom and sauciness of speech. Once, when the
former could not avoid appearing in a real process, he came to a
stand-still in his address, and only recovered his fluency when, to
please the famous man, the court was transferred from the tribunal to
the school-hall. Seneca's son, the minister of Nero and the fashionable
philosopher of the epoch, and his grandson, the poet of the sentimental
opposition to the principate, Lucanus, have an importance, as doubtful
in literature as it is indisputable in history, which may in a certain
sense be put to the account of Spain. In the early times of the empire,
likewise, two other provincials from Baetica, Mela under Claudius,
Columella under Nero, gained a place among the recognised didactic
authors who cultivated style--the former by his short description of
the earth, the latter by a thorough, in part poetical, picture of
agriculture. If, in the time of Domitian, the poet Canius Rufus from
Gades, the philosopher Decianus from Emerita, and the orator Valerius
Licinianus from Bilbilis (Calatayud not far from Saragossa) are
celebrated as literary notabilities by the side of Virgil and Catullus
and by the side of the three stars of Corduba, this is certainly
the fortune also of one likewise a native of Bilbilis, Valerius
Martialis,[37] who himself yields to none among the poets of this epoch
in elegance and plastic power, or yet in venality and emptiness, and we
are justified in taking into account withal the fact of their being
fellow-countrymen; yet the mere possibility of weaving such a garland
of poets shows the importance of the Spanish element in the literature
of the time. But the pearl of Spanish-Latin authorship is Marcus
Fabius Quintilianus (35-95) from Calagurris on the Ebro. His father
had already acted as a teacher of eloquence in Rome; he himself was
brought to Rome by Galba, and occupied, especially under Domitian, a
distinguished position as tutor of the emperor's nephews. His textbook
of rhetoric and, in some degree, of the history of Roman literature,
is one of the most excellent which we possess from Roman antiquity,
pervaded by fine taste and sure judgment, simple in feeling as in
presentation, instructive without weariness, pleasing without effort,
contrasting sharply and designedly with the fashionable literature
that was so rich in phrases and so empty of ideas. It was in no small
degree due to him that the tendency became changed at any rate, if not
improved. Subsequently, amidst the general emptiness the influence of
the Spaniards comes no further into prominence. What is, historically,
of special moment in their Latin authorship is the complete clinging of
these provincials to the literary development of the mother-country.
Cicero, indeed, scoffs at the clumsiness and the provincialisms of the
Spanish votaries of poetry; and even Latro's Latin did not meet the
approval of the equally genteel and correct Roman by birth, Messalla
Corvinus. But after the Augustan age nothing similar is again heard
of. The Gallic rhetors, the great African ecclesiastical authors have,
as Latin writers, retained in some measure a foreign complexion; no
one would recognise the Senecas and Martial by their manner and style
as belonging to one or to another land; in hearty love to his own
literature and in subtle understanding of it never has any Italian
surpassed the teacher of languages from Calagurris.




Footnotes.


[24: There triumphed over Spain--apart from the doubtless political
triumph of Lepidus--in 718 {36.} Cn. Domitius Calvinus (consul in
714 {40.}), in 720 {34.} C. Norbanus Flaccus (consul in 716 {38.}),
between 720 {34.} and 725 {29.} L. Marcius Philippus (consul in 716
{38.}) and Appius Claudius Pulcher (consul in 716 {38.}), in 726
{28.} C. Calvisius Sabinus (consul in 715 {39.}), and in 728 {26.}
Sex. Appuleius (consul in 725 {29.}). The historians mention only the
victory achieved over the Cerretani (near Puycerda in the eastern
Pyrenees) by Calvinus (Dio, xlviii. 42; comp. Velleius, ii. 78, and the
coin of Sabinus with _Osca_, Eckhel, v. 203).]

[25: As Augusta Emerita in Lusitania only became a colony in 729 {25.}
(Dio, liii. 26), and this cannot well have been left out of account in
the list of the provinces in which Augustus founded colonies (_Mon.
Ancyr._ p. 119, comp. p. 222), the separation of Lusitania and Hispania
Ulterior must not have taken place till after the Cantabrian war.]

[26: Callaecia was not merely occupied from the Ulterior province,
but must still in the earlier time of Augustus have belonged to
Lusitania, just as Asturias also must have been at first attached
to this province. Otherwise the narrative in Dio, liv. 5, is not
intelligible; T. Carisius, the builder of Emerita, is evidently the
governor of Lusitania, C. Furnius the governor of the Tarraconensis.
With this agrees the parallel representation in Florus, ii. 33, for the
_Drigaecini_ of the MSS. are certainly the Βριγαικινοί, whom Ptolemy,
ii. 6, 29, adduces among the Asturians. Therefore Agrippa, in his
measurements, comprehends Lusitania with Asturia and Callaecia (Plin.
_H. N._ iv. 22, 118), and Strabo (iii. 4, 20, p. 166) designates the
Callaeci as formerly termed Lusitani. Variations in the demarcation of
the Spanish provinces are mentioned by Strabo, iii. 4, 19, p. 166.]

[27: These were the Fourth Macedonian, the Sixth Victrix, and the
Tenth Gemina. The first of these went, in consequence of the shifting
of quarters of the troops occasioned by the Britannic expedition of
Claudius, to the Rhine. The two others, although in the meanwhile
employed elsewhere on several occasions, were still, at the beginning
of the reign of Vespasian, stationed in their old garrison-quarters,
and with them, instead of the Fourth, the First Adiutrix newly
instituted by Galba (Tacitus, _Hist._ i. 44). All three were on
occasion of the Batavian war sent to the Rhine, and only one returned
from it. For in the year 88 there were still several legions stationed
in Spain (Plin. _Paneg._ 14; comp. _Hermes_, iii. 118), of which one
was certainly the Seventh Gemina already, before the year 79, doing
garrison-duty in Spain (_C. I. L._ ii. 2477); the second must have been
one of those three, and was probably the First Adiutrix, as this soon
after the year 88 takes part in the Danubian wars of Domitian, and is
under Trajan stationed in upper Germany, which suggests the conjecture
that it was one of the several legions brought in 88 from Spain to
upper Germany, and on this occasion came away from Spain. In Lusitania
no legions were stationed.]

[28: The camp of the Cantabrian legion may have been at the place
Pisoraca (Herrera on the Pisuerga, between Palencia and Santander),
which alone is named on inscriptions of Tiberius and of Nero, and that
as starting point of an imperial road (_C. I. L._ ii. 4883, 4884),
just as the Asturian camp was at Leon. Augustobriga also (to the west
of Saragossa) and Complutum (Alcalá de Henares to the north of Madrid)
must have been centres of imperial roads, not on account of their urban
importance, but as places of encampment for troops.]

[29: With this we may connect the fact that the same legion was, though
only temporarily and with a detachment, on active service in Numidia.]

[30: The expression used by Josephus (_contra Ap._ ii. 4), that "the
Iberians were named Romans," can only be referred to the bestowal of
Latin rights by Vespasian, and is an incorrect statement of one who was
a stranger.]

[31: Probably the most recent monument of the native language, that
admits of certainty as to its date, is a coin of Osicerda--which is
modelled after the denarii with the elephant that were struck by Caesar
during the Gallic war--with a Latin and Iberian legend (Zobel, _Estudio
historico de la moneda antigua española_, ii. 11). Among the wholly or
partially local inscriptions of Spain several more recent may be found;
public sanction is not even probable in the case of any of them.]

[32: There was a time when the communities of _peregrini_ had to
solicit from the senate the right to make Latin the language of
business; but for the imperial period this no longer held good. On
the contrary, at this time probably the converse was of frequent
occurrence. For example, the right of coining was allowed on the
footing that the legend had to be Latin. In like manner public
buildings erected by non-burgesses were described in Latin; thus an
inscription of Ilipa in Andalusia (_C. I. L._ ii. 1087) runs: _Urchail
Atitta f(ilius) Chilasurgun portas fornic(es) aedificand(a) curavit
de s(ua) p(ecunia)_. That the wearing of the toga was allowed even to
non-Romans, and was a sign of a loyal disposition, is shown as well by
Strabo's expression as to the Tarraconensis togata, as by Agricola's
behaviour in Britain (Tacitus, _Agric._ 21).]

[33: These remarkable arrangements are clear, especially from the
lists of Spanish places in Pliny, and have been well exhibited by
Detlefsen (_Philologus_, xxxii., 606 f.). The terminology no doubt
varies. As the designations _civitas_, _populus_, _gens_, belong to the
independent community, they pertain _de jure_ to these portions; thus,
_e.g._ there is mention of the _X civitates_ of the Autrigones, of the
_XXII populi_ of the Asturians, of the _gens Zoelarum_ (_C. I. L._ ii.
2633), which is just one of these twenty-two tribes. The remarkable
document which we possess concerning these Zoelae (_C. I. L._ ii. 2633)
informs us that this _gens_ was again divided into _gentilitates_,
which latter are also themselves called _gentes_, as this same document
and other testimonies (_Eph. Ep._ ii. p. 243) prove. _Civis_ is also
found in reference to one of the Cantabrian _populi_ (_Eph. Ep._ ii.
p. 243). But even for the larger canton, which indeed was once the
political unit, there are no other designations than these, strictly
speaking, retrospective and incorrect; _gens_ in particular is employed
for it even in the technical style (_e.g._, _C. I. L._ ii. 4233
_Intercat[iensis] ex gente Vaccaeorum_). That the commonwealth in Spain
was based on those small districts, not on the cantons, is clear as
well from the terminology itself as from the fact that Pliny in iii.
3, 18, places overagainst those 293 places the _civitates contributae
aliis_; moreover it is shown by the official _at census accipiendos
civitatium XXIII Vasconum et Vardulorum_ (_C. I. L._ vi. 1463) compared
with the _censor civitatis Remorum foederatae_ (_C. I. L._ xi. 1855,
comp. 2607).]

[34: As the Latin communal constitution is unsuited for a community
not organised as a town, those Spanish communities, which still
after Vespasian's time lacked urban organisation, must either have
been excluded from the bestowal of Latin rights or have had special
modifications to meet their case. The latter may be regarded as having
more probability. Inscriptions, even of the _gentes_, subsequent to
Vespasian's time, show a Latin form of name, as _C. I. L._ ii. 2633,
and _Eph. Ep._ ii. 322; and if isolated ones from this period should
be found with non-Roman names, it must always be a question whether
this is not simply due to actual negligence. Presumptive proofs of
non-Roman communal organisation, comparatively frequent in the scanty
inscriptions that certainly date before Vespasian (_C. I. L._ ii. 172,
1953, 2633, 5048), have not been met with by me in inscriptions that
are certainly subsequent to Vespasian.]

[35: The direction of the _via Augusta_ is specified by Strabo (iii.
4, 9, p. 160); to it belong all the milestones which have that name,
as well those from the region of Lerida (_C. I. L._ ii. 4920-4928) as
those found between Tarragona and Valencia (_ibid._ 4949-4954), and
lastly, the numerous ones _ab Iano Augusto, qui est ad Baetem_, or _ab
arcu, unde incipit Baetica, ad oceanum_.]

[36: At Clunia there was found a dedication to the Mothers (_C. I. L._
ii. 2776)--the only Spanish example of this worship so widely diffused
and so long continuing among the western Celts--at Uxama, one set up
to the _Lugoves_ (_ib._ 2818), a deity that recurs among the Celts of
Aventicum.]

[37: The choliambics (i. 61) run thus:--

  _Verona docti syllabas amat vatis,
  Marone felix Mantua est,
  Censetur Apona Livio suo tellus
  Stellaque nec Flacco minus,
  Apollodoro plaudit imbrifer Nilus,
  Nasone Peligni sonant,
  Duosque Senecas unicumque Lucanum
  Facunda loquitur Corduba,
  Gaudent iocosae Canio suo Gades,
  Emerita Deciano meo:
  Te, Liciniane, gloriabitur nostra,
  Nec me tacebit Bilbilis._]




CHAPTER III.

THE GALLIC PROVINCES.


Like Spain, southern Gaul had already in the time of the republic
become a part of the Roman empire, yet neither so early nor so
completely as the former country. The two Spanish provinces were
instituted in the age of Hannibal, the province Narbo in that of the
Gracchi; and, while in the former case Rome took to itself the whole
Peninsula, in the latter it was not merely content, down to the last
age of the republic, with the possession of the coast, but even of
this it directly took only the smaller and the more remote half. The
republic was not wrong in designating what it so possessed as the
town-domain of Narbo (Narbonne); the greater part of the coast, nearly
from Montpellier to Nice, belonged to the city of Massilia. This Greek
community was more a state than a city, and through its powerful
position the equal alliance subsisting from of old with Rome obtained a
real significance, such as had no parallel in any second allied city.
It is true, nevertheless, that the Romans were for these neighbouring
Greeks, still more than for the more remote Greeks of the East, shield
as well as sword. The Massaliots had probably the lower Rhone as far
up as Avignon in their possession; but the Ligurian and the Celtic
cantons of the interior were by no means subject to them, and the
Roman standing camp at Aquae Sextiae (Aix) a day's march to the north
of Massilia, was, quite in the true and proper sense, instituted for
the permanent protection of the wealthy Greek mercantile city. It was
one of the most momentous consequences of the Roman civil war, that
along with the legitimate republic its most faithful ally, the city
of Massilia, was politically annihilated, was converted from a state
sharing rule into a community which continued free of the empire and
Greek, but preserved its independence and its Hellenism in the modest
proportions of a provincial middle-sized town. In a political aspect
there is nothing more to be said of Massilia after its capture in the
civil war; the town was thenceforth for Gaul only what Neapolis was
for Italy--the centre of Greek culture and Greek learning. Inasmuch as
the greater part of the later province of Narbo only at that time came
under direct Roman administration, it is to this epoch in particular
that the erection of it in a certain measure belongs.

[Sidenote: Last conflicts in the three Gauls.]

How the rest of Gaul came into the power of Rome has been already
narrated (iv. 240 ff.) {iv. 230 f.} Before Caesar's Gallic war the
rule of the Romans extended approximately as far as Toulouse, Vienne,
and Geneva; after it, as far as the Rhine throughout its course, and
the coasts of the Atlantic Ocean on the north as on the west. This
subjugation, it is true, was probably not complete, in the north-west
perhaps not much less superficial than that of Britain (iv. 296) {iv.
283.}. Yet we are informed of supplemental wars, in the main, merely
as regards the districts of Iberian nationality. To the Iberians
belonged not merely the southern but also the northern slope of the
Pyrenees, with the country lying in front, Bearn, Gascony, and western
Languedoc[38]; and it has already been mentioned (p. 63) that when
north-western Spain was sustaining the last conflicts with the Romans,
there was also on the north side of the Pyrenees, and beyond doubt in
connection therewith, serious fighting, at first on the part of Agrippa
in the year 716 {38.}, then on the part of Marcus Valerius Messalla,
the well-known patron of the Roman poets, who in the year 726 or 727
{28 or 27.}, and thus nearly at the same time with the Cantabrian
war, vanquished the Aquitanians in a pitched battle in the old Roman
territory not far from Narbonne. In respect of the Celts nothing
further is mentioned than that, shortly before the battle of Actium,
the Morini in Picardy were overthrown; and, although during the twenty
years of almost uninterrupted civil war our reporters may have lost
sight of the comparatively insignificant affairs of Gaul, the silence
of the list of triumphs--here complete--shows at any rate that no
further military undertakings of importance took place in the land of
the Celts during this period.

[Sidenote: Insurrections.]

[Sidenote: Under Tiberius.]

Subsequently, during the long reign of Augustus, and amidst all the
crises--some of them very hazardous--of the Germanic wars, the Gallic
provinces remained obedient. No doubt the Roman government, as well
as the Germanic patriot party, as we have seen, constantly had it in
view that a decisive success of the Germans and their advance into
Gaul would be followed by a rising of the Gauls against Rome; the
foreign rule cannot therefore at that time have stood by any means
secure. Matters came to a real insurrection in the year 21 under
Tiberius. There was formed among the Celtic nobility a widely-ramified
conspiracy to overthrow the Roman government. It broke out prematurely
in the far from important cantons of the Turones and the Andecavi on
the lower Loire, and not merely the small garrison of Lyons, but also
a part of the army of the Rhine at once took the field against the
insurgents. Nevertheless the most noted districts joined; the Treveri,
under the guidance of Julius Florus, threw themselves in masses into
the Ardennes; in the immediate neighbourhood of Lyons the Haedui and
Sequani rose under the leadership of Julius Sacrovir. The compact
legions, it is true, gained the mastery over the rebels without much
trouble; but the rising, in which the Germans in no way took part,
shows at any rate the hatred towards the foreign rulers, which still at
that time prevailed in the land and particularly among the nobility--a
hatred which was certainly strengthened, but was not at first produced,
by the pressure of taxes and the financial distress that are designated
as causes of the insurrection.

[Sidenote: Gradual pacification of Gaul.]

It was a greater feat of Roman policy than that which enabled it to
become master of Gaul, that it knew how to retain the mastery, and that
Vercingetorix found no successor, although, as we see, there were not
entirely wanting men who would gladly have walked in the same path.
This result was attained by a shrewd combination of terrifying and of
winning--we may add, of sharing. The strength and the proximity of
the Rhine army was beyond question the first and the most effective
means of preserving the Gauls in the fear of their master. If this
army was maintained throughout the century at the same level, as will
be set forth in the following section, it was so probably quite as
much on account of their own subjects, as on account of neighbours
who afterwards were by no means specially formidable. That even the
temporary withdrawal of these troops imperilled the continuance of the
Roman rule, not because the Germans might then cross the Rhine, but
because the Gauls might renounce allegiance to the Romans, is shown
by the rising after Nero's death, in spite of all its weakness; after
the troops had marched off to Italy to make their general emperor, an
independent Gallic empire was proclaimed in Treves, and those soldiers
who were left were made bound to allegiance towards it. But although
this foreign rule, like every such rule, rested primarily and mainly
on superior power--on the ascendancy of compact and trained troops
over the multitude--it by no means rested on this exclusively. The art
of partition was here successfully applied. Gaul did not belong to
the Celts alone; not merely were the Iberians strongly represented in
the south, but Germanic tribes were settled in considerable numbers
on the Rhine, and were of importance still more by their conspicuous
aptitude for war, than by their number. Skilfully the government knew
how to foster and to turn to useful account the antagonism between
the Celts and the Germans on the left of the Rhine. But the policy of
amalgamation and of reconciliation operated still more powerfully.

[Sidenote: Policy of amalgamation.]

What measures were taken with this view we shall explain in the sequel.
Seeing that the cantonal constitution was spared, and even a sort
of national representation was conceded, and the measures directed
against the national priesthood were taken gradually, while the Latin
language was from the beginning obligatory, and with that national
representation there was associated the new worship of the emperor;
seeing that, on the whole, the Romanising was not undertaken in an
abrupt way, but was cautiously and patiently pursued, the Roman foreign
rule in the Celtic land ceased to be such, because the Celts themselves
became, and desired to be, Romans. The extent to which the work had
already advanced after the expiry of the first century of the Roman
rule in Gaul is shown by the just mentioned occurrences after Nero's
death, which, in their course as a whole, belong partly to the history
of the Roman commonwealth, partly to its relations with the Germans,
but must also be mentioned, at least by way of slight glance, in this
connection. The overthrow of the Julio-Claudian dynasty emanated from
a Celtic noble and began with a Celtic insurrection; but this was not
a revolt against the foreign rule like that of Vercingetorix or even
of Sacrovir; its aim was not the setting aside, but the transforming,
of the Roman government. The fact that its leader reckoned descent
from a bastard of Caesar one of the patents of nobility of his house,
clearly expresses the half-national, half-Roman character of this
movement. Some months later certainly, after the revolted Roman troops
of Germanic descent and the free Germans had for the moment overpowered
the Roman army, some Celtic tribes proclaimed the independence of their
nation; but this attempt proved a sad failure, not through the eventual
interference of the government, but from the very opposition of the
great majority of the Celtic cantons themselves, which could not, and
did not, desire to fall away from Rome.

[Sidenote: Roman rule no longer felt as foreign.]

The Roman names of the leading nobles, the Latin legend on the coins of
the insurrection, the travesty throughout of Roman arrangements, show
most clearly as that the deliverance of the Celtic nation from the yoke
of the foreigners in the year 70 was no longer possible, just because
there was such a nation no longer; and the Roman rule might be felt,
according to circumstances, as a yoke, but no longer as a foreign rule.
Had such an opportunity been offered to the Celts at the time of the
battle of Philippi, or even under Tiberius, the insurrection would have
run its course, not perhaps to another issue, but in streams of blood;
now it ran off into the sand. When, some decades after these severe
crises, the Rhine army was considerably reduced, these crises had given
the proof that the great majority of the Gauls were no longer thinking
of separation from the Italians, and the four generations that had
followed since the conquest had done their work. Subsequent occurrences
here were crises within the Roman world. When that world threatened to
fall asunder, the West as well as the East separated itself for some
time from the centre of the empire; but the separate state of Postumus
was the work of necessity, not of choice, and the separation was merely
_de facto_; the emperors who bore sway over Gaul, Britain, and Spain,
laid claim to the dominion of the whole empire quite as much as their
Italian rival emperors. Certainly traces enough remained of the old
Celtic habits and also of the old Celtic unruliness. As bishop Hilary
of Poitiers, himself a Gaul, complains of the overbearing character
of his countrymen, so the Gauls are, even in the biographies of the
later Caesars, designated as stubborn and ungovernable and inclined to
insubordination, so that in dealing with them tenacity and sternness
of government appear specially requisite. But a separation from the
Roman empire, or even a renouncing of the Roman nationality, so far as
there was any such at the time, was in these later centuries nowhere
less thought of than in Gaul; on the contrary, the development of
the Romano-Gallic culture, of which Caesar and Augustus had laid the
foundation, fills the later Roman period just as it fills the Middle
Ages and more recent times.

[Sidenote: Organisation of the three Gauls.]

The regulation of Gaul was the work of Augustus. In the adjustment of
imperial affairs after the close of the civil wars the whole of Gaul,
as it had been entrusted to Caesar or had been further acquired by
him, came--with the exception merely of the region on the Roman side
of the Alps, which had meanwhile been joined to Italy--under imperial
administration. Immediately afterwards Augustus resorted to Gaul, and
in the year 727 {27.} completed in the capital Lugudunum the census of
the Gallic province, whereby the portions of the country brought to the
empire by Caesar first obtained an organised land-register, and the
payment of tribute was regulated for them. He did not stay long at that
time, for Spanish affairs demanded his presence. But the carrying out
of the new arrangement encountered great difficulties and, in various
cases, resistance. It was not mere military affairs that gave occasion
to Agrippa's stay in Gaul in the year 735 {19.}, and that of the
emperor himself during the years 738-741 {16-13.}; and the governors
or commanders on the Rhine belonging to the imperial house, Tiberius,
stepson of Augustus, in 738 {16.}, his brother Drusus, 742-745 {12-9.},
Tiberius again, 745-747 {9-7.}, 757-759 {A.D. 3-5.}, 763-765 {A.D.
9-11.}, his son Germanicus, 766-769 {A.D. 12-15.}, had all of them the
task of carrying on the organisation of Gaul. The work of peace was
certainly no less difficult and no less important than the passages of
arms on the Rhine; we perceive this in the fact that the emperor took
in hand personally the laying of the foundation, and entrusted the
carrying it out to the men in the empire who were most closely related
to him and highest in station. It was only in those years that the
arrangements, established by Caesar amidst the pressure of the civil
wars, received the shape which they thereafter in the main retained.
They extended over the old as over the new province; but Augustus
gave up the old Roman territory, along with that of Massilia, from the
Mediterranean as far as the Cevennes, as early as the year 732, {22.}
to the senatorial government, and retained only New Gaul in his own
administration. This territory, still in itself very extensive, was
then broken up into three administrative districts, over each of which
was placed an independent imperial governor. This division attached
itself to the threefold partition of the Celtic country--already
found in existence by the dictator Caesar, and based on national
distinctions--into Aquitania inhabited by Iberians, the purely Celtic
Gaul, and the Celto-Germanic territory of the Belgae; doubtless too it
was intended in this administrative partition to lay some measure of
stress on these distinctions, which tended to favour the progress of
the Roman rule. This, however, was only approximately carried out, and
could not be practically realised otherwise. The purely Celtic region
between the Garonne and Loire was attached to the too small Iberian
Aquitania; the whole left bank of the Rhine, from the Lake of Geneva to
the Moselle, was joined with Belgica, although most of these cantons
were Celtic; in general the Celtic stock so preponderated that the
united provinces could be called "the three Gauls." Of the formation
of the two so-called "Germanies,"--nominally the compensation for the
loss or abeyance of a really Germanic province, in reality the military
frontier of Gaul--we shall speak in the following section.

[Sidenote: Law and justice.]

Matters of law and justice were arranged in an altogether different way
for the old province of Gaul and for the three new ones; the former was
Latinised at once and completely, in the latter the subsisting national
state of things was in the first instance merely regulated. This
contrast of administration, which reaches far deeper than the formal
diversity of the senatorial and imperial administration, was doubtless
the primary and main occasion of the diversity, still continuing at the
present day in its effects, between the regions of the Langue d'oc and
Provence and those of the Langue d'oui.

[Sidenote: Romanising of the southern province.]

The Romanising of the south of Gaul had not in the republican period
advanced so far as that of the south of Spain. The eighty years lying
between the two conquests were not to be rapidly overtaken; the
military camps in Spain were far stronger and more permanent than the
Gallic; the towns of Latin type were more numerous in the former than
in the latter. Here doubtless in the time of the Gracchi and under
their influence Narbo had been founded, the first burgess-colony
proper beyond the sea; but it remained isolated, and, though a rival
of Massilia in commercial intercourse, to all appearance by no means
equal to it in importance. But when Caesar began to guide the destinies
of Rome, here above all--in this land of his choice and of his
star--neglect was retrieved. The colony of Narbo was strengthened, and
was under Tiberius the most populous city in all Gaul. Thereupon four
new burgess-communities were laid out, chiefly in the domain ceded by
Massilia (iv. 572) {iv. 542.}, the most important among them being,
from a military point of view, Forum Julii (Fréjus), the chief station
of the new imperial fleet, and for trade Arelate (Arles), at the mouth
of the Rhone, which soon--when Lyons rose and trade was tending more
and more towards the Rhone--outstripping Narbo, became the true heir
of Massilia and the great emporium of Gallo-Italic commerce. What
further he himself did, and what his son did in the same sense, cannot
be definitely distinguished, and historically little depends on the
distinction; here, if anywhere, Augustus was nothing but the executor
of Caesar's testament. Everywhere the Celtic cantonal constitution
gave way before the Italian community. The canton of the Volcae
in the coast region, formerly subject to the Massaliots, received
through Caesar a Latin municipal constitution on such a footing,
that the "praetors" of the Volcae presided over the whole district
embracing twenty-four townships,[39] until not long thereafter the
old arrangement disappeared even in name, and instead of the canton
of the Volcae came the Latin town of Nemausus (Nîmes). In a similar
way the most considerable of all the cantons of this province, that
of the Allobroges, who had possession of the country northward of the
Isére and eastward of the middle Rhone, from Valence and Lyons to
the mountains of Savoy and to the lake of Geneva, obtained, probably
already through Caesar, a like urban organisation and Italian rights,
till at length the emperor Gaius granted the Roman franchise to the
town of Vienna. So in the province as a whole the larger centres were
organised by Caesar, or in the first age of the empire, on the basis of
Latin rights, such as Ruscino (Roussillon), Avennio (Avignon), Aquae
Sextiae (Aix), Apta (Apt). Already at the close of the Augustan age the
country along both banks of the lower Rhone was completely Romanised
in language and manners; the cantonal constitution throughout the
province was probably set aside with the exception of slight remnants.
The burgesses of the communities on whom the imperial franchise was
conferred, and no less the burgesses in those of Latin rights, who
had acquired for themselves and for their descendants the imperial
franchise by entering the imperial army or by the holding of offices in
their native towns, stood in law on a footing of complete equality with
the Italians, and, like them, attained to offices and honours in the
imperial service.

[Sidenote: Lugudunum.]

In the three Gauls, on the other hand, there were no towns of Roman and
Latin rights, or rather there was only one such town[40] there, which
on that account belonged to none of the three provinces or belonged to
all--the town of Lugudunum (Lyons). On the extreme southern verge of
imperial Gaul, immediately on the border of the municipally-organised
province, at the confluence of the Rhone and the Saone, on a site
equally well chosen from a military and from a commercial point of
view, this settlement had arisen in the year 711 {43.} during the
civil wars, primarily in consequence of the expulsion of a number
of Italians settled in Vienna.[41] Not having originated out of a
Celtic canton,[42] and hence always with a territory of narrow limits,
but from the outset composed of Italians and in possession of the
full Roman franchise, it stood forth unique in its kind among the
communities of the three Gauls--as respects its legal relations, in
some measure resembling Washington in the North American Federation.
This unique town of the three Gauls was at the same time the Gallic
capital. The three provinces had not any common chief authority,
and, of high imperial officials, only the governor of the middle or
Lugudunensian province had his seat there; but when emperors or princes
stayed in Gaul they as a rule resided in Lyons. Lyons was, alongside of
Carthage, the only city of the Latin half of the empire which obtained
a standing garrison after the model of that of the capital.[43] The
only mint for imperial money, which we can point to with certainty in
the West for the earlier period of the empire, is that of Lyons. Here
was the headquarters of the transit-dues which embraced all Gaul; and
to this as a centre the Gallic network of roads converged. But not
merely had all government institutions, which were common to Gaul,
their native seat in Lyons; this Roman town became also, as we shall
see further on, the seat of the Celtic diet of the three provinces,
and of all the political and religious institutions associated with
it--of its temples and its yearly festivals. Thus Lugudunum rapidly
rose into prosperity, helped onward by the rich endowment combined
with its metropolitan position and by a site uncommonly favourable for
commerce. An author of the time of Tiberius describes it as the second
in Gaul after Narbo; subsequently it takes a place there by the side
of, or before, its sister on the Rhone, Arelate. On occasion of the
fire, which in the year 64 laid a great part of Rome in ashes, the
Lugudunenses sent to those burnt out a subsidy of 4,000,000 sesterces
(£43,500), and when the same fate befel their own town next year in a
still harder way, the whole empire paid its contribution to them, and
the emperor sent a like sum from his privy purse. The town rose out
of its ruins with more splendour than before; and it has for almost
two thousand years remained amidst all vicissitudes a great city up to
the present day. In the later period of the empire, no doubt, it fell
behind Treves. The town of the Treveri, named Augusta probably from
the first emperor, soon gained the first place in the Belgic province;
if still in the time of Tiberius Durocortorum of the Remi (Rheims)
is named the most populous place of the province and the seat of the
governors, an author from the time of Claudius already assigns the
primacy there to the chief place of the Treveri. But Treves became the
capital of Gaul[44]--we may even say of the West--only through the
remodelling of the imperial administration under Diocletian. After
Gaul, Britain, and Spain were placed under one supreme administration,
the latter had its seat in Treves; and thenceforth Treves was also,
when the emperors stayed in Gaul, their regular residence, and, as a
Greek of the fifth century says, the greatest city beyond the Alps.
But the epoch when this Rome of the north received its walls and its
hot baths, which might well be named by the side of the city walls of
the Roman kings and of the baths of the imperial capital, lies beyond
the limits of our narrative. Through the first three centuries of the
empire Lyons remained the Roman centre of the Celtic land, and that not
merely because it occupied the first place in population and wealth,
but because it was, like no other in the Gallic north and but few in
the south, a town founded from Italy, and Roman not merely as regards
rights, but as regards its origin and its character.

[Sidenote: The cantonal organisation of the three Gauls.]

As the Italic town was the basis for the organisation of the south
province, so the canton was for the northern, and predominantly
indeed the canton of the Celtic formerly political, now communal,
organisation. The importance of the distinction between town and canton
is not primarily dependent on its intrinsic nature; even if it had been
one of mere legal form, it would have separated the nationalities,
and would have awakened and whetted, on the one hand, the feeling
of their belonging to Rome, on the other hand, that of their being
foreign to it. The practical diversity of the two organisations
may not be estimated as of much account for this period, since the
elements of the communal organisation--the officials, the council, the
burgess-assembly--were the same in the one case as in the other, and
distinctions going deeper, such as perhaps formally subsisted, would
hardly be tolerated long by Roman supremacy. Hence the transition
from the cantonal organisation to the urban was frequently effected
of itself and without hindrance--we may even say, with a certain
necessity, in the course of development. In consequence of this the
qualitative distinctions of the two legal forms come into little
prominence in our traditional accounts. Nevertheless, the contrast was
certainly not a mere nominal one, but as regards the competence of the
different authorities, judicature, taxation, levy, there subsisted
diversities which were of importance, or at any rate seemed important,
for administration, partly of themselves, partly in consequence of
custom.

[Sidenote: Character of the cantons.]

The quantitative distinction is definitely recognisable. The cantons,
at least as they present themselves among the Celts and the Germans,
are throughout tribes more than townships; this very essential element
was peculiar to all Celtic territories, and was often covered over
rather than obliterated even by the subsequent Romanising. Mediolanum
and Brixia were indebted for their wide bounds and their lasting power
essentially to the fact that they were, properly speaking, nothing
but the cantons of the Insubres and the Cenomani. The facts, that the
territory of the town of Vienna embraced Dauphiné and Western Savoy,
and that the equally old and almost equally considerable townships
of Cularo (Grenoble) and Genava (Geneva) were down to late imperial
times in point of law villages of the colony of Vienna, are likewise
to be explained from the circumstance that this was the later name
of the tribe of the Allobroges. In most of the Celtic cantons one
township so thoroughly preponderates that it is one and the same thing
whether we name the Remi or Durocortorum, the Bituriges or Burdigala;
but the converse also occurs, as _e.g._ among the Vocontii Vasio
(Vaison) and Lucus, among the Carnutes Autricum (Chartres) and Cenabum
(Orleans) balance each other; and it is more than questionable whether
the privileges which, according to Italic and Greek organisation,
attached as a matter of course to the ring-wall in contrast to the
open field, stood _de jure_, or even merely _de facto_, on a similar
footing among the Celts. The counterpart to this canton in the
Graeco-Italic system was much less the town than the tribe; we have to
liken the Carnutes to the Boeotians, Autricum and Cenabum to Tanagra
and Thespiae. The specialty of the position of the Celts under the
Roman rule as compared with other nations--the Iberians, for example,
and the Hellenes--turns on this, that these larger unions continued
to subsist as communities in the former case, while in the latter
those constituent elements, of which they were composed, formed the
communities. Older diversities of national development belonging to the
pre-Roman epoch may have co-operated in the matter; it may possibly
have been more easily practicable to take from the Boeotians the
joint diet of their towns than to break up the Helvetii into three
or four districts; political unions maintain their ground even after
subjugation under a central power, in cases where their dissolution
would bring about disorganisation. Yet what was done in Gaul by
Augustus or, if it be preferred, by Caesar, was brought about not by
the force of circumstances, but chiefly by the free resolution of the
government, as it alone was in keeping with the forbearance otherwise
exercised towards the Celts. For there was, in fact, in the pre-Roman
time and even at the time of Caesar's conquest a far greater number of
cantons than we find later; in particular, it is remarkable that the
numerous smaller cantons attached by clientship to a larger one did
not in the imperial period become independent, but disappeared.[45] If
subsequently the Celtic land appears divided into a moderate number
of considerable, and some of them even very large, canton-districts,
within which dependent cantons nowhere make their appearance, this
arrangement had the way no doubt paved for it by the pre-Roman system
of clientship, but was completely carried out only under the Roman
reorganisation.

[Sidenote: Influence of the cantonal constitution.]

This continued subsistence and this enlargement of the cantonal
constitution must have been above all influential in determining
the further political development of Gaul. While the Tarraconensian
province was split up into two hundred and ninety-three independent
communities (p. 72), the three Gauls numbered together, as we
shall see, not more than sixty-four of them. Their unity and their
recollections remained unbroken; the zealous adoration, which
throughout the imperial period was paid among the Volcae to the
fountain-god Nemausus, shows how even here, in the south of the land
and in a canton transformed into a town, there was still a vivid sense
of the traditional tie that bound them together. Communities with wide
bounds, firmly knit in this way by inward ties, were a power. Such as
Caesar found the Gallic communities, with the mass of the people held
in entire political as well as economic dependence, and an overpowerful
nobility, they substantially remained under Roman rule; exactly as in
pre-Roman times the great nobles, with their train of dependents and
bondsmen to be counted by thousands, played the part of masters each in
his own home, so Tacitus describes the state of things in Tiberius's
time among the Treveri. The Roman government gave to the community
comprehensive rights, even a certain military power, so that they
under certain circumstances were entitled to erect fortresses and keep
them garrisoned, as was the case among the Helvetii; the magistrates
could call out the militia, and had in that case the rights and the
rank of officers. This prerogative was not the same in the hands of
the president of a small town of Andalusia, and of the president of a
district on the Loire or the Moselle of the size of a small province.
The large-hearted policy of Caesar the elder, to whom the outlines of
this system must necessarily be traced back, here presents itself in
all its grand extent.

[Sidenote: Diet of the three Gauls.]

But the government did not confine itself to leaving with the Celts
their cantonal organisation; it left, or rather gave, to them also a
national constitution, so far as such a constitution was compatible
with Roman supremacy. As on the Hellenic nation, so Augustus conferred
on the Gallic an organised collective representation, such as they in
the epoch of freedom and of disorganisation had striven after, but had
never attained. Under the hill crowned by the capital of Gaul, where
the Saone mingles its waters with those of the Rhone, on the 1st August
of the year 742 {12.}, the imperial prince Drusus, as representative
of the government in Gaul, consecrated to Roma and to the Genius of
the ruler the altar, at which thenceforth every year on this day the
festival of these gods was to be celebrated by the joint action of the
Gauls. The representatives of all the cantons chose from their midst
year by year the "priest of the three Gauls," who on the emperor's day
presented sacrifice to the emperor and conducted the festal games in
connection with it. This representative council had not only a power of
administering its own property by means of officials, who belonged to
the chief circles of the provincial nobility, but also a certain share
in the general affairs of the country. Of its immediate interference
in politics there is, it is true, no other trace than that, in the
serious crisis of the year 70, the diet of the three Gauls dissuaded
the Treveri from rising against Rome; but it had and used the right of
bringing complaints as to the imperial and domestic officials acting
in Gaul; and it co-operated, moreover, if not in the imposition, at
any rate in the apportionment of the taxes,[46] especially seeing
that these were laid on not according to the several provinces but
for Gaul in general. The imperial government certainly called into
existence similar institutions in all the provinces, and not merely
introduced in each of them the centralisation of sacred rites, but
also--what the republic had not done--conferred on each one an organ
for bringing requests and complaints before the government. Yet Gaul
had in this respect, as compared with all other parts of the empire,
at least a privilege _de facto_, as indeed this institution is here
alone found fully developed.[47] For one thing, the united diet of
the three provinces necessarily had a more independent position in
presence of the legates and procurators of each of them, than, for
example, the diet of Thessalonica in presence of the governor of
Macedonia. But then, in the case of institutions of this nature, far
less depends on the measure of the rights conferred than on the weight
of the bodies therein represented; and the strength of the individual
Gallic communities was transferred to the diet of Lyons, just as the
weakness of the individual Hellenic communities to that of Argos. In
the development of Gaul under the emperors the diet of Lyons to all
appearance promoted essentially that general Gallic homogeneity, which
went there hand in hand with the Latinising.

[Sidenote: Composition of the diet.]

The composition of the diet, which is known to us with tolerable
accuracy,[48] shows in what way the question of nationalities was
treated by the government. Of the sixty, afterwards sixty-four, cantons
represented at the diet, only four fall to the Iberian inhabitants of
Aquitania--although this region between the Garonne and the Pyrenees
was divided among a very much larger number of, as a rule, small
tribes--whether it was that the others were excluded altogether from
representation, or that those four represented cantons were the
meeting-places of canton-unions.[49] Afterwards, probably in the time
of Trajan, the Iberian district was separated from the Lyons diet, and
had an independent representation given to it.[50] On the other hand,
the Celtic cantons in that organisation, with which we have formerly
become acquainted, were substantially all represented at the diet, and
likewise the half or wholly Germanic,[51] so far as at the time of the
institution of the altar they belonged to the empire. That there was
no place in this cantonal representation for the capital of Gaul was
a matter of course. Moreover, the Ubii do not appear at the diet of
Lyons, but sacrifice at their own altar of Augustus: this was, as we
saw (p. 35), a remnant, which was allowed to subsist, of the intended
province of Germany.

[Sidenote: Restricted Roman franchise of the Gauls admitted to
citizenship.]

While the Celtic nation in imperial Gaul was thus consolidated in
itself, it was also guaranteed in some measure against Roman influences
by the course pursued as regards the conferring of the imperial
franchise for this domain. The capital of Gaul no doubt was, and
continued to be, a Roman burgess-colony, and this was essentially
bound up with the peculiar position which it occupied and was intended
to occupy in contradistinction to the rest of Gaul. But while the south
province was covered with colonies and organised throughout according
to Italian municipal law, Augustus did not institute in the three
Gauls a single burgess-colony; and probably even that municipal _ius_,
which under the name of "Latin" formed an intervening stage between
burgesses and non-burgesses, and afforded to its more notable holders
burgess-rights in law for their persons and their descendants, was for
a considerable time withheld from Gaul. The personal bestowal of the
franchise, partly, according to general enactments, on the soldiers
sometimes at their entering on, sometimes at their leaving, service,
partly out of special favour on individuals, might certainly fall to
the lot also of the Gaul; Augustus did not go so far as the republic
went in prohibiting the Helvetian, for example, once for all from
acquiring the Roman franchise, nor could he do so, after Caesar had
in many cases given the franchise in this way to native Gauls. But he
took at least from burgesses proceeding from the three Gauls--with
the exception always of the Lugudunenses--the right of candidature
for magistracies, and therewith at the same time excluded them from
the imperial senate. Whether this enactment was made primarily in the
interest of Rome or primarily in that of the Gauls, we cannot tell;
certainly Augustus wished to secure both points--to check on the one
hand the intrusion of the alien element into the Roman system, and
thereby to purify and elevate the latter, and on the other hand to
guarantee the continued subsistence of the Gallic idiosyncrasy after a
fashion, which precisely by its judicious reserve promoted the ultimate
blending with the Roman character more surely than an abrupt obtrusion
of foreign institutions would have done.

[Sidenote: Admission of individual communities to Latin rights.]

[Sidenote: Setting aside of the restricted franchise.]

The emperor Claudius, himself born in Lyons and, as those who scoffed
at him said, a true Gaul, set aside in great part these restrictions.
The first town in Gaul which certainly received Italian rights was
that of the Ubii, where the altar of Roman Germany was constructed;
there Agrippina, the subsequent wife of Claudius, was born in the camp
of her father Germanicus, and she procured in the year 50 colonial
rights, probably Latin, for her native place, the modern Cologne.
Perhaps at the same time, perhaps even earlier, the same privilege
was procured for the town of the Treveri Augusta, the modern Treves.
Some other Gallic cantons, moreover, were in this way brought nearer
to the Roman type, such as that of the Helvetii by Vespasian, and also
that of the Sequani (Besançon); but Latin rights do not seem to have
met with great extension in these regions. Still less in the time
of the earlier emperors was the full right of citizenship conferred
in imperial Gaul on whole communities. But Claudius probably made a
beginning by cancelling the legal restriction which excluded the Gauls
that had attained to personal citizenship of the empire from the career
of imperial officials; this barrier was set aside in the first instance
for the oldest allies of Rome, the Haedui, and soon perhaps generally.
By this step equality of position was essentially obtained. For,
according to the circumstances of this epoch, the imperial citizenship
had hardly any special practical value for the circles that were by
their position in life excluded from an official career, and was of
easy attainment for wealthy _peregrini_ of good descent, who wished to
enter on this career and on that account had need of it; but it was
doubtless a slight keenly felt, when the official career remained in
law closed against the Roman burgess from Gaul and his descendants.

[Sidenote: Celtic and Latin language.]

While in the organising of administration the national character of
the Celts was respected so far as was at all compatible with the
unity of the empire, this was not the case as regards language. Even
if it had been practicable to allow the communities to conduct their
administration in a language, of which the controlling imperial
officials could only in exceptional cases be masters, it undoubtedly
was not the design of the Roman government to erect this barrier
between the rulers and the ruled. Accordingly, among the coins struck
in Gaul under Roman rule, and monuments erected on behalf of any
community, there has been found no demonstrably Celtic inscription.
The use of the language of the country otherwise was not hindered; we
find as well in the southern province as in the northern monuments
with Celtic inscription, written in the former case always with the
Greek,[52] in the latter always with the Latin[53] alphabet; and
probably at least several of the former, certainly all of the latter,
belong to the epoch of Roman rule. The fact that in Gaul, outside
of the towns having Italian rights and the Roman camps, inscribed
monuments occur at all in but small number, is in all probability
to be accounted for mainly by supposing that the language of the
country, treated as dialect, appeared just as unsuited for such
employment as the unfamiliar imperial language, and hence the erection
of memorial-stones did not become generally adopted here as in the
Latinised regions; the Latin probably may at that time in the greater
part of Gaul have had nearly the same position, as it had subsequently
in the earlier Middle ages overagainst the popular language of the
time. The vigorous survival of the national language is most distinctly
shown by the reproduction of the Gallic proper names in Latin, not
seldom with the retention of non-Latin forms of sound. The facts that
spellings like _Lousonna_ and _Boudicca_ with the non-Latin diphthong
_ou_ found their way even into Latin literature, that for the aspirated
dental, the English _th_, there was even employed in Roman writing
a special sign (Ð), that Epadatextorigus is written alongside of
Epasnactus, and Ðirona alongside of Sirona--make it almost a certainty
that the Celtic language, whether in the Roman territory or beyond
it, had in or before this epoch undergone a certain regulation in the
matter of writing, and could already at that time be written as it is
written in the present day.

[Sidenote: Evidences of continued use of Celtic.]

Nor are evidences wanting of its continued use in Gaul. When the names
of towns Augustodunum (Autun), Augustonemētum (Clermont), Augustobona
(Troyes), and various similar ones arose, Celtic was necessarily
still spoken even in middle Gaul. Arrian, under Hadrian, gives in his
disquisition on cavalry, the Celtic expression for particular manœuvres
borrowed from the Celts. Irenaeus, a Greek by birth, who towards the
end of the second century acted as a clergyman in Lyons, excuses the
defects of his style by saying that he lives in the country of the
Celts, and is compelled constantly to speak in a barbarian language.
In a juristic treatise from the beginning of the third century, in
contrast to the rule of law that testamentary directions in general are
to be drawn up in Latin or Greek, any other language, _e.g._, Punic or
Gallic, is allowed for _fidei commissa_. The emperor Alexander had his
end announced to him by a Gallic fortune-teller in the Gallic language.
Further, the church father Jerome, who had been himself in Ancyra as
well as in Treves, assures us that the Galatians of Asia Minor and the
Treveri of his time spoke nearly the same language, and compares the
corrupt Gallic of the Asiatic with the corrupt Punic of the African.
The Celtic language has maintained itself in Brittany, just as in
Wales, to the present day; but while the province no doubt obtained its
present name from the insular Britons who, in the fifth century fled
thither before the Saxons, the language was hardly imported for the
first time with these, but was to all appearance handed down from one
generation to another there for thousands of years. In the rest of Gaul
naturally during the course of the imperial period Roman habits step by
step gained ground; but the Celtic idiom was put an end to here, not
so much by the Germanic immigration as by the Christianising of Gaul,
which did not, as in Syria and Egypt, adopt and make a vehicle of
the language of the country that was set aside by the government, but
preached the Gospel in Latin.

[Sidenote: Romanising stronger in the east.]

In the progress of Romanising, which in Gaul, apart from the southern
province, continued to be left in substance to inward development,
there is apparent a remarkable diversity between the eastern Gaul and
the west and north--a difference, which turns doubtless in part, but
not solely, on the contrast between the Germans and the Gauls. In
the occurrences at and after Nero's fall this diversity comes into
prominence even as exercising a political influence. The close contact
of the eastern cantons with the camps on the Rhine and the recruiting
of the Rhenish legions, which took place especially here, procured
earlier and more complete entrance for Roman habits there than in
the region of the Loire and the Seine. On occasion of those quarrels
the Rhenish cantons--the Celtic Lingones and Treveri, as well as the
Germanic Ubii or rather the Agrippinenses--went with the Roman town of
Lugudunum and held firmly to the legitimate Roman government, while the
insurrection, at least, as was observed, in a certain sense national,
originated from the Sequani, Haedui, and Arverni. In a later phase
of the same struggle we find under altered party-relations the same
disunion--those eastern cantons in league with the Germans, while the
diet of Rheims refuses to join them.

[Sidenote: Native road-measurement.]

While the Gallic land was thus in respect of language treated in the
main just like the other provinces, we again meet with forbearance
towards its old institutions in the regulations as to weights and
measures. It is true that, alongside of the general imperial ordinance,
which was issued in this respect by Augustus, the local observances
continued in many places to subsist agreeably to the tolerant, or
rather indifferent, attitude of the government in such things; but it
was only in Gaul that the local arrangement afterwards supplanted that
of the empire. The roads in the whole Roman empire were measured and
marked according to the unit of the Roman mile (1.48 kilom.), and up to
the end of the second century this applied also to those provinces.
But from Severus onward its place was taken in the three Gauls and
the two Germanies by a mile correlated no doubt to the Roman, but yet
different and with a Gallic name, the _leuga_ (2.22 kilomètres), equal
to one and a half Roman miles. Severus cannot possibly have wished in
this matter to make a national concession to the Celts; this is not in
keeping either with the epoch or with that emperor in particular, who
stood in an attitude of expressed hostility to these very provinces;
it must have been considerations of expediency that influenced him.
These could only be based on the fact that the national road-measure,
the _leuga_ or else the double _leuga_, the German _rasta_, which
latter corresponds to the French _lieue_, continued to subsist in
these provinces after the introduction of the unit of road-measure
to a much greater extent than was the case in other countries of the
empire. Augustus must have extended the Roman mile formally to Gaul and
placed the itineraries and the imperial highways on that footing, but
must have in reality left to the country the old road-measurement; and
so it may have happened that the later administration found it less
inconvenient to acquiesce in the double unit for postal traffic[54]
than to continue to make use of a road-measure practically unknown in
the country.

[Sidenote: Religion of the country.]

Of far greater significance is the attitude of the Roman government
to the religion of the country; in this beyond doubt the Gallic
nationality found its most solid support. Even in the south province
the worship of non-Roman deities must have held its ground long,
much longer than, for example, in Andalusia. The great commercial
town of Arelate, indeed, has no other dedications to show than to
gods worshipped also in Italy; but in Fréjus, Aix, Nîmes, and the
whole coast region generally, the old Celtic divinities were in the
imperial epoch not much less worshipped than in the interior of Gaul.
In the Iberian part of Aquitania also we meet numerous traces of the
indigenous worship altogether different from the Celtic. All the
images of gods, however, that have come to light in the south of Gaul
bear a stamp deviating less from the usual type than the monuments of
the north; and, above all, it was easier to manage matters with the
national gods than with the national priesthood, which meets us only
in imperial Gaul and in the British Islands,--the Druids (iv. 236)
{iv. 225.}. It would be vain labour to seek to give any conception of
the internal character of the Druidic doctrine, strangely composed
of speculation and imagination; only some examples may be allowed to
illustrate its singular and fearful nature. The power of speech was
symbolically represented in a bald-headed, wrinkled, sunburnt old man,
who carries club and bow, and from whose perforated tongue fine golden
chains run to the ears of the man that follows him--betokening the
flying arrows and the crushing blows of the old man mighty in speech,
to whom the hearts of the multitude willingly listen. This was the
Ogmius of the Celts; to the Greeks he appeared as a Charon dressed up
as Herakles. An altar found in Paris shows us three images of the gods
with annexed inscription; in the middle Jovis, on his left Vulcan, on
his right Esus "the horrid with his cruel altars," as a Roman poet
terms him, and yet a god of commerce and of peaceful dealing;[55] he is
girded for labour like Vulcan, and, as the latter carries hammer and
tongs, so he hews a willow tree with the axe. A frequently recurring
deity, probably named Cernunnos, is represented cowering with crossed
legs; on its head it bears a stag's antlers, on which hangs a neck
chain, and holds in its lap a money-bag; before it stand cattle and
goats--apparently, as if it were meant to express the ground as the
source of riches. The enormous difference of this Celtic Olympus--void
of all chasteness and beauty and delighting in quaint and fantastic
mingling of things very earthly--from the simply human forms of the
Greek, and the simply human conceptions of the Roman, religion enables
us to guess the barrier which stood between these conquered and their
conquerors. With this were connected, moreover, very serious practical
consequences; a comprehensive traffic in secret remedies and charms, in
which the priests played at the same time the part of physicians, and
in which, alongside of the conjuring and the blessing, human sacrifices
occurred, and healing of the sick by the flesh of those thus slain.
That direct opposition to the foreign rule prevailed in the Druidism
of this period cannot at least be proved; but, even if this were not
the case, it is easy to conceive that the Roman government, which
elsewhere let alone all local peculiarities of worship with indifferent
toleration, contemplated this Druidical system, not merely in its
extravagances but as a whole, with apprehension. The institution of the
Gallic annual festival in the purely Roman capital of the country, and
with the exclusion of any link attaching it to the national cultus, was
evidently a counter-move of the government against the old religion of
the country, with its yearly council of priests at Chartres, the centre
of the Gallic land. Augustus, however, took no further direct step
against Druidism than that of prohibiting any Roman citizen from taking
part in the Gallic national cultus. Tiberius in his more energetic way
acted with decision, and prohibited altogether this priesthood with
its retinue of teachers and healing practitioners; but it does not
quite speak for the practical success of this enactment that the same
prohibition was issued afresh under Claudius: it is narrated of the
latter that he caused a Gaul of rank to be beheaded, simply because he
was convicted of having brought into application the charms customary
in his own country for a good result in proceedings before the emperor.
That the occupation of Britain, which had been from of old the chief
seat of these priestly actings, was in good part resolved on in order
thereby to get at the root of the evil, will be fully set forth in
the sequel (p. 185). In spite of all this the priesthood still played
an important part in the revolt which the Gauls attempted after the
downfall of the Claudian dynasty; the burning of the Capitol--so the
Druids preached--announced the revolution in affairs, and the beginning
of the dominion of the north over the south. But, although this oracle
came subsequently to be fulfilled, it was not so through this nation
and in favour of its priests. The peculiarities of the Gallic worship
doubtless still exerted their effect even later; when in the third
century a distinctive Gallo-Roman empire came into existence for
some time, Hercules played the first part on its coins partly in his
Graeco-Roman form, partly as Gallic Deusoniensis or Magusanus. But of
the Druids there is no further mention, except only so far as the sage
women in Gaul down to the time of Diocletian passed under the name of
Druidesses and uttered oracles, and the ancient noble houses still
for long boasted of Druidic progenitors on their ancestral roll. The
religion of the country fell into the background still more rapidly
perhaps than the native language, and Christianity, as it pushed its
way, hardly encountered in the former any serious resistance.

[Sidenote: Economic condition.]

Southern Gaul, withdrawn more than any other province by its position
from hostile assault, and, like Italy and Andalusia, a land of the
olive and the fig, rose under the imperial government to great
prosperity and rich urban development. The amphitheatre and the
sarcophagus-field of Arles, the "mother of all Gaul," the theatre of
Orange, the temples and bridges still standing erect to this day in
and near Nîmes, are vivid witnesses of this down to the present time.
Even in the northern provinces the old prosperity of the country was
enhanced by the lasting peace, which, certainly with lasting pressure
of taxation, accrued to the land by means of the foreign rule. "In
Gaul," says a writer of the time of Vespasian, "the sources of wealth
are at home, and flood the earth with their abundance."[56] Perhaps
nowhere do equally numerous and equally magnificent country-houses
make their appearance,--especially in the east of Gaul, on the Rhine
and its affluents; we discern clearly the rich Gallic nobility. Famous
is the testament of a man of rank among the Lingones, who directs
that there should be erected for him a memorial tomb and a statue
of Italian marble or best bronze, and that, among other things, his
whole implements for hunting and fowling be burned along with him.
This reminds us of the elsewhere mentioned hunting-parks enclosed for
miles in the Celtic country, and of the prominent part which the Celtic
hounds for the chase and Celtic huntsmanship play in the Xenophon of
Hadrian's time, who does not fail to add that the hunting system of the
Celts could not have been known to Xenophon the son of Gryllos. To this
connection belongs likewise the remarkable fact that in the Roman army
of the imperial period the cavalry was, properly speaking, Celtic, not
merely inasmuch as it was pre-eminently recruited from Gaul, but also
because the manœuvres, and even the technical expressions, were in good
part derived from the Celts; we see here how, after the disappearance
of the old burgess-cavalry under the republic, the cavalry became
reorganised by Caesar and Augustus with Gallic men and in Gallic
fashion. The basis of this notable prosperity was agriculture, towards
the elevation of which Augustus himself worked with energy, and which
yielded rich produce in all Gaul, apart perhaps from the steppe-region
on the Aquitanian coast. The rearing of cattle was also lucrative,
especially in the north, particularly the rearing of swine and sheep,
which soon acquired importance for manufactures and for export;
the Menapian hams (from Flanders) and the Atrebatian and Nervian
cloth-mantles (near Arras and Tournay) went forth in later times to
the whole empire.

[Sidenote: Culture of the vine.]

Of special interest was the development of the culture of the vine.
Neither the climate nor the government was favourable to it. The
"Gallic winter" remained long proverbial among the inhabitants of the
southern lands; as, indeed, it was on this side that the Roman empire
extended farthest towards the north. But narrower limits were drawn for
the Gallic cultivation of the vine by Italian commercial competition.
Certainly the god Dionysos accomplished his conquest of the world on
the whole slowly, and only step by step did the drink prepared from
grain give way to the juice of the vine; but it was a result of the
prohibitive system that in Gaul beer maintained itself at least in the
north as the usual spirituous drink throughout the whole period of the
empire; and even the emperor Julian, on his abode in Gaul, came into
conflict with this pseudo-Bacchus.[57] The imperial government did not
indeed go so far as the republic, which placed under police prohibition
the culture of the vine and olive on the south coast of Gaul (iii.
175; ii. 398) {iii. 177; ii. 375.}; but the Italians of their time
were withal the true sons of their fathers. The flourishing condition
of the two great emporia on the Rhine, Arles and Lyons, depended in no
small degree on the market for Italian wine in Gaul; by which fact we
may measure what importance the culture of the vine must at that time
have had for Italy. If one of the most careful administrators who held
the imperial office, Domitian, issued orders that in all the provinces
at least the half of the vines should be destroyed[58]--which, it is
true, were not so carried out--we may thence infer that the diffusion
of the vine-culture was at all events subjected to serious restriction
on the part of the government. In the Augustan age it was still unknown
in the northern part of the Narbonese province (iv. 227, note) {iv.
217.}, and, though here too it was soon taken up, it yet appears to
have remained through centuries restricted to the Narbonensis and
southern Aquitania; of Gallic wines the better age knows only the
Allobrogian and the Biturigian, according to our way of speaking, the
Burgundian and the Bordeaux.[59] It was only when the reins of the
empire fell from the hands of the Italians, in the course of the third
century, that this was changed, and the emperor Probus (276-282) at
length threw the culture of the vine open to the provincials. Probably
it was only in consequence of this that the vine gained a firm footing
on the Seine as on the Moselle. "I have," writes the emperor Julian,
"spent a winter" (it was the winter of 357-358) "in dear Lutetia,
for so the Gauls term the little town of the Parisii, a small island
lying in the river and walled all round. The water is there excellent
and pure to look at and to drink; the inhabitants have a pretty mild
winter, and good wine is grown among them; in fact, some even rear
figs, covering them up in winter with wheaten straw as with a cloth."
And not much later the poet of Bordeaux, in his pleasing description
of the Moselle, depicts the vineyards as bordering that river on both
banks, "just as my own vines wreathe for me the yellow Garonne."

[Sidenote: Network of highways.]

The internal intercourse, as well as that with the neighbouring
lands, especially with Italy, must have been very active, and the
network of roads must have been much developed and fostered. The great
imperial highway from Rome to the mouth of the Baetis, which has
been mentioned, under Spain (p. 74), was the main artery for the land
traffic of the south province; the whole stretch, kept in repair in
republican times from the Alps to the Rhone by the Massaliots, from
thence to the Pyrenees by the Romans, was laid anew by Augustus. In the
north the imperial highways led mainly to the Gallic capital or to the
great camps on the Rhine; yet sufficient provision seems to have been
made for other requisite communication.

[Sidenote: Hellenism in south Gaul.]

If the southern province in the olden time belonged intellectually to
the Hellenic type, the decline of Massilia and the mighty progress
of Romanism in southern Gaul produced, no doubt, an alteration in
that respect; nevertheless this portion of Gaul remained always, like
Campania, a seat of Hellenism. The fact that Nemausus, one of the towns
sharing the heritage of Massilia, shows on its coins of the Augustan
period Alexandrian numbering of the years and the arms of Egypt, has
been not without probability referred to the settlement by Augustus
himself of veterans from Alexandria in this city, which presented no
attitude of opposition to Hellenism. It may, doubtless, also be brought
into connection with the influence of Massilia, that to this province,
at least as regards descent, belonged that historian, who--apparently
in intentional contrast to the national-Roman type of history, and
occasionally with sharp sallies against its most noted representatives,
Sallust and Livy--upheld the Hellenic type, the Vocontian Pompeius
Trogus, author of a history of the world beginning with Alexander and
the kingdoms of the Diadochi, in which Roman affairs are set forth only
within this framework, or by way of appendix. Beyond doubt in this he
was only retaliating, which was strictly within the province of the
literary opposition of Hellenism; still it remains remarkable that
this tendency should find its Latin representative, and an adroit and
fluent one, here in the Augustan age. From a later period Favorinus
deserves mention, of an esteemed burgess-family in Arles, one of the
chief pillars of polymathy in Hadrian's time; a philosopher with an
Aristotelian and sceptical tendency, at the same time a philologue and
rhetorician, the scholar of Dion of Prusa, the friend of Plutarch and
of Herodes Atticus, assailed polemically in the field of science by
Galen and in light literature by Lucian, sustaining lively relations
generally with the noted men of letters of the second century, and
not less with the emperor Hadrian. His manifold investigations, among
other matters, concerning the names of the companions of Odysseus
that were devoured by Scylla, and as to the name of the first man who
was at the same time a man of letters, make him appear as the genuine
representative of the erudite dealing in trifles that was then in
vogue; and his discourses for a cultivated public on Thersites and the
ague, as well as his conversations in part recorded for us "on all
things and some others," give not an agreeable, but a characteristic,
picture of the literary pursuits of the time. Here we have to call
attention to what he himself reckoned among the remarkable points of
his career in life, that he was by birth a Gaul and at the same time a
Greek author. Although the _literati_ of the West frequently gave, as
occasion offered, specimens of their Greek, but few of them made use of
this as the proper language of their authorship; in this case its use
would be influenced in part by the scholar's place of birth.

[Sidenote: Latin literature in the south province.]

South Gaul, moreover, had so far a share in the Augustan bloom of
literature, that some of the most notable forensic orators of the later
Augustan age, Votienus Montanus († 27 A.D.), from Narbo--named the Ovid
of orators--and Gnaeus Domitius Afer (consul in 39 A.D.) from Nemausus,
belonged to this province. Generally, as was natural, Roman literature
extended its circulation also over this region; the poets of Domitian's
time sent their free copies to friends in Tolosa and Vienna. Pliny,
under Trajan, is glad that his minor writings find even in Lugudunum
not merely favourable readers, but booksellers who push their sale. But
we cannot produce evidence for the south of any such special influence,
as Baetica exercised in the earlier, and northern Gaul in the later,
imperial period, on the intellectual and literary development of Rome.
The fair land yielded richly wine and fruits; but the empire drew from
it neither soldiers nor thinkers.

[Sidenote: Literature in imperial Gaul.]

Gaul proper was in the domain of science the promised land of teaching
and learning; this presumably was due to the peculiar development and
to the powerful influence of the national priesthood. Druidism was by
no means a naive popular faith, but a highly developed and pretentious
theology, which in the good church-fashion strove to enlighten, or at
any rate control, all spheres of human thought and action, physics
and metaphysics, law and medicine; which demanded of its scholars
unwearied study, it was said, for twenty years, and sought and found
these its scholars pre-eminently in the ranks of the nobility. The
suppression of the Druids by Tiberius and his successors must have
affected in the first instance these schools of the priests, and have
led to their being at least publicly abolished; but this could only be
done effectively when the national training of youth was brought face
to face with the Romano-Greek culture, just as the Carnutic council of
Druids was confronted with the temple of Roma in Lyons. How early this
took place in Gaul, without question under the guiding influence of
the government, is shown by the remarkable fact that in the formerly
mentioned revolt under Tiberius the insurgents attempted above all to
possess themselves of the town of Augustodunum (Autun), in order to
get into their power the youths of rank studying there, and thereby
to gain or to terrify the great families. In the first instance these
Gallic Lycea may well have been, in spite of their by no means national
course of training, a leaven of distinctively Gallic nationality; it
was hardly an accident that the most important of them at that time had
its seat, not in the Roman Lyons, but in the capital of the Haedui, the
chief among the Gallic cantons. But the Romano-Hellenic culture, though
perhaps forced on the nation and received at first with opposition,
penetrated, as gradually the antagonism wore off, so deeply into the
Celtic character, that in time the scholars applied themselves to it
more zealously than the teachers. The training of a gentleman, somewhat
after the manner in which it at present exists in England, based on
the study of Latin and in the second place of Greek, and vividly
reminding us in the development of the school-speech, with its finely
cut points and brilliant phrases, of more recent literary phenomena
springing from the same soil, became gradually in the West a sort of
chartered right of the Gallo-Romans. The teachers there were probably
at all times better paid than in Italy, and above all were better
treated. Quintilian already mentions with respect among the prominent
forensic orators several Gauls; and not without design Tacitus, in
his fine dialogue on oratory, makes the Gallic advocate, Marcus
Aper, the defender of modern eloquence against the worshippers of
Cicero and Caesar. The first place among the universities of Gaul was
subsequently taken by Burdigala, and indeed generally Aquitania was,
as respects culture, far in advance of middle and northern Gaul; in a
dialogue written there at the beginning of the fifth century one of the
speakers, a clergyman from Châlon-sur-Saône, hardly ventures to open
his mouth before the cultivated Aquitanian circle. This was the sphere
of working of the formerly-mentioned professor Ausonius, who was called
by the emperor Valentinian to be teacher of his son Gratian (born in
359), and who has in his miscellaneous poems raised a monument to a
large number of his colleagues; and, when his contemporary Symmachus,
the most famous orator of this epoch, sought a private tutor for his
son, he had one brought from Gaul in recollection of his old teacher
who had his home on the Garonne. By its side Augustodunum remained
always one of the great centres of Gallic studies; we have still the
speeches which were made before the emperor Constantine, asking, and
giving thanks for, the re-establishment of this school of instruction.

The representation in literature of this zealous scholastic activity
is of a subordinate kind, and of slight value--declamations, which
were stimulated especially by the later conversion of Treves into an
imperial residence and the frequent sojourn of the court in the Gallic
land, and occasional poems of a multifarious character. The making of
verses was, like the supply of speeches, a necessary function of the
teaching office, and the public teacher of literature was at the same
time a poet not exactly born, but bespoken. At least the depreciation
of poetry, which is characteristic of the otherwise similar Hellenic
literature of the same epoch, did not prevail among these Occidentals.
In their verses the reminiscence of the school and the artifice of
the pedant predominate,[60] and pictures of vivid and real feeling,
as in the Moselle-trip of Ausonius, but rarely occur. The speeches,
which we are indeed in a position to judge of only by some late
addresses delivered at the imperial palace, are models in the art of
saying little in many words, and of expressing absolute loyalty with
an equally absolute lack of thought. When a wealthy mother sent her
son, after he had acquired the copiousness and ornateness of Gallic
speech, onward to Italy to acquire also the Roman dignity,[61] this was
certainly more difficult of acquisition for these Gallic rhetoricians
than the pomp of words. For the early Middle age such performances as
these exercised decisive influence; through them in the first Christian
period Gaul became the seat proper of pious verses and withal the last
refuge of scholastic literature, while the great mental movement within
Christianity did not find its chief representatives there.

[Sidenote: Constructive and plastic art.]

In the sphere of the constructive and plastic arts the climate itself
called forth various phenomena unknown, or known only in their germs,
to the south proper. Thus the heating of the air, which in Italy was
usual only for baths, and the use of glass windows, which was likewise
far from common there, were comprehensively brought into application
in Gallic architecture. But we may perhaps speak of a development of
art peculiar to this region, in so far as figures and, in progress of
time, representations of scenes of daily life emerge in the Celtic
territory with relatively greater frequency than in Italy, and replace
the used-up mythological representations by others more pleasing. It
is certainly almost in the sepulchral monuments alone that we are
able to recognise this tendency to the real and the _genre_, but it
doubtless prevailed in the practice of art generally. The arch of
Arausio (Orange), from the early imperial period, with its Gallic
weapons and standards; the bronze statue of the Berlin museum found
at Vetera, representing apparently the god of the place with ears of
barley in his hair; the Hildesheim silver-plate, probably proceeding
in part from Gallic workshops, show a certain freedom in the adoption
and transformation of Italian suggestions. The tomb of the Julii at
St. Remy, near Avignon, a work of the Augustan age, is a remarkable
evidence of the lively and spirited reception of Hellenic art in
southern Gaul, as well in its bold architectural structure of two
square storeys crowned by a peristyle with conic dome, as also in its
reliefs which, in style most nearly akin to the Pergamene, present
battle and hunting scenes with numerous figures, taken apparently from
the life of the persons honoured, in picturesque animated execution. It
is remarkable that the acme of this development is reached--by the side
of the southern province--in the district of the Moselle and the Maas.
This region, not placed so completely under Roman influence as Lyons
and the headquarter-towns on the Rhine, and more wealthy and civilised
than the districts on the Loire and the Seine, seems to have in some
measure produced of itself this exercise of art. The tomb of a man of
rank in Treves, well known under the name of the Igel Column, gives a
clear idea of the tower-like monuments, crowned with pointed roof and
covered on all sides with representations of the life of the deceased,
that are here at home. Frequently we see on them the landlord, to whom
his peasants present sheep, fish, fowls, eggs. A tombstone from Arlon,
near Luxemburg, shows, besides the portraits of the two spouses, on
the one side a cart and a woman with a fruit-basket, on the other a
sale of apples above two men squatting on the ground. Another tombstone
from Neumagen, near Treves, has the form of a ship; in this sit six
mariners plying the oars; the cargo consists of large casks, alongside
of which the merry-looking steersman seems--one might imagine--to be
rejoicing over the wine which they contain. We may perhaps bring them
into connection with the serene picture which the poet of Bordeaux has
preserved to us of the Moselle valley, with its magnificent castles,
its many vineyards, and its stirring doings of fishermen and of
sailors, and find in it the proof that in this fair land, more than
fifteen hundred years ago, there was already the pulsation of peaceful
activity, serene enjoyment, and warm life.




Footnotes.


[38: The domain of Iberian coins reaches decidedly beyond the Pyrenees,
though the interpretation of individual coin-legends, which are among
others referred to Perpignan and Narbonne, is not certain. As all
these coinings took place under Roman authorisation, this suggests the
question whether this portion of the subsequent Narbonensis was not
at an earlier date--namely before the founding of Narbo (636 U.C.)
{118.}--under the governor of Hither Spain. There are no Aquitanian
coins with Iberian legends any more than from north-western Spain,
probably because the Roman supremacy, under whose protection this
coinage grew up, did not, so long as the latter lasted, _i.e._ perhaps
up to the Numantine war, embrace those regions.]

[39: This is shown by the remarkable inscription of Avignon (Herzog.
_Gall. Narb._ n. 403): _T. Carisius T. f. pr[aetor] Volcar[um]
dat_--the oldest evidence for the Roman organisation of the
commonwealth in these regions.]

[40: Noviodunum (Nyon on the lake of Geneva) alone perhaps in the
three Gauls may be compared, as regards plan, with Lugudunum (iv. 254)
{iv. 242.}; but, as this community emerges later as civitas Equestrium
(_Inscrip. Helvet._ 115), it seems to have been inserted among the
cantons, which was not the case with Lugudunum.]

[41: The persons earlier driven forth from Vienna by the Allobroges (οἱ
ἐκ Οὐιέννης τῆς Ναρβωνησίας ὑπὸ τῶν Ἀλλοβρίγων ποτὲ ἐκπεσόντες), in
Dio, xlvi. 50, cannot well have been other than Roman citizens, for the
foundation of a burgess-colony for their benefit is intelligible only
on this supposition. The "earlier" expulsion probably stood connected
with the rising of the Allobroges under Catugnatus in 693 {61.} (iv.
223) {iv. 213.}. The explanation why the dispossessed were not brought
back, but were settled elsewhere, is not forthcoming; but various
reasons prompting such a course may be conceived, and the fact itself
is not thereby called in question. The revenues accruing to the city
(Tacitus, _Hist._ i. 65) may have been conferred upon it possibly at
the expense of Vienna.]

[42: The ground belonged formerly to the Segusiavi (Plin. _H. N._ iv.
15, 107; Strabo, p. 186, 192), one of the small client-cantons of
the Haedui (Caesar, _B. G._ vii. 75); but in the cantonal division
it counts not as one of these, but stands for itself as μητρόπολις
(Ptolem. ii. 8, 11, 12).]

[43: This was the 1200 soldiers with whom, as Agrippa the king of the
Jews says in Josephus (_Bell. Jud._ ii. 16, 4), the Romans held in
subjection the whole of Gaul.]

[44: Nothing is so significant of the position of Treves at this time
as the ordinance of the emperor Gratianus of the year 376 (_Cod.
Theod._ xiii. 3, 11), that there should be given to the professors of
rhetoric and of the grammar of both languages in all the capitals of
the then subsisting seventeen Gallic provinces, over and above their
municipal salary, a like addition from the state chest: but for Treves
this was to be on a higher scale.]

[45: In Caesar there appear doubtless, taken on the whole, the same
cantons as are thereafter represented in the Augustan arrangement,
but at the same time manifold traces of smaller client-unions (comp.
iv. 237) {iv. 226.}; thus as "clients" of the Haedui are named the
Segusiavi, the Ambivareti, the Aulerci Brannovices, and the Brannovii
(_B. G._ vii. 75), as clients of the Treveri the Condrusi (_B. G._ iv.
6), as clients of the Helvetii the Tulingi and Latobriges. With the
exception of the Segusiavi, all these are absent from the Lyons diet.
Such minor cantons not wholly merged into the leading places may have
subsisted in great number in Gaul at the time of the conquest. If,
according to Josephus (_Bell. Jud._ ii. 16, 4), three hundred and five
Gallic cantons and twelve hundred towns obeyed the Romans; these may
be the figures that were reckoned up for Caesar's successes in arms;
if the small Iberian tribes in Aquitania and the client-cantons in the
Celtic land were included in the reckoning, such numbers might well be
the result.]

[46: This is indicated not only by the inscription in Boissieu, p.
609, where the words _tot[i]us cens[us Galliarum]_ are brought into
connection with the name of one of the altar-priests, but also by
the honorary inscription erected by the three Gauls to an imperial
official _a censibus accipiendis_ (Henzen, 6944). He appears to have
conducted the revision of the land-register for the whole country,
just as formerly Drusus did, while the valuation itself took place
by commissaries for the individual districts. A _sacerdos Romae et
Augusti_ of the Tarraconensis is praised _ob curam tabulari censualis
fideliter administratam_ (_C. I. L._ ii. 4248); thus doubtless the
diets of all provinces were invested with the apportionment of the
taxes. The imperial finance-administration of the three Gauls was at
least, as a rule, so divided that the two western provinces (Aquitania
and Lugudunensis) were placed under one procurator, Belgica and the
two Germanies under another; yet there were probably not legally
fixed powers for this purpose. A regular taking part in the levy may
not be inferred from the discussion held by Hadrian--evidently as an
extraordinary step--with representatives of all the Spanish districts
(_vita_, 12).]

[47: For the _arca Galliarum_, the freedman of the three Gauls (Henzen,
6393), the _adlector arcae Galliarum_, _inquisitor Galliarum_, _iudex
arcae Galliarum_, no other province, so far as I know, furnishes
analogies; and of these institutions, had they been general, the
inscriptions elsewhere would certainly have preserved traces. These
arrangements appear to point to a self-administering and self-taxing
body (the _adlector_, the meaning of which term is not clear, occurs as
an official in _collegia_, _C. I. L._ vi. 355; Orelli, 2406); probably
this chest defrayed the doubtless not inconsiderable expenditure for
the temple-buildings and for the annual festival. The _arca Galliarum_
was not a state-chest.]

[48: As the total number of the communities recorded on the altar at
Lyons, Strabo (iv. 3, 2, p. 192) specifies sixty, and as the number of
the Aquitanian communities in the Celtic portion north of the Garonne
fourteen (iv. 1, 1, p. 177). Tacitus (_Ann._ iii. 44) names as the
total number of the Gallic cantons sixty-four, and so does, although
in an incorrect connection, the scholiast on the _Aeneid_, i. 286.
A like total number is pointed to by the list given in Ptolemy from
the second century, which adduces for Aquitania seventeen, for the
Lugudunensis twenty-five, for the Belgica twenty-two cantons. Of his
Aquitanian cantons thirteen fall to the region between the Loire and
Garonne, four to that between the Garonne and the Pyrenees. In the
later one from the fifth century, which is well known under the name
of _Notitia Galliarum_, twenty-six fall to Aquitania, twenty-four to
the Lugudunensis (exclusive of Lyons), twenty-seven to Belgica. All
these numbers are presumably correct, each for its time. Between the
erection of the altar in 742 {12.} and the time of Tacitus (for to
this his statement is doubtless to be referred), four cantons may have
been added, just as the shifting of the numbers from the second to the
fifth century may be referred to individual changes still in good part
demonstrable.

Considering the importance of these arrangements, it will not be
superfluous to exhibit them in detail, at least for the two western
provinces. In the purely Celtic middle province the three lists given
by Pliny (first century), Ptolemy (second century), and the _Notitia_
(fifth century), agree in twenty-one names: _Abrincates_--_Andecavi_
--_Aulerci Cenomani_--_Aulerci Diablintes_--_Aulerci Eburovici_
--_Baiocasses_ (_Bodiocasses_ Plin., _Vadicasii_ Ptol.--_Carnutes_
--_Coriosolites_ (beyond doubt the _Samnitae_ of Ptolemy)--_Haedui_
--_Lexovii_--_Meldae_--_Namnetes_--_Osismii_--_Parisii_--
_Redones_--_Senones_--_Tricassini_--_Turones_--_Veliocasses_
(_Rotomagenses_)--_Veneti_--_Unelli_ (_Constantia_); in three more:
_Caletae_--_Segusiavi_--_Viducasses_, Pliny and Ptolemy agree, while
they are wanting in the _Notitia_, because in the meanwhile the
_Caletae_ were put together with the Veliocasses or the Rotomagenses,
the Viducasses with the Baiocasses, and the Segusiavi were merged in
Lyons. On the other hand, instead of the three that have disappeared,
there appear two new ones that have arisen by division: _Aureliani_
(Orleans), a branch from the _Carnutes_ (Chartres), and _Autessiodurum_
(Auxerre), a branch from the _Senones_ (Sens). There are left in
Pliny two names, _Boi_--_Atesui_; in Ptolemy one, _Arvii_; in the
_Notitia_ one, _Saii_. For Celtic Aquitania the three lists agree
in eleven names: _Arverni_--_Bituriges Cubi_--_Bituriges Vivisci_
(_Burdigalenses_)--_Cadurci_--_Gabales_--_Lemovici_--_Nitiobriges_
(_Aginnenses_)--_Petrucorii_--_Pictones_--_Ruteni_--_Santones_; the
second and third agree in the 12th of _Vellauni_, which must have
dropped out in Pliny; Pliny alone has (apart from the problematic
_Aquitani_) two names more, _Ambilatri_ and _Anagnutes_; Ptolemy one
otherwise unknown, _Datii_; perhaps Strabo's number of fourteen is to
be made up by two of these. The _Notitia_ has, besides these eleven,
other two, based on splitting up the _Albigenses_ (Albi on the Tarn),
and the _Ecolismenses_ (Angoulême). The lists of the eastern cantons
stand related in a similar way. Although subordinate differences
emerge, which cannot be here discussed, the character and the
continuity of the Gallic cantonal division are clearly apparent.]

[49: The four represented tribes were the Tarbelli, Vasates, Auscii,
and Convenae. Besides these Pliny enumerates in southern Aquitania
no less than twenty-five tribes--most of them otherwise unknown--as
standing on a legal equality with those four.]

[50: Pliny and, presumably here too following older sources of
information, Ptolemy know nothing of this division; but we still
possess the uncouth verses of the Gascon farmer (Borghesi, _Opp._ viii.
544), who effected this change in Rome, beyond doubt in company with a
number of his countrymen, although he has preferred not to add that it
was so:--

  _Flamen, item dumvir, quaestor pagiq[ue] magister
  Verus ad Augustum legato_ (sic) _munere functus
  pro novem optinuit populis seiungere Gallos:
  urbe redux Genio pagi hanc dedicat aram._

The oldest trace of the administrative separation of Iberian Aquitania
from the Gallic is the naming of the "district of Lactora" (Lectoure)
alongside of Aquitania in an inscription from Trajan's time (_C. I. L._
v. 875: _procurator provinciarum Luguduniensis et Aquitanicae, item
Lactorae_). This inscription certainly of itself proves the diversity
of the two territories rather than the formal severance of the one from
the other; but it may be otherwise shown that soon after Trajan the
latter was carried out. For the fact that the separated district was
originally divided into nine cantons, as these verses say, is confirmed
by the name that thenceforth continued in use, _Novempopulana_; but
under Pius the district numbers already eleven communities (for the
_dilectator per Aquitanicae XI populos_, Boissieu, _Lyon_, p. 246,
certainly belongs to this connection), in the fifth century twelve, for
the _Notitia_ enumerates so many under the Novempopulana. This increase
is to be explained similarly to that discussed at p. 95, note 2. The
division does not relate to the governorship; on the contrary, both the
Celtic and the Iberian Aquitania remained under the same legate. But
the Novempopulana obtained under Trajan its own diet, while the Celtic
districts of Aquitania, after as before, sent deputies to the diet of
Lyons.]

[51: There are wanting some smaller Germanic tribes, such as the
Baetasii and the Sunuci, perhaps for similar reasons with those of the
minor Iberian; and further, the Cannenefates and the Frisians, probably
because it was not till later that these became subjects of the empire.
The Batavi were represented.]

[52: Thus there was found in Nemausus a votive inscription written in
the Celtic language, erected Ματρεβο Ναμαυσικαβο (_C. I. L._ xi. p.
383), _i.e._, to the Mothers of the place.]

[53: For example, we read on an altar-stone found in Néris-les-Bains,
(Allier; Desjardins, _Géographie de la Gaule romaine_, ii. 476);
_Bratronos Nantonicn Epadatextorici Leucullo Suio rebelocitoi_. On
another, which the Paris mariners' guild under Tiberius erected to
Jupiter the highest and best (Mowat; _Bull. épig. de la Gaule_,
p. 25f.) the main inscription is Latin, but on the reliefs of the
lateral surfaces, which appear to represent a procession of nine armed
priests, there stand explanatory words appended: _Senani Useiloni
..._ and _Eurises_, which are not Latin. Such a mixture is also met
with elsewhere, _e.g._, in an inscription of Arrènes (Creuse, _Bull.
épig. de la Gaule_, i. 38); _Sacer Peroco ieuru_ (probably = _fecit_)
_Duorico v(otum) s(olvit) l(ibens) m(erito)._]

[54: The posting-books and itineraries do not fail to remark at Lyons
and Toulouse that here the _leugae_ begin.]

[55: The second Berne gloss on Lucan, i. 445, which rightly makes
Teutates Mars, and seems also otherwise credible, says of him: _Hesum
Mercurium colunt, si quidem a mercatoribus colitur_.]

[56: Josephus, _Bell. Jud._ ii. 16, 4. There king Agrippa asks his Jews
whether they imagined themselves to be richer than the Gauls, braver
than the Germans, more sagacious than the Hellenes. With this all other
testimonies accord. Nero hears of the revolt not unwillingly _occasione
nata spoliandarum iure belli opulentissimarum provinciarum_ (Suetonius,
_Nero_, 40; Plut. _Galb._ 5); the booty taken from the insurgent army
of Vindex is immense (Tac. _Hist._ i. 51). Tacitus (_Hist._ iii. 46)
calls the Haedui _pecunia dites et voluptatibus opulentos_. The general
of Vespasian is not wrong in saying to the revolted Gauls in Tac.
_Hist._ iv. 74: _Regna bellaque per Gallias semper fuere, donec in
nostrum ius concederetis; nos quamquam totiens lacessiti iure victoriae
id solum vobis addidimus quo pacem tueremur, nam neque quies gentium
sine armis neque arma sine stipendiis neque stipendia sine tributis
haberi queunt_. The taxes doubtless pressed heavily, but not so heavily
as the old state of feud and club-law.]

[57: This epigram on "barley-wine" is preserved (_Anthol. Pal._ ix.
368):

  Τίς πόθεν εἶς Διόνυσε; μὰ γὰρ τὸν ἀληθέα Βάκχον,
    οὐ σ' ἐπιγιγνώσκω· τὸν Διὸς οἶδα μόνον.
  κεῖνος νέκταρ ὄδωδε· σὺ δὲ τράγου· ἦ ῥά σε Κελτοὶ
    τῇ πενίῃ βοτρύων τεῦξαν ἀπ' ἀσταχύων.
  τῷ σε χρὴ καλέειν Δημήτριον, οὐ Διόνυσον,
    πυρογένη μᾶλλον καὶ βρόμον, οὐ Βρόμιον.

On an earthen ring found in Paris (Mowat, _Bull. épig. de la Gaule_,
ii. 110; iii. 133), which is hollow and adapted for the filling of
cups, the drinker says to the host: _copo, conditu(m)_ [_cnoditu_ is
a misspelling] _abes_; _est reple(n)da_--"Host, thou hast more in
the cellar; the flask is empty;" and to the barmaid: _ospita, reple
lagona(m) cervesa_--"Girl, fill the flask with beer."]

[58: Suetonius, _Dom._ 7. When it was specified as a reason, that the
higher prices of corn were occasioned by the conversion of agricultural
land into vineyards, that was of course a pretext which calculated on
the want of intelligence in the public.]

[59: When Hehn still appeals (_Kulturpflanzen_, p. 76) for the
vine-culture of the Arverni and the Sequani, beyond the Narbonensis,
to Pliny, _H. N._ xiv. 1, 18, he follows discarded interpolations of
the text. It is possible that the sterner imperial government in the
three Gauls kept back the cultivation of the vine more than the lax
senatorial rule in the Narbonensis.]

[60: One of the professorial poems of Ausonius is dedicated to four
Greek grammarians:--

  _Sedulum cunctis studium docendi;
  Fructus exilis tenuisque sermo;
  Sed, quia nostro docuere in aevo,
    Commemorandi._

This mention is the more meritorious, seeing that he had learned
nothing suitable from them:--

  _Obstitit nostrae quia, credo, mentis
  Tardior sensus, neque disciplinis
  Appulit Graecis puerilis aevi
    Noxius error._

Such thoughts have frequently found utterance, but seldom in Sapphic
measure.]

[61: _Romana gravitas_, Hieronymus, _Ep._ 125, p. 929, Vall.]




CHAPTER IV.

ROMAN GERMANY AND THE FREE GERMANS.


[Sidenote: Limitation of Roman Germany.]

The two Roman provinces of Upper and Lower Germany were the result of
that defeat of the Roman arms and of Roman policy under the reign of
Augustus which has been already (p. 55 f.) described. The original
province of Germany, which embraced the country from the Rhine to the
Elbe, subsisted only twenty years, from the first campaign of Drusus,
742 U.C. {12.}, down to the battle of Varus and the fall of Aliso, 762
U.C. {A.D. 9.}; but as, on the one hand, it included the military camps
on the left bank of the Rhine--Vindonissa, Mogontiacum, Vetera--and,
on the other hand, even after that disaster, more or less considerable
portions of the right bank remained Roman, the governorship and the
command were not, in a strict sense, done away by that catastrophe,
although they were, so to speak, placed in suspense. The internal
organisation of the Three Gauls has been already set forth; they
embraced the whole country as far as the Rhine without distinction
of descent--except that the Ubii, who had only been brought over to
settle in Gaul during the last crises, did not belong to the sixty-four
cantons, while the Helvetii, the Triboci, and generally the districts
elsewhere held in occupation by the Rhenish troops, doubtless did so
belong. The intention had been to gather together the German cantons
between the Rhine and Elbe into a similar association under Roman
supremacy, as had been constituted in the case of the Gallic cantons,
and to bestow upon it, in the altar to Augustus of the Ubian town--the
germ of the modern Cologne--an executive centre similar to that which
the altar of Augustus at Lyons formed for Gaul; for the more remote
future the transference of the chief camp to the right bank of the
Rhine, and the restoration of the left, at least in the main, to the
governor of the Belgica, were doubtless in contemplation. But these
projects came to an end with the legions of Varus; the Germanic altar
of Augustus on the Rhine became or remained the altar of the Ubii; the
legions permanently retained their standing quarters in the territory,
which properly belonged to the Belgica, but--seeing that a separation
of the military and civil administration was, according to the Roman
arrangement, excluded--was placed, so long as the troops were stationed
there, for administrative purposes also under the commandants of the
two armies.[62] For, as was formerly stated, Varus was probably the
last commandant of the united army of the Rhine; on the increase of the
army to eight legions, which was consequent upon that disaster, the
division of it to all appearance also ensued. What we have to describe
in this section therefore is not, strictly speaking, the circumstances
of a Roman province, but the fortunes of a Roman army, and, as most
closely connected therewith, the fortunes of the neighbouring peoples
and adversaries, so far as these are interwoven with the history of
Rome.

[Sidenote: Upper and Lower Germany.]

The two headquarters of the army of the Rhine were always Vetera near
Wesel and Mogontiacum, the modern Mentz, both doubtless older than
the division of the command, and one of the reasons for introducing
that division. The two armies numbered in the first century four
legions each, thus about 30,000 men[63]; at or between those two
points lay the main bulk of the Roman troops, besides one legion at
Noviomagus (Nimeguen), another at Argentoratum (Strassburg), and a
third at Vindonissa (Windisch not far from Zürich) not far from the
Raetian frontier. To the lower army belonged the not inconsiderable
fleet on the Rhine. The boundary between the upper and the lower
army lay between Andernach and Remagen near Brohl,[64] so that
Coblenz and Bingen fell to the upper, Bonn and Cologne to the lower
military district. On the left bank there belonged to the upper German
administrative circuit the districts of the Helvetii (Switzerland), the
Sequani (Besançon), the Lingones (Langres), the Rauraci (Basle), the
Triboci (Alsace), the Nemetes (Spires), and the Vangiones (Worms); to
the more restricted lower German circuit belonged the district of the
Ubii, or rather the colony Agrippina (Cologne), those of the Tungri
(Tongern), the Menapii (Brabant), and the Batavi, while the cantons
situated farther to the west, including Metz and Treves, were placed
under the different governors of the three Gauls. While this separation
has merely administrative significance, on the other hand the varying
extent of the two jurisdictions on the right bank coincides with the
varying relations to their neighbours and the advancing or receding
of the bounds of the Roman rule conditioned by those relations. With
these neighbours confronting them, matters on the lower and on the
upper Rhine were regulated in ways so diverse, and the course of events
was so thoroughly different that here the provincial separation became
historically of the most decisive importance. Let us look first at the
development of things on the lower Rhine.

[Sidenote: Lower Germany.]

We have formerly described how far the Romans had subjugated the
Germans on both banks of the Rhine. The Germanic Batavi had been
peacefully united with the empire not by Caesar, but not long
afterwards, perhaps by Drusus (p. 28). They were settled in the Rhine
delta, that is on the left bank of the Rhine and on the islands formed
by its arms, upwards as far at least as the Old Rhine, and so nearly
from Antwerp to Utrecht and Leyden in Zealand and southern Holland, on
territory originally Celtic--at least the local names are predominantly
Celtic; their name is still borne by the Betuwe, the lowland between
the Waal and the Leck with the capital Noviomagus, now Nimeguen. They
were, especially compared with the restless and refractory Celts,
obedient and useful subjects, and hence occupied a distinctive position
in the aggregate, and particularly in the military system, of the
Roman empire. They remained quite free from taxation, but were on
the other hand drawn upon more largely than any other canton in the
recruiting; this one canton furnished to the army 1000 horsemen and
9000 foot soldiers; besides, the men of the imperial body-guard were
taken especially from them. The command of these Batavian divisions
was conferred exclusively on native Batavi. The Batavi were accounted
indisputably not merely as the best riders and swimmers of the army,
but also as the model of true soldiers, and in this case certainly the
good pay of the Batavian body-guard, as well as the privilege of the
nobles to serve as officers, considerably confirmed their loyalty.
These Germans accordingly had taken no part either preparatory to, or
consequent upon, the disaster of Varus; and if Augustus, under the
first impression of the terrible news, discharged his Batavian guard,
he soon became convinced of the groundlessness of his suspicion, and
the troop was a short time afterwards reinstated.

[Sidenote: Cannenefates.]

[Sidenote: Frisians.]

[Sidenote: Chauci.]

On the other bank of the Rhine next to the Batavi, in the modern
Kennemer district (North Holland beyond Amsterdam), dwelt the
Cannenefates, closely related to them but less numerous; they are not
merely named among the tribes subjugated by Tiberius, but were also
treated like the Batavi in the furnishing of soldiers. The Frisians,
adjoining these further on, in the coast district that is still named
after them, as far as the lower Ems, submitted to Drusus and obtained
a position similar to that of the Batavi. There was imposed on them
instead of tribute simply the delivery of a number of bullocks' hides
for the wants of the army; on the other hand they had to furnish
comparatively large numbers of men for the Roman service. They were the
most faithful allies of Drusus as afterwards of Germanicus, useful to
him in constructing canals as well as especially after the unfortunate
North Sea expeditions (p. 53). They were followed on the east by the
Chauci, a widely extended tribe of sailors and fishermen along the
coast of the North Sea on both sides of the Weser, perhaps from the
Ems to the Elbe; they were brought into subjection to the Romans
by Drusus at the same time with the Frisians, but not, like these,
without resistance. All these Germanic coast tribes submitted either by
agreement or at any rate without any severe struggle to the new rule,
and as they had taken no part in the rising of the Cherusci, they still
continued after the battle of Varus in their earlier relations to the
Roman empire; even from the more remote cantons of the Frisians and the
Chauci the garrisons were not at that time withdrawn, and the latter
still furnished a contingent to the campaigns of Germanicus. On the
renewed evacuation of Germany in the year 17 the poor and distant land
of the Chauci, difficult of protection, seems certainly to have been
given up; at least there are no later evidences of the continuance
of the Roman dominion there, and some decades later we find them
independent. But all the land westward of the lower Ems remained with
the empire, whose boundary thus included the modern Netherlands. The
defence of this part of the imperial frontier against the Germans not
belonging to the empire was left in the main to the subject maritime
cantons themselves.

[Sidenote: Limes and desert-frontier on the lower Rhine.]

Farther up the stream a different course was taken; a frontier-road
was here marked off, and the land lying between it and the Rhine
was depopulated. With the frontier-road drawn at a greater or less
distance from the Rhine, the _Limes_,[65] was associated the control
of frontier-intercourse, as the crossing of this road was forbidden
altogether by night, and, as regards armed men, by day, and was
permitted in the case of others, as a rule, only under special
precautions for security and on payment of the prescribed transit-dues.
Such a road was drawn opposite to the headquarters on the lower Rhine,
in what is now Münster, by Tiberius after the disaster of Varus, at
some distance from the Rhine, seeing that between it and the river
stretched the "Caesian forest," the more precise position of which is
not known. Similar arrangements must have been made at the same time in
the valleys of the Ruhr and the Sieg as far as that of the Wied, where
the province of the lower Rhine ended. This road did not necessarily
require to be militarily occupied and arranged for defence, although of
course the defence of the frontier and the fortification of it always
aimed at making the frontier-road as far as possible secure. A chief
means for protecting the frontier was the depopulation of the tract
of land between the river and the road. "The tribes on the right bank
of the Rhine," says a well-informed author of the time of Tiberius,
"have been in part transferred by the Romans to the left bank, in part
withdrawn of their own accord into the interior." This applied, in what
is now the Münster country, to the Germanic stocks earlier settled
there of the Usipes, Tencteri, Tubantes. In the campaigns of Germanicus
these appear dislodged from the Rhine, but still in the region of the
Lippe, afterwards, probably in consequence of those very expeditions,
farther southward opposite to Mentz. Their old home lay thenceforth
desolate, and formed the extensive pasture-country reserved for the
herds of the lower Germanic army, on which in the year 58 first the
Frisii and then the Amsivarii, wandering homeless, thought of settling,
without being able to procure leave from the Roman authorities to
do so. Farther to the south at least a portion of the Sugambri, who
likewise were subjected in great part to the same treatment, remained
settled on the right bank,[66] while other smaller tribes were wholly
dislodged. The scanty population tolerated within the Limes were, as a
matter of course, subjects of the empire, as is confirmed by the Roman
levy taking place among the Sugambri.

[Sidenote: Conflicts with the Frisii and Chauci under Claudius.]

In this way matters were arranged on the lower Rhine after the
abandonment of the more comprehensive projects, and thus a not
inconsiderable territory on the right bank was still held by the
Romans. But various inconvenient complications arose in connection
with it. Towards the end of the reign of Tiberius (28) the Frisians,
in consequence of intolerable oppression in the levying of tribute in
itself small, revolted from the empire, slew the people employed in
levying it, and besieged the Roman commandant acting there, with the
rest of the Roman soldiers and civilians sojourning in the territory,
in the fortress of Flevum, where, previous to the extension of the
Zuyder See that took place in the Middle Ages, lay the eastmost mouth
of the Rhine, near the modern island Vlieland beside the Texel. The
rising assumed such proportions that both armies of the Rhine marched
in concert against the Frisians; but still the governor Lucius Apronius
accomplished nothing. The Frisians gave up the siege of the fortress,
when the Roman fleet brought up the legions; but it was difficult to
get near the Frisians themselves in a country so much intersected;
several Roman corps were destroyed in detail, and the Roman advanced
guard was so thoroughly defeated that even the dead bodies of the
fallen were left in the power of the enemy. The matter was not brought
to a decisive action, nor yet to a true subjugation; Tiberius, the
older he grew, became ever less inclined to larger enterprises, which
gave to the general in command a position of power. With this state of
things was connected the fact that in the immediately succeeding years
the neighbours of the Frisians, the Chauci, became very troublesome
to the Romans; in the year 41 the governor Publius Gabinius Secundus
had to undertake an expedition against them, and six years later (47)
they even pillaged far and wide the coast of Gaul with their light
piratical vessels under the leadership of the Roman deserter Gannascus,
by birth one of the Cannenefates. Gnaeus Domitius Corbulo, nominated
governor of Lower Germany by Claudius, put a stop with his fleet to
these forerunners of the Saxons and Normans, and afterwards vigorously
brought back the Frisians to obedience, by organising anew their
commonwealth and stationing a Roman garrison among them.

[Sidenote: The occupation of the right bank abandoned.]

Corbulo had the intention of chastising the Chauci also; at his
instigation Gannascus was put out of the way--against a deserter he
held himself entitled to take this course--and he was on the point
of crossing the Ems and advancing into the country of the Chauci,
when not only did he receive counter-orders from Rome, but the Roman
government wholly and completely altered its attitude on the lower
Rhine. The emperor Claudius directed the governor to remove all Roman
garrisons from the right bank. We may well conceive that the imperial
general with bitter words commended the good fortune of the free
commanders of Rome in former days; in this step certainly there was
a conclusive admission of defeat, which had been but partially owned
after the battle of Varus. Probably this restriction of the Roman
occupation of Germany, which was not occasioned by any pressure of
immediate necessity, was called forth by the resolve just then adopted
to occupy Britain, and finds its justification in the fact that the
troops were not sufficient for accomplishing both objects at once.
That the order was executed, and matters remained afterwards in that
position, is proved by the absence of Roman military inscriptions on
the whole right bank of the lower Rhine.[67] Only isolated points
for crossing and sally-ports, such as, in particular, Deutz opposite
Cologne, formed exceptions from this general rule. The military road
keeps here to the left bank and strictly to the course of the Rhine,
while the traffic-route running behind it, cutting off the windings,
pursues the straight line of communication. Here on the right bank of
the Rhine there is no evidence of Roman military roads, either through
the discovery of milestones or otherwise.

[Sidenote: Its subsequent position.]

The withdrawal of the garrisons did not imply giving up possession,
strictly speaking, of the right bank in this province. It was looked
upon by the Romans thenceforth somewhat as the commandant of a fortress
looks upon the ground that lies under his cannon. The Cannenefates
and at least a part of the Frisians[68] were afterwards subject, as
before, to the empire. We have already remarked that subsequently
in the Münster country the herds of the legions still pastured, and
the Germans were not allowed to settle there. But the government
thenceforth relied--for the defence of such border-territory on the
right bank as still existed in this province--in the north on the
Cannenefates and the Frisians, and farther up the stream substantially
on the space left desolate; and, if it did not directly forbid, at
any rate did not give scope to Roman settlement there. The altar
stone of a private person found at Altenberg (circuit of Mülheim),
on the river Dhün, is almost the only evidence of Roman inhabitants
in these regions. This is the more remarkable, as the prosperity of
Cologne would, if special hindrances had not here stood in the way,
have of itself carried Roman civilisation far and wide on the other
bank. Often enough Roman troops may have traversed these extensive
regions, perhaps even have kept the roads--which were here laid out in
large number during the Augustan period--in some measure passable, and
possibly laid out new ones; sparse settlers, partly remains of the old
Germanic population, partly colonists from the empire, may have settled
here, similar to those that we shall soon find in the earlier imperial
period on the right bank of the upper Rhine; but the highways, like
the possessions, lacked the stamp of durability. There was no wish to
undertake here a labour of similar extent and difficulty to that which
we shall become acquainted with further on in the upper province, or
to provide here, as was done there, military defence and fortification
for the frontier of the empire. Therefore the lower Rhine was crossed
doubtless by Roman rule, but not, like the upper Rhine, also by Roman
culture.

[Sidenote: The situation in Gaul and Germany after the fall of Nero.]

For the double task of keeping the neighbouring Gaul in obedience and
of keeping the Germans of the right bank aloof from Gaul, the army of
the lower Rhine would, even after abandoning the occupation of the
region on the right of the river, have quite sufficed, and the peace
without and within would not presumably have been interrupted, had not
the downfall of the Julio-Claudian dynasty, and the civil or rather
military war thereby called forth, exercised a momentous influence
on these relations. The insurrection of the Celtic land under the
leadership of Vindex was no doubt defeated by the two Germanic armies;
but Nero's fall nevertheless ensued, and when the Spanish army as well
as the imperial guard in Rome appointed a successor to him, the armies
of the Rhine did the same; and in the beginning of the year 69 the
greater portion of these troops crossed the Alps to settle the point on
the battle-fields of Italy, whether its ruler was to be called Marcus
or Aulus. In May of the same year the new emperor Vitellius followed,
after arms had decided in his favour, accompanied by the remainder of
the good soldiers inured to war. The blanks in the garrisons of the
Rhine were no doubt filled up for the exigency by recruits hastily
levied in Gaul; but the whole land knew that they were not the old
legions, and it soon became apparent that these were not coming back.
If the new ruler had had in his power the army that placed him on the
throne, at least a portion of them must have returned to the Rhine
immediately after the defeat of Otho in April; but the insubordination
of the soldiers still more than the new complication which soon set in
with the proclamation of Vespasian as emperor in the East, retained the
German legions in Italy.

[Sidenote: Preparations for the insurrection.]

Gaul was in the most fearful excitement. The rising of Vindex was, as
we formerly remarked (p. 82), in itself directed not against the rule
of Rome but against the rulers for the time being; but it was none the
less on that account a warfare between the armies of the Rhine and the
levy _en masse_ of the great majority of the Celtic cantons; and these
were none the less subjected to pillage and maltreatment resembling
that of the conquered. The tone of feeling which subsisted between the
provincials and the soldiers was shown, for instance, by the treatment
which the canton of the Helvetii experienced as the troops destined for
Italy marched through it. Because a courier despatched by the adherents
of Vitellius to Pannonia had here been seized, the columns on the march
from the one side, and the Romans stationed as a garrison in Raetia
on the other, entered the canton, pillaged the villages far and wide,
particularly what is now Baden near Zürich, chased those who had fled
to the mountains out of their lurking-places, and put them to death
by thousands or sold the captives under martial law. Although the
capital Aventicum (Avenches, near Murten) submitted without resistance,
the agitators of the army demanded that it should be razed, and all
that the general granted was that the question should be referred
not, forsooth, to the emperor, but to the soldiers of the great
headquarters; these sat in judgment on the fate of the town, and it was
merely the turn of their caprice that saved the place from destruction.
Outrages of this nature brought the provincials to extremities; even
before Vitellius left Gaul, a certain Mariccus, from the canton of the
Boii, dependent on the Haedui, came forward a god on earth, as he said,
and destined to restore the freedom of the Celts; and people flocked in
troops to his banner. But the exasperation in the Celtic country was
not of so very great moment. The very rising of Vindex had most clearly
shown how utterly incapable the Gauls were of releasing themselves from
the Roman embrace.

[Sidenote: Rising of the Batavian auxiliaries.]

[Sidenote: Civilis.]

But the tone of feeling of the Germanic districts reckoned as belonging
to Gaul--in the modern Netherlands--of the Batavi, the Cannenefates,
the Frisians, whose distinctive position has already been dwelt on, had
a somewhat greater importance; and it happened that, on the one hand,
these very tribes had been exasperated to the utmost, and on the other,
that their contingents were accidentally to be found in Gaul. The bulk
of the Batavian troops, 8000 men, assigned to the 14th legion, had for
a considerable time a place along with the latter in the army of the
upper Rhine, and had then under Claudius, on occasion of the occupying
of Britain, gone to that island, where this corps shortly before had,
by its incomparable valour, gained the decisive battle under Paullinus
for the Romans; from this day onward it occupied indisputably the first
place among all the divisions of the Roman army. When it was recalled
on account of this very distinction by Nero, in order to go off with
him to the war in the East, the revolution breaking out in Gaul had
brought about a quarrel between the legion and its auxiliary troops;
the former, faithfully devoted to Nero, hastened to Italy; the Batavi,
on the other hand, refused to follow. Perhaps this was connected with
the fact that two of their most noted officers, the brothers Paulus
and Civilis, had, without any reason and without respect to many years
of faithful service and honourable wounds, been shortly before put on
trial as suspected of high treason, and the former executed, the latter
placed in captivity. After the downfall of Nero, to which the revolt of
the Batavian cohorts had materially contributed, Galba released Civilis
and sent the Batavians back to their old headquarters in Britain. While
they, on the march thither, were encamped among the Lingones (Langres),
the legions of the Rhine revolted from Galba and proclaimed Vitellius
emperor. The Batavi, after considerable hesitation, ultimately joined
the movement; Vitellius did not forgive them for this hesitation, but
did not venture directly to call to account the leader of the powerful
corps.

[Sidenote: Progress of the movement.]

Thus the Batavians had marched with the legions of lower Germany to
Italy and had fought with their usual valour in the battle of Betriacum
for Vitellius, while their old legionary comrades confronted them in
the army of Otho. But the arrogance of the Germans exasperated their
Roman comrades in victory, however much these acknowledged their valour
in battle; the very generals in command did not trust them, and even
made an attempt to divide by detaching them--a course, which, in this
war, where the soldiers commanded and the generals obeyed, was not
capable of being carried out, and had almost cost the general his life.
After the victory they were commissioned to accompany their hostile
comrades of the 14th legion to Britain; but when matters came to a
skirmish between the two at Turin, the latter alone went to Britain,
and the Batavians to Germany. Meanwhile Vespasian had been proclaimed
emperor in the East, and, while in consequence of this Vitellius
gave to the Batavian cohorts marching orders for Italy as well as
ordered new comprehensive levies among the Batavi, commissioners of
Vespasian opened communications with the Batavian officers to hinder
this departure, and to provoke in Germany itself a rising which
should detain the troops there. Civilis entered into the suggestion.
He resorted to his home, and gained easily the assent of his own
people as well as the neighbouring Cannenefates and Frisians. The
insurrection broke out among the former; the camps of the two cohorts
in the neighbourhood were surprised and the Roman posts seized; the
Roman recruits fought ill; soon Civilis with his cohort--which he had
caused to follow, ostensibly to employ it against the insurgents--threw
himself openly into the movement, along with the three Germanic cantons
renounced allegiance to Vitellius, and summoned the other Batavians and
Cannenefates, who just then were breaking up from Mentz for the march
to Italy, to join him.

[Sidenote: Its character.]

All this was more a soldiers' rising than an insurrection of the
province, or even a Germanic war. If at that time the Rhine legions
were fighting with those of the Danube, and further with these and
the army of the Euphrates, it was but in keeping that the soldiers of
the second class, and above all their most distinguished troop, the
Batavian, should enter independently into this divisional warfare. Any
one who compares this movement among the cohorts of the Batavians and
the Germans on the left of the Rhine with the insurrection of those
on the right bank of the Rhine under Augustus, may not overlook the
fact, that in the later rising the alae and cohorts took up the part
of the general levy of the Cherusci; and, if the perfidious officer
of Varus released his nation from the Roman rule, the Batavian leader
acted in the commission of Vespasian; in fact, perhaps, on the secret
directions of the governor of his province privately inclined towards
Vespasian, and the rising in the first instance was directed simply
against Vitellius. It is true that the position of things was such that
this soldiers' revolt might change itself at any moment into a German
war of the most dangerous kind. The same Roman troops who covered the
Rhine against the Germans of the right bank were, in consequence of the
corps-warfare, placed in an attitude of hostility to the Germans on
the left bank; the parts were of such a nature, that it seemed almost
easier to exchange them than to carry them out. Civilis himself may
possibly have left it to depend on the sequel, whether the movement
would end in a change of emperor or in the expulsion of the Romans from
Gaul by the Germans.

[Sidenote: State of the armies on the Rhine.]

The command of the two armies on the Rhine was held at this time, after
the governor of lower Germany had been made emperor, by his former
colleague in upper Germany, Hordeonius Flaccus, a gouty man advanced in
years, without energy and without authority, either, moreover, in fact
secretly holding to Vespasian, or at any rate very much suspected of
such faithlessness by the legions, who zealously adhered to the emperor
of their own making. It is characteristic of him and of his position
that, to clear himself of the suspicion of treason, he gave orders that
the government despatches on arrival should be sent unopened to the
eagle-bearers of the legions, and these should read them in the first
instance to the soldiers, before they forwarded them to their address.
Of the four legions of the lower army which had primarily to do with
the insurgents two, the 5th and the 15th, were stationed under the
legate Munius Lupercus in the headquarters at Vetera; the 16th, under
Numisius Rufus, in Novaesium (Neuss); the 1st, under Herennius Gallus,
in Bonna (Bonn). Of the upper army, which then numbered only three
legions,[69] one, the 21st, remained in its stated quarters Vindonissa,
aloof from these events, if it had not rather been drawn off wholly to
Italy; the two others, the 4th Macedonian and the 22d, were stationed
at the headquarters Mentz, where Flaccus also was present; and in point
of fact, his able legate Dillius Vocula exercised the chief command.
The legions had throughout only half of their full complement, and most
of the soldiers were half-invalids or recruits.

[Sidenote: First conflicts.]

[Sidenote: Participation of the Germans on the right of the Rhine.]

Civilis, at the head of a small number of regular troops, but of the
collective levy of the Batavi, Cannenefates, and Frisians, advanced
from his home to the attack. In the first instance, on the Rhine he met
with remnants of the Roman garrisons driven from the northern cantons
and a division of the Roman Rhenish fleet; when he attacked them, not
merely did the ships' crews, consisting in great part of Batavians, go
over to him, but also a cohort of the Tungri--it was the first revolt
of a Gallic division; such Italian soldiers as were present were slain
or taken prisoners. This success brought at length the Germans on the
right of the Rhine into the movement. What they had long vainly hoped
for--the rising of the Roman subjects on the other bank--now came to
be fulfilled, and as well the Chauci and the Frisians on the coast,
as above all, the Bructeri on both sides of the upper Ems as far down
as the Lippe, the Tencteri on the middle Rhine opposite to Cologne,
and in lesser measure the tribes adjoining these on the south--Usipes,
Mattiaci, Chatti--threw themselves into the struggle. When, on the
orders of Flaccus, the two weak legions marched out from Vetera against
the insurgents, these could already confront them with a numerous
contingent drawn from beyond the Rhine; and the battle ended, like the
combat on the Rhine, with a defeat of the Romans through the defection
of the Batavian cavalry, which belonged to the garrison of Vetera, and
through the bad behaviour of the cavalry of the Ubii and of the Treveri.

[Sidenote: Siege of Vetera.]

The insurgents and the Germans who flocked to them proceeded to invest
and besiege the headquarters of the lower army. During this siege news
of the events on the lower Rhine reached the other Batavian cohorts
in the neighbourhood of Mentz; they at once wheeled round towards
the north. Instead of ordering them to be cut down, the weak-minded
commander-in-chief allowed them to go, and when the commandant of the
legion in Bonn sought to intercept them, Flaccus did not support him as
he might have done and had even at first promised. So the brave Germans
dispersed the Bonn legion and succeeded in joining Civilis--henceforth
the compact core of his army, in which now the banners of the
Roman cohorts stood by the side of the animal-standards from the
sacred groves of the Germans. But still the Batavian held, at least
ostensibly, by Vespasian; he swore in the Roman troops in Vespasian's
name, and summoned the garrison of Vetera to join him in declaring for
the latter. These troops, however, saw in this, probably with warrant,
a mere attempt to overreach them, and repelled it as resolutely as they
repelled the assailing hosts of the enemy, who soon found themselves
compelled by the superiority of Roman tactics to change the siege into
a blockade. But, as the leaders of the Roman army had been taken by
surprise in these events, provisions were scarce and speedy relief was
urgently called for. In order to bring it, Flaccus and Vocula set out
with their whole force from Mentz, drew to themselves on the way the
two legions from Bonna and Novaesium as well as the auxiliary troops of
the Gallic cantons appearing at the word of command in large numbers,
and approached Vetera.

[Sidenote: Vocula.]

But instead of throwing at once the whole force from within and without
on the besiegers, however great their superiority in numbers, Vocula
pitched his camp at Gelduba (Gellep on the Rhine, not far from Krefeld)
a long day's march distant from Vetera, while Flaccus lay farther back.
The worthlessness of the so-called general and the ever increasing
demoralisation of the troops, above all, the distrust towards the
officers, which frequently went so far as to maltreat and attempt to
kill them, can alone at least explain this halting. Thus the mischief
gradually thickened on all sides. All Germany seemed desirous to take
part in the war; while the besieging army constantly obtained new
contingents from that quarter, other bands passed over the Rhine,
which in this dry summer was unusually low, partly in the rear of the
Romans into the cantons of the Ubii and the Treveri to lay waste the
valley of the Moselle, partly below Vetera into the region of the Maas
and the Scheldt; further bands appeared before Mentz and made pretext
of besieging it. Then came the accounts of the catastrophe in Italy.
On the news of the second battle at Betriacum in the autumn of the
year 69 the Germanic legions gave up the cause of Vitellius as lost
and took the oath, though reluctantly, to Vespasian, perhaps in the
hope that Civilis, who had in fact inscribed the name of Vespasian on
his banners, would then make his peace. But the German swarms, who
had meanwhile poured themselves over all northern Gaul, had not come
to install the Flavian dynasty; even if Civilis had ever wished this,
he now had no longer the power. He threw off the mask, and openly
expressed--what indeed was long settled--that the Germans of north Gaul
intended, with the help of their free countrymen, to shake off the
Roman rule.

[Sidenote: Relief of Vetera.]

But the fortune of war changed. Civilis attempted to surprise the camp
of Gelduba; the attack began successfully, and the defection of the
cohorts of the Nervii brought Vocula's little band into a critical
position. Then suddenly two Spanish cohorts fell on the rear of the
Germans; what threatened to be a defeat was converted into a brilliant
victory; the flower of the assailing army remained on the field of
battle. Vocula indeed did not advance at once against Vetera, as he
possibly might have done, but he penetrated into the besieged town some
days later after a renewed vehement conflict with the enemy. It is true
that he brought no provisions; and, as the river was in the power of
the enemy, these had to be procured by the land-route from Novaesium,
where Flaccus was encamped. The first convoy passed through; but the
enemy, having meanwhile assembled again, attacked the second column
with provisions on its way, and compelled it to throw itself into
Gelduba. Vocula went off thither to its support with his troops and a
part of the old garrison of Vetera. When they had arrived at Gelduba,
the men refused to return to Vetera and to take upon themselves the
further sufferings of the siege in prospect; instead of this they
marched to Novaesium, and Vocula, who knew that the remnant of the old
garrison of Vetera was in some measure provisioned, had for good or
evil to follow.

[Sidenote: Mutiny of Roman troops.]

In Novaesium meanwhile mutiny had broken out. The soldiers had come to
learn that a largess destined for them by Vitellius had reached the
general, and compelled its distribution in the name of Vespasian. They
had scarcely received it, when, in the wild carousing which ensued upon
the largess, the old grudge of the soldiers broke out afresh; they
pillaged the house of the general who had betrayed the army of the
Rhine to the general of the Syrian legions, slew him, and would have
prepared the same fate for Vocula, if the latter had not escaped in
disguise. Thereupon they once more proclaimed Vitellius emperor, not
knowing that he was already dead. When this news came to the camp, the
better part of the soldiers, and in particular the two upper German
legions, began in some measure to reflect; they again exchanged the
effigy of Vitellius on their standards for that of Vespasian, and
placed themselves under the orders of Vocula; he led them to Mentz,
where he remained during the rest of the winter 69-70. Civilis occupied
Gelduba, and thereby cut off Vetera, which was most closely blockaded;
the camps of Novaesium and Bonna were still held.

[Sidenote: Insurrection in Gaul.]

Hitherto the Gallic land, apart from the few insurgent Germanic cantons
in the north, had kept firmly by Rome. Certainly partisanship ran
through the several cantons; among the Tungri, for example, the Batavi
had a strong body of adherents, and the bad behaviour of the Gallic
auxiliary troops during the whole campaign may probably have been in
part called forth by such a temper of hostility to the Romans. But
even among the insurgents there was a considerable party favourably
disposed to Rome; a Batavian of note, Claudius Labeo, waged a partisan
warfare not without success against his countrymen in his home and its
neighbourhood, and the nephew of Civilis, Julius Briganticus, fell in
one of these combats at the head of a band of Roman horse. All the
Gallic cantons had without more ado complied with the injunction to
send contingents; the Ubii, although of Germanic descent, were in this
war mindful simply of their Romanism, and they as well as the Treveri
had offered brave and successful resistance to the Germans invading
their territory. It is easy to understand how this was so. The position
of things in Gaul was still much as it was in the days of Caesar and
Ariovistus; a liberation of their Gallic home from the Roman dominion
by means of those hordes, which, in order to lend to Civilis the help
of his countrymen, were just then pillaging the valleys of the Moselle,
Maas, and Scheldt, was tantamount to a surrender of the land to its
Germanic neighbours; in this war, which had grown out of a feud between
two corps of Roman troops into a conflict between Rome and Germany,
the Gauls were, properly speaking, nothing but the stake and the
booty. That the tone of feeling among the Gauls, in spite of all their
well-founded general and special complaints as to the Roman government,
was predominantly anti-Germanic, and that the materials for kindling
such a national rising suddenly bursting into flame and reckless of
consequences, as had spread through the people in an earlier time, were
wanting in this Gaul now half-Romanised, events up to this time had
most clearly shown. But amidst the constant misfortunes of the Roman
army the courage of the Gauls hostile to the Romans gradually grew
stronger, and their defection completed the catastrophe. Two Treveri
of note, Julius Classicus, the commander of the Treverian cavalry, and
Julius Tutor, commandant of the garrisons on the banks of the middle
Rhine, Julius Sabinus one of the Lingones, descended, as he at least
boasted, from a bastard of Caesar, and some other men of like mind from
different cantons, professed in thoughtless Celtic fashion to discern
that the destruction of Rome was written in the stars and announced to
the world by the burning of the Capitol (Dec. 69).

[Sidenote: The Gallic empire.]

So they resolved to set aside the Roman rule and to set up a Gallic
empire. For this purpose they took the course of Arminius. Vocula
allowed himself to be really induced by falsified reports of these
Roman officers to set out, with the contingents placed under their
command and a part of the Mentz garrison, in the spring of 70 for the
lower Rhine, in order with these troops and the legions of Bonna
and Novaesium to relieve the hard-pressed Vetera. On the march from
Novaesium to Vetera, Classicus and the officers in concert with him
left the Roman army and proclaimed the new Gallic empire. Vocula led
the legions back to Novaesium; Classicus pitched his camp immediately
in front of it; Vetera could not now hold out long; the Romans could
not but expect after its fall to find themselves confronted by the
whole power of the enemy.

[Sidenote: Capitulation of the Romans.]

The Roman troops refused to face this prospect and entered into a
capitulation with the revolted officers. In vain Vocula attempted once
more to urge the ties of discipline and of honour; the legions of Rome
allowed a Roman deserter from the 1st legion to stab the brave general
on the order of Classicus, and themselves delivered up the other chief
officers in chains to the representative of the empire of Gaul, who
thereupon made the soldiers swear allegiance to that empire. The same
oath was taken at the hands of the perfidious officers by the garrison
of Vetera, which, compelled by famine, at once surrendered, and
likewise by the garrison of Mentz, where but a few individuals avoided
disgrace by flight or death. The whole proud army of the Rhine, the
first army of the empire, had surrendered to its own auxiliaries; Rome
had surrendered to Gaul.

[Sidenote: End of the Gallic empire.]

It was a tragedy, and at the same time a farce. The Gallic empire
lapsed, as it could not fail to do. Civilis and his Germans were
doubtless, in the first instance, well content that the quarrel in the
Roman camp delivered the one as well as the other half of their foes
into their hands; but he had no thought of recognising that empire, and
still less had his allies from the right bank of the Rhine.

As little would the Gauls themselves have anything to do with it--a
result, to which certainly the split between the eastern districts
and the rest of the country, which had already become apparent at the
rising of Vindex, materially contributed. The Treveri and the Lingones,
whose leading men had instigated that camp-conspiracy, stood by their
leaders, but they remained virtually alone; only the Vangiones and
Triboci joined them. The Sequani, into whose territory the Lingones
marched to induce their accession, drove them summarily homeward. The
esteemed Remi, the leading canton in Belgica, convoked the diet of the
three Gauls, and, although there was no lack there of orators on behalf
of political freedom, it resolved simply to dissuade the Treveri from
the revolt. How the constitution of the new empire would have turned
out, had it been established, it is difficult to say; we learn only
that Sabinus, the great-grandson of Caesar's concubine, named himself
also Caesar, and in this capacity allowed himself to be beaten by the
Sequani; whereas Classicus, who had not such ascendency at his command,
assumed the insignia of Roman magistracy, and thus played perhaps the
part of republican proconsul. In keeping with this there exists a coin,
which must have been struck by Classicus or his adherents, exhibiting
the head of Gallia, as the coins of the Roman republic show that of
Roma, and by its side the symbol of the legion, with the genuinely
audacious legend of "fidelity" (_fides_). At first, doubtless, on the
Rhine the imperialists, in concert with the insurgent Germans, had
full freedom. The remnants of the two legions that had capitulated in
Vetera were put to death, contrary to the terms of surrender and to the
will of Civilis; the two from Novaesium and Bonna were sent to Treves;
all the Roman camps on the Rhine, large and small, with the exception
of Mogontiacum, were burnt. The Agrippinenses found themselves in the
worst plight. The imperialists had certainly confined themselves to
requiring from them the oath of allegiance; but the Germans in this
case did not forget that they were properly speaking, the Ubii. A
message of the Tencteri from the right bank of the Rhine--this was one
of the tribes whose old home the Romans had laid desolate and used
as pasture-ground, and which had in consequence of this been obliged
to seek other abodes--demanded the razing of this chief seat of the
Germanic apostates, and the execution of all their citizens of Roman
descent. This would probably have been resolved on had not Civilis,
who was personally under obligation to them, as well as the German
prophetess Veleda in the canton of the Bructeri, who had predicted
this victory, and whose authority the whole insurgent army recognised,
interceded on their behalf.

[Sidenote: Advent of the Romans.]

The victors were not left long to contend over the booty. The
imperialists certainly gave the assurance that the civil war in Italy
had broken out, that all the provinces were overrun by the enemy,
and Vespasian was probably dead; but the heavy arm of Rome was soon
enough felt. The newly confirmed government could despatch its best
generals and numerous legions to the Rhine; and certainly an imposing
display of power was there needed. Annius Gallus took up the command
in the upper, Petillius Cerialis in the lower province; the latter, an
impetuous and often incautious, but brave and capable officer, took
the really serious action. Besides the 21st legion from Vindonissa,
five came from Italy, three from Spain, one along with the fleet from
Britain, and, in addition, a further corps from the Raetian garrison.
This and the 21st legion were the first to arrive. The imperialists
had possibly talked of blocking the passes of the Alps; but nothing
was done, and the whole country of the upper Rhine lay open as far
as Mentz. The two Mentz legions had no doubt sworn allegiance to the
Gallic empire, and at first offered resistance; but, so soon as they
perceived that a larger Roman army confronted them, they returned to
obedience, and the Vangiones and Triboci immediately followed their
example. Even the Lingones submitted--merely upon a promise of mild
treatment--without striking a blow on the part of their 70,000 men
capable of bearing arms.[70] The Treveri themselves had almost done the
same; but they were prevented from doing so by the nobility. The two
surviving legions of the lower Rhenish army that were stationed here
had, on the first news of the approach of the Romans, torn the Gallic
insignia from their standards, and withdrew to the Mediomatrici that
had remained faithful (Metz), where they submitted to the mercy of the
new general. When Cerialis arrived at the army, he found a good part of
the work already done. The insurgent leaders exerted themselves, it is
true, to the utmost--at that time by their orders the legionary legates
delivered up at Novaesium were put to death--but in a military sense
they were impotent, and their last political move--that of offering the
Roman general himself the sovereignty of the Gallic empire--was worthy
of the beginning. After a short combat Cerialis occupied the capital of
the Treveri, the leaders and the whole council having taken refuge with
the Germans. This was the end of the Gallic empire.

[Sidenote: Last struggles of Civilis.]

More serious was the struggle with the Germans. Civilis, with his
whole fighting strength, the Batavi, the contingent of the Germans,
and the refugee bands of the Gallic insurgents, suddenly assailed the
much weaker Roman army in Treves itself. The Roman camp was already
in his power, and the bridge of the Moselle occupied by him, when his
men, instead of following up the victory which they had won, began
prematurely to pillage, and Cerialis, compensating for his imprudence
by brilliant valour, restored the combat and ultimately drove the
Germans out from the camp and the town. There was no further success of
importance. The Agrippinenses again joined the Romans, and killed the
Germans, who were staying among them, in their houses; a whole Germanic
cohort encamped there was shut up and burnt in its quarters. Whatsoever
in Belgica still held to the Germans was brought back to obedience
by the legion arriving from Britain; a victory of the Cannenefates
over the Roman ships which had landed the legion, and other isolated
successes of the brave Germanic bands, above all, of the more numerous
and better managed Germanic ships, did not change the general position
of the war. On the ruins of Vetera Civilis confronted the foe; but he
had to give way to the Roman army, which had meanwhile been doubled,
and at length, after an obstinate resistance, had to leave his own
home to the enemy. As ever happens, discord ensued in the train of
misfortune. Civilis was no longer sure of his own men, and sought and
found protection from them among his opponents. Late in the autumn of
the year 70 the unequal struggle was decided; the auxiliaries now on
their part surrendered to the burgess-legions, and the priestess Veleda
went as a captive to Rome.

[Sidenote: Nature of the Roman task and its issue.]

When we look back on this war, one of the most singular and most
dreadful in all ages, we cannot but own that hardly ever has an army
had a task set before it equally severe with that of the two Roman
armies on the Rhine in the years 69 and 70. In the course of a few
months soldiers successively of Nero, of the senate, of Galba, of
Vitellius, and of Vespasian; the only support to the dominion of Italy
over the two mighty nations of the Gauls and the Germans, while the
soldiers of the auxiliaries were taken almost entirely, and those
of the legions in great part, from those very nations; deprived of
their best men, mostly without pay, often starving, and beyond all
measure wretchedly led, they were certainly expected to perform feats
physically and morally super-human. They ill sustained the severe
trial. This was less a war between two divisions of the army, like the
other civil wars of this terrible time, than a war of soldiers, and
above all of officers, of the second class against those of the first,
combined with a dangerous insurrection and invasion of the Germans,
and an incidental and insignificant revolt of some Celtic districts.
In Roman military history Cannae and Carrhae and the Teutoburg Forest
are glorious pages compared with the double disgrace of Novaesium; only
a few individual men, not a single troop, preserved a pure escutcheon
amidst the general dishonour. The frightful disorganisation of the
political and, above all, of the military system, which meets us on the
fall of the Julio-Claudian dynasty, appears--more clearly even than
in the leaderless battle of Betriacum--in those events on the Rhine,
to which the history of Rome never before and never after exhibits a
parallel.

[Sidenote: Consequences of the Batavian war.]

The very extent and general diffusion of these misdeeds rendered a
corresponding chastisement impossible. It deserves to be acknowledged
that the new ruler, who happily had remained in person aloof from all
these occurrences, in a genuine statesmanly fashion allowed the past
to be past, and exerted himself only to prevent the repetition of
similar scenes. That the prominent culprits, whether from the ranks
of the troops or from the insurgents, were brought to account for
their crimes, was a matter of course; we may measure the punishment by
the fact that when five years afterwards one of the Gallic insurgent
leaders was discovered in a lurking-place, in which his wife had up to
that time kept him concealed, Vespasian gave him as well as her over
to the executioner. But the renegade legions were allowed to share
in the fighting against the Germans, and to atone for their guilt to
some extent in the hot conflicts at Treves and at Vetera. It is true,
nevertheless, that the four legions of the lower Rhenish army were
all dismissed, as was one of the two upper Rhenish legions that took
part--one would gladly believe that the 22d was spared in honourable
remembrance of its brave legate. Probably a considerable number of the
Batavian cohorts met with the same fate, and not less, apparently, the
cavalry regiment of the Treveri, and perhaps several other specially
prominent troops. Still less than against the rebellious soldiers could
proceedings be taken with the full severity of the law against the
insurgent Celtic and German cantons; that the Roman legions demanded
the razing of the Treverian colony of Augustus--this time for the
sake not of booty but of vengeance--is at least as intelligible as
the destruction, desired by the Germans, of the town of the Ubii;
but as Civilis protected the one so Vespasian protected the other.
Even the Germans on the left of the Rhine had, on the whole, their
previous position left to them. But probably--we are here without
certain tradition--there was introduced in the levy and the employment
of the _auxilia_ an essential change, which diminished the danger
involved in the auxiliary system. The Batavi retained freedom from
taxation and a still privileged position as regards service; a part
of them, not altogether inconsiderable, had withal championed in arms
the cause of the Romans. But the Batavian troops were considerably
diminished, and, while hitherto--as it would appear of right--officers
had been placed over them from their own nobility, and the same
had been at least frequently done as respects the other Germanic
and Celtic troops, the officers of the _alae_ and _cohortes_ were
afterwards taken predominantly from the class from which Vespasian
himself was descended--from the good urban middle class of Italy and
of the provincial towns organised after the Italian fashion. Officers
of the position of the Cheruscan Arminius, of the Batavian Civilis,
of the Treverian Classicus do not henceforth recur. As little is the
previous close association of troops levied from the same canton met
with subsequently; on the contrary, the men serve, without distinction
as to their descent, in the most various divisions; this was probably
a lesson which the Roman military administration gathered from this
war. It was another change, probably suggested by this war, that while
hitherto the majority of the auxiliaries employed in Germany were
taken from the Germanic and neighbouring cantons, thenceforth the
Germanic auxiliary troops found preponderantly employment outside of
their native country, just like the Dalmatian and Pannonian troops in
consequence of the war with Bato. Vespasian was a soldier of sagacity
and experience; it is probably in good part a merit of his if we meet
with no later example of revolt of the _auxilia_ against their legions.

[Sidenote: Later attitude of the Roman Germans on the lower Rhine.]

That the insurrection, which we have just narrated, of the Germans on
the left of the Rhine--although it, in consequence of the accidental
completeness of the accounts preserved respecting it, alone gives us a
clear insight into the political and military relations on the lower
Rhine and in Gaul generally, and therefore deserved to be narrated in
more detail--was yet called forth more by outward and accidental causes
than by the inner necessity of things, is proved by the apparently
complete quiet which now ensued there, and by the--so far as we can
see--uninterrupted _status quo_ in this very region. The Roman Germans
were merged in the empire no less completely than the Roman Gauls; of
attempts at insurrection on the part of the former there is no further
mention. At the close of the third century, the Franks invading Gaul
by way of the lower Rhine included in their seizure the Batavian
territory; yet the Batavians maintained themselves in their old though
diminished settlements, as did likewise the Frisians, even during the
confusions of the great migration of peoples, and, so far as we know,
preserved allegiance even to the decaying empire.

[Sidenote: The free Germans on the lower Rhine.]

When we turn from the Romanised to the free Germans to the east of the
Rhine, we find offensive action on their part not less brought to an
end with their participation in that Batavian insurrection, than the
attempts of the Romans to bring about an alteration of the frontier on
a grand scale in those regions came to a close with the expeditions of
Germanicus.

[Sidenote: Bructeri.]

Of the free Germans, those dwelling next to the Roman territory were
the Bructeri on both banks of the middle Ems, and in the region of the
sources of the Ems and Lippe; for which reason they took part before
all the other Germans in the Batavian insurrection. To their canton
belonged the maiden Veleda, who sent forth her countrymen to the war
against Rome and promised them the victory, whose utterance decided
the fate of the town of the Ubii, and to whose high tower the captive
senators and the captured admiral's ship of the Rhenish fleet were
sent. The overthrow of the Batavi affected them also; and perhaps, in
addition, a special counterblow of the Romans since that virgin was
subsequently led as a captive to Rome. This disaster, as well as feuds
with the neighbouring tribes, broke their power; under Nero a king whom
they did not wish was obtruded on them by force of arms on the part of
their neighbours with the passive assistance of the Roman legate.

[Sidenote: Cherusci.]

[Sidenote: Langobardi.]

[Sidenote: Semnones.]

The Cherusci, in the region of the upper Weser, in the time of
Augustus and Tiberius the leading canton in central Germany, is seldom
mentioned after the death of Arminius, but always as sustaining
good relations to the Romans. When the civil war, which must have
continued to rage among them even after the fall of Arminius, had
swept away the whole family of their princes, they requested from the
Roman government the last of that house, Italicus, a brother's son
of Arminius living in Italy, to be their ruler; it is true that the
return home of one who was brave but answered more to his name than to
his lineage, kindled the feud afresh, and, when he was driven off by
his own people, the Langobardi placed him once more on the tottering
throne. One of his successors, king Chariomerus, so earnestly took the
side of the Romans in Domitian's war with the Chatti, that he after
its close, when driven away by the Chatti, fled to the Romans and
invoked--although vainly--their intervention. Through those perpetual
inward and outward feuds the Cheruscan people was so weakened that it
henceforth disappears from active politics. The name of the Marsi is
no longer met with at all after the expeditions of Germanicus. That
the tribes dwelling farther to the east on the Elbe as well as all
the more remote Germans took as little part in the struggles of the
Batavians and their allies in the years 69 and 70, as these took in the
German wars under Augustus and Tiberius may, considering the detailed
character of the narrative, be described as certain. Where they meet
us subsequently they never appear in a hostile attitude to the Romans.
That the Langobardi reinstated the Roman king of the Cherusci, has
already been mentioned. Masuus, the king of the Semnones, and--what
is remarkable--along with him the prophetess Ganna, who was held in
high repute among this tribe famous for its special credulity, visited
the emperor Domitian in Rome, and met with a friendly reception at
his court. In the regions from the Weser to the Elbe during these
centuries various feuds may have raged, the balance of power may in
various cases have shifted, various cantons may have changed their name
or joined another combination; as regards their relations to the Romans
a permanent frontier-peace set in, after it came to be generally felt
that these had positively abandoned the subjugation of this region.
Even invasions from the far East cannot have materially disturbed it at
this epoch; for they could not but have reacted on the Roman guarding
of the frontier, and we should not have lacked information had more
serious crises occurred in this domain. All this is confirmed by the
reduction of the army of the lower Rhine to half of its former amount,
which occurred we know not exactly when, but within this epoch. The
army of the lower Rhine, with which Vespasian had to fight, numbered
four legions; that of the time of Trajan presumably the same number,
at least three;[71] probably already under Hadrian, certainly under
Marcus, there were not more than two--the 1st Minervian and the 30th of
Trajan--stationed there.

[Sidenote: Upper Germany.]

Germanic affairs in the upper province developed themselves after
another fashion. Of the Germans on the left of the Rhine who belonged
to this province, the Triboci, Nemetes, Vangiones, there is nothing
historically worth mentioning, except that they, for long settled among
the Celts, shared the destinies of Gaul. Here too the Rhine always
remained the chief line of defence for the Romans. All the standing
camps of the legions were at all times on the left bank of the Rhine;
not even that of Argentoratum was transferred to the right bank,
when the whole region of the Neckar was Roman. But while in the lower
province the Roman rule on the right bank of the Rhine was restricted
in course of time, here on the other hand it was extended. The project
of Augustus to connect the camps on the Rhine with those on the Danube
by advancing the imperial frontier in an eastward direction--which,
if it had been carried out, would have enlarged upper more than lower
Germany--was perhaps never completely abandoned in this command, and
was resumed subsequently, though on a more modest scale. Historical
tradition does not give us the means of presenting a connected view
of the operations continued with this object for centuries, the
construction of roads and walls pertaining thereto, and the wars waged
on this account; and even the great military structure still existing,
whose rise and progress--likewise embracing centuries--must include in
itself a good part of that history, has hitherto not been investigated
throughout, as it well might be, by the eyes of military experts. The
hope that unified Germany would combine for the investigation of this
its oldest historical monument, has not been fulfilled. We shall here
attempt to put together what has hitherto been brought to light on
the subject from the fragments of the Roman annals or of the Roman
strongholds.

[Sidenote: Mogontiacum.]

[Sidenote: Mattiaci.]

On the right bank, not far from the northern end of the province, there
stretches in front of the level or hilly country of the lower Rhine,
in a direction from west to east, the range of the Taunus, which abuts
on the Rhine opposite to Bingen. Parallel to this mountain-range,
shut off on the other side by the spurs of the Odenwald, stretches
the plain of the lower Main-valley, the true access to the interior
of Germany, dominated by the key of the position at the point where
the Main falls into the Rhine, Mogontiacum or Mentz, from the time of
Drusus down to the end of Rome the stronghold out of which the Romans
sallied to attack Germany from Gaul,[72] as it is at the present day
the true barrier of Germany against France. Here the Romans, even
after they had abandoned their rule in the region of the upper Rhine
generally, retained not merely the _tête-de-pont_ on the other bank,
the _castellum Mogontiacense_ (Castel), but also that plain of the Main
itself in their possession; and in this region a Roman civilisation
might establish itself. This land originally belonged to the Chatti,
and a Chattan tribe, the Mattiaci, remained settled here even under
Roman rule; but, after the Chatti were compelled to cede this district
to Drusus, it remained a part of the empire. The hot springs in the
immediate neighbourhood of Mentz (aquae Mattiacae, Wiesbaden) were
used by the Romans demonstrably in Vespasian's time, and doubtless
long before: silver was worked here under Claudius; the Mattiaci
already furnished troops to the army at an early date like other
subject districts. They took part in the general rising of the Germans
under Civilis; but, after they were vanquished, the earlier relations
were re-established. From the end of the second century we find the
community of the Taunensian Mattiaci under authorities organised after
the Roman model.[73]

[Sidenote: Chatti.]

The Chatti, although thus driven away from the Rhine, appear in the
sequel as the most powerful among the tribes of inland Germany who
came into contact with the Romans; the lead which, under Augustus and
Tiberius, had been possessed by the Cherusci on the middle Weser,
passed, amidst the constant feuds with these their southern cognate
neighbours, over to the latter. All the wars between Romans and
Germans, of which we have any knowledge from the time after the death
of Arminius down to the time when the migrations of the peoples began
at the end of the third century, were waged against the Chatti; as in
the year 41 under Claudius by Galba, who became afterwards emperor; and
in the year 50 under the same emperor by Publius Pomponius Secundus,
celebrated as a poet. These were the usual border incursions, and
the Chatti had taken a part, but only a secondary one, in the great
Batavian war (p. 133). But in the campaign which the Emperor Domitian
undertook in the year 83 the Romans were the aggressors; and this war
led, not indeed to brilliant victories, but doubtless to a considerable
and momentous pushing forward of the Roman frontier.[74] At that time
the frontier-line was arranged, as we find it thenceforth drawn; and
within that line, which in its most northern portion was not far
removed from the Rhine, must have been included a great part of the
Taunus and the region of the Main as far as above Friedberg. The
Usipes, who, after their already-mentioned expulsion from the region
of the Lippe, appear about the time of Vespasian in the neighbourhood
of Mentz, and may have found new settlements to the east of the
Mattiaci on the Kinzig or in the Fuldan district, were then annexed
to the empire, and, at the same time with them, a number of smaller
tribes thrown off by the Chatti. Thereupon, when in the year 88, under
the governor Lucius Antonius Saturninus, the upper German army rose
against Domitian, the war was on the point of renewal; the revolted
troops made common cause with the Chatti;[75] and it was only the
interruption of the communications, when the ice broke up on the Rhine,
that made it possible for the regiments which had remained faithful
to settle matters with the revolters before the dangerous contingent
arrived. It is stated that the Roman rule extended from Mentz towards
the interior 80 _leugae_, and thus even beyond Fulda;[76] and this
account appears worthy of credit, if we take into consideration that
the military frontier-line, which certainly seems not to have gone
far above Friedberg, doubtless kept here also within the territorial
boundary.

[Sidenote: The region of the Neckar.]

But not merely was the valley of the lower Main in front of Mentz
brought within the military frontier-line; in south-western Germany
also the boundary was pushed forward in a still greater degree. The
region of the Neckar, once possessed by the Celtic Helvetii, then for
long a debateable borderland between these and the advancing Germans,
and therefore named the Helvetian desert, subsequently perhaps occupied
partially by the Marcomani, before these retreated to Bohemia (p. 29),
came on the regulation of the Germanic boundaries after the battle of
Varus into the same position as the greater portion of the right bank
of the lower Rhine. Here, too, there must have been a frontier-line
already at that time marked off, within which Germanic settlements were
not tolerated. Thereupon individual, mostly Gallic, immigrants, who
had not much to lose, settled down, as on an unenclosed moor, in these
fertile but little protected regions, which went at that time by the
name of _agri decumates_.[77] This private occupation, which was, it
may be conjectured, merely tolerated by the government, was followed
by the formal taking possession of it probably under Vespasian. As
already, about the year 74, a highway was carried from Strassburg
on the right bank of the Rhine as far as Offenburg,[78] there must
have been instituted about this time in this region a more earnest
protection of the frontier than the mere prohibition of Germanic
settlement furnished. What the father had begun the sons carried
out. Perhaps even through the construction--whether by Vespasian, by
Titus, or Domitian--of the "Flavian altars"[79] at the source of the
Neckar, near the modern Rottweil--a settlement of which indeed we know
nothing but the name--there was procured for the new upper Germany on
the right of the Rhine a centre similar to what the Ubian altar was
formerly intended to become for Great Germany, and soon afterwards the
altar of Sarmizegetusa became for the newly-conquered Dacia. The first
institution of the frontier-defence, to be described further on, by
which the Neckar valley was brought within the Roman line, is thus the
work of the Flavii, chiefly, doubtless, of Domitian,[80] who thereby
carried further the construction at the Taunus. The military road
on the right of the Rhine from Mogontiacum by way of Heidelberg and
Baden in the direction of Offenburg--the necessary consequence of this
annexation of the Neckar region--was, as we now know,[81] constructed
by Trajan in the year 100, and was a part of the more direct
communication established by that emperor between Gaul and the line of
the Danube. There was employment for the soldiers at these works, but
hardly for their arms; there were no Germanic tribes dwelling in the
region of the Neckar, and still less can the narrow strip on the left
bank of the Danube, which was thereby brought within the frontier line,
have cost serious struggles. The nearest Germanic people of note there,
the Hermunduri, had more friendly dispositions towards the Romans
than any other tribe had, and carried on lively commercial intercourse
with them in the town of the Vindelici, Augusta; of the fact that this
advance met with no resistance from them, we shall find traces further
on. Under the following reigns of Hadrian, Pius, and Marcus, further
progress was made with these military arrangements.

[Sidenote: The upper Germanic Limes.]

We cannot historically follow out the mode in which the frontier-fence
between the Rhine and the Danube--still in great part subsisting as
regards its foundations at the present day--came into existence, but
we are able to recognise not merely the course which it took but also
the purpose which it served. The work was as to its nature and purpose
different in upper Germany from what it was in Raetia. The upper
German frontier-fence, with a length in all of about 250 Roman miles
(228 English miles[82]) begins immediately at the northern boundary
of the province, embraces, as has been already said, the Taunus and
the plain of the Main as far as the district of Friedberg, and turns
thence southward to the Main, which it meets at Grosskrotzenburg above
Hanau. Following the Main thence as far as Wörth, it here takes the
direction of the Neckar, which it reaches somewhat below Wimpfen and
does not again leave. Afterwards in front of the southern half of this
frontier-line a second was laid out, which follows the Main by way of
Wörth as far as Miltenberg, and thence is led for the most part in a
straight direction to Lorch between Stuttgart and Aalen. Here to the
upper German frontier-fence is joined on the Raetian, only 120 miles
(108 English) long; it leaves the Danube at Kelheim above Ratisbon and
runs thence, twice crossing the Altmuhl, in a curve westward likewise
as far as Lorch.

The upper Germanic Limes consists of a series of forts which are
distant from each other, at the most, half a day's march (about nine
English miles). Where the lines of connection between the forts are not
closed by the Main or the Neckar, as stated above, there was introduced
an artificial barrier, at first perhaps merely by a palisade,[83]
afterwards by a continuous earthen rampart of moderate height, with
a fosse outside and watch-towers built in at short intervals on the
inner side.[84] The forts are not introduced into the rampart, but
constructed immediately behind it at a distance seldom exceeding
one-third of an English mile.

[Sidenote: The Raetian Limes.]

The Raetian frontier-fence was a mere barrier, produced by piling up
quarry-stones; there were no fosses or watch-towers, and the forts,
constructed behind the Limes without regular succession and at unequal
intervals (none nearer than two and a half to three miles), stand
in no immediate connection with the barrier-line. As to the order
in time of the constructions there is no definite testimony; it is
proved that the upper Germanic line of the Neckar was in existence
under Pius,[85] that placed in front of it from Miltenberg to Lorch
under Marcus.[86] The idea of a frontier-bar was common to the two
structures, otherwise so different; the preference in the one case for
the piling up of earth--whence the fosse for the most part resulted
of itself--in the other case, for layers of stone, probably depended
only on the diversity of the soil and of the materials for building.
It was common to them, further, that neither the one nor the other was
constructed for the defence, as a whole, of the frontier. Not merely
was the hindrance, which the piling up of earth or stone presented to
the assailant, slight in itself; but along the line we meet everywhere
with commanding positions, morasses lying in the rear, a want of
outlook towards the country in front, and similar clear indications
of the fact, that in the tracing of it warlike purposes generally
were not contemplated. The forts are of course arranged for defence,
each by itself, but they are not connected by paved cross-roads; and
so the individual garrison relied for support not on those of the
neighbouring forts, but on the rear-base, to which the road led,
whereby each was kept garrisoned. Moreover, these garrisons were not
dovetailed into a military system of frontier defence; they were rather
fortified positions for a case of need than strategically chosen for
the occupation of the territory, as indeed the very extent of the line
itself, compared with the number of troops at disposal, excludes the
possibility of its defence as a whole.[87]

[Sidenote: Object of these structures.]

Thus these extensive military structures had not, like the Britannic
wall, the object of checking the invasion of the enemy. The intention
rather was, that, like the bridges over the river-frontier, so the
roads on the land-frontier should be commanded by the forts, but in
other respects, like the river as the water-boundary, so the wall on
the landward should hinder the uncontrolled crossing of the frontier.
Other uses might be combined with this; the preference, often apparent,
for the rectilineal direction points to its application for signals,
and occasionally the structure may have been used directly for
purposes of war. But the proper and immediate object of the structure
was to prevent the crossing of the frontier. The fact, withal, that
watch-posts and forts were erected, not on the Raetian but on the upper
Germanic frontier, is explained by their different relations to the
neighbours, in the former case to the Hermunduri, in the latter to the
Chatti. The Romans in upper Germany did not confront their neighbours
as they confronted the Highlanders of Britain, in whose presence the
province was always in a state of siege; but the repulse of predatory
invaders as well as the levying of the frontier-dues demanded at any
rate ready and near military help. The upper German army, and in
keeping with it the garrisons on the Limes, might be gradually reduced,
but the Roman _pilum_ could never be dispensed with in the land of
the Neckar. It might, however, be dispensed with in presence of the
Hermunduri, who, in Trajan's time, alone of all the Germans, were at
liberty to cross the frontier of the empire without special control
and to trade freely in the Roman territory, especially in Augsburg,
and with whom, so far as we know, border-collisions never took place.
There was thus at this period no occasion for a similar structure on
the Raetian frontier; the forts north of the Danube, which can be shown
to have subsisted already in Trajan's time,[88] sufficed here for the
protection of the frontier and the control of frontier-intercourse.
This accords with the observation that the Raetian Limes, as it stands
before our eyes, corresponds only with the more recent upper Germanic
barrier-line perhaps laid out for the first time under Marcus. Then
occasion for it was not wanting. The wars of the Chatti, as we shall
see (p. 161), seized at this time also on Raetia; the strengthening too
of the garrison of the province might reasonably stand in connection
with the erection of this Limes, which, however little it was arranged
for military ends, was at any rate doubtless constructed with a view to
its being a frontier-bar, though of less strong character.[89]

[Sidenote: Their effect.]

In a military as well as a political sense the shifting of the
frontier, or rather the strengthening of the frontier-fence, was
effective and useful. While formerly the Roman chain of forts in upper
Germany and Raetia probably went up the Rhine by way of Strassburg
to Basel and along by Vindonissa to the lake of Constance, then from
thence to the upper Danube, now the upper German headquarters were in
Mentz and the Raetian in Ratisbon, and generally the two chief armies
of the empire were brought considerably nearer to each other. The
legionary camp of Vindonissa (Windisch near Zürich) became thereby
superfluous. The army of the upper Rhine could, like the neighbouring
one, be reduced after some time to the half of its former strength. The
original number of four legions, which was only accidentally diminished
to three during the Batavian war, subsisted, at all events, probably
still under Trajan;[90] but under Marcus the province was only occupied
by two legions, the 8th and the 22d, of which the former was stationed
at Strassburg, the second at the headquarters Mentz, while most of
the troops, broken up into smaller posts, were stationed along the
frontier-wall. Within the new line urban life flourished almost as on
the left bank of the Rhine; Sumelocenna (Rottenburg on the Neckar),
Aquae (_civitas Aurelia Aquensis_, Baden), Lopodunum (Ladenburg), had,
if we except Cologne and Treves, to fear no comparison as respects
Roman urban development with any town of Belgica. The rise of these
settlements was chiefly the work of Trajan, who began his government
with this act of peace;[91] "the Rhine Roman on both its banks" is what
a Roman poet entreats speedily to send to Rome its yet unseen ruler.
The great and fertile region, which was placed in this way under the
protection of the legions, needed that protection and was worthy of it.
Doubtless the battle of Varus marks the beginning of the ebb of Roman
power, but only in so far as its advance was thereby ended, and the
Romans thenceforth contented themselves in general with shielding more
vigorously and continuously what was retained.

[Sidenote: Germany under Marcus.]

Down to the beginning of the third century the Roman power on the Rhine
showed no indications of tottering. During the war with the Marcomani
under Marcus all remained quiet in the lower province. If a legate
of Belgica had at that time to call out the general levy against the
Chauci, this was presumably a piratical expedition, such as often
visited the north coast at this time, just as earlier and later. The
surge of the great movement of peoples reached to the sources of the
Danube and even as far as the region of the Rhine; but it did not shake
the foundations there. The Chatti, the only considerable Germanic
tribe on the upper German and Raetian border-fence, pushed forward in
both directions, and were probably at that time even among the Germans
invading Italy, as will be shown further on when we describe this war.
At any rate the reinforcement of the Raetian army at that time ordained
by Marcus, and its conversion into a command of the first class with
legion and legates, can only have taken place in order to check the
attacks of the Chatti, and proves that they did not treat them lightly
as regards the future. The already-mentioned strengthening of the
border-defence would likewise stand connected with this movement. These
measures must have sufficed for the next generation.

[Sidenote: War with the Alamanni.]

[Sidenote: Severus Antoninus.]

[Sidenote: Alexander.]

Under Antoninus the son of Severus a new and more severe war once more
(213) broke out in Raetia. This also was waged against the Chatti; but
by their side a second people is named, which we here meet for the
first time--the Alamanni. Whence they came, we know not. According to a
Roman writing a little later they were a conflux of mixed elements; the
appellation also seems to point to a league of communities, as well as
the fact that afterwards the different tribes comprehended under this
name stand forth--more than is the case among the other great Germanic
peoples--in their separate character, and the Juthungi, the Lentienses,
and other Alamannic peoples not seldom act independently. But that it
is not the Germans of this region who here emerge allied under the
new name and strengthened by the alliance, is shown as well by the
naming of the Alamanni alongside of the Chatti, as by the mention of
the unwonted skilfulness of the Alamanni in equestrian combat. On the
contrary it was certainly, in the main, hordes coming on from the East
that lent new strength to the almost extinguished German resistance on
the Rhine; it is not improbable that the powerful Semnones, in earlier
times dwelling on the middle Elbe, of whom there is no further mention
after the end of the second century, furnished a strong contingent to
the Alamanni. The constantly increasing misgovernment in the Roman
empire naturally contributed its share, although only in a secondary
degree, to the shifting of power. The emperor took the field in person
against the new foe; in August of the year 213 he crossed the Roman
frontier, and a victory over them on the Main was achieved or at least
celebrated; further forts were constructed; the tribes of the Elbe and
of the North Sea sent deputies to the Roman ruler, and wondered when
in receiving them he wore their own dress, with silver-mounted jacket,
and hair and beard coloured and arranged after the German fashion. But
thenceforth the wars on the Rhine are incessant, and the aggressors
are the Germans; the neighbours formerly so pliant had as it were
exchanged characters. Twenty years later the inroads of the barbarians
on the Danube as on the Rhine were so constant and so serious, that
the emperor Alexander had on their account to break off the less
immediately dangerous Persian war and to resort in person to the camp
of Mentz, not so much to defend the territory as to purchase peace from
the Germans by large sums of money. The exasperation of the soldiers
at this led to his murder (A.D. 235), and thereby to the fall of the
Severian dynasty, the last that existed at all until the regeneration
of the state.

[Sidenote: Maximinus.]

[Sidenote: The Franks.]

His successor Maximinus, a rough but brave Thracian who had risen
from the position of a common soldier, compensated for the cowardly
conduct of his predecessor by an energetic expedition into the heart
of Germany. The barbarians did not yet venture to face a strong and
well-led Roman army; they retreated to their forests and morasses, and
the brave emperor, following them even thither, fought in front of all
hand to hand. From these conflicts, which were doubtless directed from
Mentz primarily against the Alamanni, he could with right call himself
Germanicus; and even for the future the expedition of the year 236, for
long the last great victory which the Romans gained on the Rhine, bore
some fruit. Although the constant and bloody changes on the throne and
the grave disasters in the East and on the Danube allowed the Romans
no time to breathe, during the next twenty years, if peace was not
strictly preserved on the Rhine a greater disaster did not occur. It
appears even that one of the upper German legions was at that time
sent to Africa without its place being supplied, and so upper Germany
was held as tolerably secure. But when in the year 253 the different
generals of Rome were once more fighting each other for the imperial
dignity, and the Rhine-legions marched to Italy to fight out the cause
of their emperor Valerianus against the Aemilianus of the Danube-army,
this seems to have been the signal[92] for the Germans pushing forward
especially towards the lower Rhine.[93] These Germans were the Franks,
who appear here for the first time, perhaps new opponents only in name;
for, although the identification of them, already to be met with in
later antiquity, with tribes formerly named on the lower Rhine--partly,
the Chamavi settled beside the Bructeri, partly the Sugambri formerly
mentioned subject to the Romans--is uncertain and at least inadequate,
there is here greater probability than in the case of the Alamanni that
the Germans hitherto dependent on Rome on the right bank of the Rhine,
and the Germanic tribes previously dislodged from the Rhine, took at
that time--under the collective name of the "Free"--the offensive in
concert against the Romans.

[Sidenote: Gallienus.]

[Sidenote: Postumus.]

So long as Gallienus himself remained on the Rhine, he, notwithstanding
the small forces that were at his disposal, kept his opponents to some
extent in check, prevented them from crossing the river, or drove
out again the intruders, although he doubtless ceded to one of the
Germanic leaders a portion of the desired territory on the river-bank,
under the condition of his acknowledging the Roman rule and defending
his possession against his countrymen--which indeed almost amounted
to a capitulation. But when the emperor, recalled by the still more
dangerous position of affairs on the Danube, resorted thither and left
behind as representative in Gaul his elder son still in boyhood, one of
the officers, to whom he had intrusted the defence of the frontier and
the guardianship of his son, Marcus Cassianius Latinius Postumus,[94]
got himself proclaimed by his men as emperor and besieged in Cologne
Silvanus the guardian of the emperor's son. He was successful in
capturing the town and in getting into his power his former colleague
as well as the imperial boy, whereupon he had them both executed.
But during this confusion the Franks burst over the Rhine, and not
merely overflowed all Gaul, but penetrated also into Spain and indeed
pillaged even the coast of Africa. Soon afterwards, when the capture
of Valerian by the Persians had filled up the measure of misfortune,
all the Roman land on the left bank of the Rhine in the upper province
was lost, passing doubtless to the Alamanni, whose eruption into Italy
in the last years of Gallienus necessarily presupposes this loss. He
is the last emperor whose name is found on monuments on the right of
the Rhine. His coins celebrate him on account of five great victories
over the Germans, and not less are those of his successor in the
Gallic rule, Postumus, full of the praise of the German victories of
the deliverer of Gaul. Gallienus in his earlier years had taken up the
struggle on the Rhine not without energy, and Postumus was even an
excellent officer and would gladly have been a good regent; but amidst
the utter unruliness which then prevailed in the Roman state or rather
in the Roman army, the talent and ability of the individual profited
neither himself nor the commonwealth. A series of flourishing Roman
towns was at that time laid desolate by the invading barbarians, and
the right bank of the Rhine was for ever lost to the Romans.

[Sidenote: Aurelianus.]

The re-establishment of peace and order in Gaul was primarily dependent
on the cohesion of the empire generally; so long as the Italian
emperors stationed their troops in the Narbonensis to set aside the
Gallic rival, and the latter in turn made as though he would cross
the Alps, effective operations against the Germans were of themselves
excluded. It was only after that, about the year 272,[95] the then
ruler of Gaul, Tetricus, weary of his ungrateful part, had himself
brought about the submission of his troops to Aurelianus, the emperor
recognised by the Roman senate, that the thought of warding off the
Germans could be again entertained. The raids of the Alamanni, who had
for almost ten years ravaged upper Italy as far down as Ravenna, had
a stop put to them for long by the same able ruler who had brought
Gaul back to the empire, and he emphatically defeated one of their
tribes, the Juthungi, on the upper Danube. If his government had lasted
he would doubtless have renewed the protection of the frontier also
in Gaul; after his speedy and sudden end (275) the Germans once more
crossed the Rhine and devastated the country far and wide.

[Sidenote: Probus.]

His successor Probus (from 276), also an able soldier, not merely drove
them out afresh--he is said to have taken from them seventy towns--but
also advanced again on the aggressive, crossed the Rhine, and drove
the Germans back over the Neckar. He did not, however, renew the lines
of the earlier time,[96] but contented himself with erecting and
occupying at the more important positions of the Rhine _têtes de pont_
on the other bank,--that is, he reverted nearly to such arrangements
as had subsisted here before Vespasian. At the same time the Franks
were defeated by his generals in the northern province. Great masses
of the vanquished Germans were sent as forced settlers to Gaul, and
above all to Britain. In this way the frontier of the Rhine was won
back and handed over to the later empire. No doubt, like the rule on
the right bank of the Rhine, peace on the left had passed away beyond
recall. The Alamanni stood in a threatening attitude opposite to
Basel and Strassburg, the Franks opposite to Cologne. By their side
other tribes presented themselves. The fact that the Burgundiones,
once settled beyond the Elbe, advancing westward as far as the upper
Main, threatened Gaul, is first mentioned under the emperor Probus; a
few years later the Saxons, in concert with the Franks, began their
attacks by sea on the north coast of Gaul as on the Roman Britain.
But under the--for the most part--vigorous and capable emperors of
the Diocletiano-Constantinian house, and even under their immediate
successors, the Romans kept the threatening inundation of peoples
within measured bounds.

[Sidenote: Romanising of the Germans.]

To depict the Germans in their national development is not the task
of the historian of the Romans; for him they appear only as hindering
or as destroying. An interpenetration of the two nationalities, and a
mixed culture thence resulting, such as the Romanised land of the Celts
presented, Roman Germany has none to show; or--so far as concerns our
conception of it--it coincides with the Romano-Gallic all the more,
since the Germanic territories on the left bank of the Rhine, which
remained for a considerable time in the Roman possession, were pervaded
throughout with Celtic elements, and even those on the right, deprived
for the most part of their original population, obtained the majority
of the new settlers from Gaul. Communal centres, such as the Celtic
system possessed in large number, were wanting to the German element.
Partly on that account, partly in consequence of outward circumstances,
the Roman element was able, as has been already brought out (p. 102),
to develop itself sooner and more fully in the Germanic east than in
the Celtic regions. The encampments of the army of the Rhine, all
of which fell within Roman Germany, were of essential influence in
this respect. The larger of them obtained, partly through the traders
who attached themselves to the army, partly, and above all, through
the veterans who remained in their wonted quarters even after their
discharge, an urban appendage--a town of huts (_canabae_), separate
from the military quarters proper; everywhere, and particularly in
Germany, towns proper grew in time out of these at the legionary camps
and especially the headquarters. At their head stood the Roman town of
the Ubii, originally the second largest camp of the army of the lower
Rhine, then from the year 50 onward a Roman colony (p. 99), exercising
the most important effect in elevating Roman civilisation in the region
of the Rhine. Here the camp-town gave place to that of the Roman
plantation; subsequently urban rights were obtained, without shifting
the quarters of the troops, by the settlements belonging to the two
great camps of the lower Rhine--Ulpia Noviomagus, in the land of the
Batavi, and Ulpia Traiana, near Vetera--from Trajan, and in the third
century by the military capital of upper Germany, Mogontiacum. No doubt
these civil towns always retained a subordinate position by the side of
the military centres of administration independent of them.

[Sidenote: Roman Germanising.]

If we look beyond the limit where this narrative closes, we certainly
find, instead of the Romanising of the Germans, in some measure a
Germanising of the Romans. The last phase of the Roman state was
marked by its becoming barbarian, and especially becoming Germanised;
and the beginnings of the process reach far back. It commences with
the peasantry in the colonate, passes on to the troop as modelled by
the emperor Severus, seizes then on the officers and magistrates,
and ends with the hybrid Romano-Germanic states of the Visigoths in
Spain and Gaul, the Vandals in Africa, above all, with the Italy of
Theoderic. For the understanding of this last phase there is certainly
needed an insight into the political development of the one as of the
other nation. Unfortunately, the enquiry into early German history is
here at fault. It is true that the political arrangements into which
these Germans entered as servants or joint rulers are well known, far
better than the systematic history of the same epoch. But over the
primitive condition of the Germans floats that gray morning-haze in
which sharp outlines are lost. German heathenism, apart from the far
north, perished before the time of which we have knowledge; and the
religious elements, which are never wanting in a national war, we know
doubtless for the Sassanidae, but not for the Marcomani. The beginnings
of the political development of the Germans are delineated for us in
part by the picture of Tacitus--many-coloured, hampered by modelling
itself on the ideas of a fading past, and but too often keeping silence
as to elements of really decisive moment--while in part we must take
them from the hybrid states which arose on formerly Roman soil and had
Roman elements everywhere inwoven. Here our records seldom give us
German technical terms, but substitute Latin descriptions which are
plainly inadequate, and here, in general, we miss those sharply-defined
ideas which our studies of classical history offer us in plenty. It is
characteristic of our German nation that it has not been permitted to
develop itself by German effort from German origins, and we may connect
with this the fact that German scholarship has studied the beginnings
and characters of other nations with more success than it has won in
the study of its own.




Footnotes.


[62: This division of a province among three governors is without
parallel elsewhere in Roman administration. The relation of Africa
and Numidia offers doubtless an external analogy, but was politically
conditioned by the position of the senatorial governor to the
imperial military commandant, while the three governors of Belgica
were uniformly imperial; and it is not at all easy to see why the
two Germanic ones had districts within the Belgica assigned to them
instead of districts of their own. Nothing but the taking back of the
frontier, while the hitherto subsisting name was retained--just as
the Transdanubian Dacia continued subsequently to subsist in name as
Cis-Danubian--explains this singular peculiarity.]

[63: The strength of the _auxilia_ of the upper army may be fixed for
the epoch of Domitian and Trajan with tolerable certainty at about
10,000 men. A document of the year 90 enumerates four _alae_ and
fourteen _cohortes_ of this army; to these is to be added at least one
cohort (_I Germanorum_), which, it can be shown, did garrison-duty
there as well in the year 82 as in the year 116; whether two _alae_
which were there in the year 82, and at least three cohorts which
were there in 116, and which are absent from the list of the year 90,
were doing garrison work there in 90 or not, is doubtful, but most
of them probably were away from the province before 90 or only came
into it after 90. Of those nineteen _auxilia_ one was certainly (_coh.
I Damascenorum_), another perhaps (_ala I Flavia gemina_), a double
division. At the minimum, therefore, the figure indicated above results
as the normal state of the _auxilia_ of this army, and it cannot have
been materially exceeded. But the _auxilia_ of lower Germany, whose
garrisons were less extended, may well have been smaller in number.]

[64: At the frontier bridge over the rivulet Abrinca, now Vinxt, the
old boundary of the archdioceses of Cologne and Treves, stood two
altars, that on the side of Remagen dedicated to the Boundaries, the
Spirit of the place, and Jupiter (_Finibus et Genio loci et Iovi optimo
maximo_) by soldiers of the 30th lower German legion; the other on the
side of Andernach, dedicated to Jupiter, the Genius of the place, and
Juno, by a soldier of the 8th Upper Germanic (Brambach, 649, 650).]

[65: _Limes_ (from _limus_, across) is a technical expression foreign
to the state of things under our [German] law, and hence not to be
reproduced in our language, derived from the fact that the Roman
division of land, which excludes all natural boundaries, separates
the squares, into which the ground coming under the head of private
property is divided, by intermediate paths of a definite breadth;
these intermediate paths are the _limites_, and so far the word
always denotes at once the boundary drawn by man's hand, and the road
constructed by man's hand. The word retains this double signification
even in application to the state (Rudorff, _Grom. Inst._ p. 289, puts
the matter incorrectly); _limes_ is not every imperial frontier,
but only that which is marked out by human hands, and arranged at
the same time for being patrolled and having posts stationed for
frontier-defence (_Vita Hadriani_, 12; _locis in quibus barbari non
fluminibus, sed limitibus dividuntur_), such as we find in Germany
and in Africa. Therefore there are applied to the laying-out of
this _limes_ the terms that serve to designate the construction of
roads, _aperire_ (Velleius, ii. 121, which is not to be understood,
as Müllenhoff, _Zeitschr. f. d. Alterth._, new series, ii. p. 32,
would have it, like our opening of a turnpike), _munire_, _agere_
(Frontinus, _Strat._ i. 3, 10: _limitibus per CXX m. p. actis_).
Therefore the _limes_ is not merely a longitudinal line, but also of
a certain breadth (Tacitus, _Ann._ i. 50; _castra in limite locat_).
Hence the construction of the _limes_ is often combined with that of
the _agger_--that is, of the road-embankment (Tacitus, _Ann._ ii. 7:
_cuncta novis limitibus aggeribusque permunita_), and the shifting
of it with the transference of frontier-posts (Tacitus, _Germ._ 29:
_limite acto promotisque praesidiis_). The Limes is thus the imperial
frontier-road, destined for the regulation of frontier-intercourse,
inasmuch as the crossing of it was allowed only at certain points
corresponding to the bridges of the river boundary, and elsewhere
forbidden. This was doubtless effected in the first instance by
patrolling the line, and, so long as this was done, the _limes_
remained a boundary road. It remained so too, when it was fortified
on both sides, as was done in Britain and at the mouth of the Danube;
the Britannic wall is also termed _limes_ (p. 187, note 2). Posts
might also be stationed at the allowed points of crossing, and the
intervening spaces of the frontier-roads might be in some way rendered
impassable. In this sense the biographer of Hadrian says in the
above-quoted passage that at the _limites_ he _stipitibus magnis in
modum muralis saepis funditus iactis atque conexis barbaros separavit_.
By this means the frontier-road was converted into a frontier-barricade
provided with certain passages through it, and such was the _limes_ of
upper Germany in the developed shape to be set forth in the sequel.
We may add that the word is not used with this special import in the
time of the republic; and beyond doubt this conception of the _limes_
only originated with the institution of the chain of posts enclosing
the state, where natural boundaries were wanting--a protection of the
imperial frontier, which was foreign to the republic, but was the
foundation of the Augustan military system, and above all, of the
Augustan system of tolls.]

[66: The Sugambri transplanted to the left bank are not subsequently
mentioned under this name, and are probably the Cugerni dwelling
below Cologne on the Rhine. But that the Sugambri on the right bank,
whom Strabo mentions, were at least still in existence in the time of
Claudius, is shown by the cohort named after this emperor, and thus
certainly formed under him, doubtless of Sugambri (_C. I. L._ iii. p.
877); and they, as well as the four other probably Augustan cohorts of
this name, confirm what Strabo also in a strict sense says, that these
Sugambri belonged to the Roman empire. They disappeared doubtless, like
the Mattiaci, only amidst the tempests of the migration of nations.]

[67: The fortress of Niederbiber, not far from the point at which the
Wied falls into the Rhine, as well as that of Arzbach, near Montabaur,
in the region of the Lahn, belong to upper Germany. The special
significance of the former stronghold, the largest fortress in upper
Germany, turned on the fact that it, in a military point of view,
closed the Roman lines on the right bank of the Rhine.]

[68: The levies (_Eph. Epigr._ v. p. 274) require us to assume this,
while the Frisians, as they come forward in the year 58 (Tacitus,
_Ann._ xiii. 54) rather appear independent; the elder Pliny also (_H.
N._ xxv. 3, 22) under Vespasian names them, looking back to the time
of Germanicus, as _gens tum fida_. Probably this is connected with the
distinction between the _Frisii_ and _Frisiavones_ in Pliny, _H. N._
iv. 15, 101, and between the _Frisii maiores_ and _minores_ in Tacitus,
_Germ._ 34. The Frisians that remained Roman would be the western; the
free, the eastern; if the Frisians generally reach as far as the Ems
(Ptolem. iii. 11, 7), those subsequently Roman may have settled perhaps
to the westward of the Yssel. We may not put them elsewhere than on the
coast that still bears their name; the designation in Pliny, iv. 17,
106, stands isolated, and is beyond doubt incorrect.]

[69: The fourth upper German legion was sent in the year 58 to Asia
Minor on account of the Armeno-Parthian war (Tacitus, _Ann._ xiii. 35).]

[70: Frontinus, _Strat._ iv. 3, 14. In their territory the advancing
troops must have constructed a reserve station and a depot; according
to tiles recently found near Mirabeau-sur-Bèze, about fourteen miles
north-east of Dijon, men of at least five of the advancing legions had
executed buildings here (_Hermes_, xix. 437).]

[71: Under the legate Q. Acutius Nerva, who was probably the consul of
the year 100, and so administered lower Germany after that year, there
were stationed, according to inscriptions of Brohl (Brambach, 660,
662, 679, 680), in this province four legions, the 1st Minervia, 6th
Victrix, 10th Gemina, 22d Primigenia. As each of these inscriptions
names only two or three, the garrison may then have consisted only of
three legions, if during the governorship of Acutius the 1st Minervia
came in place of the 22d Primigenia drafted off elsewhere. But it is
far more probable--seeing that all the legions were not always taking
part in the detachments to the stone quarries at Brohl--that these four
legions were doing garrison-duty at the same time in lower Germany.
These four legions are probably just those that came to lower Germany
on the reorganisation of the Germanic armies by Vespasian (p. 159
note), only that the 1st Minervia was put by Domitian in the place of
the 21st, probably broken up by him.]

[72: According to the ingenious decipherings of Zangemeister
(_Westdeutsche Zeitschrift_, iii. 307 ff), it is established that a
military road was already laid out under Claudius on the left bank
of the Rhine from Mentz as far as the frontier of the upper German
province.]

[73: The full name _c(ivitas) M(attiacorum) Ta(unensium)_ appears
on the inscription of Castel in Brambach, _C. I. Rh._ 1330; it
occurs frequently as _civitas Mattiacorum_ or _civitas Taunensium_,
with Duoviri, Aediles, Decuriones, Sacerdotales, Seviri; peculiar
and characteristic of a frontier town are the _hastiferi civitatis
Mattiacorum_, probably to be taken as a municipal militia (Brambach,
1336). The oldest dated document of this community is of the year 198
(Brambach, 956).]

[74: The accounts of this war have been lost; its time and place
admit of being determined. As the coins give to Domitian the title
_Germanicus_ after the beginning of the year 84 (Eckhel, vi. 378,
397), the campaign falls in the year 83. Accordant with this is the
levy of the Usipes, which falls on this same year, and their desperate
attempt at flight (Tacitus, _Agr._ 28; comp. Martialis, vi. 60). It was
an aggressive war (Suetonius, _Dom._ 6: _expeditio sponte suscepta_;
Zonaras, xi. 19; λεηλατήσας τινὰ τῶν πέραν Ῥήνου τῶν ἐνσπόνδων). The
shifting of the line of posts is attested by Frontinus, who took part
in the war, _Strat._ ii. 11, 7: _cum in finibus Cubiorum_ (name unknown
and probably corrupt) _castella poneret_, and i. 3, 10: _limitibus per
cxx. m. p. actis_, which is here brought into immediate connection
with the military operations, and hence may not be separated from the
Chattan war itself and referred to the _agri decumates_, which had
for long been in the Roman power. The measure of 108 miles is very
conceivable for the military line which Domitian planned at the Taunus
(according to Cohausen's estimates, _Röm. Grenzwall_, p. 8, the later
Limes from the Rhine round the Taunus as far as the Main is set down at
137 miles), but is much too small to admit of its being referred to the
line of connection from thence to Ratisbon.]

[75: The Germans (Suetonius, _Dom._ 6) could only be the Chatti, and
their earlier allies, perhaps in the first instance just the Usipes and
those sharing their fate. The insurrection broke out in Mentz, which
alone was a double camp of two legions. Saturninus was assailed from
Raetia by the troops of L. Appius Maximus Norbanus. For the epigram of
Martial, ix. 84, cannot be understood otherwise, the more especially
as his conqueror, of senatorial rank as he was, could not administer
a regular command in Raetia and Vindelicia, and could only be led
into this region by a case of war emerging, as indeed the _sacrilegi
furores_ clearly point to the insurrection. The tiles of this same
Appius, which have been found in the provinces of upper Germany and
Aquitania, do not warrant the making him legate of the Lugdunensis,
as Asbach (_Westdeutsche Zeitschrift_, iii. 9), suggests, but must be
referred to the epoch after the defeat of Antonius (_Hermes_, xix.
438). Where the battle was fought remains doubtful; the region of
Vindonissa most naturally suggests itself, to which point Saturninus
may have gone to meet Norbanus. Had Norbanus encountered the insurgents
only at Mentz, which in itself seems conceivable, these would have had
the crossing of the Rhine in their power, and the contingent of the
Germans could not have been hindered by the breaking-up of the Rhine
from reinforcing them.]

[76: The detached notice is found subjoined to the Veronese provincial
list (_Notitia dignitatum_, ed. Seeck, p. 253): _nomina civitatum trans
Renum fluvium quae sunt; Usiphorum_ (read _Usiporum_)--_Tuvanium_ (read
_Tubantum_)--_Nictrensium--Novarii--Casuariorum: istae omnes civitates
trans Renum in formulam Belgicae primae redactae trans castellum
Montiacese: nam lxxx. leugas trans Renum Romani possederunt. Istae
civitates sub Gallieno imperatore a barbaris occupatae sunt_. That
the Usipes afterwards dwelt in this region, is confirmed by Tacitus,
_Hist._ iv. 37, _Germ._ 32; that they belonged to the empire in the
year 83, but had perhaps been made subject only shortly before, is
plain from the narrative, _Agr._ 28. The Tubantes and Chasuarii are
placed by Ptolemy, ii. 11, 11, in the vicinity of the Chatti; that
they shared the fate of the Usipes is accordingly probable. No certain
identification of the other two corrupt names has hitherto been
found; perhaps the Tencteri had a place here, or some of the small
tribes named with these only in Ptolemy, ii. 11, 6. The notice in its
original form named Belgica simply, as the province was only divided
by Diocletian, and named it rightly in so far as the two Germanies
belonged geographically to Belgica. The specified measurement carries
us, if we follow the Kinzig valley to the north-east, beyond Fulda
nearly to Hersfeld. Inscriptions have been found here far eastward
beyond the Rhine, as far as the Wetterau; Friedberg and Butzbach were
military positions strongly garrisoned; at Altenstadt between Friedberg
and Büdingen there has been found an inscription of the year 242
(Brambach, _C. I. Rh._ 1410) pointing to protection of the frontier
(_collegium iuventutis_).]

[77: What the designation _agri decumates_ (for the latter word is
at anyrate to be connected with _agri_) occurring only in Tacitus,
_Germ._ 29, means, is uncertain. It is possible that the territory
regarded in the earlier imperial period certainly as property of the
state or rather of the emperor, like the old _ager occupatorius_ of
the republic, might be used by the first who took possession upon
payment of the tenth; but neither is it linguistically proved that
_decumas_ can mean "liable for a tenth," nor are we acquainted with
such arrangements in the imperial period. Moreover it should not be
overlooked that the description of Tacitus refers to the time before
the institution of the line of the Neckar; it does not suit the latter
period any more than does the designation, which doubtless is not
clear, but is at any rate certainly connected with the earlier legal
relation.]

[78: This has been proved by Zangemeister (_Westdeutsche Zeitschrift_,
iii. p. 246).]

[79: The fact that here several altars were dedicated, while elsewhere
at these central sanctuaries only one is mentioned, may be explained
perhaps by the cultus of Roma falling into the background by the side
of that of the emperors. If at the very outset several altars were
erected, which is probable, perhaps one of the sons caused altars to
be set up as well to his father and perhaps his brother as to his own
Genius.]

[80: That the transfer took place shortly before Tacitus wrote the
Germania in the year 98, he himself states, and that Domitian was its
author, follows from the fact that he does not name the author.]

[81: This, too, has been documentarily established by Zangemeister
(_Westdeutsche Zeitschrift_, iii. 237 f.).]

[82: This measurement holds for the line of forts from Rheinbrohl
to Lorch (Cohausen, _der Röm. Grenzwall_, p. 7 f.). For the earthen
rampart there falls to be deducted the stretch of the Main from
Miltenberg to Grosskrotzenburg, of about thirty Roman miles. In the
case of the older line of the Neckar the rampart is considerably
shorter, since, instead of that from Miltenberg to Lorch, here comes in
the much shorter one of the Odenwald from Wörth to Wimpfen.]

[83: If, as is probable, the statement that Hadrian blocked the
imperial frontier-roads by palisades against the barbarians (p. 122)
relates in part and perhaps primarily to the upper Germanic, the wall,
of which remains are extant, was not his work; whether this may have
carried palisades or not, no report would mention these and pass over
the wall itself. Dio. lxix. 9, says that Hadrian revised the defence
of the frontier throughout the empire. The designation of the pale
[_Pfahl_] or pale-ditch [_Pfahlgraben_] cannot be Roman; in Latin the
stakes, which, driven into the wall of the camp, form a palisade-chain
for it, are called not _pali_, but _valli_ or _sudes_, just as the wall
itself is never other than _vallum_. If the designation in use from of
old for this purpose apparently along the whole line among the Germans
was really borrowed from the palisades, it must have been of Germanic
origin, and can only have proceeded from the time when this wall stood
before their eyes in its integrity and significance. Whether the
"region" Palas which Ammianus mentions (xviii. 2, 15) is connected with
this is doubtful.]

[84: In such an one recently discovered between the forts of Schlossau
and Hesselbach, 1850 yards from the former, about three miles from the
latter, there has been found a votive inscription (_Korrespondenzblatt
der Westdeutschen Zeitschrift_, 1 Jul. 1884), which the troop
that built it--a detachment of the 1st cohort of the Sequani and
Raurici under command of a centurion of the 22d legion, erected as a
thanksgiving _ob burgum explic(itum)_. These towers thus were _burgi_.]

[85: The oldest dated evidence for these is two inscriptions of the
garrison of Böckingen, opposite Heilbronn, on the left bank of the
Neckar of the year 148 (Brambach, _C. I. Rh._ 1583, 1590).]

[86: The oldest dated evidence for the existence of this line is the
inscription of _vicus Aurelii_ (Oehringen) of the year 169 (Brambach,
_C. I. Rh._ 1558), doubtless only private, but certainly not set up
before the construction of this fort belonging to the Miltenberg-Lorch
line; little later is that of Jagsthausen, likewise belonging to that
line, of the year 179 (_C. I. Rh._ 1618). Accordingly _vicus Aurelii_
might take its name from Marcus, not from Caracalla, though it is
attested of the latter that he constructed various forts in these
regions and named them after himself (Dio, lxxvi. 13).]

[87: As to the distribution of the upper German troops there is a
want of sufficient information, but not entirely of data on which to
rest. Of the two headquarters in upper Germany, that of Strassburg
can be shown to have been after the construction of the line of the
Neckar occupied but weakly, and was probably more an administrative
than a military centre (_Westdeutsches Correspondenzblatt_, 1884,
p. 132). On the other hand, the garrison of Mentz always demanded a
considerable portion of the aggregate strength, all the more because it
was probably the only compact body of troops on a large scale in all
upper Germany. The other troops were distributed partly to the Limes,
whose forts, according to Cohausen's estimate (_Röm. Grenzwall_, p.
335), were on an average five miles apart from one another, and so in
all about fifty; partly to the interior forts, especially on the line
of the Odenwald from Gündelsheim to Wörth; that the latter, at least
in part, remained occupied even after the laying out of the outer
Limes, is at least probable. Owing to the inequality in size of the
forts still measurable, it is difficult to say what number of troops
was required to make them capable of defence. Cohausen (_l.c._ p.
340) reckons to a middle-sized fort, including the reserve, 720 men.
As the usual cohort of the legion as of the auxiliaries numbered 500
men, and the fort-buildings must necessarily have had regard to this
fact, the garrison of the fort in the event of siege must be estimated
on an average at least at this number. After the reduction the upper
German army could not possibly have held the forts, even of the Limes
alone, simultaneously in this strength. Much less could it, even before
the reduction, have kept the lines between the forts even barely
occupied with its 30,000 men (p. 119); and, if this was not possible,
the simultaneous occupation of all the forts had in fact no object.
To all appearance each fort was planned in such a way that, when duly
garrisoned, it could be held; but, as a rule--and on this frontier
the state of peace was the rule--the individual fort was not on a
war-footing, but only furnished with troops, in so far that posts might
be stationed in the watch-towers, and the roads as well as the byways
might be kept under inspection. The standing garrisons of the forts
were, it may be conjectured, very much weaker than is usually assumed.
We possess from antiquity but a single record of such a garrison; it
is of the year 155, and relates to the fort of Kutlowitza, to the
north of Sofia (_Eph. Epigr._ iv. p. 524), for which the army of lower
Moesia, and in fact the 11th legion, furnished the garrison. This troop
numbered at that time, besides the centurion in command, only 76 men.
The Raetian army was, at least before Marcus, still less in a position
to occupy extensive lines; it numbered then at the most 10,000 men, and
had, besides the Raetian Limes, to supply also the line of the Danube
from Ratisbon to Passau.]

[88: This is proved by the document of Trajan of the year 107, found at
Weissenburg.]

[89: The investigations hitherto as to the Raetian Limes have but
little cleared up the destination of this work; this only is made
out that it was less adapted than the analogous upper German one
for military occupation. A weaker frontier-bar of that sort may
reasonably, even before the Marcomanian war, have been chosen to face
the Hermunduri; nor does what Tacitus says of their intercourse in
Augusta Vindelicum by any means exclude the existence at that time of a
Raetian Limes. Only in that case we should expect that it would not end
at Lorch, but would join the line of the Neckar; and in some measure it
does this, inasmuch as at Lorch instead of the Limes comes the Rems,
which falls into the Neckar at Canstatt.]

[90: Of the seven legions which at Nero's death were stationed in
the two Germanies (p. 132), Vespasian broke up five; there remained
the 21st and the 22d, to which, thereupon, were added the seven or
eight legions introduced for the suppression of the revolt, the 1st
Adiutrix, 2d Adiutrix, 6th Victrix, 8th and 10th Gemina, 11th, 13th
(?), and 14th. Of these, after the close of the war, the 1st Adiutrix
was sent probably to Spain (p. 65, note), the 2d Adiutrix probably to
Britain (p. 174, note 4), the 13th Gemina (if this came to Germany
at all) to Pannonia; the other seven remained, namely, in the lower
province the 6th, 10th, 21st, and 22d (p. 147, note), in the upper the
8th, 11th, and 14th. To the latter was probably added in the year 88
the 1st Adiutrix, once more sent from Spain to upper Germany (p. 65
note). That under Trajan the 1st Adiutrix and the 11th were stationed
in upper Germany is shown by the inscription of Baden-Baden (Brambach,
_C. I. Rh._ 1666). The 8th and the 14th, it can be shown, both came
with Cerialis to Germany, and both did garrison duty there for a
considerable period.]

[91: Traian was sent by Nerva in the year 96 or 97 as legate to
Germany, probably to the upper, as at that time Vestricius Spurinna
seems to have presided over the lower. Nominated here as co-regent in
October of the year 97, he received the accounts of Nerva's death and
of his nomination as the Augustus in February 98 at Cologne. He may
have remained there during the winter and the following summer; in the
winter 98-99 he was on the Danube. The words of Eutropius, viii. 2:
_urbes trans Rhenum in Germania reparavit_ (whence the often misused
notice in Orosius, vii. 12, 2, has been copied), which can only be
referred to the upper province, but naturally apply not to the legate,
but to the Caesar or the Augustus, obtain a confirmation through the
_civitas Ulpia s(altus?) N(icerini?) Lopodunum_ of the inscriptions.
The "restoration" may stand in contrast not to the institutions of
Domitian, but to the irregular germs of urban arrangements in the
Decumates-land before the shifting of the military frontier. There
is no indication pointing to warlike events under Trajan; that he
planned and gave his name (Ammianus, xvii. 1, 11) to a _castellum in
Alamannorum solo_--according to the connection, on the Main not far
from Mentz--is as little proof of such events as the circumstance that
a later poet (Sidonius, _Carm._ vii. 115), mixing up old and new, makes
Agrippina under him the terror of the Sugambri--that is, in his sense,
of the Franks.]

[92: Not merely the causal connection, but even the chronological
succession of these important events is obscure. The account,
relatively the best, in Zosimus, i. 29, describes the Germanic war as
the cause why Valerian immediately on ascending the throne in 253 made
his son joint-ruler with equal rights; and Valerian bears the title
_Germanicus maximus_ as early as 256 (_C. I. L._ viii. 2380; likewise
in 259 _C. I. L._ xi. 826), perhaps even if the coin in Cohen, n. 54,
is to be trusted, the title _Germanicus maximus ter_.]

[93: That the Germans, against whom Gallienus had to fight, are to be
sought at least chiefly on the lower Rhine, is shown by the residence
of his son in Agrippina, where he can only have remained behind as
nominal representative of his father. His biographer also, c. 8, names
the Franks.]

[94: It is difficult to form a conception of the degree of historical
falsification which prevails in a portion of the Imperial Biographies;
it will not be amiss to present here a specimen of it in the account of
Postumus. He is here called (no doubt in an inserted document) _Iulius
Postumus_ (_Tyr._ 6), on the coins and inscriptions _M. Cassianius
Latinius Postumus_, in the epitomised Victor, 32, Cassius Labienus
Postumus.--He reigns seven years (_Gall._ 4); _Tyr._ 3, 5; the coins
name his _tr. p. X._, and Eutropius, ix. 10, gives him ten years.--His
opponent is called _Lollianus_, according to the coins _Ulpius
Cornelius Laelianus_, _Laelianus_ in Eutropius ix. 9 (according to the
one class of manuscripts, while the other follows the interpolation
of the biographers) and in Victor (c. 33), _Aelianus_ in the epitome
of Victor.--Postumus and Victorinus rule jointly according to the
biographer; but there are no coins common to both, and consequently
these confirm the report in Victor and Eutropius that Victorinus was
the successor of Postumus.--It is a peculiarity of this class of
falsifications that they reach their culmination in the documents
inserted. The Cologne epitaph of the two Victorini (_Tyr._ 7), _hic
duo Victorini tyranni (!) siti sunt_ criticises itself. The alleged
commission of Valerian, whereby the latter communicates to the Gauls
the nomination of Postumus, not only praises prophetically the gifts
of Postumus as a ruler, but names also various impossible offices;
a _Transrhenani limitis dux et Galliae praeses_ at no time existed,
and Postumus ἀρχὴν ἐν Κελτοῖς στρατιωτῶν ἐμπεπιστευμένος (Zosimus, i.
38) can only have been _praeses_ of one of the two Germanies, or, if
his command was an extraordinary one, _dux per Germanias_. Equally
impossible is, in the same quasi-document, the _tribunatus Vocontiorum_
of the son, an evident imitation of the tribunates, as they emerge
in the _Notitia Dign._ of the time of Honorius.--Against Postumus
and Victorinus, under whom the Gauls and the Franks fight, Gallienus
marches with Aureolus, afterwards his opponent, and the later emperor
Claudius; he himself is wounded by a shot from an arrow, but is
victorious, without any change being produced by the victory. Of this
war the other accounts know nothing. Postumus falls in the military
insurrection instigated by the so-called Lollianus, while according
to the report in Victor and Eutropius, Postumus becomes master of
this Mentz insurrection, but then the soldiers kill him because he
will not deliver up Mentz to them for plunder. As to the elevation of
Postumus, by the side of the narrative which agrees in the main with
the ordinary one, that Postumus had perfidiously set aside the son
of Gallienus entrusted to his guardianship, stands another evidently
invented to clear him, according to which the people in Gaul did this,
and then offered the crown to Postumus. The tendency to eulogise one
who had spared Gaul the fate of the Danubian lands and of Asia and had
saved it from the Germans, comes here and everywhere (most obviously at
_Tyr._ 5) to light; with which is connected the fact that this report
knows nothing of the loss of the right bank of the Rhine and of the
expeditions of the Franks to Gaul, Spain, and Africa. It is further
significant that the alleged progenitor of the Constantinian house is
here provided with an honourable secondary part. This narrative, not
confused but thoroughly falsified, must be completely set aside; the
reports on the one hand in Zosimus, on the other in the Latins drawing
from a common source--Victor and Eutropius, short and confused as they
are, can alone be taken into account.]

[95: The rule of Postumus lasted ten years (p. 164, note 1). That the
elder son of Gallienus was already dead in 259, we learn from the
inscription of Modena, _C. I. L._ xi. 826; the revolt of Postumus thus
falls certainly in or before this year. As the captivity of Tetricus
cannot well be placed later than 272, immediately after the second
expedition against Zenobia, and the three Gallic rulers reigned,
Postumus for ten years, Victorinus for two (Eutropius, ix. 9), Tetricus
for two (Victor, 35), this brings the revolt of Postumus to somewhere
about 259; yet such numbers are frequently somewhat deranged. When the
duration of the expeditions of the Germans into Spain under Gallienus
is definitely stated at twelve years (Orosius, vii. 41, 2), this
appears to be superficially reckoned according to the Chronicle of
Jerome. The usual exact numbers are unattested and deceptive.]

[96: According to the biographer, c. 14, 15, Probus brought the
Germans of the right bank of the Rhine into dependence, so that they
were tributary to the Romans and defended the frontier for them (_omnes
jam barbari vobis arant, vobis jam serviunt et contra interiores gentes
militant_); the right of bearing arms is left to them for the time,
but the idea is, on further successes, to push forward the frontier
and erect a province of Germania. Even as free fancies of a Roman of
the fourth century--more they are not--these utterances have a certain
interest.]




CHAPTER V.

BRITAIN.


[Sidenote: Caesar and the Julian Emperors.]

Ninety-seven years elapsed from the time when Roman troops had entered,
subdued, and again abandoned the great island in the north-western
ocean, before the Roman government resolved to repeat the voyage and
permanently to occupy Britain. Certainly Caesar's Britannic expedition
had not been, like his campaigns against the Germans, a mere forward
movement of defence. So far as his arm reached, he had made the
individual tribes subject to the empire, and had regulated their
annual tribute to it in this case as in Gaul. The leading tribe, too,
which was to be firmly attached to Rome by its privileged position and
thereby to become the fulcrum of Roman rule, was found; the Trinovantes
(Essex) were to take up on the Celtic island the same part--more
advantageous than honourable--as the Haedui and the Remi on the Gallic
continent. The bloody feud between the prince Cassivellaunus and the
princely house of Camalodunum (Colchester) had been the immediate cause
of the Roman invasion; to reinstate this house Caesar had landed, and
the object was for the moment attained. Beyond doubt Caesar never
deceived himself as to the fact that the tribute, as well as the
protectorate, were in the first instance mere words; but these words
were a programme which could not but bring about, and was intended to
bring about, the permanent occupation of the island by Roman troops.

Caesar himself did not get so far as permanently to organise the
affairs of the subject island; and for his successors Britain was a
perplexity. The Britons who had become subject to the empire certainly
did not long pay--perhaps never paid at all--the tribute which was
due. The protectorate over the dynasty of Camalodunum must have been
still less respected, and had simply as its effect, that princes and
scions of that house again and again appeared in Rome and invoked the
intervention of the Roman government against neighbours and rivals.
Thus king Dubnovellaunus, probably the successor of the prince of the
Trinovantes confirmed by Caesar, came as a refugee to Rome to the
emperor Augustus, and so, later, one of the princes of the same house
came to the emperor Gaius.[97]

In fact the expedition to Britain was a necessary part of the heritage
left by Caesar. Already during the Dual Rule Caesar the younger had
projected such an expedition, and had only desisted from it on account
of the more urgent necessity of procuring quiet in Illyricum, or on
account of the strained relation with Antonius, which proved useful
to the Parthians in the first instance as well as to the Britons. The
courtly poets of the earlier years of Augustus celebrated variously
in anticipation the Britannic conquest; the programme of Caesar was
thus accepted and adopted by his successor. When the monarchy was
consolidated, all Rome thereupon expected that the close of the civil
war would be followed by the Britannic expedition; the complaints of
the poets as to the dreadful strife, but for which the Britons would
long since have been led in triumphal procession to the Capitol,
became transformed into the proud hope of adding to the empire the new
province of Britain. The expedition was, moreover, repeatedly announced
(727, 728) {27, 26.}, yet Augustus, without formally abandoning the
undertaking, soon desisted from carrying it out; and Tiberius, faithful
to his maxim, adhered in this question also to the system of his
father.[98] The worthless thoughts of the last Julian emperor roamed
doubtless also over the ocean; but serious things he was incapable of
even planning. It was the government of Claudius that first took up the
plan of the dictator afresh and carried it out.

[Sidenote: The reasons for, and against, the occupation of Britain.]

What were the determining motives, on the one side as on other, may be
at least partially discerned. Augustus himself laid it down that the
occupation of the island was not necessary from a military point of
view--seeing that its inhabitants were not in a position to annoy the
Romans on the continent--and was not advantageous for the finances;
that what could be drawn from Britain flowed into the exchequer of the
empire in the form of import and export duties at the Gallic harbours;
that at least a legion and some cavalry would be requisite as garrison,
and after deduction of its cost from the tribute of the island not much
would be left.[99] All this was indisputably correct, but it was not
the whole truth. Experience showed later that a legion was far from
sufficient to hold the island. We must further take into account, what
the government certainly had no occasion to say, that, considering
the state of weakness to which the Roman army had been brought by the
internal policy of Augustus, it could not but appear very hazardous to
banish a considerable fragment of it, once for all, to a distant island
of the North Sea. There was presumably only the choice of keeping
aloof from Britain or increasing the army on its account; and with
Augustus considerations of internal policy always outweighed those of
an external character.

[Sidenote: Conviction of its necessity predominant.]

But yet the conviction of the necessity for subduing Britain must
have predominated with Roman statesmen. Caesar's conduct would be
inconceivable if we do not presuppose that conviction in his case.
Augustus at first formally recognised, and never formally disowned,
the aim proposed by Caesar, notwithstanding its inconvenience. It
was precisely the governments that were the most far-seeing and most
tenacious of purpose--those of Claudius, Nero, and Domitian--that laid
the foundation for the conquest of Britain, or extended the work; and,
after it had taken place, it was never regarded in any such light as,
let us say, the conquest by Trajan of Dacia and Mesopotamia. If the
maxim of government, elsewhere adhered to almost inviolably, that the
Roman empire had simply to fill, but not to extend, its bounds, was
permanently set aside only in respect of Britain, the cause lies in
the fact that the Celts could not be subdued in such a way as Rome's
interest demanded, on the continent alone. This nation was to all
appearance more connected than separated by the narrow arm of the sea
which parts England and France; the same names of peoples meet us on
the one side and on the other; the bounds of the individual states
often reach over the Channel; the chief seat of the priestly system,
which here more than anywhere else pervaded the whole nationality, was
from of old the islands of the North Sea. These islanders indeed were
not able to wrest the continent of Gaul from the Roman legions; but,
if the conqueror of Gaul himself, and, later, the Roman government in
Gaul, pursued other aims than in Syria and Egypt--if the Celts were
to be annexed as members to the Italian nation--this task remained
quite impracticable, so long as the subjugated and the free Celtic
territories touched each other over the sea, and the enemy of the
Romans as well as the Roman deserter found an asylum in Britain.[100]
In the first instance the subjugation of the southern coast sufficed
for this purpose, although the effect was naturally the greater, the
farther the free Celtic territory was pushed back.[101] The special
regard of Claudius for his Gallic home and his knowledge of Gallic
relations may also have played a part in the matter.

[Sidenote: Occasion for the war.]

[Sidenote: Cunobelinus.]

What furnished occasion for the war was the fact that that very
principality which sustained a certain dependence on Rome under
the leadership of its king Cunobelinus--this was Shakespeare's
Cymbeline--extended widely its rule,[102] and emancipated itself from
the Roman protectorate. One of his sons--Adminius, who had revolted
against his father, came to the emperor Gaius desiring protection, and
upon his successor refusing to deliver up to the British ruler these
his subjects, the war arose in the first instance against the father
and the brothers of this Adminius. The real motive, of course, was the
indispensable need for completing the conquest of a nation hitherto but
half vanquished and keeping closely together.

[Sidenote: Military arrangements for occupying the island.]

That the occupation of Britain could not ensue without a contemporary
increase of the standing army was also the view of those statesmen who
gave occasion to it; three of the Rhine-legions and one from the Danube
were destined thither,[103] but at the same time two newly instituted
legions were assigned to the Germanic armies. An able soldier, Aulus
Plautius, was selected as leader of this expedition, and at the same
time as first governor of the province; it departed for the island in
the year 43. The soldiers showed themselves reluctant, more doubtless
because of the banishment to the distant island than from fear of the
foe. One of the leading men, perhaps the soul of the undertaking,
Narcissus, the emperor's cabinet-secretary, wished to instil into them
courage; they did not allow the slave to utter a word for their shouts
of scoffing, but did withal as he wished and embarked.

[Sidenote: Course of the occupation.]

The occupation of the island was not attended by any special
difficulty. The natives stood, in a political as in a military point of
view, at the same low stage of development which Caesar had previously
found in the island. Kings or queens reigned in the several cantons,
which had no outward bond of conjunction and were at perpetual feud
with one another. The men were doubtless possessed of bodily strength,
endurance, and bravery--despising death; and were in particular expert
horsemen. But the Homeric war-chariot, which was still a reality here,
and on which the princes of the land themselves wielded the reins, as
little held its ground against the compact squadrons of Roman cavalry
as the foot soldier without coat of mail and helmet, defended only by
the small shield, was with his short javelin and his broad sword a
match in close combat for the short Roman knife, or even for the heavy
_pilum_ of the legionary, and sling-bullet and arrow of the light Roman
troops. To the army of about 40,000 well-trained soldiers the natives
could oppose no corresponding defensive force. The disembarkation did
not even encounter resistance; the Britons had accounts as to the
reluctant temper of the troops and no longer expected the landing. King
Cunobelinus had died shortly before; the opposition was led by his
two sons Caratacus and Togodumnus. The invading army had its march at
once directed to Camalodunum,[104] and in a rapid course of victory
it reached as far as the Thames; here a halt was made, chiefly perhaps
to give the emperor the opportunity of plucking the easy laurels in
person. So soon as he arrived, the river was crossed; the British levy
was beaten, on which occasion Togodumnus met his death; Camalodunum
itself was taken. His brother Caratacus, it is true, obstinately
continued the resistance, and gained for himself, in victory or defeat,
a proud name with friend and foe; nevertheless, the progress of the
Romans was not to be checked. One prince after another was beaten
and deposed--the triumphal arch of Claudius names eleven British
kings as conquered by him; and what did not succumb to the Roman arms
yielded to the Roman largesses. Numerous men of rank accepted the
possessions which the emperor conferred on them at the expense of their
countrymen; various kings also submitted to the modest position of
vassals, as indeed Cogidumnus the king of the Regni (Chichester) and
Prasutagus the king of the Iceni (Norfolk) bore rule for a series of
years as dependent princes. But in most districts of the island, which
had hitherto been monarchically governed throughout, the conquerors
introduced their communal constitution, and gave what was still left
to be administered into the hands of the local men of rank--a course
which brought in its train wretched factions and internal quarrels.
Even under the first governor the whole level country as far as the
Humber seems to have come into Roman power; the Iceni, for example,
had already submitted to him. But it was not merely with the sword
that the Romans made way for themselves. Veterans were settled at
Camalodunum immediately after its capture; thus the first town of
Roman organisation and Roman burgess-rights, the "Claudian colony of
victory," was founded in Britain, destined to be the capital of the
country. Immediately afterwards began also the profitable working of
the British mines, particularly of the productive lead-mines; there are
British leaden bars from the sixth year after the invasion. Evidently
with like rapidity the stream of Roman merchants and artisans poured
itself over the field newly opened up; if Camalodunum received
Roman colonists, Roman townships, which soon obtained legally urban
organisation, were formed elsewhere in the south of the island as a
mere result of freedom of traffic and of immigration, particularly
at the hot springs of Sulis (Bath), in Verulamium (St. Albans to the
north-west of London), and above all in the natural emporium of trading
on a great scale--Londinium at the mouth of the Thames.

The advance of the foreign rule asserted itself everywhere, not merely
in new taxes and levies, but perhaps still more in commerce and trade.
When Plautius after four years of administration was recalled, he
entered Rome in triumph, the last citizen who attained such honour,
and honours and orders were lavished on the officers and soldiers of
the victorious legions; triumphal arches were erected to the emperor
in Rome, and thereafter in other towns, on account of victory achieved
"without any losses whatever;" the crown-prince born shortly before
the invasion received, instead of his grandfather's name, that of
Britannicus. We may discern in these matters the unmilitary age disused
to victories with loss, and the extravagance in keeping with political
dotage; but, if the invasion of Britain has not much significance
from a military standpoint, testimony must withal be borne to the
leading men that they set about the work in an energetic and persistent
fashion, and that the painful and dangerous time of transition from
independent to foreign rule in Britain was an unusually short one.

After the first rapid success, it is true, there were developed
difficulties and even dangers, which the occupation of the island
brought not merely to the conquered but also to the conquerors.

[Sidenote: Resistance in West Britain.]

[Sidenote: Mona.]

[Sidenote: Paullinus.]

They were masters of the level country, but not of the mountains or of
the sea. The west above all gave trouble to the Romans. No doubt in
the extreme south-west, in what is now Cornwall, the old nationality
maintained itself, probably more because the conquerors concerned
themselves but little about this remote corner than because it directly
rebelled against them. But the Silures in the south of the modern
Wales, and their northern neighbours the Ordovici, perseveringly
defied the Roman arms; the island Mona (Anglesey), adjacent to the
latter, was the true focus of national and religious resistance. It
was not the character of the ground alone that hindered the advance
of the Romans; what Britain had been for Gaul, that the large island
Ivernia was now for Britain, and especially for this west coast; the
freedom on the one side of the channel did not allow the foreign rule
to take firm root in the other. We clearly recognise in the laying out
of the legionary camps that the invasion was here arrested. Under the
successor of Plautius the camp for the 14th legion was laid out at the
confluence of the Tern with the Severn near Viroconium (Wroxeter, not
far from Shrewsbury);[105] presumably about the same time, to the south
of it, that of Isca (Caerleon = _Castra legionis_) for the 2d; to the
north that of Deva (Chester = _Castra_) for the 20th; these three camps
shut off the region of Wales towards the south, north, and west, and
protected thus the pacified land against the mountains that remained
free. Into this region the last prince of Camalodunum, Caratacus,
threw himself, after his home had become Roman. He was defeated by
the successor of Plautius, Publius Ostorius Scapula, in the territory
of the Ordovici, and soon afterwards delivered up by the terrified
Brigantes, with whom he had taken refuge, to the Romans (51), and
conducted with all his adherents to Italy. In surprise he asked, when
he saw the proud city, how the masters of such palaces could covet the
poor huts of his native country. But with this the west was by no means
subdued; the Silures above all persevered in obstinate resistance, and
the fact that the Roman general announced his purpose of extirpating
them to the last man did not contribute to make them more submissive.
The enterprising governor, Gaius Suetonius Paullinus, attempted
some years later (61) to bring into Roman power the chief seat of
resistance, the island of Mona, and in spite of the furious opposition
with which he was met, and in which the priests and the women took the
lead, the sacred trees, beneath which many a Roman captive had bled,
fell under the axes of the legionaries. But out of the occupation
of this last asylum of the Celtic priesthood there was developed a
dangerous crisis in the subject territory itself; and the governor was
not destined to complete the conquest of Mona.

[Sidenote: Boudicca.]

In Britain, too, the alien rule had to stand the test of national
insurrection. What was undertaken by Mithradates in Asia Minor, by
Vercingetorix among the Celts of the continent, by Civilis among the
subject Germans, was attempted among the insular Celts by a woman, the
wife of one of those vassal-princes confirmed by Rome, the Queen of the
Iceni, Boudicca. Her deceased husband had, to secure the future of his
wife and his daughters, bequeathed his sovereignty to the emperor Nero,
and divided his property between the latter and his own relatives.
The emperor took the legacy and, in addition, what was not meant for
him; the princely cousins were put in chains, the widow was scourged,
the daughters maltreated in more shameful fashion. Then came other
wrongs at the hands of the later Neronian government. The veterans
settled in Camalodunum chased the earlier possessors from house and
homestead as it pleased them, without the authorities interfering
to check them. The presents conferred by the emperor Claudius were
confiscated as revocable gifts. Roman ministers, who at the same time
trafficked in money, drove in this way the Britannic communities,
one after the other, to bankruptcy. The moment was favourable. The
governor Paullinus, more brave than cautious, was just then, as we
have said, with the flower of the Roman army in the remote island of
Mona, and this attack on the most sacred seat of the national religion
exasperated men's minds as much as it paved the way for insurrection.
The old vehement Celtic faith, which had given the Romans so much
trouble, burst forth once more, for the last time, in a mighty flame.
The weakened and far separated camps of the legions in the west and in
the north afforded no protection to the whole south-east of the island
with its flourishing Roman towns.

[Sidenote: Attack on Camalodunum.]

Above all, the capital, Camalodunum, was utterly defenceless; there
was no garrison. The walls were not completed, although the temple
of their imperial founder, the new god Claudius, was so. The west of
the island, probably kept down by the legions stationed there, seems
not to have taken part in the rising, and as little the non-subject
north; but, as frequently occurred in Celtic revolts, in the year
61 on a concerted signal all the rest of the subject territory rose
in a moment against the foreigners, the Trinovantes, driven out of
their capital, taking the lead. The second commander, who at the time
represented the governor, the procurator Decianus Catus, had at the
last moment sent what soldiers he had to its protection; they were 200
men. They defended themselves with the veterans and the other Romans
capable of arms for two days in the temple; then they were overpowered,
and all that was Roman in the town perished. The like fate befell the
chief emporium of Roman trade, Londinium, and a third flourishing
Roman city, Verulamium (St. Albans, north-west of London), as well as
the foreigners scattered over the island; it was a national Vesper
like that of Mithradates, and the number of victims--alleged to be
70,000--was not less. The procurator gave up the cause of Rome as lost,
and fled to the continent. The Roman army, too, became involved in the
disaster. A number of scattered detachments and garrisons succumbed
to the assaults of the insurgents. Quintus Petillius Cerialis, who
held the command in the camp of Lindum, marched on Camalodunum with
the 9th legion; he came too late to save it, and, assailed by an
enormous superiority of force, lost in the battle all his infantry; the
camp was stormed by the Brigantes. The same fate well-nigh overtook
the general-in-chief. Hastily returning from the island of Mona, he
called to him the 2d legion stationed at Isca; but it did not obey the
command, and with only about 10,000 men Paullinus had to take up the
unequal struggle against the numberless and victorious army of the
insurgents. If ever soldiers made good the errors of their leader it
was on the day when this small band--chiefly the thenceforth celebrated
14th legion--achieved, doubtless to its own surprise, a full victory,
and once more established the Roman rule in Britain. Little was wanting
to bring the name of Paullinus into association with that of Varus.
But success decides, and here it remained with the Romans.[106] The
guilty commandant of the legion that remained aloof anticipated the
court-martial, and threw himself upon his sword. The queen Boudicca
drank the cup of poison. The otherwise brave general was not indeed
brought to trial, as seemed to be at first the intention of the
government, but was soon under a suitable pretext recalled.

[Sidenote: Subjugation of West Britain.]

The subjugation of the western portions of the island was not continued
at once by the successors of Paullinus. The able general Sextus Julius
Frontinus first under Vespasian forced the Silures to recognise the
Roman rule; his successor Gnaeus Julius Agricola, after obstinate
conflicts with the Ordovici, effected what Paullinus had not achieved,
and occupied in the year 78 the island of Mona. Afterwards there
is no mention of active resistance in these regions; the camp of
Viroconium could probably about this time be dispensed with, and the
legion thereby set free could be employed in northern Britain. But
the other two legionary camps still remained on the spot down to the
time of Diocletian, and only disappeared in the later arrangements of
the troops. If political considerations may have contributed to this
(p. 190), yet the resistance of the west was probably continued even
later, perhaps supported by communications with Ivernia. Moreover, the
complete absence of Roman traces in the interior of Wales, and the
Celtic nationality maintaining itself there up to the present day, tell
in favour of this view.

[Sidenote: Subjugation of Northern Britain.]

In the north the camp of the 9th Spanish legion in Lindum (Lincoln)
formed the centre of the Roman position to the east of Viroconium. In
closest contact with this camp in north England was the most powerful
principality of the island, that of the Brigantes (Yorkshire); it
had not properly submitted, but the queen, Cartimandus, sought to
keep peace with the conquerors and showed herself compliant to them.
The party hostile to the Romans had attempted to break loose here in
the year 50, but the attempt had been quickly suppressed. Caratacus,
beaten in the west, had hoped to be able to continue his resistance
in the north, but the queen delivered him, as already stated, to the
Romans. These internal dissensions and domestic quarrels must have
partly influenced the rising against Paullinus, in which we find the
Brigantes in a leading position, and which fell with all its weight
upon this very legion of the north. Meanwhile the Roman party of the
Brigantes, however, was influential enough to obtain the restoration
of the government of Cartimandus after the insurrection was defeated.
But some years afterwards the patriotic party there, supported by the
tidings of revolt from Rome, which during the civil war after the
downfall of Nero filled all the west, brought about a new rising of
the Brigantes against the foreign rule, at the head of which stood
Cartimandus's former husband, set aside and scorned by her--the veteran
warrior Venutius. It was only after prolonged conflicts that the mighty
people was subdued by Petillius Cerialis, the same who had fought
unsuccessfully under Paullinus against these same Britons, now one of
the most noted generals of Vespasian, and the first governor of the
island nominated by him. The gradually slackening resistance of the
west made it possible to combine one of the three legions hitherto
stationed there with that stationed in Lindum, and to advance the
camp itself from Lindum to the chief place of the Brigantes, Eburacum
(York). But, so long as the west offered serious resistance, nothing
further was done in the north for the extension of the Roman bounds;
at the Caledonian forest, says an author of the time of Vespasian, the
Roman arms were arrested for thirty years.

[Sidenote: Agricola.]

It was Agricola who first, after his work was over in the west,
energetically set himself to the subjugation also of the north. First
of all, he created for himself a fleet, without which the provisioning
of the troops in these mountains, which afforded few supplies, would
have been impossible. Supported by this fleet he reached, under Titus
(80), as far as the estuary of the Tava (Frith of Tay), into the region
of Perth and Dundee, and employed the three following campaigns in
gaining an exact knowledge of the wide districts between this frith and
the previous Roman boundary on the two seas, in breaking everywhere
the local resistance, and in constructing intrenchments at the fitting
places; with reference to which, in particular, the natural line of
defence which is formed by the two friths running deeply into the land,
of Clota (Clyde) near Glasgow, and Bodotria (Forth) near Edinburgh, was
selected for a basis. This advance called the whole Highlands under
arms; but the mighty battle which the united Caledonian tribes offered
to the legions between the two friths of Forth and Tay at the Graupian
mountains ended with the victory of Agricola. According to his view
the subjugation of the island, once begun, had to be also completed,
nay, even extended to Ivernia; and in favour of that course there
might be urged, with respect to Roman Britain, what the occupation of
the island had brought about with respect to Gaul. Moreover, with an
energetic carrying out of the occupation of the islands as a whole, the
expenditure of men and money for the future would probably be reduced.

[Sidenote: Caledonia abandoned.]

The Roman government did not follow these counsels. How far personal
and spiteful motives may have co-operated in the recall of the
victorious general in the year 85, who for that matter had remained
longer in office than was usually the case elsewhere, must be left
undetermined. The coincidence of the last victories of the general in
Scotland and the first defeats of the emperor in the region of the
Danube was certainly in a high degree annoying. But for the putting
a stop to the operations in Britain,[107] and for the calling away,
which apparently then ensued, of one of the four legions with which
Agricola had executed his campaigns to Pannonia, a quite sufficient
explanation is furnished by the military position of the state at that
time--the extension of the Roman rule to the right bank of the Rhine
in upper Germany and the outbreak of the dangerous wars in Pannonia.
This, indeed, does not explain why, withal, an end should be put to the
pressing forward towards the north, and northern Scotland as well as
Ireland should be left to themselves.

[Sidenote: Probable grounds for this policy.]

That thenceforth the government desisted not on account of accidents of
the situation for the moment, but once for all, from pushing forward
the frontier of the empire, and amidst all change of persons adhered to
this course, we are taught by the whole later history of the island,
and taught especially by the laborious and costly wall-structures
to be mentioned immediately. Whether the completion of the conquest
was renounced by them in the true interest of the state, is another
question. That the imperial finances would only suffer loss by this
extension of the bounds was even now urged, quite as much as it
formerly was against the occupation of the island itself; but could
not be decisive of the matter.[108] In a military point of view the
occupation was capable of being carried out, as Agricola had conceived
it, beyond doubt without material difficulty. But the consideration
might turn the scale, that the Romanising of the regions still free
would have to encounter great difficulty on account of the diversity
of race. The Celts in England proper belonged throughout to those of
the continent; national name, faith, language, were common to both.
As the Celtic nationality of the continent had found a support in the
island, on the other hand the Romanising of Gaul necessarily carried
its influence over to England, and to this especially Rome owed the
fact that Britain became Romanised with so surprising rapidity. But
the natives of Ireland and Scotland belonged to another stock and
spoke another language; the Briton understood their Gaelic probably as
little as the German understood the language of the Scandinavians. The
Caledonians--with the Iverni the Romans hardly came into contact--are
described throughout as barbarians of the wildest type. On the other
hand, the priest of the oak (Derwydd, _Druida_) exercised his office
on the Rhone as in Anglesey, but not in the island of the west nor in
the mountains of the north. If the Romans had waged the war chiefly
to bring the domain of the Druids entirely into their power, this aim
was in some measure attained. Beyond doubt at another time all these
considerations would not have induced the Romans to renounce the
sea-frontier on the north when brought so near to them, and at least
Caledonia would have been occupied. But the Rome of that time was no
longer able to leaven further regions with Roman habits; the productive
power and the progressive spirit of the people had disappeared from
it. At least that sort of conquest, which cannot be enforced by decrees
and marches, would have hardly succeeded, had they attempted it.

[Sidenote: Fortifying of the northern frontier.]

[Sidenote: The wall of Hadrian.]

[Sidenote: The wall of Antoninus.]

Their aim therefore was to arrange the northern frontier appropriately
for defence, and to this object their military works were thenceforth
directed. Eburacum remained the military centre. The wide territory
occupied by Agricola was retained and furnished with forts, which
served as advanced posts for the headquarters in rear; probably
the greatest part of the non-legionary troops were employed for
this purpose. The construction of connected lines of fortification
followed later. The first of the kind proceeded from Hadrian, and is
also remarkable, in so far as it still in a certain sense subsists
to the present day, and is more completely known than any other of
the great military structures of the Romans. It is, strictly taken,
a military road protected on both sides by fortifications, leading
from sea to sea for a length of about seventy miles, westward to the
Solway Frith, and eastward to the mouth of the Tyne. The defence on
the north is formed by a huge wall, originally at least 16 feet high
and 8 feet thick, built on the two outer sides of square stones,
filled up between with rubble and mortar, in front of which stretched
a no less imposing fosse, 9 feet in depth and 34 feet or more in
breadth at the top. Towards the south the road is protected by two
parallel earthen ramparts, even now 6 to 7 feet high, between which
is drawn a fosse 7 feet deep, with a margin raised to the south, so
that the structure from rampart to rampart has a total breadth of 24
feet. Between the stone-wall and the earthen ramparts on the road
itself lie the camp-stations and watch-houses, viz. at the distance
of about four miles from one another the cohort-camps, constructed as
forts, independently capable of defence, with gates opening towards
all the four sides; between every two of these a smaller structure
of a similar kind with sally-ports to the north and south; between
every two of the latter four smaller watch-houses within call of each
other. This structure of grand solidity, which must have required
as garrison 10,000 to 12,000 men, formed thenceforth the basis of
military operations in the north of England. It was not a frontier-wall
in the proper sense; on the contrary, not merely did the posts that
had already from Agricola's time been pushed forward far beyond it
continue to subsist by its side, but subsequently the line, about a
half shorter, from the Frith of Forth to the Frith of Clyde, already
occupied by Agricola with a chain of posts, was fortified in a similar
but weaker way, first under Pius, then in a more comprehensive manner
under Severus--as it were, as an advanced post for Hadrian's wall.[109]
In point of construction this line was different from that of Hadrian
only so far as it was limited to a considerable earthen wall, with
fosse in front and road behind, and so was not adapted for defence
toward the south; moreover, it too included a number of smaller camps.
At this line the Roman imperial roads terminated,[110] and, although
there were Roman posts even beyond this--the most northerly point,
at which the tombstone of a Roman soldier has been found, is Ardoch,
between Stirling and Perth--the limit of the expeditions of Agricola,
the Frith of Tay, may be regarded as subsequently still the limit of
the Roman empire.

[Sidenote: Wars in the 2d and 3d centuries.]

We know more of these imposing defensive works than of the application
that was made of them, and generally of the later events on this
distant scene of warfare. Under Hadrian a severe disaster occurred
here, to all appearance a sudden attack on the camp of Eburacum, and
the annihilation of the legion stationed there,[111] the same 9th
legion which had fought so unsuccessfully in the war with Boudicca.
Probably this was occasioned, not by a hostile inroad, but by the
revolt of the northern tribes that passed as subjects of the empire,
especially of the Brigantes. With this we shall have to connect the
fact that the wall of Hadrian presents a front towards the south as
well as towards the north; evidently it was destined also for the
purpose of keeping in check the superficially subdued north of England.
Under Hadrian's successor Pius also conflicts took place here, in
which the Brigantes again took part; yet more exact information cannot
be got.[112] The first serious attack upon this imperial boundary,
and the first demonstrable crossing of the wall--doubtless that of
Pius--took place under Marcus, and further attacks under Commodus;
as indeed Commodus is the first emperor who assumed the surname of
victory Britannicus, after the able general Ulpius Marcellus had routed
the barbarians. But the sinking of the Roman power was henceforth
just as apparent here as on the Danube and on the Euphrates. In the
turbulent early years of Severus's reign the Caledonians had broken
their promise not to interfere with the Roman subjects, and, resting on
their support, their southern neighbours, the Maeates, had compelled
the Roman governor Lupus to ransom captive Romans with large sums.
For this the heavy arm of Severus lighted on them not long before his
death; he penetrated into their own territory and compelled them to
cede considerable tracts,[113] from which indeed, after the old emperor
had died in 211 at the camp of Eburacum, his sons at once of their
own accord withdrew the garrisons, to be relieved of their burdensome
defence.

[Sidenote: Caledonians and Scots.]

From the third century hardly anything is told us of the fate of
the island. Since none of the emperors down to Diocletian and his
colleagues derived the name of conqueror from the island, there were
probably no more serious conflicts in that quarter; and, although in
the region lying between the walls of Pius and of Hadrian the Roman
system doubtless never gained a firm footing, yet at least the wall
of Hadrian seems to have rendered even then the service for which it
was intended, and the foreign civilisation seems to have developed in
security behind it. In the time of Diocletian we find the district
between the two walls evacuated, but the Hadrianic wall occupied still
as before, and the rest of the Roman army in cantonments between it
and the headquarters Eburacum, to ward off the predatory expeditions,
thenceforth often mentioned, of the Caledonians, or--as they are now
usually called--the "tattooed" (_picti_), and the Scots streaming in
from Ivernia.

[Sidenote: Fleet.]

The Romans possessed a standing fleet in Britain; but, as the marine
always remained the weak side of Roman warlike organisation, the
British fleet was temporarily of importance only under Agricola.

[Sidenote: Garrison and administration in the 2d and 3d centuries.]

If, as is probable, the government had reckoned on being able to
take back the greater part of the troops sent to the island, after it
had been occupied, this hope was not fulfilled; only one of the four
legions sent thither was, as we have seen, recalled under Domitian;
the three others must have been indispensable, for no attempt was ever
made to shift them. To these fall to be added the auxiliaries, who were
called out apparently in larger proportion than the burgess-troops for
the far from inviting service in the remote island of the North Sea. In
the battle at the Graupian Mount in 84 there fought, besides the four
legions, 8000 infantry and 3000 horsemen of the auxiliary soldiers.
For the time of Trajan and Hadrian, when of these there were stationed
in Britain six _alae_ and twenty-one cohorts, together about 15,000
men, we shall have to estimate the whole British army at about 30,000
men. Britain was from the outset a field of command of the first rank,
inferior to the two Rhenish commands and to the Syrian perhaps in rank,
but not in importance, towards the end of the second century probably
the most highly esteemed of all the governorships. It was owing only
to the great distance that the British legions appear in the second
rank amidst the rival armies of the earlier imperial period; in the
soldiers' war after the extinction of the Antonine house they fought in
the first rank. But it was one of the consequences of the victory of
Severus that the governorship was divided. Thenceforth the two legions
of Isca and Deva were placed under the legate of the upper province,
the legion of Eburacum and the troops at the walls--consequently
the main body of the auxiliaries--under the legate of the lower
province.[114] Probably the transference of the whole garrison to
the north, which, as was above remarked, would doubtless have been
appropriate on mere military grounds, was not carried out--partly
because it would have put three legions into the hands of one governor.

[Sidenote: Taxation and levy.]

That financially the province cost more than it brought in (p. 172),
can accordingly excite no surprise. For the military strength of the
empire, on the other hand, Britain was of considerable account; the
balance of proportion between taxation and levy must have had its
application also to the island, and the British troops were reckoned
alongside of the Illyrian as the flower of the army. At the very
beginning seven cohorts were raised from the natives there, and these
were constantly increased onward to the time of Hadrian; after the
latter had brought in the system of recruiting the troops as far
as possible from their garrison-districts, Britain appears to have
furnished the supply, at least in great part, for its strong garrison.
There was an earnest and brave spirit in the people; they bore
willingly the taxes and the levy, but not the arrogance and brutality
of the officials.

[Sidenote: Communal organisation.]

As a basis for the internal organisation of Britain, the cantonal
constitution existing there at the time of the conquest offered itself,
which differed, as we have already remarked, from that of the Celts
of the continent essentially only in the fact that the several tribes
of the island, apparently all of them, were under princes (iv. 233)
{iv. 222.}. But this organisation seems not to have been retained,
and the canton (_civitas_) to have become in Britain as in Spain a
geographical conception; at least we can hardly otherwise explain the
facts that the Britannic tribes, taken in the strict sense, disappear
as soon as they fall under Roman rule, and of the individual cantons
after their subjugation there is virtually no mention at all. Probably
the several principalities, as they were subdued and annexed, were
broken up into smaller communities; this was facilitated by the fact
that there did not exist on the island, as there did on the continent,
a cantonal constitution organised without a monarchic head. With
this is doubtless connected the circumstance that, while the Gallic
cantons possessed a common capital and in it a political and religious
collective representation, nothing similar is stated as to Britain. The
province was not without a _concilium_ and a common _cultus_ of the
emperor; but, if the altar of Claudius in Camalodunum[115] had been
even approximately what that of Augustus was in Lugudunum, something
would doubtless have been heard of it. The free and great political
remodelling, which was given to the Gallic country by Caesar and
confirmed by his son, no longer fits into the framework of the later
imperial policy.

We have already mentioned the founding, nearly contemporary with the
invasion of Britain, of the colony Camalodunum (p. 176), as it has also
been already noticed that the Italian urban constitution was early
introduced into a series of British townships. Herein, too, Britain was
treated more after the model of Spain than after that of the Celtic
continent.

[Sidenote: Prosperity.]

The internal condition of Britain must, in spite of the general faults
of the imperial government, have been, at least in comparison with
other regions, not unfavourable. If the people in the north knew
only hunting and pasturing, and the inhabitants there as well as
those adjoining them were always ready for feud and rapine, the south
developed itself in an undisturbed state of peace, especially by means
of agriculture, and along with it by cattle-rearing and the working of
mines, to a moderate prosperity. The Gallic orators of Diocletian's
time praise the wealth of the fertile island, and often enough the
Rhine-legions received their corn from Britain.

[Sidenote: Roads.]

The network of roads in the island, which was uncommonly developed,
and for which in particular Hadrian did much in connection with
the building of his wall, was of course primarily subservient to
military ends; but alongside of, and in fact taking precedence over
the legionary camps Londinium occupies in that respect a place which
brings clearly into view its leading position in traffic. Only in Wales
were these imperial roads solely in the immediate neighbourhood of the
Roman camps, from Isca to Nidum (Neath) and from Deva to the point of
crossing to Mona.

[Sidenote: Roman manners and culture.]

In respect of Romanisation, Britain seems to have been very similar to
northern and central Gaul. The national deities, the Mars Belatucadrus
or Cocidius, the goddess Sulis treated as equivalent to Minerva, after
whom the modern city of Bath was named, still received much worship
on the island even in the Latin language. The language and manners
that penetrated thither from Italy were yet more an exotic growth
on the island than on the continent; still towards the close of the
first century the families of note there shunned as well the Latin
language as the Latin dress. The great urban centres, the seats proper
of the new culture, were more weakly developed in Britain; we do not
precisely know what English town served as seat for the _concilium_
of the province and for the common worship of the emperor, or in
which of the three legion-camps the governor of the province resided;
if, as it seems, the civil capital of Britain was Camalodunum, and
the military capital Eburacum,[116] the latter can as little measure
itself with Mentz as the former with Lyons. The ruined sites even of
places of note, of the Claudian veteran-town Camalodunum, and the
populous mercantile town Londinium, and not less the camps of the
legions for several hundred years, at Deva, Isca, Eburacum, present
inscribed stones only in trifling number; towns of name with Roman
rights like the colony Glevum (Gloucester), and the _municipium_
Verulamium, have hitherto yielded not a single one; the custom of
setting up memorial-stones, on the results of which we are for such
questions largely dependent, never really prevailed in Britain. In
the interior of Wales and in other less accessible districts no Roman
monuments at all have come to light. But there exist withal clear
traces of the stirring commerce and traffic brought into prominence by
Tacitus, such as the numerous drinking-cups which have come out of the
ruins of London, and the London network of roads. If Agricola exerted
himself to transplant municipal emulation in the embellishment of one's
native city by buildings and monuments to Britain, as it had been
transferred from Italy to Africa and Spain, and to induce the islanders
of note to adorn the markets of their home and to erect temples and
palaces, as this was usual elsewhere, he was but in a slight degree
successful as regards the public buildings. But it was otherwise as
regards private economics; the stately country-houses constructed and
embellished in Roman fashion, of which now nothing is left but the
mosaic pavements, are found in southern Britain--so far north as the
region of York[117]--as frequently as in the land of the Rhine. The
higher scholastic training of youth penetrated gradually from Gaul into
Britain. It is specified among Agricola's administrative successes that
the Roman tutor began to find his way into the leading houses of the
island. In Hadrian's time Britain is described as a region conquered by
the Gallic schoolmasters, and "even Thule speaks of hiring a professor
for itself." These schoolmasters were in the first instance Latin, but
Greeks also came; Plutarch tells of a conversation which he held at
Delphi with a Greek teacher of languages from Tarsus returning home
from Britain. If in modern England, apart from Wales and its borders,
the old native language has disappeared, it has given way not to the
Angles or to the Saxons, but to the Roman idiom; and, as usually
happens in border-lands, in the later imperial period no one stood more
faithfully by Rome than the man of Britain. It was not Britain that
gave up Rome, but Rome that gave up Britain. The last that we learn of
the island is the urgent entreaty of the population addressed to the
emperor Honorius for protection against the Saxons, and his answer,
that they might help themselves as best they could.




Footnotes.


[97: To all appearance the political relations between Rome and Britain
in the time before the conquest are to be regarded essentially as
arising out of the restoration and guarantee (_B. G._ v. 22) of the
principality of the Trinovantes by Caesar. That king Dubnovellaunus,
who along with another quite unknown Britannic prince sought protection
with Augustus, ruled chiefly in Essex, is shown by his coins (my _Mon.
Ancyr._ 2d ed., p. 138 f.). We have to seek also mainly there the
Britannic princes who sent to Augustus and recognised his supremacy
(for such apparently we must take to be the meaning of Strabo, iv.
5, 3, p. 200; comp. Tacitus, _Ann._ ii. 24). Cunobelinus, according
to the coins the son of king Tasciovanus, of whom history is silent,
dying as it would seem in advanced years between 40 and 43, and thus
contemporary in his government with the later years of Augustus and
with Tiberius and Gaius, resided in Camalodunum (Dio, lx. 21); around
him and his sons the preliminary history of the invasion turns. To what
quarter Bericus, who came to Claudius (Dio, lx. 19), belonged we do not
know, and other British dynasts may have followed the example of those
of Colchester; but these stand at the head.]

[98: Tacitus, _Agr._ 13, _consilium id divus Augustus vocabat, Tiberius
praeceptum_.]

[99: The exposition in Strabo, ii. 5, 8, p. 115; iv. 5, 3, p. 200,
gives evidently the governmental version. That, after annexation of the
island, the free traffic and therewith the produce of the customs would
decline, must doubtless be taken as conceding the proposition that the
Roman rule and the Roman tribute affected injuriously the prosperity of
the subjects.]

[100: Suetonius, _Claud._ 17, specifies as cause of the war:
_Britanniam tunc tumultuantem ob non redditos transfugas_; which O.
Hirschfeld justly brings into connection with _Gai._ 44: _Adminio
Cunobellini Britannorum regis filio, qui pulsus a patre cum exigua manu
transfugerat, in deditionem recepto_. By the _tumultuari_ are doubtless
meant at least projected expeditions for pillage to the Gallic coast.
The war was certainly not waged on account of Bericus (Dio, lx. 19).]

[101: Mona was in like manner afterwards _receptaculum perfugarum_
(Tacitus, _Ann._ xiv. 29).]

[102: Tacitus, _Ann._ xii. 37: _pluribus gentibus imperitantem_.]

[103: The three legions of the Rhine were the 2d Augusta, the 14th, and
the 20th; from Pannonia came the 9th Spanish. The same four legions
were still stationed there at the beginning of the government of
Vespasian; the latter called away the 14th for the war against Civilis,
and it did not return to Britain, but, in its stead, probably the 2d
Adiutrix. This was presumably transferred under Domitian to Pannonia;
under Hadrian the 9th was broken up and replaced by the 6th Victrix.
The two other legions, the 2d Augusta and the 20th, were stationed in
England from the beginning to the end of the Roman rule.]

[104: The identification, based only on dubious emendations, of the
Boduni and Catuellani in Dio. lx. 20, with tribes of similar name in
Ptolemy, cannot be correct; these first conflicts must have taken place
between the coast and the Thames.]

[105: Tacitus, _Ann._ xii. 31 (_P. Ostorius_) _cuncta castris ad
...ntonam_ (MSS. read _castris antonam_) _et Sabrinam fluvios cohibere
parat_. So the passage is to be restored, only that the name of the
river Tern not elsewhere given in tradition cannot be supplied. The
only inscriptions found in England of soldiers of the 14th legion,
which left England under Nero, have come to light at Wroxeter, the
so-called "English Pompeii." The epitaph of a soldier of the 20th has
also been found there. The camp described by Tacitus was perhaps common
at first to the two legions, and the 20th did not go till afterwards to
Deva. That the camp at Isca was laid out immediately after the invasion
is plain from Tacitus, _Ann._ xii. 32, 38.]

[106: A worse narrative than that of Tacitus concerning this war,
_Ann._ xiv. 31-39, is hardly to be found even in this most unmilitary
of all authors. We are not told where the troops were stationed, and
where the battles were fought; but we get, instead, signs and wonders
enough and empty words only too many. The important facts, which
are mentioned in the life of Agricola, 31, are wanting in the main
narrative, especially the storming of the camp. That Paullinus coming
from Mona should think not of saving the Romans in the south-east, but
of uniting his troops, is intelligible; but not why, if he wished to
sacrifice Londinium, he should march thither on that account. If he
really went thither, he can only have appeared there with a personal
escort, without the corps which he had with him in Mona--which indeed
has no meaning. The bulk of the Roman troops, as well those brought
back from Mona as those still in existence elsewhere, can, after the
extirpation of the 9th legion, only have been stationed on the line
Deva--Viroconium--Isca; Paullinus fought the battle with the two
legions stationed in the first two of these camps, the 14th and the
(incomplete) 20th. That Paullinus fought because he was obliged to
fight, is stated by Dio, lxii. 1-12, and although his narrative cannot
be otherwise used to correct that of Tacitus, this much seems required
by the very state of the case.]

[107: Tacitus, _Hist._ i. 2, sums up the result in the words _perdomita
Britannia et statim missa_.]

[108: The imperial finance-official under Pius, Appian (_proem._ 5),
remarks that the Romans had occupied the best part (τὸ κράτιστον) of
the British islands οὐδὲν τῆς ἄλλης δεόμενοι, οὐ γὰρ εὔφορος αὐτοῖς
ἐστὶν οὐδ' ἣν ἔχουσιν. This was the answer of the governmental staff to
Agricola and such as shared his opinion.]

[109: The opinion that the northern wall took the place of the southern
is as widely spread as it is untenable; the cohort-camps on Hadrian's
wall, as shown to us by the inscriptions of the second century, still
subsisted in the main unchanged at the end of the third (for to
this epoch belongs the relative section of the _Notitia_). The two
structures subsisted side by side, after the more recent was added; the
mass of monuments at the wall of Severus also shows evidently that it
continued to be occupied up to the end of the Roman rule in Britain.

The building of Severus can only be referred to the northern structure.
In the first place, the structure of Hadrian was of such a nature that
any sort of restoration of it could not possibly be conceived as a
new building, as is said of the wall of Severus; while the structure
of Pius was a mere earthen rampart (_murus cespiticius_, _Vita_,
c. 5), and such an assumption in its case creates less difficulty.
Secondly, the length of Severus's wall 32 miles (Victor, _Epit._ 20;
the impossible number 132 is an error of our MSS. of Eutropius, viii.
19--where Paulus has preserved the correct number; which error has
been then taken over by Hieronymus, _Abr._ 2221; Orosius, vii. 17,
7; and Cassiodorus on the year 207), does not suit Hadrian's wall of
80 miles; but the structure of Pius, which, according to the data
of inscriptions, was about 40 miles long, may well be meant, as the
terminal points of the structure of Severus on the two seas may very
well have been different and situated closer. Lastly, if, according
to Dio, lxxvi. 12, the Caledonians dwell to the north and the Maeates
to the south of the wall which divides the island into two parts, the
dwelling-places of the latter are indeed not otherwise known (comp.
lxxv. 5), but cannot possibly, even according to the description which
Dio gives of their district, be placed to the south of Hadrian's wall,
and those of the Caledonians have extended up to the latter. Thus what
is here meant is the line from Glasgow to Edinburgh.]

[110: _A limite id est a vallo_ is the expression in the _Itinerarium_,
p. 464.]

[111: The chief proof of this lies in the disappearance of this legion,
that undoubtedly took place soon after the year 108 (_C. I. L._ vii.
241), and substitution for it of the 6th Victrix. The two notices
which point to this incident (Fronto, p. 217 Naber: _Hadriano imperium
obtinente quantum militum a Britannis caesum?_ Vita, 5, _Britanni
teneri sub Romana dicione non poterant_), as well as the allusion in
Juvenal, xiv. 196: _castella Brigantum_, point to a revolt, not to an
inroad.]

[112: If Pius, according to Pausanias, viii. 43, 4, ἀπετέμετο τῶν ἐν
Βριτταννίᾳ Βριγάντων τὴν πολλὴν, ὅτι ἐπεσβαίνειν καὶ οὗτοι σὺν ὅπλοις
ἦρξαν ἐς τὴν Γενουνίαν μοῖραν (unknown; perhaps, as O. Hirschfeld
suggests, the town of the Brigantes, Vinovia) ὑπηκόους Ῥωμαίων, it
follows from this, not that there were Brigantes also in Caledonia, but
that the Brigantes in the north of England at that time ravaged the
settled land of the Britons, and therefore a part of their territory
was confiscated.]

[113: That he had the design of bringing the whole north under the
Roman power (Dio, lxxvi. 13) is not very compatible either with the
cession (_l.c._) or with the building of the wall, and is doubtless as
fabulous as the Roman loss of 50,000 men without the matter even coming
to a battle.]

[114: The division results from Dio, lv. 23.]

[115: To it doubtless the epigram of Seneca applies (vol. iv. p. 69,
Bährens): _oceanusque tuas ultra se respicit aras_. The temple too,
which according to the satire of the same Seneca (viii. 3), was erected
to Claudius during his lifetime in Britain, and the temple certainly
identical therewith of the god Claudius in Camalodunum (Tacitus, _Ann._
xiv. 31), is probably to be taken not as a sanctuary for the town
itself, but after the analogy of the shrines of Augustus at Lugudunum
and Tarraco. The _delecti sacerdotes_, who _specie religionis omnes
fortunas effundebant_, are the well-known provincial priests and
purveyors of spectacles.]

[116: The command stationed here was, at least in later times, without
question the most important among the Britannic; and there is also
mention here (for it is beyond doubt Eburacum that is in view) of a
_Palatium_ (_Vita Severi_, 22). The _praetorium_, situated probably
on the coast below Eburacum (_Itin. Ant._ p. 466), may have been the
summer seat of the governor.]

[117: None have been found to the north of Aldborough and Easingwold
(both somewhat north of York). See Bruce, _The Roman Wall_, p. 61.]




CHAPTER VI.

THE DANUBIAN LANDS AND THE WARS ON THE DANUBE.


[Sidenote: Arrangements of Augustus.]

As the frontier on the Rhine was the work of Caesar, so the frontier
on the Danube was the work of Augustus. When he came to the helm, the
Romans were in the Italian peninsula hardly masters of the Alps, and
in the Greek peninsula hardly masters of the Haemus (Balkan) and of
the coast districts along the Adriatic and the Black Sea; nowhere did
their territory reach the mighty stream which separates southern from
northern Europe. As well northern Italy as the Illyrian and Pontic
commercial towns, and still more the civilised provinces of Macedonia
and Thrace, were constantly exposed to the predatory expeditions of
the rude and restless neighbouring tribes. When Augustus died there
were substituted for the one province of Illyricum, which had barely
attained to independent administration, five great Roman administrative
districts, Raetia, Noricum, Lower Illyria or Pannonia, Upper Illyria
or Dalmatia, and Moesia; and the Danube became in its whole course,
if not everywhere the military, at any rate the political, frontier
of the empire. The comparatively easy subjugation of these wide
territories, as well as the grave insurrection of the years 6-9, and
the abandonment, thereby occasioned, of the formerly cherished purpose
of shifting the boundary-line from the upper Danube to Bohemia and to
the Elbe, have been formerly described. It remains that we should set
forth the development of these provinces in the time after Augustus and
the relations of the Romans to the tribes dwelling beyond the Danube.

[Sidenote: Late civilisation in Raetia.]

The destinies of Raetia were so closely interwoven with those of the
upper German province that we might refer for them to the earlier
narrative. Roman civilisation here, taken as a whole, underwent but
little development. The highlands of the Alps with the valleys of the
upper Inn and the upper Rhine embraced a weak and peculiar population,
probably the same as had once possessed the eastern half of the
north-Italian plain, perhaps akin to the Etruscans. Driven back thence
by the Celts, and perhaps also by the Illyrici, it held its ground
in the northern mountains. While the valleys opening to the south,
like that of the Adige, were attached to Italy, these offered to the
southerns little room and still less incitement for settlement and
founding of towns. Farther northward on the plateau between the lake
of Constance and the Inn, which was occupied by the Celtic tribes of
the Vindelici, there would doubtless have been room and place for Roman
culture; but apparently in this region, which could not become, like
the Norican, an immediate continuation of Italy, and which, like the
adjacent so-called Decumates-land, was probably in the first instance
of value for the Romans merely as separating them from the Germans, the
policy of the earlier imperial period had rather repressed culture.
We have already indicated (p. 18) that immediately after the conquest
there were thoughts of depopulating the district. Alongside of this
lies the fact, that in the earlier imperial period no community with
Roman organisation originated here. It is true that the founding of
Augusta Vindelicorum, the modern Augsburg, was a necessary part of
the laying out of the great road which was carried, simultaneously
with the conquest itself, by the elder Drusus through the high Alps
to the Danube (pp. 19, 20); but this rapidly flourishing place was,
and remained for above a century, a market-village, till at length
Hadrian in this respect left the path prescribed by Augustus and made
the land of the Vindelici share in the Romanising of the north. The
bestowal of Roman urban rights on the chief place of the Vindelici by
Hadrian may be connected with the fact that, nearly about the same
time, the military frontier was pushed forward on the upper Rhine,
and Roman towns arose in the former Decumates-land; nevertheless in
Raetia ever afterwards Augusta remained the only larger centre of
Roman civilisation. The military arrangements exercised an influence
in keeping it back. The province was from the first under imperial
administration, and could not be left without a garrison; but special
considerations, as we have formerly shown, compelled the government to
send to Raetia simply troops of the second class, and, though these
were not inconsiderable in number, the smaller headquarters of _alae_
and _cohortes_ could not have exercised a civilising and town-forming
effect like the camp of the legion. Under Marcus certainly, in
consequence of the Marcomanian war, the Raetian headquarters, Castra
Regina, the modern Ratisbon, was occupied by a legion; but even this
place appears to have remained in the Roman time a mere military
settlement, and hardly to have stood on a line in urban development
with the camps of second rank on the Rhine, such as _e.g._ Bonna.

[Sidenote: The Raetian Limes.]

That the frontier of Raetia was already in Trajan's time pushed forward
from Ratisbon westward some distance beyond the Danube, has already
been observed (p. 158); and it has been there also shown that this
territory was probably annexed to the empire without applying force
of arms, similarly with the Decumates-land. It was likewise already
mentioned that the fortifying of this territory was perhaps connected
with the incursions of the Chatti extending thus far under Marcus, as
also that these and subsequently the Alamanni in the third century
visited as well this country in front as Raetia itself, and ultimately
under Gallienus wrested it from the Romans.

[Sidenote: The Italising of Noricum.]

The neighbouring province of Noricum was doubtless in the provincial
arrangement treated similarly to Raetia, but in other respects had
a different development. In no direction was Italy so open for
land-traffic as towards the north-east; the commercial relations of
Aquileia, as well through Friuli with the upper Danube and with the
iron-works of Noreia, as over the Julian Alps with the valley of the
Save, here paved the way for the Augustan extension of the frontier as
nowhere else in the region of the Danube. Nauportus (Upper Laybach)
beyond the pass was a Roman trading village already in the time of the
republic; Emona (Laybach), a Roman burgess-colony, afterwards formally
incorporated with Italy, but substantially belonging to Italy from
the time of its foundation by Augustus. Hence, as has already been
noticed (p. 18), the mere proclamation was probably enough for the
conversion of this "kingdom" into a Roman province. The population,
originally doubtless Illyrian, afterwards in good part Celtic, shows
no trace of that adherence to the national ways and language which we
perceive among the Celts of the west. Roman language and Roman manners
must have found early entrance here; and by the emperor Claudius the
whole territory, even the northern portion separated by the Tauern
chain from the valley of the Drave, was organised in accordance with
the Italian municipal constitution. While in the neighbouring lands of
Raetia and Pannonia the monuments of Roman language are either wanting
or appear withal only at the larger centres, the valleys of the Drave,
the Mur, and the Salzach and their affluents are filled far up into the
mountains with evidences of the Romanising which here took deep hold.
Noricum adjoined, and was as it were a part of, Italy; in the levy for
the legions and for the guard, so long as the Italians were here at all
preferred, this preference was extended to no other province so fully
as to this.

As respects military occupation what applies to Raetia applies also
to Noricum. For the reasons already developed there were in Noricum,
during the first two centuries of the empire, only forts of _alae_ and
_cohortes_. Carnuntum (Petronell, near Vienna), which in the Augustan
age belonged to Noricum, was, when the Illyrian legions were sent
thither, annexed for that very reason to Pannonia. The smaller Norican
encampments on the Danube, and even the camp of Lauriacum (near Enns),
instituted by Marcus for the legion sent by him to this province, were
of no importance for the urban development. The large townships of
Noricum, such as Celeia (Cilli), in the valley of the Sann, Aguontum
(Lienz), Teurnia (not far from Spital), Virunum (Zollfeld, near
Klagenfurt), in the north Juvavum (Salzburg), originated purely out of
civil elements.

[Sidenote: The Illyrian stock.]

Illyricum, that is the Roman territory between Italy and Macedonia,
was in the republican time united, as to its lesser portion, with the
Graeco-Macedonian governorship, as to its greater, administered as a
land adjacent to Italy, and, after the institution of the governorship
of Cisalpine Gaul, as a portion of the latter. The territory coincides
to a certain degree with the widely diffused stock from which the
Romans named it; it is the same whose scanty remnant still at the
present day, at the southern end of its formerly far-extended
possessions, has preserved its own nationality and its old language
under the name of Skipetars, which they assign to themselves, or, as
their neighbours call them, the Arnauts or Albanians. It is a member
of the Indo-Germanic family, and within it doubtless most closely akin
to the Greek branch, as is in keeping with its local relations; but it
stands by the side of the Greek at least as independent as the Latin
and the Celtic. This nation in its original extent filled the coast of
the Adriatic Sea from the mouth of the Po through Istria, Dalmatia,
and Epirus, as far as Acarnania and Aetolia, and also in the interior
upper Macedonia, as well as the modern Servia and Bosnia and the
Hungarian territory on the right bank of the Danube; it bordered thus
on the east with the Thracian tribes, on the west with the Celtic, from
which latter Tacitus expressly distinguishes them. It is a vigorous
type of a southern kind, with black hair and dark eyes, very different
from the Celts, and still more from the Germans; sober, temperate,
intrepid, proud people, excellent soldiers, but little accessible to
civic organisation, shepherds more than agriculturists. They did not
attain any great political development. On the Italian coast they were
confronted probably, in the first instance, by the Celts; the probably
Illyrian tribes there, especially the Veneti, became, through rivalry
with the Celts, at an early date pliant subjects of the Romans.

[Sidenote: Its relations with Rome.]

At the end of the sixth century of the city the founding of Aquileia
and the subjugation of the peninsula of Istria (ii. 207 f.) {ii. 196.}
farther narrowed their limits. Along the east coast of the Adriatic Sea
the more important islands and the southern harbours of the mainland
had long been occupied by the bold Hellenic mariners. When thereupon
in Scodra (Scutari), to a certain extent in olden time as now the
central point of the Illyrian land, the rulers began to develop a
power of their own, and especially to make war upon the Greeks at
sea, Rome, even before the Hannibalic war, struck them down with a
strong hand, and took the whole coast under its protectorate (ii. 77
f.) {ii. 74 f.}, which soon, after the ruler of Scodra had shared war
and defeat with king Perseus of Macedonia, brought about the complete
dissolution of this principality (ii. 321) {ii. 303.}. At the end of
the sixth century of the city, and in the first half of the seventh,
after long years of conflict, the coast between Istria and Scodra
was also occupied by the Romans (iii. 180 f.) {iii. 172.}. In the
interior the Illyrians were little touched by the Romans during the
republican period; but instead the Celts, advancing from the west,
must have brought under their power a good portion of originally
Illyrian territory, such as Noricum, afterwards preponderantly Celtic.
The Latobici also in the modern Carniola were Celts; and in the whole
territory between the Save and Drave, just as in the Raab valley, the
two great stocks were settled promiscuously, when Caesar Augustus
subjected the southern districts of Pannonia to the Roman rule.
Probably this strong admixture of Celtic elements contributed its part,
along with the level character of the ground, to the early decline
of the Illyrian nation in the Pannonian districts. Into the southern
half, on the other hand, of the regions inhabited by Illyrians there
penetrated of the Celts only the Scordisci, whose establishment on
the lower Save as far as Morava, and raids as far as the vicinity of
Thessalonica, have been formerly mentioned (iii. 184 f.) {iii. 176 f.}.
But the Greeks here gave place to them in some measure; the sinking of
the Macedonian power, and the desolation of Epirus and Aetolia, must
have favoured the extension of the Illyrian neighbours. Bosnia, Servia,
above all Albania, were in the imperial period Illyrian, and Albania is
so still.

[Sidenote: The province of Illyricum.]

It has already been mentioned that Illyricum was, according to
the design of the dictator Caesar, to be constituted as a special
governorship, and this design came into execution on the partition of
the provinces between Augustus and the senate; that this governorship,
at first committed to the senate, passed to the emperor on account of
the need for waging war there; that Augustus divided this governorship
and rendered effective the rule, which hitherto on the whole had been
but nominal, over the interior both in Dalmatia and in the region of
the Save; and, lastly, that he subdued, after a severe struggle of
four years, the mighty national insurrection which broke out among the
Dalmatian as among the Pannonian Illyrians in the year 6. It remains
that we relate the further fortunes, in the first instance, of the
southern province.

[Sidenote: Dalmatia and its Italian civilisation.]

[Sidenote: Salonae.]

After the experience attained in the insurrection it seemed requisite
not merely to employ the forces raised in Illyricum abroad rather than
as hitherto in their native country, but also to keep in subordination
the Dalmatians as well as the Pannonians by a command of the first
rank. This rapidly fulfilled its object. The resistance, which the
Illyrici under Augustus opposed to the unwonted foreign rule, expended
its rage in the one violent storm; afterwards our reports record no
similar movement, even of but a partial kind. For the southern or,
according to the Roman expression, the Upper Illyricum--the province
Dalmatia, as it was usually called from the time of the Flavii--a new
epoch began with the government of the emperors. The Greek merchants
had indeed founded on the coast lying nearest to them the two great
emporia of Apollonia (near Valona) and Dyrrachium (Durazzo); for
that very reason this portion had already under the republic been
consigned to Greek administration. But farther northward the Hellenes
had settled only on the adjacent islands Issa (Lissa), Pharos (Lesina),
Black-Corcyra (Curzola), and thence maintained intercourse with the
natives particularly along the coast of Narona and in the townships
adjacent to Salonae. Under the Roman republic the Italian traders, who
here entered upon the heritage of the Greek, had settled in the chief
ports Epitaurum (Ragusa Vecchia), Narona, Salonae, Iader (Zara), in
such numbers that they could play a not unimportant part in the war
of Caesar and Pompeius. But it was only through Augustus that these
townships received strengthening by the settlement of veterans there,
and--what was the main thing--urban rights; and at the same time partly
the energetic suppression of the piratic retreats still existing in the
islands, partly the subjugation of the interior and the pushing forward
of the Roman frontier towards the Danube, tended to benefit especially
these Italians settled on the east coast of the Adriatic Sea. Above
all the capital of the country, the seat of the governor and of the
whole administration, Salonae rapidly flourished and far outstripped
the older Greek settlements Apollonia and Dyrrachium, although to
the latter town there were sent likewise under Augustus Italian
colonists, not indeed veterans but dispossessed Italians, and the
town was erected as a Roman burgess-community. It may be conjectured
that in the prosperity of Dalmatia and the arrested development of
the Illyro-Macedonian coast the distinction between the imperial and
the senatorial government played an essential part--as regards better
administration, as well as a privileged position with the real holder
of power. With this, moreover, may be connected the fact, that the
Illyrian nationality held its ground better in the sphere of the
Macedonian governorship than in that of the Dalmatian; in the former
it still lives at the present day; and in the imperial period--apart
from the Greek Apollonia and the Italian colony of Dyrrachium--while
the two languages of the empire were made use of, in the interior that
of the people must have continued to be the Illyrian. In Dalmatia, on
the other hand, the coasts and the islands, so far as they were at all
adapted thereto--the inhospitable stretch to the north of the Iader
necessarily was left behind in the development--were communalised
after the Italian organisation, and soon the whole coast spoke Latin,
somewhat as it speaks at the present day Venetian.

[Sidenote: Civilisation in the interior.]

The advance of civilisation into the interior had to encounter local
difficulties. The considerable streams of Dalmatia form waterfalls
more than water-ways; and even the establishment of land-routes
meets unusual difficulties from the nature of its mountain-network.
The Roman government made earnest exertions to open up the country.
Under the protection of the legionary camp of Burnum in the valley
of the Kerka and in that of Cettina under the protection of the camp
of Delminium--which camps must have been here too the channels of
civilisation and of Latinising--the cultivation of the soil developed
itself after the Italian fashion, as also the planting of the vine
and the olive, and in general Italian organisation and habits. On the
other hand, beyond the watershed between the Adriatic Sea and the
Danube the valleys less favourable for agriculture from the Kulpa to
the Drin remained during the Roman period in a primitive state, similar
to that exhibited by Bosnia at the present day. The emperor Tiberius
certainly had various roads made by the soldiers of the Dalmatian camps
from Salonae into the valleys of Bosnia; but the later governments
apparently allowed the difficult task to drop. On the coast and in the
districts adjoining the coast Dalmatia soon needed no further military
protection; Vespasian could already withdraw the legions from the
valleys of the Kerka and the Cettina and employ them elsewhere.

[Sidenote: Prosperity under Diocletian.]

Amidst the decay of the empire in the third century Dalmatia suffered
comparatively little; indeed, Salonae probably only reached at that
time its greatest prosperity. This, it is true, was occasioned partly
by the fact that the regenerator of the Roman state, the emperor
Diocletian, was by birth a Dalmatian, and allowed his efforts aimed
at the decapitalising of Rome to redound chiefly to the benefit of the
capital of his native land; he built alongside of it the huge palace,
from which the modern capital of the province takes the name Spalato,
within which it has for the most part found a place, and the temples
of which now serve it as cathedral and as baptistery.[118] Diocletian,
however, did not make Salonae a great city for the first time, but,
because it was such, chose it for his private residence; commerce,
navigation, and trade must at that time in these waters have been
concentrated chiefly at Aquileia and at Salonae, and the city must
have been one of the most populous and opulent towns of the west. The
rich iron mines of Bosnia were largely worked at least in the later
imperial period; the forests of the province likewise yielded abundant
and excellent timber; even of the flourishing textile industry of the
land a reminiscence is still preserved in the priestly "Dalmatica."
Altogether the civilising and Romanising of Dalmatia form one of the
most peculiar and most significant phenomena of the imperial period.
The boundary between Dalmatia and Macedonia was at the same time the
political and linguistic demarcation of the West and East. As the
spheres of rule of Caesar and Marcus Antonius came into contact at
Scodra, so did those of Rome and Byzantium after the partition of the
empire in the fourth century. Here the Latin province of Dalmatia
bordered with the Greek province of Macedonia; and the younger sister
stands here alongside of the elder, vigorous in aspiration and
excelling in energy of effort.

[Sidenote: Pannonia down to Trajan.]

While the southern Illyrian province and its peaceful government soon
ceased to be prominent in a historical aspect, northern Illyricum,
or as it is usually called, Pannonia, forms in the imperial period
one of the great military and thereby also political centres. In the
army of the Danube the Pannonian camps have the leading position like
the Rhenish in the west, and the Dalmatian and the Moesian attach
themselves to them, and subordinate themselves under them, in like
manner as the legions of Spain and Britain were subordinate to those
of the Rhine. Roman civilisation stands and continues here under
the influence of the camps, which did not remain in Pannonia as in
Dalmatia only for some generations, but were permanent. After the
subduing of the insurrection of Bato, the regular garrison of the
province amounted at first to three, afterwards apparently only to two,
legions; and the further development was conditioned by their standing
quarters and the shifting of these forward. When Augustus after the
first war against the Dalmatians had selected Siscia, at the point
where the Kulpa falls into the Save, as his chief stronghold, after
Tiberius had subdued Pannonia at least as far as the Drave, the camps
were pushed forward to the latter, and at least one of the Pannonian
headquarters was thenceforth found at Poetovio (Pettau), on the borders
of Noricum. The reason why the Pannonian army remained wholly or in
part in the valley of the Drave can only have been the same as led to
the construction of the Dalmatian legionary camps; they needed troops
here to keep in obedience their subjects as well in the neighbouring
Noricum as above all in the region of the Drave itself. On the Danube
watch was kept by the Roman fleet, which is already mentioned in the
year 50, and presumably originated on the erection of the province.
There was not yet perhaps a legionary camp on the river itself under
the Julio-Claudian dynasty,[119] in connection with which we may
note that the state of the Suebi immediately adjoining the province
in front was at that time immediately dependent on Rome, and sufficed
in some measure to protect the frontier. Then, as with the camps of
Dalmatia, Vespasian apparently did away also with the camps on the
Drave and transferred them to the Danube itself; thenceforth the great
headquarters of the Pannonian army were the formerly Norican (p.
198) Carnuntum (Petronell, to the east of Vienna), and along with it
Vindobona (Vienna).

[Sidenote: Urban development.]

Civil development, such as we meet in Noricum and on the coast of
Dalmatia, shows itself likewise in Pannonia only at some districts
situated on the Norican frontier, and in part belonging originally
to Noricum; Emona and the upper valley of the Save stand on an
equality with Noricum, and if Savaria (Stein, on the Anger) received
the Italian municipal constitution at the same time with the Norican
towns, that place must doubtless, so long as Carnuntum was a Norican
town, have belonged also to Noricum. It was only after the troops were
stationed on the Danube that the government set to work to give urban
organisation to the country behind. In the western territory originally
Norican, Scarbantia (Oedenburg, on the Neusiedler See) obtained urban
rights under the Flavii, while Vindobona and Carnuntum became of
themselves camp-towns. Between the Save and Drave Siscia and Sirmium
received urban rights under the Flavii, as on the Drave Poetovio
(Pettau) under Trajan, Mursa (Eszeg) under Hadrian colonial rights--to
mention here only the chief places. That the population, predominantly
Illyrian but in good part also Celtic, opposed no energetic resistance
to the Romanising, has already been mentioned; the old language and the
old habits disappeared where the Romans came, and kept their ground
only in the more remote districts. The districts--wide, but far from
inviting for settlement--to the east of the river Raab and to the
north of the Drave as far as the Danube were probably reckoned even
from the time of Augustus as belonging to the empire, but perhaps in a
way not much differing from Germany before the battle of Varus; urban
development neither then nor later found a true soil here, and in a
military point of view this region was for a long time occupied but
little or not at all. This state of matters changed in some measure
only in consequence of the incorporation of Dacia under Trajan; the
pushing forward of the Pannonian camps towards the east frontier of the
province, to which that step gave occasion, and the further internal
development of Pannonia, will be better described in connection with
the wars of Trajan.

[Sidenote: The Thracian stock.]

The last portion of the right bank of the Danube--the mountain-land on
the two sides of the Margus (Morava), and the flat country stretching
along between the Haemus and the Danube--was inhabited by Thracian
tribes; and it appears necessary in the first instance to cast a glance
at this great stock as such. It runs parallel in a certain sense to the
Illyrian. As the Illyrians once filled the regions from the Adriatic
Sea to the middle Danube, so the Thracians were formerly settled to
the east of them, from the Aegean Sea as far as the mouths of the
Danube, and not less on the one hand upon the left bank of the Danube,
particularly in the modern Transylvania, on the other hand beyond the
Bosporus, at least in Bithynia and as far as Phrygia. Herodotus is not
wrong in calling the Thracians the greatest of the peoples known to him
after the Indians. Like the Illyrian, the Thracian stock attained to
no full development, and appears more as hard-pressed and dispossessed
than as having any historically memorable course of its own. But, while
the language and habits of the Illyrians have been preserved--though
in a form worn down in the course of centuries--to the present day,
and we with some right transfer the image of the Palikars from more
recent history to that of the Roman imperial period, the same does not
hold good of the Thracian stock. There is manifold and sure attestation
that the tribes of the territory, which in consequence of the Roman
provincial division has ultimately retained the name Thracian, as well
as the Moesians between the Balkan and the Danube, and not less the
Getae or Daci on the other bank of the Danube, all spoke one and the
same language. This language had in the Roman empire a position similar
to that of the Celts and of the Syrians. The historian and geographer
of the Augustan age, Strabo, mentions the likeness of language among
the peoples named; in botanical writings of the imperial period the
Dacian appellations of a number of plants are specified.[120] When
his contemporary, the poet Ovid, had opportunity given to him in the
far-off Dobrudscha to reflect on his too dissolute course of life,
he used his leisure to learn Getic, and became almost a poet of the
Getae:--

  _Ah pudet! et Getico scripsi sermone libellum....
  Et placui (gratare mihi) coepique poetae
  Inter inhumanos nomen habere Getas._

But while the Irish bards, the Syrian missionaries, and the mountain
valleys of Albania secured a certain continued duration for other
idioms of the imperial period, the Thracian disappeared amidst
the fluctuations of peoples in the region of the Danube and the
overpowerful influence of Constantinople, and we cannot even determine
the place which belongs to it in the pedigree of nations. The
descriptions of manners and customs of particular tribes belonging
to it, as to which various notices have been preserved, yield no
individual traits valid for the race as a whole, and for the most
part bring into relief merely singularities such as appear among
all peoples at a low stage of culture. But they were and remained a
soldier-people, not less useful as horsemen than for light infantry,
from the times of the Peloponnesian war and of Alexander down to
that of the Roman Caesars, whether they might range themselves
against them or subsequently fight for them. Their wild but grand
mode of worshipping the gods may perhaps be conceived as a trait
peculiar to this stock--the mighty outburst of the joy of spring and
youth, the nocturnal mountain-festivals of torch-swinging maidens,
the intoxicating sense-confusing music, the flowing of wine and the
flowing of blood, the giddy festal whirl frantic with the simultaneous
excitement of all sensuous passions. Dionysos, the glorious and the
terrible, was a Thracian god; and whatever of the kind was specially
prominent in the Hellenic and the Roman _cultus_, was connected with
Thracian or Phrygian customs.

[Sidenote: The Thracian principate.]

While the Illyrian tribes in Dalmatia and Pannonia, after the overthrow
of the great insurrection in the last years of Augustus, did not again
invoke the decision of arms against the Romans, the same did not hold
true of the Thracian stock; the often-shown spirit of independence
and the wild bravery of this nation did not fail it even in its
decline. In Thrace, south of the Haemus, the old principate remained
under Roman supremacy. The native ruling house of the Odrysae, with
their residence Bizye (Wiza), between Adrianople and the coast of the
Black Sea, was already in the earlier period the most prominent among
the princely families of Thrace; after the triumviral period there
is no further mention of other Thracian kings than of those of this
house, so that the other princes appear to have been made vassals
or superseded under Augustus, and only members of this family were
thenceforth invested with the Thracian kingly office. This was done,
probably, because during the first century, as will be shown further
on, there were no Roman legions stationed on the lower Danube; Augustus
expected the frontier at the mouth of the Danube to be protected by the
Thracian vassals. Rhoemetalces, who in the second half of the reign
of Augustus ruled all Thrace as a Roman vassal-king,[121] and his
children and grandchildren therefore played in this country nearly
the same part as Herod and his descendants in Palestine; unconditional
devotedness towards the lord-paramount, a decided inclination to Roman
habits, hostility to their own countrymen who clung to the national
independence, mark the attitude of the Thracian ruling house. The great
Thracian insurrection of the years 741-743, of which we have formerly
spoken (p. 24), was directed in the first instance against this
Rhoemetalces and his brother and co-regent Cotys who perished in it,
and, as he at that time was indebted to the Romans for reinstatement
into his dominion, so he some years afterwards rendered to them his
thanks when, on occasion of the rising of the Dalmatians and the
Pannonians, to which his Dacian kinsmen adhered, he kept faithfully
to the Romans, and bore an essential part in its overthrow. His son
Cotys was more Roman, or rather Greek, than Thracian; he traced back
his pedigree to Eumolpus and Erichthonius, and gained the hand of
a kinswoman of the imperial house, the great granddaughter of the
triumvir Antonius; and not merely did the Greek and Latin poets of his
time address him in song, but he himself was also a poet and not a
Getic poet.[122] The last of the Thracian kings, Rhoemetalces, son of
the early deceased Cotys, was reared in Rome, and, like the Herodian
Agrippa, a youthful playmate of the emperor Gaius.

[Sidenote: Province of Thrace.]

But the Thracian nation by no means shared the Roman leanings of the
ruling house, and the government gradually became convinced in Thrace
as in Palestine that the tottering vassal-throne, only maintained by
constant interference of the protecting power, was of use neither
for them nor for the country, and that the introduction of direct
administration was in every respect to be preferred. The emperor
Tiberius made use of the quarrels that arose in the Thracian royal
house to send to Thrace in the year 19 a Roman governor, Titus
Trebellenus Rufus, under cover of exercising guardianship over the
princes that were minors. Yet this occupation was not accomplished
without resistance, ineffectual doubtless, but serious on the part
of the people, who, particularly in the mountain-valleys, troubled
themselves little about the rulers appointed by Rome, and whose
forces, led by their family-chiefs, hardly felt themselves to be
soldiers of the king, and still less soldiers of Rome. The sending of
Trebellenus called forth in the year 21 a rising, in which not merely
did the most noted Thracian tribes take part, but which threatened to
assume greater proportions; messengers of the insurgents went over
the Haemus to enkindle the national war in Moesia, and perhaps still
further. Meanwhile the Moesian legions appeared in right time to
relieve Philippopolis, which the insurgents besieged, and to suppress
the movement. But, when some years later (25) the Roman government
ordered levies in Thrace, the men refused to serve beyond the bounds
of their own country. When no regard was paid to this refusal, the
whole mountains rose and a struggle of despair ensued, in which
the insurgents, constrained at length by hunger and thirst, threw
themselves in great part on the swords of the enemy or on their own,
and preferred to renounce life rather than their time-honoured freedom.
The direct government continued in the form of exercising wardship in
Thrace up to the death of Tiberius; and, if the emperor Gaius at the
commencement of his reign gave back the rule to the Thracian friend of
his youth just as to the Jewish, a few years after, in the year 46,
the government of Claudius definitely put an end to it. This final
annexation of the kingdom, and conversion of it into a Roman province,
also encountered an equally hopeless and equally obstinate resistance.
But with the introduction of direct administration the resistance
was broken. The governor, at first of equestrian, and from Trajan's
time of senatorial, rank, never had a legion; the garrison sent into
the country, though it was not stronger than 2000 men, along with a
small squadron stationed at Perinthus, was sufficient, in connection
with the precautionary measures otherwise taken by the government, to
keep down the Thracians. The laying out of military roads was begun
immediately after the annexation; we find that the buildings requisite
in the state of the country for the accommodation of travellers at
the posting stations were already, in the year 61, erected by the
government and opened to traffic. Thrace was thenceforth an obedient
and important province of the empire; hardly any other furnished so
numerous men for all parts of the war-forces, especially for the
cavalry and the fleet, as this old home of gladiators and of mercenary
soldiers.

[Sidenote: Moesia.]

The serious conflicts which the Romans had to sustain with the same
nation on the so-called "Thracian shore" [Ripa Thraciae], in the region
between the Balkan and the Danube, and which led to the institution
of the Moesian command, form an essential constituent part of the
regulation of the northern frontier in the Augustan age, and have been
already described in their connection (p. 13 f). Of resistance similar
to that offered by the Thracians to the Romans nothing is reported from
Moesia; the tone of feeling there may not have been different, but in
the level country and under the pressure of the legions encamped at
Viminacium the resistance did not emerge openly.

[Sidenote: Hellenism and Romanism in Thrace.]

Civilisation came to the Thracian tribes, as to the Illyrian, from two
sides; that of the Hellenes from the coast and from the Macedonian
frontier, the Latin from the Dalmatian and Pannonian frontier. Of the
former it will be more appropriate to treat when we attempt to describe
the position of the European Greeks under the imperial rule; here it
suffices generally to bring out the fact that not merely did that rule
protect the Greek element, where it found it, and the whole coast, even
that subject to the governor of Moesia, always remained Greek; but
that the province of Thrace, whose civilisation was begun in earnest
only by Trajan, and was throughout a work of the imperial period, was
not guided into a Roman path, but became Hellenised. Even the northern
slopes of the Haemus, although administratively belonging to Moesia,
were comprehended in this Hellenising; Nicopolis on the Jantra and
Marcianopolis, not far from Varna, both foundations of Trajan, were
organised after a Greek model.

[Sidenote: And in Moesia.]

Of the Latin civilisation of Moesia the same holds true as of that of
the adjoining Dalmatian and Pannonian interior; only, as was natural,
it emerges so much the later, weaker, and more impure, the farther
remote it is from its starting-point. It followed predominantly here
the encampments of the legions, and with these advanced eastward,
starting from the probably oldest camps of Moesia at Singidunum
(Belgrade) and Viminacium (Kostolatz).[123] It is true that, in keeping
with the character of its armed apostles, it kept at a very low stage
in upper Moesia, and left room enough for the play of the primitive
conditions. Viminacium obtained Italian urban rights from Hadrian.
Lower Moesia, between the Balkan and the Danube, in the earlier
imperial period, remained probably throughout in the condition which
the Romans found subsisting there; not till the legion-camps on the
lower Danube were founded at Novae, Durostorum, and Troesmis, which,
as will be set forth further on (p. 227), probably did not take place
till the beginning of the second century, did this part of the right
bank of the Danube become a seat of so much Italian civilisation as
was compatible with camp-arrangements. Thenceforth civil settlements
arose here too--particularly on the Danube itself, between the
great standing camps, the towns constituted after the Italian model,
Ratiaria, not far from Widin, and Oescus at the confluence of the Iskra
with the Danube--and gradually the region approached the level of the
Roman culture then subsisting, though of itself on its decline. In the
construction of highways in lower Moesia the rulers displayed manifold
activity after the time of Hadrian, from whom the oldest milestones
hitherto found there date.

[Sidenote: Hermunduri.]

If we turn from the survey of the Roman rule, as it took shape from
Augustus onward in the lands on the right bank of the Danube, to the
relations and the inhabitants of the left, what we should have to
remark as to the most westerly region has already in the main been
said in the description of upper Germany; and in particular it has
been noticed (p. 158) that the Germans next adjoining Raetia, the
Hermunduri, were of all the neighbours of the Romans the most peaceful,
and, so far as is known to us, never fell into conflict with them.

[Sidenote: Marcomani.]

[Sidenote: Vannius.]

We have already stated that the people of the Marcomani, or, as
Romans usually term them in earlier times, the Suebi, after it had in
the Augustan age found new settlements in the old land of the Boii,
the modern Bohemia, and had acquired through king Maroboduus a more
fixed political organisation, remained indeed an onlooker during
the Romano-German wars, but was preserved through the intervention
of the Rhenish Germans from the threatened Roman invasion. We have
also pointed out that, indirectly, the renewed abandonment of the
Roman offensive on the Rhine overthrew this too neutral state. The
position of paramount power, which the Marcomani under Maroboduus had
gained over the more remote peoples in the region of the Elbe, was
thereby lost; and the king himself died as an exile on Roman soil (p.
61). The Marcomani and their eastern neighbours of kindred stock,
the Quadi in Moravia, fell under Roman clientship, in so far as in
their case, nearly as in that of Armenia, the pretenders contending
for the mastery leaned in part for support on the Romans, and these
claimed, and according to circumstances also exercised, the right of
investiture. The prince of the Cotones, Catualda, who had in the first
instance overthrown Maroboduus, could not maintain himself long as his
successor, especially as Vibilius king of the neighbouring Hermunduri
took part against him; he too had to pass over into Roman territory,
and like Maroboduus to invoke the imperial favour. Tiberius then
induced a Quadian of rank Vannius to take his place; for the numerous
train of the two banished kings, which was not allowed to remain on
the right bank of the Danube, Tiberius procured settlements on the
left in the March valley,[124] and procured for Vannius recognition on
the part of the Hermunduri friendly with Rome. After a thirty years'
rule the latter was overthrown in the year 50 by his two nephews
Vangio and Sido, who revolted against him, and gained for themselves
the neighbouring peoples, the Hermunduri in Franconia, the Lugii in
Silesia. The Roman government, which Vannius solicited for support,
remained true to the policy of Tiberius; it granted to the overthrown
king the right of asylum, but did not interfere, especially as the
successors, who shared the territory between them, readily acknowledged
the Roman supremacy. The new prince of the Suebi, Sido, and his
co-ruler Italicus, perhaps the successor of Vangio, fought in the
battle, which decided between Vitellius and Vespasian, with the Roman
army of the Danube on the side of the Flavians. In the great crises
of the Roman rule on the Danube under Domitian and Marcus we shall
again meet their successors. The Suebi of the Danube did not belong to
the Roman empire; coins probably struck by them show doubtless Latin
inscriptions, but not the Roman standard, to say nothing of the image
of the emperor; taxes proper and levies for Rome did not here take
place. But, in the first century particularly, the Suebian state in
Bohemia and Moravia was included within the sphere of Roman power; and,
as was already observed, this was not without its influence on the
stationing of the Roman frontier-guard.

[Sidenote: Jazyges.]

In the plain between the Danube and Theiss eastward from the Roman
Pannonia, and between this and the Thracian Daci, there was inserted
a section of the people--probably belonging to the Medo-Persian
stock--the Sarmatae, who living nomadically as a nation of shepherds
and horsemen filled in great part the wide east-European plain; these
were the Jazyges, named the "emigrants" (μετανάσται) in distinction
from the chief stock which remained behind on the Black Sea. The
designation shows that they only advanced at a comparatively late
period into these regions; perhaps their immigration falls to be
included among the assaults, under which about the time of the battle
of Actium the Dacian kingdom of Burebista broke down (p. 11). They
meet us here at first under the emperor Claudius; the Jazyges supplied
the Suebian king Vannius with the cavalry for his wars. The Roman
government was on its guard against the alert and predatory bands of
horsemen, but did not otherwise sustain hostile relations to them. When
the legions of the Danube marched to Italy in the year 70 to place
Vespasian on the throne, they declined the contingent of cavalry
offered by the Jazyges, and in fitter fashion carried with them only a
number of the men of chief rank, in order that these should meanwhile
be pledges for quiet on the denuded frontier.

[Sidenote: Daci.]

More serious and continuous watch was needed farther down on the lower
Danube. There, beyond the mighty stream, which was now the boundary
of the empire, were settled in the plains of Wallachia and the modern
Transylvania the Daci; in the eastern flat country, in Moldavia,
Bessarabia, and onward, in the first instance, the Germanic Bastarnae,
and then Sarmatian tribes, such as the Roxolani, a people of horsemen
like the Jazyges, at first between the Dnieper and Don (iii. 295)
{iii. 281.}, then advancing along the sea-shore. In the first years
of Tiberius the vassal prince of Thrace strengthened his troops to
ward off the Bastarnae and Scythians; in the latter years of Tiberius
it was urged among other proofs of his government more and more
neglecting everything, that he suffered the inroads of the Dacians and
the Sarmatae to pass unpunished. How matters went on in the last years
of Nero on either side of the mouths of the Danube is approximately
shown by the accidentally preserved report of the governor of Moesia
at that time, Tiberius Plautius Silvanus Aelianus. The latter "brought
upwards of 100,000 men dwelling beyond the Danube, with their wives
and children, and their princes or kings over the river, so that they
became liable to pay tribute. He suppressed a movement of the Sarmatae
before it came to an outbreak, although he had given away a great part
of his troops for the carrying on of war in Armenia (to Corbulo). A
number of kings hitherto unknown or at feud with the Romans he brought
over to the Roman bank, and compelled them to prostrate themselves
before the Roman standards. To the kings of the Bastarnae and Roxolani
he sent back their sons, who had been made captive or recovered from
the enemy, to those of the Dacians their captive brothers,[125] and
took hostages from several of them. Thereby the state of peace for
the province was confirmed as well as further extended. He induced
also the king of the Scythians to desist from the siege of the town
Chersonesus (Sebastopol) beyond the Borysthenes. He was the first who,
by great consignments of corn from this province, made bread cheaper in
Rome." We perceive here clearly as well the agitated vortex of peoples
on the left bank of the Danube under the Julio-Claudian dynasty, as
also the strong arm of the imperial power, which even beyond the stream
sought to protect the Greek towns on the Dnieper and in the Crimea, and
was able also in some measure to do so, as will be further set forth
when we describe the state of Greek affairs.

[Sidenote: Inadequacy of Roman forces.]

The forces, however, which Rome had here at her disposal, were more
than inadequate. The insignificant garrison of Asia Minor, and the
fleet, likewise small on the Black Sea, were of account at most for the
Greek inhabitants of its northern and western coasts. A very difficult
task was assigned to the governor of Moesia, who with his two legions
had to protect the bank of the Danube from Belgrade to the mouth; and
the aid of the far from obedient Thracians was under the circumstances
an additional danger. Especially towards the mouth of the Danube there
was wanting a sufficient bulwark against the barbarians now pressing on
with increasing weight. The withdrawal on two occasions of the Danubian
legions to Italy in the troubles after Nero's death provoked still
more at the mouth of the Danube, than on the lower Rhine, incursions
of the neighbouring peoples, at first of the Roxolani, then of the
Dacians, then of the Sarmatae, that is, probably the Jazyges. There
were severe conflicts; in one of these engagements, apparently with the
Jazyges, the brave governor of Moesia, Gaius Fonteius Agrippa, fell.
Nevertheless, Vespasian did not proceed to increase the army of the
Danube;[126] the necessity of strengthening the Asiatic garrisons must
have appeared still more urgent, and the economy specially enjoined
at that time forbade any increase of the army as a whole. He contented
himself with pushing forward the great camps of the army of the Danube
to the frontier of the empire, as the pacification of the interior
allowed, and the relations subsisting at the frontier, as well as the
breaking up of the Thracian troops brought about by the annexation of
Thrace, imperatively required. Thus the Pannonian camps were brought
away from the Drave, opposite to the Suebian kingdom, to Carnuntum and
Vindobona (p. 206), and the Dalmatian from the Kerka and the Cettina
to the Moesian bank of the Danube,[127] so that the governor of Moesia
thenceforth disposed of double the number of legions.

[Sidenote: Dacian war of Domitian.]

[Sidenote: Decebalus.]

A shifting of the proportions of power to the disadvantage of Rome set
in under Domitian,[128] or rather the consequences of the insufficient
frontier-defence were then reaped. According to the little we know
of the matter, the change of affairs hinged, quite like the similar
one in Caesar's time, upon a single Dacian man; what king Burebista
had planned, king Decebalus seemed destined to execute. How much the
real moving-spring lay in his personality, is shown by the story
that the Dacian king Duras, in order to bring the right man into
the right place, retired from his office in favour of Decebalus.
That Decebalus first of all organised in order to strike, is shown
by the reports as to his introduction of Roman discipline into the
Dacian army, and his enlisting people of capacity among the Romans
themselves, and even by the condition proposed by him to the Romans
after the victory, that they should send him the necessary workmen to
instruct his people in the arts of peace as of war. On what a great
scale he set to work is shown by the connections which he formed,
westward and eastward, with the Suebi and the Jazyges, and even with
the Parthians. The assailants were the Dacians. The governor of the
province of Moesia, who first went to oppose them, Oppius Sabinus,
lost his life on the field of battle. A number of smaller camps were
conquered; the larger were threatened, the possession of the province
itself was at stake. Domitian in person resorted to the army, and
his representative--he himself was no general and remained in the
background--the commandant of the guard, Cornelius Fuscus, led the
army over the Danube; but he paid for the incautious proceeding by a
severe defeat, and he too, the second in supreme command, fell before
the enemy. His successor, Julianus, a capable officer, defeated the
Dacians in their own territory in a great battle near Tapae, and was
on the way to achieve lasting results. But, while the struggle with
the Dacians was in suspense, Domitian had threatened the Suebi and
Jazyges with war, because they had omitted to send to him a contingent
against the former; the messengers, who came to excuse this, he caused
to be executed.[129] Here too misfortune pursued the Roman arms. The
Marcomani achieved a victory over the emperor himself; a whole legion
was surrounded by the Jazyges and cut down. Shaken by this defeat,
Domitian, in spite of the advantages gained by Julianus over the
Dacians, hastily concluded with these a peace, which did not indeed
prevent him from conferring the crown upon the representative of
Decebalus in Rome, Diegis, just as if the latter were a vassal of the
Romans, or from marching as victor to the Capitol, but which in reality
was equivalent to a capitulation. What Decebalus, on the advance of the
Roman army into Dacia, had scoffingly offered--to dismiss to his home
uninjured every man for whom a yearly payment of two asses was promised
to him--became almost true: in the peace the incursions into Moesia
were bought off with a fixed sum to be paid yearly.

[Sidenote: Dacian war of Trajan.]

Here a change had to be effected. Domitian, who was doubtless a good
administrator of the empire, but obtuse to the demands of military
honour, was followed after the short reign of Nerva by the emperor
Trajan, who, first and above all a soldier, not merely tore in pieces
that agreement, but also took measures that similar things should not
recur. The war against the Suebi and Sarmatae, which was still being
continued at Domitian's death (96), was happily ended, as it would
seem, under Nerva in the year 97. The new emperor went, even before
he held his entrance into the capital of the empire, from the Rhine
to the Danube, where he stayed in the winter 98-99, but not to attack
the Dacians at once, but to prepare for the war: to this time belongs
the construction--joining itself on to the roads formed in upper
Germany--of the road completed on the right bank of the Danube in the
region of Orsova in the year 100 (p. 153). For the war against the
Dacians, in which, as in all his campaigns, he commanded in person, he
did not set out till the spring of 101. He crossed the Danube below
Viminacium, and advanced against the not far distant capital of the
king, Sarmizegetusa. Decebalus with his allies--the Buri and other
tribes dwelling to the northward took part in this struggle--offered
resolute resistance, and it was only by vehement and bloody conflicts
that the Romans cleared their way; the number of the wounded was so
great that the emperor put his own wardrobe at the disposal of the
physicians. But victory did not waver; one stronghold after another
fell; the sisters of the king, the captives from the former war, the
standards taken from the armies of Domitian, fell into the hands of the
Romans; for the king, intercepted by Trajan himself and by the brave
Lusius Quietus, nothing was left but complete surrender (102). Trajan
demanded nothing less than the renunciation of the sovereign power and
the entrance of the Dacian kingdom into the clientship of Rome. The
deserters, the arms, the engines of war, the workmen once supplied for
these by Rome, had to be delivered up, and the king personally to kneel
before the victor; he divested himself of the right to make war and
peace, and promised military service; the fortresses were either razed
or delivered to the Romans, and in these, above all in the capital,
there remained a Roman garrison. The strong bridge of stone, which
Trajan caused to be thrown over the Danube at Drobetae (opposite Turnu
Severinului), secured the communication even in the bad season of the
year, and gave to the Dacian garrisons a reserve-support in the near
legions of upper-Moesia.

[Sidenote: Second Dacian war.]

But the Dacian nation, and above all the king himself, did not know
the art of accommodating themselves to dependence, as the kings of
Cappadocia and Mauretania had understood it; or rather they had
merely taken upon them the yoke in the hope of ridding themselves
of it again on the first opportunity. The signs of this were soon
apparent. A portion of the arms to be delivered up was kept back; the
fortresses were not given over as had been stipulated; an asylum was
still granted, moreover, to Roman deserters; portions of territory
were wrested from the Jazyges at enmity with the Dacians, or perhaps
the occurrence of violations of the frontier on their part was not
taken patiently; a lively and suspicious intercourse was maintained
with the more remote natives still free. Trajan could not but be
convinced that his work was but half done; and, rapid in resolution as
he was, he, without entering upon further negotiations, declared war
once more against the king three years after the conclusion of peace
(105). Gladly would the latter have avoided it; but the demand that
he should give himself a captive spoke too clearly. Nothing was left
but a struggle of despair, and all were not ready for this; a great
part of the Dacians submitted without resistance. The appeal to the
neighbouring peoples to enter jointly into measures for warding off the
danger that threatened even their freedom and their national existence
sounded without effect; Decebalus and the Dacians that remained
faithful to him stood alone in this war. The attempts to make away with
the imperial general by means of deserters, or to purchase tolerable
terms by the release of a high officer taken prisoner, likewise broke
down. The emperor marched once more as victor into the enemy's capital,
and Decebalus, who up to the last moment had struggled with fate, put
himself to death when all was lost (107). This time Trajan made an end;
the war concerned no longer the freedom of the people, but its very
existence. The native population were driven out from the best part
of the land, and these districts were reoccupied with a non-national
population brought in from the mountains of Dalmatia, for the mines,
and otherwise preponderantly, as it would appear, from Asia Minor. In
several regions, no doubt, the old population yet remained, and even
the language of the country maintained its ground.[130] These Dacians,
as well as the sections dwelling beyond the bounds, still gave trouble
to the Romans--subsequently, for example, under Commodus and Maximinus;
but they stood isolated, and dwindled away. The danger with which the
vigorous Thracian race had several times threatened the Roman rule
could not be allowed to recur, and this end Trajan attained. The Rome
of Trajan was no longer that of the age of Hannibal; but it was still
dangerous to have conquered the Romans.

[Sidenote: Trajan's column.]

The stately column which six years afterwards was erected to the
emperor by the imperial senate in the new Forum Trajanum of the
capital, and which still adorns it at the present day, is an evidence,
to which we possess nothing parallel, of the extent to which the
traditional history of the Roman imperial period has suffered havoc.
Throughout its height of exactly one hundred Roman feet it is covered
with separate representations to the number of one hundred and
twenty-four--a chiselled picture-book of the Dacian wars, to which
almost everywhere we lack the text. We see the watch-towers of the
Romans with their pointed roofs, their palisaded court, their upper
gallery, their fire-signals; the town on the bank of the Danube-stream,
whose river-god looks on at the Roman warriors, as they march under
their standards along the bridge of boats; the emperor himself in his
council of war, and then sacrificing at the altar before the walls
of the camp. It is narrated that the Buri allied with the Dacians
dissuaded Trajan from the war in a Latin sentence written on a huge
mushroom; we fancy that we recognise this mushroom placed as a load
on a sumpter-animal, jumping from which a barbarian, lying on the
ground with his club, points out the mushroom with his finger to the
advancing emperor. We see the pitching of the camp, the felling of
trees, the fetching of water, the laying of the bridge. The first
captive Dacians, easily recognisable by their long-sleeved frocks
and their wide trousers, with their hands bound behind their back,
and with their long bushy hair grasped by the soldiers, are brought
before the emperor. We see the combats, the men hurling spears, the
slingers, the sickle-bearers, the archers on foot, the heavy-mailed
horsemen also bearing the bow, the dragon-banners of the Dacians, the
officers of the enemy adorned with the round cap as the token of their
rank, the pine-wood, into which the Dacians carry their wounded, the
cut-off heads of the barbarians deposited before the emperor. We see
the Dacian village on piles in the middle of the lake, against the
round huts of which, with their pointed roof, the burning torches are
flying. Women and children sue the emperor for mercy. The wounded are
cared for and bound up; badges of honour are distributed to officers
and soldiers. Then the conflict proceeds; the hostile entrenchments,
partly of wood, partly stone walls, are assailed; the besieging-train
advances, the ladders are brought up, the storming-column makes its
assault under cover of the _testudo_. Lastly, the king with his train
lies at the feet of Trajan; the dragon-banners are in the hands of the
Romans; the troops in exultation salute the emperor; Victoria stands
before the piled-up arms of the enemy and inscribes the slab recording
the victory. Then follow the pictures of the second war, of similar
character on the whole to those of the first series. Worthy of notice
is one great representation, which, after the king's stronghold has
been burnt, appears to show the princes of the Dacians sitting round
a kettle and, one after the other, emptying the poison-cup; another,
where the head of the brave Dacian king is brought on a tray to the
emperor; and lastly, the closing picture, the long series of the
conquered with their women, children, and flocks marching away from
their home. The emperor himself wrote the history of this war--as
Frederick the Great wrote that of the Seven Years' War--and many
others after him; all this is lost to us, and as nobody would venture
to invent the history of the Seven Years' War from Menzel's pictures,
there is left to us only, along with a glimpse into half intelligible
details, the painful feeling of a stirring and great historical
catastrophe faded for ever and lost even to remembrance.

[Sidenote: Military position on the Danube after Trajan.]

The defence of the frontier in the region of the Danube was not shifted
to such a degree, as might well be expected, in consequence of the
conversion of Dacia into a Roman province; a change, in the strict
sense, of the line of defence did not take place, but the new province
was treated on the whole as an eccentric position, which was only
connected directly with the Roman territory towards the south along the
Danube itself, on the other three sides projected into the barbarian
land. The plain of the Theiss, stretching between Pannonia and Dacia
continued in the hands of the Jazyges; there have been found remains of
old walls, which led from the Danube over the Theiss away to the Dacian
mountains, and bounded the region of the Jazyges to the north, but of
the time and the authors of these entrenchments nothing certain is
known. Bessarabia also is intersected by a double barrier-line which,
running from the Pruth to the Dniester, ends at Tyra, and--according
to the inadequate reports hitherto before us on the subject--appears
to proceed from the Romans.[131] If this was the case, then Moldavia
and the south half of Bessarabia as well as the whole of Wallachia
were incorporated in the Roman empire. But, though this may have been
done nominally, the Roman rule hardly extended effectively to these
lands; at least there is, up to the present time, an utter absence
of sure proofs of Roman settlement either in eastern Wallachia or in
Moldavia and Bessarabia. At any rate, the Danube here remained, much
more than the Rhine in Germany, the limit of Roman civilisation and the
proper basis of frontier-defence. The positions on it were considerably
reinforced. It was a fortunate circumstance for Rome that, while the
surge of peoples rose on the Danube, it sank on the Rhine, and the
troops that could be there dispensed with were disposable elsewhere.

[Sidenote: Commands increased to five.]

Although under Vespasian probably not more than six legions were
stationed on the Danube, their number was subsequently raised by
Domitian and Trajan to ten; the two chief commands of Moesia and
Pannonia hitherto subsisting were withal divided, the first under
Domitian, the second under Trajan, and, as the Dacian was super-added,
the whole number of the commanderships on the lower Danube was fixed
at five. At the outset, indeed, they seem to have cut off the corner
which this stream forms below Durostorum (Silistria)--the modern
Dobrudscha--and from the place now called Rassowa, where the river
approaches within thirty miles of the sea, in order then to bend almost
at a right angle to the north, to have substituted for the river-line a
fortified road after the manner of the British (p. 187), which reached
the coast at Tomis.[132] This corner, however, was, at least from the
time of Hadrian, embraced within the Roman frontier-fortification; for
from that time we find lower Moesia, which before Trajan had probably
possessed no larger standing garrisons at all, furnished with the three
legionary camps of Novae (near Svischtova), Durostorum (Silistria),
and Troesmis (Iglitza, near Galatz), of which the last lies in front
of that very angle of the Danube. Against the Jazyges the position was
strengthened by adding to the upper Moesian camps at Singidunum and
Viminacium the lower Pannonian at the confluence of the Theiss with the
Danube near Acumincum. Dacia itself was then but weakly garrisoned.
The capital, now a colony of Trajan, Sarmizegetusa, lay not far from
the chief crossings over the Danube in upper Moesia; here and on the
middle Marisus, as well as beyond it in the districts of the gold
mines, the Romans chiefly settled; the one legion serving as garrison
since Trajan's time in Dacia obtained its headquarters, at least soon
afterwards, in this region at Apulum (Karlsburg). Farther to the north
Potaissa (Thorda) and Napoca (Klausenburg) were probably also at once
taken possession of by the Romans, but it was only gradually that
the great Pannono-Dacian military centres pushed farther towards the
north. The transference of the lower Pannonian legion from Acumincum
to Aquincum, the modern Buda, and the occupation of this commanding
military position, fall not later than Hadrian, and probably under
him; probably at the same time one of the upper Pannonian legions came
to Brigetio (opposite to Comorn). Under Commodus all settlement was
prohibited along the northern frontier of Dacia for a breadth of nearly
five miles, which must stand connected with the frontier regulations to
be subsequently mentioned after the Marcomanian war. At that time also
the fortified lines may have originated, which barred this frontier
similarly to the upper Germanic. Under Severus one of the legions
previously in lower Moesia was brought to Potaissa (Thorda) on the
Dacian north frontier.

[Sidenote: Dacia an advanced position.]

But even after these transferences Dacia remained an advanced position
on the left bank, covered by mountains and defences, with reference
to which it might well be doubtful whether it did more to promote or
to impede the general defensive attitude of the Romans. Hadrian, in
fact, had thought of giving up this territory, and so regarded its
incorporation as a mistake; after the step had once been taken, there
certainly preponderated the consideration, if not of the lucrative gold
mines of the country, at any rate of the Roman civilisation rapidly
developing itself in the region of the Marisus. But he caused at least
the superstructure of the stone bridge of the Danube to be removed,
as his apprehension of its being used by the enemy outweighed his
consideration for the Dacian garrison. The later period released itself
from this anxiety; but the eccentric position of Dacia in relation to
the rest of the frontier-defence remained.

The sixty years after the Dacian wars of Trajan were for the Danube
lands a time of peace and of peaceful development. No doubt there was
never entire quiet, particularly at the mouths of the Danube, and even
the hazardous expedient of purchasing the security of the frontier from
the adjoining restless neighbours, just as was done with Decebalus, by
the bestowal of yearly gratuities was further employed;[133] yet the
remains of antiquity show at this very time everywhere the flourishing
of urban life, and not a few communities, particularly of Pannonia,
name as their founder Hadrian or Pius. But upon this stillness
followed a storm such as the empire had not yet sustained, and which,
although properly but a frontier-war, by its extension over a series
of provinces and by its duration for thirteen years shook the empire
itself.

[Sidenote: Marcomanian war.]

The war named after the Marcomani was not kindled by any single
personage of the type of Hannibal or Decebalus. As little did
aggressions on the part of the Romans provoke this war; the emperor
Pius injured no neighbour, either powerful or humble, and set on
peace almost more than its just value. The realm of Maroboduus and
of Vannius had thereafter, perhaps in consequence of the partition
under Vangio and Sido (p. 216), become divided into the kingdom of
the Marcomani in what is now Bohemia and that of the Quadi in Moravia
and upper Hungary. Conflicts with the Romans do not appear to have
occurred here; the vassal-relation of the princes of the Quadi was even
formally recognised under the reign of Pius by the confirmation asked
for. Shiftings of peoples, which lay beyond the Roman horizon, were
the proximate cause of the great war. Soon after the death of Pius (†
161) masses of Germans, especially Langobardi from the Elbe, but also
Marcomani and other bodies of men, appeared in Pannonia, apparently to
gain new abodes on the right bank. Pressed hard by the Roman troops who
were despatched against them, they sent the prince of the Marcomani,
Ballomarius, and with him a representative of each of the ten tribes
taking part, to renew their request for assignation of land. But the
governor abode by his decision and compelled them to go back over the
Danube.

[Sidenote: Its beginning.]

[Sidenote: Invasion of Italy.]

This was the beginning of the great Danubian war.[134] The governor
of upper Germany, Gaius Aufidius Victorinus, the father-in-law of
Fronto known in literature, had already, about the year 162, to repel
an assault of the Chatti, which likewise may have been occasioned by
tribes from the Elbe pressing on their rear. Had equally energetic
steps been taken, greater mischief might have been averted. But just
then the Armenian war had begun, into which the Parthians soon entered;
though the troops were not actually sent away from the threatened
frontier to the east, for which there is at least no evidence,[135]
there was at any rate a want of men to take up the second war at once
with energy. This temporising severely avenged itself. Just when
people were triumphing in Rome over the kings of the east, on the
Danube the Chatti, the Marcomani, the Quadi, the Jazyges burst as
with a thunderclap into the Roman territory. Raetia, Noricum, the two
Pannonias, Dacia, were inundated at the same moment; in the Dacian
mine-district we can still follow the traces of this irruption. What
devastations they then wrought in those regions, which for long had
seen no enemy, is shown by the fact that several years afterwards
the Quadi gave back first 13,000, then 50,000, and the Jazyges even
100,000 Roman captives. Nor did the matter end with the injury done to
the provinces. There happened what had not occurred for three hundred
years and begun to be accounted as impossible--the barbarians broke
through the wall of the Alps and invaded Italy itself; from Raetia they
destroyed Opitergium (Oderzo); bands from the Julian Alps invested
Aquileia.[136] Defeats of individual Roman divisions must have taken
place in various cases; we learn only that one of the commandants of
the guard, Victorinus, fell before the enemy, and the ranks of the
Roman armies were sorely thinned.

[Sidenote: Pestilence.]

This grave attack befell the state at a most unhappy moment. No doubt
the Oriental war was ended; but in its train a pestilence had spread
throughout Italy and the west, which swept men away more continuously
than the war, and in more fearful measure. When the troops were
concentrated, as was necessary, the victims of the pestilence were all
the more numerous. As dearth always accompanies pestilence, so on this
occasion there appeared with it failure of crops and famine, and severe
financial distress; the taxes did not come in, and in the course of the
war the emperor saw himself under the necessity of alienating by public
auction the jewels of his palace.

[Sidenote: Verus and Marcus.]

There was lack of a fitting leader. A military and political task
so extensive and so complicated could, as things stood in Rome, be
undertaken by no commissioned general, but only by the ruler himself.
Marcus had, with a correct and modest knowledge of his shortcomings,
on ascending the throne, placed by his side with equal rights his
younger adopted brother Lucius Verus, on the benevolent assumption that
the jovial young man--as he was a vigorous fencer and hunter--would
also grow into an able general. But the worthy emperor did not
possess the sharp glance of one who knows men; the choice had proved
as unfortunate as possible; the Parthian war just ended had shown
the nominal general to be personally dissolute, and as an officer
incapable. The joint regency of Verus was nothing but an additional
calamity, which indeed was obviated by his death, that ensued not
long after the outbreak of the Marcomanian war (169). Marcus, by his
leanings more reflective than inclined to practical life, and not at
all a soldier, nor in general a strong personality, undertook the
exclusive and personal conduct of the requisite operations. He may, in
doing so, have made mistakes enough in detail, and perhaps the long
duration of the struggle is partly traceable to this; but the unity
of supreme command, his clear insight into the object for which the
war was waged, the tenacity of his statesmanly action, above all the
rectitude and firmness of the man administering his difficult office
with self-forgetful faithfulness, ultimately broke the dangerous
assault. This was a merit all the higher, as the success was due more
to character than to talent.

[Sidenote: Progress of the war.]

The character of the task set before the Romans is shown by the fact
that the government, despite the want of men and money in the first
year of this war, had the walls of the capital of Dalmatia, Salonae,
and of the capital of Thrace, Philippopolis, restored by its soldiers
and at its expense; certainly these were not isolated arrangements.
They had to prepare themselves to see the men of the north everywhere
investing the great towns of the empire; the terrors of the Gothic
expeditions were already knocking at the gates, and were perhaps for
this time averted only by the fact that government saw them coming.
The immediate superintendence of the military operations, and the
regulation, demanded by the state of the case, of the relations to
the frontier-peoples and reformation of the existing arrangements
on the spot, might neither be omitted nor left to his unprincipled
brother or individual leaders. In fact, the position of matters was
changed as soon as the two emperors arrived at Aquileia, in order
to set out thence with the army to the scene of war. The Germans
and Sarmatians, far from united in themselves, and without common
leading, felt themselves unequal to such a counter-blow. The masses of
invaders everywhere retreated; the Quadi sent in their submission to
the imperial generals, and in many cases the leaders of the movement
directed against the Romans paid for this reaction with their lives.
Lucius thought that the war had demanded victims enough, and advised
a return to Rome; but the Marcomani persevered in haughty resistance,
and the calamity which had come upon Rome, the hundred thousands of
captives dragged away, the successes achieved by the barbarians,
imperatively demanded a more vigorous policy and the offensive
continuance of the war. The son-in-law of Marcus, Tiberius Claudius
Pompeianus, as an extraordinary measure took the command in Raetia
and Noricum; his able lieutenant, the subsequent emperor, Publius
Helvius Pertinax, cleared the Roman territory without difficulty with
the first auxiliary legion called up from Pannonia. In spite of the
financial distress two new legions were formed, particularly from
Illyrian soldiers, in the raising of which no doubt many a previous
highway-robber was made a defender of his country; and, as was already
stated (pp. 161, 198), the hitherto slight frontier-guard of these
two provinces was reinforced by the new legion-camps of Ratisbon and
Enns. The emperors themselves went to the upper Pannonian camps. It was
above all of consequence to restrict the area within which the fire
of war was raging. The barbarians coming from the north, who offered
their aid, were not repelled, and fought in Roman pay, so far as they
did not--as also occurred--break their word and make common cause with
the enemy. The Quadi, who sued for peace and for the confirmation of
the new king Furtius, had the latter readily granted to them, and
nothing demanded of them but the giving back of the deserters and the
captives. Success in some measure attended the attempt to restrict the
war to the two chief opponents, the Marcomani and the Jazyges from of
old allied with them. Against these two peoples it was carried on in
the following years with severe conflicts and not without defeat. We
know only isolated details, which do not admit of being brought into
set connection. Marcus Claudius Fronto, to whom had been entrusted the
commands of upper Moesia and Dacia united as an extraordinary measure,
fell about the year 171 in conflict against Germans and Jazyges. The
commandant of the guard, Marcus Macrinius Vindex, likewise fell before
the enemy. They and other officers of high rank obtained in these years
honorary monuments in Rome at the column of Trajan, because they had
met death in defence of their fatherland. The barbaric tribes, who had
declared for Rome, again partially fell away--such as the Cotini and
above all the Quadi, who granted an asylum to the fugitive Marcomani
and drove out their vassal-king Furtius, whereupon the emperor Marcus
set a price of 1000 gold pieces on the head of his successor Ariogaesus.

[Sidenote: Its issue; and second war.]

Not till the sixth year of the war (172) does the complete conquest
of the Marcomani seem to have been achieved, and Marcus to have
thereupon assumed the well-deserved title of victory, Germanicus.
Then followed the overthrow of the Quadi; lastly in 175 that of the
Jazyges, in consequence of which the emperor received the further
surname of Conqueror of the Sarmatae. The terms which were laid down
for the conquered tribes show that Marcus designed not to punish but to
subdue. The Marcomani and the Jazyges, probably also the Quadi, were
required to evacuate a border-strip along the river to the breadth of
ten, subsequently modified to five, miles. In the strongholds on the
right bank of the Danube were placed Roman garrisons, which, among the
Marcomani and Quadi alone, amounted together to not less than 20,000
men. All the subdued had to furnish contingents to the Roman army; the
Jazyges, for example, 8000 horsemen. Had the emperor not been recalled
by the insurrection of Syria, he would have driven the latter entirely
from their country, as Trajan drove the Dacians. That Marcus intended
to treat the revolted Transdanubians after this model, was confirmed
by the further course of events. Hardly was that hindrance removed,
when the emperor went back to the Danube and began, just like Trajan,
in 178 the second definitive war. The ground put forward for thus
declaring war is not known; the aim is doubtless correctly specified
to the effect that he purposed to erect two new provinces, Marcomania
and Sarmatia. To the Jazyges, who must have shown themselves submissive
to the designs of the emperor, their burdensome imposts were for the
most part remitted, and, in fact, for intercourse with their kinsmen
dwelling to the east of Dacia the Roxolani, right of passage through
Dacia was granted to them under fitting supervision--probably just
because they were already regarded as Roman subjects. The Marcomani
were almost extirpated by sword and famine. The Quadi in despair wished
to migrate to the north, and to seek settlements among the Semnones;
but even this was not allowed to them, as they had to cultivate the
fields in order to provide for the Roman garrisons. After fourteen
years of almost uninterrupted warfare, he who was a warrior-prince
against his will reached his goal, and the Romans were a second time
face to face with the acquisition of the upper Elbe; now, in fact, all
that was wanting was the announcement of the wish to retain what was
won. Thereupon he died--not yet sixty years of age--in the camp of
Vindobona on 17th March 180.

[Sidenote: Results of the Marcomanian war.]

We must not merely acknowledge the resoluteness and tenacity of the
ruler, but must also admit that he did what right policy enjoined. The
conquest of Dacia by Trajan was a doubtful gain, although in this very
Marcomanian war the possession of Dacia not only removed a dangerous
element from the ranks of the antagonists of Rome, but probably also
had the effect of preventing the host of peoples on the lower Danube,
the Bastarnae, Roxolani, and others, from interfering in the war. But
after the mighty onset of the Transdanubians to the west of Dacia had
made their subjugation a necessity, this could only be accomplished in
a definitive way by embracing Bohemia, Moravia, and the plain of the
Theiss within the Roman line of defence, although these regions were
probably accounted, like Dacia, as having only the position of advanced
posts, and the strategical frontier-line was certainly meant to remain
the Danube.

[Sidenote: Conclusion of peace by Commodus.]

The successor of Marcus, the emperor Commodus, was present in the camp
when his father died, and as he had already for several years nominally
shared the throne with his father, he entered with the latter's death
at once into possession of unlimited power. Only for a brief time did
the nineteen years' old successor allow the men who had enjoyed his
father's confidence--his brother-in-law Pompeianus, and others who
had borne with Marcus the heavy burden of the war--to rule in his
spirit. Commodus was in every respect the opposite of his father; not
a scholar, but a fencing-master; as cowardly and weak in character,
as his father was resolute and tenacious of purpose; as indolent and
forgetful of duty, as his father was active and conscientious. He
not merely gave up the idea of incorporating the territory won, but
voluntarily granted even to the Marcomani conditions such as they
had not ventured to hope for. The regulation of the frontier-traffic
under Roman control, and the obligation not to injure their neighbours
friendly to the Romans, were matters of course; but the garrisons
were withdrawn from their country, and there was retained only the
prohibition of settlement on the border-strip. The payment of taxes
and the furnishing of recruits were doubtless stipulated for, but
the former were soon remitted, and the latter were certainly not
furnished. A similar settlement was made with the Quadi; and the
other Transdanubians must have been similarly dealt with. Thereby the
conquests made were given up, and the work of many years of warfare was
in vain; if no more was wished for, a similar arrangement of things
might have been reached much earlier. Nevertheless the Marcomanian war
secured in these regions the supremacy of Rome for the sequel, in spite
of the fact that Rome let slip the prize of victory. It was not by the
tribes that had taken part in it that the blow was dealt, to which the
Roman world-power succumbed.

[Sidenote: The colonate.]

Another permanent consequence of this war was connected with the
removals, to which it gave occasion, of the Transdanubians over into
the Roman empire. Of themselves such changes of settlement had occurred
at all times; the Sugambri, transplanted under Augustus to Gaul, the
Dacians sent to Thrace, were nothing but new subjects or communities
of subjects added to those formerly existing, and probably not much
different were the 3000 Naristae, whom Marcus allowed to exchange their
settlements westward of Bohemia for such settlements within the empire,
while the like request was refused to the otherwise unknown Astingi on
the Dacian north frontier. But the Germans settled by him not merely in
the land of the Danube, but in Italy itself at Ravenna, were neither
free subjects nor strictly non-free persons; these were the beginnings
of the Roman villanage, the colonate, the influence of which on the
agricultural economy of the whole state is to be set forth in another
connection. That Ravennate settlement, however, had no permanence;
the men rose in revolt and had to be conveyed away, so that the new
colonate remained restricted primarily to the provinces, particularly
to the lands of the Danube.

[Sidenote: The advancing Northmen.]

The great war on the middle Danube was once more followed by sixty
years' time of peace, the blessings of which could not be completely
neutralised by the internal misgovernment that was constantly
increasing during its course. No doubt various isolated accounts show
that the frontier, especially the Dacian, which was most exposed,
remained not without trouble; but above all, the stern military
government of Severus did its duty here, and at least Marcomani and
Quadi appear even under his immediate successors in unconditional
dependence, so that the son of Severus could cite a prince of the Quadi
before him and lay his head at his feet. The conflicts occurring
at this epoch on the lower Danube were of subordinate importance.
But probably at this period a comprehensive shifting of peoples
from the north-east towards the Black Sea took place, and the Roman
frontier-guard on the lower Danube had to confront new and more
dangerous opponents. Up to this time the antagonists of the Romans
there had been chiefly Sarmatian tribes, among whom the Roxolani came
into closest contact with them; of Germans there were settled here at
that time only the Bastarnae, who had been long at home in this region.
Now the Roxolani disappear, merged possibly among the Carpi apparently
akin to them, who thenceforth were the nearest neighbours of the Romans
on the lower Danube, perhaps in the valleys of the Seret and Pruth.

[Sidenote: Goths.]

By the side of the Carpi came, likewise as immediate neighbours of
the Romans at the mouth of the Danube, the people of the Goths. This
Germanic stock migrated, according to the tradition which has been
preserved to us, from Scandinavia over the Baltic towards the region of
the Vistula, and from this to the Black Sea; in accordance with this
the Roman geographers of the second century know them at the Vistula,
and Roman history from the first quarter of the third at the north-west
coast of the Black Sea. Thenceforth they appear here constantly on the
increase; the remains of the Bastarnae retired before them to the right
bank of the Danube under the emperor Probus, the remains of the Carpi
under the emperor Diocletian, while beyond doubt a great part of the
former as of the latter mingled among the Goths and joined them. On
the whole this catastrophe may be designated as that of the Gothic war
only in the sense in which that which set in under Marcus is called the
war of the Marcomani; the whole mass of peoples set in movement by the
stream of migration from the north-east to the Black Sea took part in
it; and took part all the more, seeing that these attacks took place
just as much by land over the lower Danube as by water from the north
coasts of the Black Sea, in an inextricable complication of landward
and maritime piracy. Not unsuitably, therefore, the learned Athenian
who fought in this war and has narrated it, prefers to term it the
Scythian, as he includes under this name--which, like the Pelasgian,
forms the despair of the historian--all Germanic and non-Germanic
enemies of the empire. What is to be told of these expeditions will
here be brought together, so far as the confusion of tradition, which
is only too much in keeping with the confusion of these fearful times,
allows.

[Sidenote: Gothic wars.]

The year 238--a year also of civil war, when there were four
emperors--is designated as that in which the war against those here
first named Goths began.[137] As the coins of Tyra and Olbia cease with
Alexander († 235), these Roman possessions situated beyond the boundary
of the empire had doubtless become some years earlier a prey to the
new enemy. In that year they first crossed the Danube, and the most
northerly of the Moesian coast towns, Istros, was the first victim.
Gordianus, who emerged out of the confusions of this time as ruler, is
designated as conqueror of the Goths; it is more certain that the Roman
government at any rate under him, if not already earlier, agreed to buy
off the Gothic incursions.[138] As was natural, the Carpi demanded the
same as the emperor had granted to the inferior Goths; when the demand
was not granted, they invaded the Roman territory in the year 245. The
emperor Philippus--Gordianus was at that time already dead--repulsed
them, and energetic action with the combined strength of the great
empire would probably here have checked the barbarians.

[Sidenote: Decius.]

[Sidenote: His death.]

[Sidenote: Loss of Dacia.]

But in these years the murderer of an emperor reached the throne as
surely as he found in turn his own murderer and successor; it was
just in the imperilled regions of the Danube that the army proclaimed
against the emperor Philippus first Marinus Pacatianus, and, after he
was set aside, Traianus Decius, which latter in fact vanquished his
antagonist in Italy, and was acknowledged as ruler. He was an able and
brave man, not unworthy of the two names which he bore, and entered, so
soon as he could, resolutely into the conflicts on the Danube; but what
the civil war waged in the meanwhile had destroyed, could no longer be
retrieved. While the Romans were fighting with one another the Goths
and the Carpi had united, and had under the Gothic prince Cniva invaded
Moesia denuded of troops. The governor of the province, Trebonianus
Gallus, threw himself with his force into Nicopolis on the Haemus, and
was here besieged by the Goths; these at the same time pillaged Thrace
and besieged its capital, the great and strong Philippopolis; indeed
they reached as far as Macedonia, and invested Thessalonica, where
the governor Priscus found this just a fitting moment to have himself
proclaimed as emperor. When Decius arrived to combat at once his rival
and the public foe, the former was doubtless without difficulty set
aside, and success also attended the relief of Nicopolis, where 30,000
Goths are said to have fallen. But the Goths, retreating to Thrace,
conquered in turn at Beroë (Alt-Zagora), threw the Romans back on
Moesia, and reduced Nicopolis there as well as Anchialus in Thrace
and even Philippopolis, where 100,000 men are said to have come into
their power. Thereupon they marched northwards to bring into safety
their enormous booty. Decius projected the plan of inflicting a blow
on the enemy at the crossing of the Danube. He stationed a division
under Gallus on the bank, and hoped to be able to throw the Goths upon
this, and to cut off their retreat. But at Abrittus, a place on the
Moesian frontier, the fortune of war, or else the treachery of Gallus,
decided against them. Decius perished with his son, and Gallus, who was
proclaimed as his successor, began his reign by once more assuring to
the Goths the annual payments of money (251).[139] This utter defeat
of Roman arms as of Roman policy, the fall of the emperor, the first
who lost his life in conflict with the barbarians--a piece of news
which deeply moved men's minds even in this age demoralised by its
familiarity with misfortune--the disgraceful capitulation following
thereon, placed in fact the integrity of the empire at stake. Serious
crises on the middle Danube, threatening probably the loss of Dacia,
must have been the immediate consequence. Once more this was averted;
the governor of Pannonia, Marcus Aemilius Aemilianus, a good soldier,
achieved an important success of arms, and drove the enemy over the
frontier. But Nemesis bore sway. The consequence of this victory,
achieved in the name of Gallus, was, that the army renounced allegiance
to the betrayer of Decius and chose their general as his successor.
Once more therefore civil war took precedence of frontier-defence;
and, while Aemilianus no doubt vanquished Gallus in Italy but soon
afterwards succumbed to his general Valerianus (254), Dacia was lost
for the empire--how, and to whom, we know not.[140] The last coin
struck by this province, and the latest inscription found there, are
of the year 255, the last coin of the neighbouring Viminacium in upper
Moesia of the following year; in the first years of Valerianus and
Gallienus therefore the barbarians occupied the Roman territory on the
left bank of the Danube, and certainly also pressed across to the
right.

Before we pursue further the development of affairs on the lower
Danube, it appears necessary to cast a glance at piracy, as it was then
in vogue in the eastern half of the Mediterranean, and the maritime
expeditions of the Goths and their allies originating from it.

[Sidenote: Piracy on the Black Sea.]

That the Roman fleet could at no time be dispensed with on the Black
Sea, and piracy there was probably never extirpated, was implied in
the very nature of the Roman rule as it had taken shape on its coasts.
The Romans were in firm possession only from about the mouths of the
Danube as far as Trapezus. It is true that on the one hand Tyra at
the mouth of the Dniester and Olbia on the bay at the mouth of the
Dnieper, on the other side the Caucasian harbours in the regions
of the modern Suchum-Kaleh, Dioscurias and Pityus, were Roman. The
intervening Bosporan kingdom in the Crimea also stood under Roman
protection, and had a Roman garrison subject to the governor of Moesia.
But on these shores, for the most part far from inviting, there were
only those posts formerly held either as old Greek settlements or
as Roman fortresses; the coast itself was desolate or in the hands
of the natives filling the interior, who, comprehended under the
general name of Scythians, mostly of Sarmatian descent, never were,
or were to become, subject to the Romans; it was enough if they did
not directly lay hands on the Romans or their clients. Accordingly,
it is not to be wondered at, that even in the time of Tiberius the
pirates of the east coast not merely made the Black Sea insecure, but
also landed and levied contributions on the villages and towns of the
coast. If, under Pius or Marcus, a band of the Costoboci dwelling on
the north-western shore fell upon the inland town Elateia situated
in the heart of Phocis, and came to blows under its walls with the
citizens, this event, which certainly only by accident stands forth
for us as isolated, shows that the same phenomena which preceded the
downfall of the government of the senate were now renewed, and even
with the imperial power maintaining itself outwardly unshaken not
merely individual piratical ships, but squadrons of pirates cruised
in the Black and even in the Mediterranean seas. The decline of the
government, clearly discernible after the death of Severus, and above
all after the end of the last dynasty, manifested itself then, as
was natural, especially in the further decay of marine police. The
accounts, in detail far from trustworthy, mention already in the time
before Decius the appearance of a great fleet of pirates in the Aegean
Sea; then under Decius the plundering of the Pamphylian coast and of
the Graeco-Asiatic islands; under Gallus maraudings of pirates in
Asia Minor as far as Pessinus and Ephesus.[141] These were predatory
expeditions. These comrades plundered the coasts far and wide, and made
even, as we see, bold raids into the interior; but nothing is mentioned
of the destruction of towns, and the pirates shunned coming into
collision with Roman troops; the attack was chiefly directed against
such regions as had no troops stationed in them.

[Sidenote: Maritime expeditions of the Goths and allies.]

[Sidenote: To Trapezus.]

Under Valerian these expeditions assume a different character. The
nature of the raids varies so much from the earlier, that the raid,
in itself not specially important, of the Borani against Pityus under
Valerian could be designated by intelligent reporters precisely as the
beginning of this movement,[142] and that the pirates were for a long
time called in Asia by the name of this tribe not otherwise known to
us. These expeditions proceed no longer from the old native dwellers
beside the Black Sea, but from the hordes pressing behind them. What
had hitherto been piracy begins to form a portion of that migratory
movement of peoples to which the advance of the Goths on the lower
Danube belongs. The peoples taking part in it are very varied and in
part little known; in the later expeditions the Germanic Heruli, then
dwelling beside the Maeotis, appear to have played a leading part. The
Goths also took part, but, so far as sea-voyages are concerned--and
tolerably exact reports of these are before us--not in a prominent
manner; strictly speaking, these expeditions are more correctly termed
Scythian than Gothic. The maritime centre of these aggressions was
the mouth of the Dniester, the port of Tyra.[143] The Greek towns of
the Bosporus, abandoned through the bankruptcy of the imperial power,
without protection to the hordes pressing onward, and expecting to be
besieged by them, consented, half under compulsion, half voluntarily,
to convey in their vessels, and by their mariners, the inconvenient new
neighbours over to the nearest Roman possessions on the north coast
of Pontus--for which these neighbours themselves lacked the needful
means and the needful skill. It was thus that the expedition against
Pityus was brought about. The Borani were landed and, confident of
success, sent back the ships. But the resolute commander of Pityus,
Successianus, repelled the attack; and the assailants, fearing the
arrival of the other Roman garrisons, hastily withdrew, for which they
had difficulty in procuring the necessary transports. But the plan was
not given up; in the next year they came back, and, as the commandant
had meanwhile been changed, the fortress surrendered. The Borani, who
this time had retained the Bosporan vessels and had them manned by
pressed mariners and Roman captives, possessed themselves of the coast
far and wide, and reached as far as Trapezus. Into this well fortified
and strongly garrisoned town all had fled, and the barbarians were not
in a position for a real siege. But the leadership of the Romans was
bad, and the military discipline so on the decline that not even the
walls were occupied; so the barbarians scaled them by night, without
encountering resistance, and in the great and rich city enormous booty,
including a number of ships, fell into their hands. They returned
successful from the far distant land to the Maeotis.

[Sidenote: To Bithynia.]

Excited by this success, a second expedition of other but neighbouring
Scythian bands was in the following winter directed against Bithynia.
It is significant of the unsettled state of things that the instigator
of this movement was Chrysogonus, a Greek of Nicomedia, and that he
was highly honoured by the barbarians for its successful result. This
expedition was undertaken--as the necessary number of ships was not
to be procured--partly by land, partly by water; it was only in the
neighbourhood of Byzantium that the pirates succeeded in possessing
themselves of a considerable number of fishing-boats, and so they
arrived along the Asiatic coast at Chalcedon, whose strong garrison
on this news ran off. Not merely this town fell into their hands, but
also along the coast Nicomedia, Chios, Apamea; in the interior Nicaea
and Prusa; Nicomedia and Nicaea they burnt down, and reached the river
Rhyndacus. Thence they sailed home, laden with the treasures of the
rich land and of its considerable cities.

[Sidenote: To Greece.]

The expedition against Bithynia had already been undertaken in part by
land; all the more were the attacks that were directed against European
Greece composed of piratical expeditions by land and sea. If Moesia
and Thrace were not permanently occupied by the Goths, they yet came
and went there as if they were at home, and roved from thence far into
Macedonia. Even Achaia expected under Valerian invasion from this side;
Thermopylae and the Isthmus were barricaded, and the Athenians set to
work to restore their walls that had lain in ruins since the siege by
Sulla. The barbarians did not come then, nor by this route. But under
Gallienus a fleet of five hundred sail, this time chiefly Heruli,
appeared before the port of Byzantium, which, however, had not yet
lost its capacity of defence; the ships of the Byzantines successfully
repulsed the robbers. These sailed onward, showed themselves on the
Asiatic coast before Cyzicus not formerly attacked, and arrived
from thence by way of Lemnos and Imbros at Greece proper. Athens,
Corinth, Argos, Sparta, were pillaged and destroyed. It was always
something that, as in the times of the Persian wars, the citizens of
the destroyed Athens, two thousand in number, laid an ambush for the
retiring barbarians, and, under the leadership of their equally learned
and brave captain, Publius Herennius Dexippus, of the old and noble
family of the Kerykes, with support of the Roman fleet, inflicted a
notable loss on the pirates. On the return home, which took place in
part by the land route, the emperor Gallienus attacked them in Thrace
at the river Nestus and put to death a considerable number of their
men.[144]

[Sidenote: The imperial government of the Gothic period.]

In order completely to survey the measure of misfortune, we must take
into account that in this empire going to shreds, and above all in
the provinces overrun by the enemy, one officer after another grasped
at the crown, which hardly any longer existed. It is not worth the
trouble to record the names of these ephemeral wearers of the purple;
it marks the situation that, after the devastation of Bithynia by the
pirates, the emperor Valerian omitted to send thither an extraordinary
commandant, because every general was, not without reason, regarded
by him as a rival. This co-operated to produce the almost thoroughly
passive attitude of the government in presence of this sore emergency.
Yet, on the other hand, undoubtedly a good part of this irresponsible
passiveness is to be traced to the personality of the rulers: Valerian
was weak and aged, Gallienus vehement and dissolute, and neither the
one nor the other was equal to the guidance of the vessel of the state
in a storm. Marcianus, to whom Gallienus after the invasion of Achaia
had committed the command in these regions, operated not without
success; but the matter did not gain any real turn for the better so
long as Gallienus occupied the throne.

[Sidenote: Gothic victories of Claudius.]

[Sidenote: Renewed fortifying of the Danube-frontier.]

After the murder of Gallienus (268), perhaps on the news of it, the
barbarians, again led by the Heruli, but this time with united forces,
undertook an assault on the imperial frontier, such as there had not
been hitherto, with a powerful fleet, and probably at the same time by
land from the Danube.[145] The fleet had much to suffer from storms in
the Propontis; then it divided, and the Goths advanced partly against
Thessaly and Greece, partly against Crete and Rhodes; the chief mass
resorted to Macedonia and thence penetrated into the interior, beyond
doubt in combination with the bands that had marched into Thrace. But
the emperor Claudius, who marched up in person with a strong force,
brought relief at length to the Thessalonians oft besieged but now
reduced to extremity; he drove the Goths before him up the valley of
the Axius (Vardar) and onward over the mountains to upper Moesia; after
various conflicts, with changing fortune of war, he achieved here in
the Morava valley near Naissus a brilliant victory, in which 50,000
of the enemy are said to have fallen. The Goths retired broken up,
first in the direction towards Macedonia, then through Thrace to the
Haemus, in order to put the Danube between themselves and the enemy. A
quarrel in the Roman camp, this time between infantry and cavalry, had
almost given them once more a respite; but, when it came to fighting,
the cavalry could not bear to leave their comrades in the lurch, and
so the united army was once more victorious. A severe pestilence,
which raged in all the years of distress, but especially then in those
regions, and above all in the armies, did great injury doubtless to the
Romans--the emperor Claudius himself succumbed to it--but the great
army of the Northmen was utterly extirpated, and the numerous captives
were incorporated in the Roman armies or made serfs. The hydra of
military revolutions, too, was in some measure subdued; Claudius, and
after him Aurelian, were masters in the empire after another fashion
than could be said of Gallienus. The renewal of the fleet, towards
which a beginning had been made under Gallienus, would not be wanting.
The Dacia of Trajan was, and remained, lost; Aurelian withdrew the
posts still holding out there, and gave to the possessors dislodged or
inclined for emigration new dwellings on the Moesian bank. But Thrace
and Moesia, which for a time had belonged more to the Goths than to the
Romans, returned under Roman rule, and at least the frontier of the
Danube was once more fortified.

[Sidenote: Character of the Gothic wars.]

We may not assign to these Gothic and Scythian expeditions by land and
by sea, which fill up the twenty years 250-269, such significance, as
if the hordes moving forth had been minded to take permanent possession
of the countries which they traversed. Such a plan cannot be shown to
have existed even for Moesia and Thrace, to say nothing of the more
remote coasts; hardly, moreover, were the assailants numerous enough
to undertake invasions proper. As the bad government of the last
rulers, and above all the untrustworthiness of the troops, far more
than the superior power of the barbarians, called forth the flooding
of the territory by land and sea robbers, so the re-establishment
of internal order and the energetic demeanour of the government of
themselves brought its deliverance. The Roman state could not yet be
broken if it did not break itself. But still it was a great work to
rally the government again as Claudius had done it. We know somewhat
less even of him than of most regents of this time, as the probably
fictitious carrying back of the Constantinian pedigree to him has
repainted his portrait after the tame pattern of perfection; but this
very association, as well as the numberless coins struck in his honour
after his death, show that he was regarded by the next generation
as the deliverer of the state, and in this it cannot have been
mistaken. These Scythian expeditions were at all events a prelude of
the later migration of peoples; and the destruction of cities, which
distinguishes them from the ordinary piratic voyages, took place at
that time to such an extent that the prosperity as well as the culture
of Greece and Asia Minor never recovered from it.

[Sidenote: The Danubian wars to the end of the 3d century.]

On the re-established frontier of the Danube Aurelian consolidated the
victory achieved, inasmuch as he conducted the defensive once more
offensively, and, crossing the Danube at its mouth, defeated beyond it
not only the Carpi, who thenceforth stood in client-relation to the
Romans, but also the Goths under king Canabaudes. His successor Probus
took, as was already stated, the remains of the Bastarnae, hard pressed
by the Goths, over to the Roman bank, just as Diocletian in the year
295 took the remnant of the Carpi. This points to the fact that beyond
the river the empire of the Goths was consolidating; but they came
no further. The border-fortresses were reinforced; counter-Aquincum
(_contra Aquincum_, Pesth) was constructed in the year 294. The piratic
expeditions did not entirely disappear. Under Tacitus hordes from
the Maeotis appeared in Cilicia. The Franks, whom Probus had settled
on the Black Sea, procured for themselves vessels, and sailed home
to their North Sea, after plundering by the way on the Sicilian and
African coasts. By land, too, there was no cessation of arms, as indeed
all the numerous Sarmatian victories of Diocletian, and a part of his
Germanic, would fall to the regions of the Danube; but it was only
under Constantine that matters again came to a serious war with the
Goths, which had a successful issue. The preponderance of Rome was
re-established after the Gothic victory of Claudius as firmly as before.

[Sidenote: Illyrising of the military force and of the government.]

The war-history which we have just unfolded did not fail to react
with general and lasting effect upon the internal organisation of the
Roman political and military system. It has already been pointed out
that the corps of the Rhine, holding in the early imperial period the
leading position in the army, yielded their primacy already under
Trajan to the legions of the Danube. While under Augustus six legions
were stationed in the region of the Danube and eight in that of the
Rhine, after the Dacian wars of Domitian and Trajan in the second
century the Rhine-camps numbered only four, the camps of the Danube
ten, and after the Marcomanian war even twelve, legions. Inasmuch as
since Hadrian's time the Italian element, apart from the officers, had
disappeared from the army, and, taken on the whole, every regiment
was recruited in the district in which it was quartered, the most of
the soldiers of the Danubian army, and not less the centurions who
rose from the ranks, were natives of Pannonia, Dacia, Moesia, Thrace.
The new legions formed under Marcus proceeded from Illyricum, and
the extraordinary supplemental levies which the troops then needed
were probably likewise taken chiefly from the districts in which the
armies were stationed. Thus the primacy of the Danubian armies, which
the war of the three emperors in the time of Severus established and
increased, was at the same time a primacy of Illyrian soldiers; and
this reached a very emphatic expression in the reform of the guard
under Severus. This primacy did not, properly speaking, affect the
higher spheres of government, so long as the position of officer still
coincided with that of imperial official, although the equestrian
career was accessible to the common soldier through the intervening
link of the centurionate at all times, and thus the Illyrians early
found their way into that career; as indeed, already, in the year 235,
a native Thracian, Gaius Julius Varus Maximinus, in the year 248 a
native Pannonian, Trajanus Decius, had in this way attained even to
the purple. But when Gallienus, in a distrust certainly but too well
justified, excluded the class of senators from serving as officers,
what had hitherto held good as to the soldiers became necessarily
extended to the officers also. It was thus simply a matter of course
that the soldiers belonging to the army of the Danube, and mostly
springing from Illyrian districts, played thenceforth the first
part also in government, and, so far as the army made the emperors,
these were likewise as to the majority Illyrians. Thus Gallienus was
followed by Claudius the Dardanian, Aurelianus from Moesia, Probus
from Pannonia, Diocletianus from Dalmatia, Maximianus from Pannonia,
Constantius from Dardania, Galerius from Serdica; as to the last
named, an author writing under the Constantinian dynasty brings into
prominence their descent from Illyricum, and adds that they, with
little culture but good preliminary training by labour in the field
and service in war, had been excellent rulers. Such service as the
Albanians for a long time rendered to the Turkish empire, their
predecessors likewise rendered to the Roman imperial state, when this
had arrived at similar disorder and similar barbarism. Only, the
Illyrian regeneration of the Roman imperial order may not be conceived
of as a national reorganisation; it was simply the propping up, by
soldiers, of an empire utterly reduced through the misgovernment of
rulers of gentler birth. Italy had wholly ceased to be military; and
history does not acknowledge the ruler's right without the warrior's
power.




Footnotes.


[118: The baptistery is perhaps the tomb of the emperor.]

[119: That there were no legions stationed on the Danube itself in the
year 50, follows from Tacitus, _Ann._ xii. 29; otherwise it would not
have been necessary to send a legion thither to receive the accession
of the Suebi. The laying out also of the Claudian Savaria suits better,
if the town was then Norican, than if it already belonged to Pannonia;
and, as the assignment of this town to Pannonia coincides certainly as
to time with the like severance of Carnuntum and with the transference
of the legion thither, all this may probably have taken place only in
the period after Claudius. The small number also of inscriptions of
Italici found in the camps of the Danube (_Eph. Ep._ v. p. 225) points
to their later origin. Certainly there have been found in Carnuntum
some epitaphs of soldiers of the 15th legion which, from their outward
form and from the absence of cognomen, appear to be older (Hirschfeld,
_Arch. Epigraph. Mittheilungen_, v. 217). Such determinations of date
cannot claim full certainty, where a decade is concerned; nevertheless
it must be conceded that the former arguments also furnish no full
proofs, and the translocation may have begun earlier, possibly under
Nero. For the construction or extension of this camp by Vespasian we
have the evidence of the inscription, attesting such a structure, of
Carnuntum, dating from the year 73 (Hirschfeld, _l.c._).]

[120: We know whole sets of Thracian, Getic, Dacian names of places
and persons. Remarkable in a linguistic point of view is a group
of personal names compounded with _-centhus_: _Bithicenthus_,
_Zipacenthus_, _Disacenthus_, _Tracicenthus_, _Linicenthus_ (_Bull. de
Corr. Hell._ vi. 179), of which the first two also frequently occur
isolated in their other half (_Bithus_, _Zipa_). A similar group
is formed by the compounds with _-poris_, such as _Mucaporis_ (as
Thracian, _Bull._ _l.c._, as Dacian in numerous cases), _Cetriporis_,
_Rhaskyporis_, _Bithoporis_, _Dirdiporis_.]

[121: Tacitus, _Ann._ ii. 64, says this expressly. Of free Thracians,
viewed from the Roman stand-point, there were at that time none;
but the Thracian mountains, and especially the Rhodope of the
Bessi, maintained even in the state of peace an attitude as regards
the princes installed by Rome, that could hardly be designated as
subjection; they acknowledged the king doubtless, but obeyed him, as
Tacitus says (_l.c._ and iv. 46, 51), only when it suited them.]

[122: We have still a Greek epigram, dedicated to Cotys by Antipater of
Thessalonica (_Anthol. Planud._ iv. 75), the same poet who celebrated
also the conqueror of the Thracians, Piso (p. 24), and a Latin epistle
in verse addressed to Cotys by Ovid (_ex Ponto_, ii. 9).]

[123: It is one of the most seriously felt blanks of the Roman imperial
history that the standing quarters of the two legions, which formed
under the Julio-Claudian emperors the garrison of Moesia, the 4th
Scythica and the 5th Macedonica (at least these were stationed there
in the year 33; _C. I. L._ iii. 1698) cannot hitherto be pointed out
with certainty. Probably they were Viminacium and Singidunum in what
was afterwards upper Moesia. Among the legion-camps of lower Moesia,
of which that of Troesmis in particular has numerous monuments to
show, none appear to be older than Hadrian's time; the remains of the
upper-Moesian are hitherto so scanty that they at least do not hinder
our carrying back their origin a century further. When the king of
Thrace in the year 18 takes arms against the Bastarnae and Scythians
(Tacitus, _Ann._ ii. 65), this could not have been put forward even as
a pretext, had lower-Moesian legionary camps been already at that time
in existence. This very narrative shows that the warlike power of this
vassal-prince was not inconsiderable, and that the setting aside of an
uncompliant king of Thrace demanded caution.]

[124: That the _regnum Vannianum_ (Plin. _H. N._ iv. 12, 81), the
Suebian state (Tacitus, _Ann._ xii. 29; _Hist._ iii. 5, 21), must be
referred, not merely, as might appear from Tacitus, _Ann._ ii. 63,
to the dwellings of the people that went over with Maroboduus and
Catualda, but to the whole territory of the Marcomani and Quadi, is
shown clearly by the second report, _Ann._ xii. 29, 30, since here,
as opponents of Vannius alongside of his own insurgent subjects,
there appear the peoples bordering on Bohemia to the west and north,
the Hermunduri and Lugii. As boundary towards the east Pliny _l.c._
designates the region of Carnuntum (_Germanorum ibi confinium_) more
exactly the river Marus or Duria, which separates the Suebi and the
_regnum Vannianum_ from their eastern neighbours, whether we may refer
the _dirimens eos_ with Müllenhoff (_Sitzungsberichte der Berliner
Akademie_ 1883, p. 871) to the Jazyges, or, as is more natural, to
the Bastarnae. In reality both doubtless bordered, the Jazyges on the
south, the Bastarnae on the north, with the Quadi of the March valley.
Accordingly the Marus is the March, and the demarcation is formed by
the small Carpathians that stretch between the March and the Waag.
If thus those retainers were settled _inter flumen Marum et Cusum_,
then the Cusus not elsewhere mentioned is, provided the statement is
correct, not the Waag, or even, as Müllenhoff supposed, the Eipel
falling into the Danube below Gran, but an affluent of the Danube
westward of the March, perhaps the Gusen near Linz. The narrative in
Tacitus xii. 29, 30, also requires the territory of Vannius to have
reached to the west even beyond the March. The subscription to the
first book of the _Meditations_ of the emperor Marcus ἐν Κουάδοις πρὸς
τῷ Γρανούᾳ, proves doubtless that then the state of the Quadi stretched
as far as the river Gran; but this state is not coincident with the
_regnum Vannianum_.]

[125: _Regibus Bastarnarum et Roxolanorum filios, Dacorum fratrum
captos aut hostibus ereptos remisit_ (Orelli, 750) is miswritten; it
must run _fratres_, or at any rate _fratrum filios_. In like manner
afterwards _per quae_ is to be read for _per quem_ and _rege_ instead
of _regem_.]

[126: In Pannonia there were stationed about the year 70 two legions,
the 13th Gemina and the 15th Apollinaris, in room of which latter
during its participation in the Armenian war for some time the 7th
Gemina came in (_C. I. L._ iii. p. 482). Of the two legions added
later, 1st Adiutrix and 2d Adiutrix, the first still at the beginning
of the reign of Trajan lay in upper Germany (p. 159, note 1), and can
only have come to Pannonia under Trajan; the second stationed under
Vespasian in Britain can only have come to Pannonia under Domitian
(p. 174, note 4). The Moesian army numbered after the union with the
Dalmatian under Vespasian probably but four legions, consequently as
many as the two armies together previously--the later upper-Moesian,
4th Flavia and 7th Claudia, and the later lower-Moesian, 1st Italica
and 5th Macedonica. The positions shifted by the marching to and fro of
the year of the four emperors (Marquardt, _Staatsverw._ ii. 435), which
temporarily brought these legions to Moesia, need not deceive us. The
subsequent third lower-Moesian legion, the Eleventh, was still under
Trajan stationed in upper Germany.]

[127: Josephus, _Bell. Iud._ vii. 4, 3: πλείοσι καὶ μείζοσι φυλακαῖς
τὸν τόπον διέλαβεν ὡς εἶναι τοῖς βαρβάροις τὴν διάβασιν τελέως
ἀδύνατον. By this seems meant the transference of the two Dalmatian
legions to Moesia. Whither they were transferred we do not know.
According to the Roman custom elsewhere it is more probable that they
were stationed in the environs of the previous headquarters Viminacium
than in the remote region of the mouths of the Danube. The camp there
probably originated only at the division of the Moesian command and
at the erection of the independent province of lower Moesia under
Domitian.]

[128: The chronology of the Dacian war is involved in much uncertainty.
That it had begun already before the war with the Chatti (83), we
learn from the Carthaginian inscription (_C. I. L._ viii. 1082) of
a soldier decorated three times by Domitian, in the Dacian, in the
German, and again in the Dacian war. Eusebius puts the outbreak of
the war, or rather the first great conflict, in the year Abr. 2101 or
2102 = A.D. 85 (more exactly 1 Oct. 84-30 Sept. 85) or 86, the triumph
in the year 2106 = 90; these numbers indeed have no claim to complete
trustworthiness. With some probability the triumph is placed in the
year 89 (Henzen, _Acta Arval._ p. 116).]

[129: The fragment, Dio, lxvii. 7, 1, Dind., stands in the sequence of
the Ursinian excerpts before lxvii. 5, 1, 2, 3, and belongs also in the
order of events to a time before the negotiation with the Lugii. Comp.
_Hermes_, iii. 115.]

[130: Arrian, _Tact._ 44, mentions among the changes which Hadrian
introduced into the cavalry, that he allowed to the several divisions
their national battle-cries: Κελτικοὺς μὲν τοῖς Κελτοῖς ἱππεῦσιν,
Γετικοὺς δὲ τοῖς Γέταις, Ῥαιτικοὺς δὲ ὅσοι ἐκ Ῥαίτων.]

[131: The walls, which, three mètres in height and two mètres in
thickness, with broad outer fosse and many remains of forts, stretch
in two almost parallel lines, partly--to the length of ninety-four
miles--from the left bank of the Pruth by way of Tabak and Tatarbunar
to Dniester-Liman, between Akerman and the Black Sea; partly--to the
length of sixty-two miles--from Leowa on the Pruth to the Dniester
below Bendery (Petermann, _Geograph. Mittheilungen_, 1857, p. 129),
may perhaps be also Roman; but there has not been as yet any exact
settlement of this point.]

[132: According to von Vincke's estimate (_Monatsberichte über die
Verhandlungen der Gesellschaft für Erdkunde in Berlin_ in the years
1839-40, p. 197 f.; comp. in von Moltke's _Briefe über Zustände in
der Turkei_, the letter of 2d Nov. 1837), as well as according to the
delineations and plans of Dr. C. Schuchhardt communicated to me, three
barriers were here constructed. The south-most and probably oldest is
a simple earthen wall with (singularly) a fosse in front of it towards
the south; whether of Roman origin may be doubtful. The two other lines
are an earthen wall, even now at many places as high as three mètres,
and a lower wall, once lined with stones, which often run close beside
each other and elsewhere again are miles apart. We might hold them as
the two lines of defence of a fortified road, though in the eastern
half the earthen wall, in the more southern half the stone-wall, is
the more northerly, and they cross in the middle. At one spot the
earthen wall (here more southerly) forms the rear of a fort constructed
behind the stone-wall. The earthen wall is covered on the north side
by a deep, on the south side by a shallow, fosse; each fosse is closed
off by a bank. A fosse lies also in front of the stone-wall to the
north. Behind the earthen wall, and mostly resting on it, are found
forts distant from each other seven hundred and fifty mètres; others
at irregular distances of the like kind behind the stone-wall. All the
lines keep behind the Karasu-lakes as the natural basis of defence;
from the point where this ceases, they are carried as far as the sea
with slight regard to the character of the ground. The town Tomis lies
outside of the wall and to the north of it; but its fortress-walls are
put in connection with the barrier-fortification by a special wall.]

[133: _Vita Hadriani_ 6: _cum rege Roxolanorum qui de imminutis
stipendiis querebatur cognito negotio pacem composuit_.]

[134: _Vita Marci_ 14: _gentibus quae pulsae a superioribus barbaris
fugerant nisi reciperentur bellum inferentibus_. Dio, in Petrus
Patricius, _fr._ 6, says: Λαγγιβάρδων καὶ Ὀβίων (otherwise unknown)
ἑξακισχιλίων Ἴστρον περαιωθέντων τῶν περὶ Βίνδικα (perhaps already then
_praef. praetorio_, in which case the guard would be marched out on
account of this occurrence), ἱππέων ἐξελασάντων καὶ τῶν ἀμφὶ Κάνδιδον
πεζῶν ἐπιφθασάντων εἰς παντελῆ φυγήν οἱ βάρβαροι ἐτράποντο· ἐφ' οἷς
οὗτω πραχθεῖσιν ἐν δέει καταστάντες ἐκ πρώτης ἐπιχειρήσεως οἱ βάρβαροι
πρέσβεις παρὰ Αἴλιον Βάσσον τὴν Παιονίαν διέποντα στέλλουσι Βαλλομάριόν
τε τὸν βασιλέα Μαρκομάνων καὶ ἑτέρους δέκα, κατ' ἔθνος ἐπιλεξάμενοι
ἕνα· καὶ ὅρκοις τὴν εἰρήνην οἱ πρέσβεις πιστωσάμενοι οἴκαδε χωροῦσιν.
That this incident falls before the outbreak of the war, is shown by
its position; _fr._ 7 of Patricius is an excerpt from Dio, lxxi. 11, 2.]

[135: The Moesian army gave away soldiers to the Armenian war
(Hirschfeld, _Arch. epig. Mitth._ vi. 41); but here the frontier was
not endangered.]

[136: The participation of the Germans on the right of the Rhine is
attested by Dio, lxxi. 3, and only thereby are the measures explained
which Marcus adopted for Raetia and Noricum. The position of Oderzo
also speaks for the view that these assailants came over the Brenner.]

[137: The alleged first mention of the Goths in the biography of
Caracalla, c. 10, rests on a misunderstanding. If really a senator
allowed himself the malicious jest of assigning to the murderer of Geta
the name Geticus, because he on his march from the Danube to the east
had conquered some Getic hordes (_tumultuariis proeliis_), he meant
Dacians, not the Goths, scarcely at that time dwelling there and hardly
known to the Roman public, whose identification with the Getae was
certainly only a later invention.--We may add that the statement that
the emperor Maximinus (235-238) was the son of a Goth settled in the
neighbouring Thrace, carries us still further back; yet not much weight
is to be attached to it.]

[138: Petrus Patricius _fr._ 8. The administration of the legate of
lower Moesia here mentioned, Tullius Menophilus, is fixed by coins
certainly to the time of Gordian, and with probability to 238-240
(Borghesi, _Opp._ ii. 227). As the beginning of the Gothic war and
the destruction of Istros are fixed by Dexippus (_vita Max. et Balb._
16) at 238, it is natural to bring into connection with these events
the undertaking of tribute; at any rate it was then renewed. The vain
sieges of Marcianopolis and Philippopolis by the Goths (Dexippus,
_fr._ 18, 19) may have followed on the capture of Istros. Jordanes,
_Get._ 16, 92, puts the former under Philippus, but is in chronological
questions not a valid witness.]

[139: The reports of these occurrences in Zosimus, i. 21-24, Zonaras,
xii. 20, Ammianus, xxxi. 5, 16, 17 (which accounts, down to that
concerning Philippopolis, are fixed as belonging to this time by the
fact that the latter recurs in Zosimus), although all fragmentary or in
disorder, may have flowed from the report of Dexippus, of which _fr._
16, 19, are preserved, and may be in some measure combined. The same
source lies at the bottom of the imperial biographies and Jordanes; but
both have disfigured and falsified it to such a degree that use can be
made of their statements only with great caution. Victor, _Caes._ 29,
is independent.]

[140: Perhaps the irruption of the Marcomani in Zosimus, i. 29, refers
to this.]

[141: Ammianus, xxxi. 5, 15; _duobus navium milibus perrupto Bosporo
et litoribus Propontidis Scythicarum gentium catervae transgressae
ediderunt quidem acerbas terra marique strages: sed amissa suorum
parte maxima reverterunt_; whereupon the catastrophe of the Decii
is narrated, and into this is inwoven the further notice: _obsessae
Pamphyliae civitates_ (to which must belong the siege of Side in
Dexippus himself, fr. 23), _insulæ populatæ complures_, as also the
siege of Cyzicus. If in this retrospect all is not confused--which
cannot well be assumed to be the case with Ammianus--this falls before
those naval expeditions which begin with the siege of Pityus, and are
more a part of the migration of peoples than piratical raids. The
number of the ships might indeed be transferred hither by error of
memory from the expedition of the year 269. To the same connection
belongs the notice in Zosimus, i. 28, as to the Scythian expeditions
into Asia and Cappadocia as far as Ephesus and Pessinus. The account
as to Ephesus in the biography of Gallienus, c. 6, is the same, but
transposed as to time.]

[142: In the case of Zosimus himself we should not expect complete
understanding of the matter; but his voucher Dexippus, who was a
contemporary and took part in the matter, knew well why he termed the
Bithynian expedition the δευτέρα ἔφοδος (Zos. i. 35); and even in
Zosimus we discern clearly the contrast, intended by Dexippus, between
the expedition of the Borani against Pityus and Trapezus and the
traditional piratic voyages. In the biography of Gallienus the Scythian
expedition to Cappadocia, narrated at c. 11, under the year 264, must
be that to Trapezus, just as the Bithynian therewith connected must
be that which Zosimus terms the second; here indeed everything is
confused.]

[143: This is said by Zosimus, i. 42, and follows also from the
relation of the Bosporans to the first (i. 32), and that of the first
to the second expedition (i. 34).]

[144: The report of Dexippus as to this expedition is given in extract
by Syncellus, p. 717 (where ἀνελόντος must be read for ἀνελόντες),
Zosimus, i. 39, and the biographer of Gallienus, c. 13. _Fr._ 22 is
a portion of his own narrative. In the continuator of Dio, on whom
Zonaras depends, the event is placed under Claudius, through error or
through falsification, which grudged this victory to Gallienus. The
biography of Gallienus narrates the incident apparently twice, first
shortly in c. 6 under the year 262; then better, under or after 265, in
c. 13.]

[145: In our traditional accounts this expedition appears as a pure
sea-voyage, undertaken with (probably) 2000 ships (so the biography
of Claudius; the numbers 6000 and 900, between which the tradition in
Zosimus, i. 42, wavers, are probably both corrupt) and 320,000 men. It
is, however, far from credible that Dexippus, to whom these statements
must be traced back, can have put the latter figure in this way. On the
other hand, considering the direction of the expedition, in the first
instance against Tomis and Marcianopolis, it is more than probable that
in it the procedure described by Zos. i. 34 was followed, and a portion
marched by land; and under this supposition even a contemporary might
well estimate the number of assailants at that figure. The course of
the campaign, particularly the place of the decisive battle, shows that
they had by no means to do merely with a fleet.]




CHAPTER VII.

GREEK EUROPE.


[Sidenote: Hellenism and Panhellenism.]

With the general intellectual development of the Hellenes the political
development of their republics had not kept equal pace, or rather the
luxuriant growth of the former had--just as too full a bloom bursts
the calyx that contains it--not allowed any individual commonwealth
to acquire the extent and stability which are preliminary conditions
for the thorough formation of a state. The petty-state-system of
individual cities or city-leagues could not but be stunted in itself
or fall a prey to the barbarians. Panhellenism alone guaranteed alike
the continued existence of the nation and its further development in
presence of the alien races dwelling around it. It was realised by
the treaty which king Philip of Macedonia, the father of Alexander,
concluded in Corinth with the states of Hellas. This was, in name, a
federal agreement, in fact, the subjection of the republics to the
monarchy, but a subjection, which took effect only as regards external
relations, seeing that the absolute generalship in opposition to
the national foe was transferred by almost all towns of the Greek
mainland to the Macedonian general, while in other respects freedom and
autonomy were left to them; and this was, as circumstances stood, the
only possible realisation of Panhellenism and the form regulating in
substance the future of Greece. It subsisted in presence of Philip and
Alexander, though the Hellenic idealists were reluctant, as they always
were, to acknowledge the realised ideal as such. Then, when the kingdom
of Alexander fell to pieces, all was over, as with Panhellenism
itself, so also with the union of the Greek towns under the monarchic
supremacy; and these wore out their last mental and material power in
centuries of aimless striving, distracted between the alternating rule
of the too powerful monarchies, and vain attempts, under cover of their
quarrels, to restore the old particularism.

[Sidenote: Hellas and Rome.]

When at length the mighty republic of the west entered into the
conflict, hitherto in some measure balanced, of the monarchies of
the east, and soon showed itself more powerful than each of the
Greek states there striving with one another, the Panhellenic policy
became renewed as the position of supremacy became fixed. Neither the
Macedonians nor the Romans were Hellenes in the full sense of the word;
it is indeed the sad feature of Greek development that the Attic naval
empire was more a hope than a reality, and the work of union could
not emanate from the bosom of the nation itself. While in a national
respect the Macedonians stood nearer to the Greeks than the Romans
did, the commonwealth of Rome had politically far more of elective
affinity to the Hellenic than the Macedonian hereditary kingdom.
But--what is the chief matter--the attractive power of the Greek spirit
was probably felt more permanently and deeply by the Roman burgesses
than by the statesmen of Macedonia, just because the former stood at
a greater distance from it than the latter. The desire to become at
least internally Hellenised, to become partakers of the manners and the
culture, of the art and the science of Hellas, to be--in the footsteps
of the great Macedonian--shield and sword of the Greeks of the East,
and to be allowed further to civilise this East not after an Italian
but after a Hellenic fashion--this desire pervades the later centuries
of the Roman republic and the better times of the empire with a power
and an ideality which are almost no less tragic than that political
toil of the Hellenes failing to attain its goal. For both sides strove
after the impossible: to Hellenic Pan-hellenism there was refused
duration, and to Roman Hellenism solid intrinsic worth. Nevertheless it
has essentially influenced the policy of the Roman republic as well as
that of the emperors. However much the Greeks, particularly in the last
century of the republic, showed the Romans that their labour of love
was a forlorn one, this made no change either in the labour or in the
love.

[Sidenote: The Amphictiony of Augustus.]

The Greeks of Europe had been comprehended by the Roman republic under
a single governorship named after the chief country Macedonia. When
this was administratively dissolved at the beginning of the imperial
period, there was at the same time conferred on the whole Greek name
a religious bond of union, which attached itself to the old Delphic
Amphictiony introduced for the sake of "a peace of God" and then
misused for political ends. Under the Roman republic it had been in the
main brought back to the original foundations; Macedonia as well as
Aetolia, both of which had intruded as usurpers, were again eliminated,
and the Amphictiony once more embraced not all, but most, of the tribes
of Thessaly and of Greece proper. Augustus caused the league to be
extended to Epirus and Macedonia, and thereby made it in substance the
representative of the Hellenic land in the wider sense alone suited
to this epoch. A privileged position in this union alongside of the
time-honoured Delphi was occupied by the two cities of Athens and
Nicopolis, the former the capital of the old, the latter, according to
Augustus's design, that of the new imperial, Hellenic body.[146] This
new Amphictiony has a certain resemblance to the diet of the three
Gauls (p. 93); just like the altar of the emperor at Lyons for this
diet, the temple of the Pythian Apollo was the religious centre of the
Greek provinces. But, while to the former withal a directly political
activity was conceded, the Amphictions of this epoch, in addition to
the religious festivals proper, simply attended to the administration
of the Delphic sanctuary and of its still considerable revenues.[147]
If its president in later times ascribed to himself "Helladarchy," this
rule over Greece was simply an ideal conception.[148] But the official
conserving of the Greek nationality remained always a token of the
attitude which the new imperialism occupied towards it, and of its
Philhellenism, far surpassing that of the republic.

[Sidenote: Province of Achaia.]

Hand in hand with the ritual union of the European Greeks went the
administrative breaking up of the Graeco-Macedonian governorship of
the republic. It did not depend on the partition of the imperial
administration between emperor and senate, as this whole territory and
not less the adjacent Danubian regions were assigned in the original
partition to the senate; as little did military considerations here
intervene, seeing that the whole peninsula up to the frontier of Thrace
was--as protected partly by this region, partly by the garrisons on
the Danube--always reckoned to belong to the pacified interior. If
the Peloponnesus and the Attico-Boeotian mainland obtained at that
time its own proconsul and was separated from Macedonia--which perhaps
Caesar may have already designed--it may be presumed that in that
course, along with the general tendency not to magnify the senatorial
governorships the dominant consideration was that of separating the
purely Hellenic domain from what was half-Hellenic. The boundary of the
province of Achaia was at first Oeta, and, even after the Aetolians
were subsequently attached to it,[149] it did not go beyond the
Achelous and Thermopylae.

[Sidenote: The Greek towns under the Roman republic.]

These arrangements concerned the country as a whole. We turn now to the
position which was given to the several urban communities under the
Roman rule.

The original design of the Romans--to attach the whole of the Greek
urban communities to their own commonwealth, in a way similar to what
had been done with the Italian--had undergone essential restrictions,
in consequence of the resistance which these arrangements met with,
especially in consequence of the insurrection of the Achaean league
in the year 608 (iii. 47) {iii. 45.}, and of the falling away of most
of the Greek towns to king Mithradates in the year 666 (iii. 313)
{iii. 297.}. The city-leagues, the foundation of all development of
power in Hellas as in Italy, and at first accepted by the Romans,
were all of them--particularly the most important, the Peloponnesian,
or, as it called itself, the Achaean--broken up, and the several
cities were admonished to regulate their own public affairs. Moreover
certain general rules were laid down by the leading power for the
several communal constitutions, and according to this scheme these
were reorganised in an anti-democratic sense. It was only within
these limits that the individual community retained autonomy and
a magistracy of its own. It retained also its own courts; but the
Greek stood at the same time _de jure_ under the rods and axes of the
praetor, and at least could be sentenced--on account of any offence
which admitted of being regarded as rebellion against the leading
power--by the Roman officials to a money-fine or banishment, or even
capital punishment.[150] The communities taxed themselves; but they had
throughout to pay to Rome a definite sum, on the whole, apparently,
not on a high scale. Garrisons were not assigned, as formerly in the
Macedonian period, to the towns, for the troops stationed in Macedonia
were in a position, should need arise, to move also into Greece. But a
graver blame than that falling on the memory of Alexander through the
destruction of Thebes rests on the Roman aristocracy for the razing of
Corinth. The other measures, odious and exasperating as in part they
were, particularly as imposed by foreign rule, might, taken as a whole,
be unavoidable and have in various respects a salutary operation; they
were the inevitable palinode of the original Roman policy--in part
truly impolitic--of forgiving and forgetting towards the Hellenes.
But in the treatment of Corinth mercantile selfishness had after an
ill-omened fashion shown itself more powerful than all Philhellenism.

[Sidenote: Freed communities under the Roman republic.]

Amidst all this, the fundamental idea of Roman policy--to confederate
the Greek towns with the Italian--was never forgotten; just as
Alexander never wished to rule Greece like Illyria and Egypt, so his
Roman successors never completely applied the subject-relation to
Greece, and even in the republican period essentially fell short of
urging the strict rights of the war forced upon the Romans. Especially
was this the case in dealing with Athens. No Greek city from the
standpoint of Roman policy erred so gravely against Rome as this; its
demeanour in the Mithradatic war would, had its case been that of any
other commonwealth, have inevitably led to its being razed. But from
the Philhellenic standpoint, doubtless, Athens was the masterpiece
of the world, and for the genteel world of other lands similar
leanings and memories were associated with it, as for our cultivated
circles are connected with Pforta and Bonn. This consideration then,
as formerly, prevailed. Athens was never placed under the fasces of
the Roman governor, and never paid tribute to Rome; it always had
a sworn alliance with Rome, and granted aid to the Romans only in
an extraordinary and, at least as to form, voluntary fashion. The
capitulation after the Sullan siege brought about doubtless a change in
the constitution of the community, but the alliance was renewed,--in
fact, even all extraneous possessions were given back, including the
island of Delos itself, which, when Athens passed over to Mithradates,
had broken off and constituted itself an independent commonwealth, and
had been, by way of punishment for its fidelity towards Rome, pillaged
and destroyed by the Pontic fleet.[151]

Sparta was treated with similar consideration, and that doubtless
in good part on account of its great name. Some other towns of the
freed communities to be afterwards named had this position already
under the republic. Probably such exceptions occurred in every Roman
province; but this was from the outset peculiar to the Greek territory,
that precisely its two most noted cities were beyond the range of
the subject-relation, which accordingly affected only the smaller
commonwealths.

[Sidenote: City-leagues under the republic.]

Even for the subject Greek cities alleviations were introduced already
under the republic. The city-leagues, at first prohibited, gradually
and very soon revived, especially the smaller and powerless ones,
like the Boeotian;[152] with the becoming familiarised to foreign
rule the oppositional tendencies disappeared which had brought about
their abolition, and their close connection with the time-hallowed
_cultus_ carefully spared must have further told in their favour, as
indeed it has already been observed that the Roman republic restored
and protected the Amphictiony in its original non-political functions.
Towards the end of the republican period the government seems even to
have allowed the Boeotians to enter into a collective union with the
small regions adjacent to the north and the island of Euboea.[153]

The copestone of the republican epoch was the atonement for the sack of
Corinth made by the greatest of all Romans and of all Philhellenes, the
dictator Caesar (iv. 574) {iv. 544.}, and the renewal of the star of
Hellas in the form of an independent community of Roman citizens, the
new "Julian Honour."

[Sidenote: Achaia under the emperors.]

[Sidenote: Freed towns and Roman colonies.]

These were the relations which the imperial government at its outset
found existing in Greece, and in these paths it went forward. The
communities freed from the immediate interference of the provincial
government and from the payment of tribute to the empire, with which
the colonies of Roman burgesses in many respects stood on a level,
comprehended far the largest and best part of the province of Achaia:
in the Peloponnesus, Sparta, with its territory diminished no doubt,
but yet once more embracing the northern half of Laconia,[154] still
the counterpart of Athens as well in its petrified, old-fashioned
institutions as in its at least outwardly preserved organisation and
bearing; further, the eighteen communities of the free Laconians, the
southern half of the Laconian region, once Spartan subjects, organised
by the Romans as an independent cities-league after the war against
Nabis, and, like Sparta, invested with freedom by Augustus;[155]
lastly, in the region of the Achaeans not only Dyme, which had been
already furnished by Pompeius with pirate-colonists, and then had
received new Roman settlers from Caesar,[156] but above all Patrae,
which Augustus, on account of its position favourable for commerce,
transformed from a declining hamlet,--partly by drawing together
the small surrounding townships, partly by settlement of numerous
Italian veterans--into the most populous and most flourishing city
of the peninsula, and constituted as a Roman burgess-colony, under
which was also placed Naupactus (the Italian Lepanto) on the opposite
Locrian coast. On the Isthmus Corinth, as it had formerly become a
victim to the advantages of its site, had now after its restoration
rapidly risen, similarly to Carthage, and had become the richest in
industry and in population of the cities of Greece, as well as the
regular seat of government. As the Corinthians were the first Greeks
who had recognised the Romans as countrymen by admission to the
Isthmian games (ii. 79) {ii. 75.}, so this town now, although a Roman
burgess-community, took charge of this high Greek national festival. On
the mainland there belonged to the freed districts not merely Athens,
with its territory embracing all Attica and numerous islands of the
Aegean Sea, but also Tanagra and Thespiae, at that time the two most
considerable towns of the Boeotian country, as also Plataeae;[157]
in Phocis Delphi, Abae, Elateia, as well as the most considerable of
the Locrian towns, Amphissa. What the republic had begun Augustus
completed in the arrangement just set forth, which was at least in
its main outlines settled by him and was afterwards in substance
maintained. Although the communities of the province subject to the
proconsul preponderated, certainly as to number, and perhaps also as to
the aggregate population, yet in a genuinely Philhellenic spirit the
towns of Greece most distinguished by material importance or by great
memories were set free.[158]

[Sidenote: Nero's liberation of Greece.]

The last emperor of the Claudian house, one of the race of spoiled
poets and so far at all events a born Philhellene, went further than
Augustus had gone in this direction. In gratitude for the recognition
which his artistic contributions had met with in the native land of the
Muses, Nero, like Titus Flamininus formerly (ii. 262) {ii. 247.}--and
that once more in Corinth at the Isthmian games--declared the Greeks
collectively to be rid of Roman government, free from tribute, and,
like the Italians, subject to no governor. At once there arose
throughout Greece movements, which would have been civil wars, if these
people could have achieved anything more than brawling; and after a few
months Vespasian re-established the provincial constitution,[159] so
far as it went, with the dry remark that the Greeks had unlearned the
art of being free.

[Sidenote: Rights of the freed towns.]

The legal position of the communities set free remained in substance
the same as under the republic. They retained, so far as Roman
burgesses were not in question, the full control of justice; only, the
general enactments as to appeals to the emperor on the one hand and to
the senatorial authorities on the other seem to have also included the
free towns.[160] Above all, they retained full self-determination and
self-administration. Athens, for example, exercised in the imperial
period the right of coinage, without even putting the emperor's head
on its coins, and even on Spartan coins of the first imperial period it
is frequently wanting. In Athens even the old reckoning by _drachmae_
and _oboli_ continued; only that, it is true, the local Attic _drachma_
of this period was nothing but small money current on the spot, and as
to value circulated as _obolus_ of the Attic imperial _drachma_ or of
the Roman _denarius_. Even the formal exercise of the right of war and
peace was in individual treaties granted to such states.[161] Numerous
institutions quite at variance with the Italian municipal organisation
remained in existence, such as the annual change of the members of
council and the daily allowance-moneys of these and the jurymen, which,
at least at Rhodes, were still paid in the imperial period. As a matter
of course, the Roman government nevertheless exercised continuously
a regulative influence over the constitution even of the freed
communities. Thus, for example, the Athenian constitution was, whether
at the end of the republic or by Caesar or Augustus, modified in such a
way that the right of bringing a proposal before the burgesses belonged
no longer to every burgess, but, as according to the Roman arrangement,
only to definite officials; and among the great number of officials,
who were mere figures, the conduct of business was placed in the
hands of a single one--the _Strategos_. Certainly in this way various
further reforms were carried out, the presence of which, in dependent
as in independent Greece, we everywhere discern, without being able
to determine the time and occasion of the reform. Thus the right, or
rather the wrong, of asylums, which, as survivals of a lawless period,
had now become pious retreats for bad debtors and criminals, was
certainly, if not set aside, at least restricted in this province also.
The institution of _proxenia_--originally an appropriate arrangement,
that may be compared to our foreign consulates, but politically
dangerous through the bestowal of full civil rights and often also
of the privilege of exemption from taxes on the friendly foreigner,
especially considering the extent to which it was granted--was set
aside by the Roman government, apparently only at the beginning of the
imperial period; in room of which thereupon came, after the Italian
fashion, the empty city-patronate, which did not come into contact
with the system of taxation. Lastly, the Roman government, as wielding
supreme sovereignty over these dependent republics just as over the
client-princes, always regarded it as its right, and exercised the
power, to cancel the free constitution in case of misuse, and to take
the town into its own administration. But partly the sworn agreement,
partly the powerlessness of these nominally allied states, gave to
these treaties a greater stability than is discernible in the relation
to the client-princes.

[Sidenote: Diets of the Greek cities.]

While the freed communities of Achaia retained their previous legal
position under the empire, Augustus conferred on those communities of
the province, in which freedom was not granted or possessed, a new
and better legal position. As he had given to the Greeks of Europe a
common centre in the reorganised Delphic Amphictiony, he allowed also
all the towns of the province of Achaia, so far as they were placed
under Roman administration, to constitute themselves as a collective
union, and to meet annually in Argos, the most considerable town of
non-free Greece, as a national assembly.[162] Thereby not merely was
the Achaean league, dissolved after the Achaean war, reconstituted,
but also the enlarged Boeotian union formerly mentioned (p. 259) was
engrafted on it. Probably it was just by the laying together of these
two domains that the demarcation of the province of Achaia was brought
about. The new union of the Achaeans, Boeotians, Locrians, Phocians,
Dorians, and Euboeans,[163] or, as it is usually designated like the
province, the union of the Achaeans, presumably had rights neither
more nor less than the other provincial diets of the empire. A certain
control of the Roman officials must have been intended in the case, and
for that reason the towns not placed under the proconsul, like Athens
and Sparta, must have been excluded from it. This diet withal, like all
similar ones, must have found the centre of its activity chiefly in
the common _cultus_ embracing the whole land. But, while in the other
provinces this _cultus_ of the land preponderantly attached itself
to Rome, the diet of Achaia was rather a focus of Hellenism, and was
perhaps meant to be so. Already under the Julian emperors it regarded
itself as the true representative of the Greek nation, and assigned
to its president the name of Helladarch, to itself even that of "the
Panhellenes."[164] The assembly thus deviated from its provincial
basis, and its modest administrative functions fell into the background.

[Sidenote: The Panhellenion of Hadrian in Athens.]

These Panhellenes therefore took to themselves this name by an abuse of
language, and were simply tolerated by the government. But as Hadrian
created a new Athens, so he created also a new Hellas. Under him the
representatives of all the autonomous or non-autonomous towns of the
province of Achaia were allowed to constitute themselves in Athens
as united Greece, as the Panhellenes.[165] The national union, often
dreamed of and never attained in better times, was thereby created, and
what youth had wished for old age possessed in imperial fulness. It is
true that the new Panhellenion did not obtain political prerogatives;
but there was no lack of what imperial favour and imperial gold could
give. There arose in Athens the temple of the new Zeus Panhellenios,
and brilliant popular festivals and games were connected with this
foundation, the carrying out of which pertained to the _collegium_ of
the Panhellenes, and primarily to the priest of Hadrian as the living
god who founded them. One of the acts, which these performed every
year, was the offering of sacrifice to Zeus the Deliverer at Plataeae,
in memory of the Hellenes that fell there in battle against the
Persians, on the anniversary of the battle, the 4th Boedromion: this
marks its tendency.[166] Still more clearly was this shown in the fact
that the Greek towns outside of Hellas, which appeared worthy of the
national fellowship, had ideal certificates of Hellenism issued to them
by the assembly in Athens.[167]

[Sidenote: The decay of Hellas.]

[Sidenote: Decrease of the population.]

While the imperial rule in its whole wide range encountered the
devastations of a twenty years' civil war, and in many places its
consequences were never entirely healed, probably no domain was so
severely affected by them as the Greek peninsula. Fate had so arranged,
that the three great decisive battles of this epoch--Pharsalus,
Philippi, Actium--were fought on its soil or on its coast; and the
military operations, which with both parties led up to these battles,
had here above all demanded their sacrifices of human life and human
happiness. Even Plutarch was told by his great-grandfather how the
officers of Antonius had compelled the citizens of Chaeronea, when
they no longer possessed slaves or beasts of burden, to drag their
last grain on their own shoulders to the nearest port to be shipped
for the army; and how thereupon, just as the second convoy was about
to depart, the accounts of the battle of Actium arrived as glad news
of relief. The first thing that Caesar did after the victory was to
distribute the enemy's stores of grain that had fallen into his power
among the famishing population of Greece. This heaviest measure of
suffering fell upon a specially weak power of resistance. Already,
more than a century before the battle of Actium, Polybius had stated
that unfruitfulness in marriage and diminution of the population had
in his time come over all Greece, without any diseases or severe wars
befalling the land. Now these scourges had emerged in fearful fashion;
and Greece remained desolate for all time to come. Plutarch thinks
that throughout the Roman empire the population had fallen off in
consequence of the devastating wars, but most of all in Greece, which
was not now in a position to furnish from the better circles of the
citizens the 3000 hoplites, with which once the smallest of the Greek
districts, Megara, had fought at Plataeae.[168] Caesar and Augustus
had attempted to remedy this depopulation, which alarmed even the
government, by the despatch of Italian colonists, and, in fact, the
two most flourishing towns of Greece were these very colonies; the
later governments did not repeat such consignments. The background
to the charming Euboean peasant-idyll of Dio of Prusa is formed by a
depopulated town, in which numerous houses stand empty, flocks are fed
at the council-hall and at the city register-house, two-thirds of the
territory lie untilled for want of hands; and when the narrator reports
this as falling within his own experience, he therewith assuredly
describes not unaptly the circumstances of numerous small Greek country
towns in the time of Trajan. "Thebes in Boeotia," says Strabo in the
Augustan age, "is now hardly to be termed even a goodly village, and
the same holds true of all the Boeotian towns, with the exception of
Tanagra and Thespiae." But not merely did men dwindle away as regards
number; the type also declined. "There are doubtless still beautiful
women," says one of the finest observers about the end of the first
century,[169] "but beautiful men one sees no longer; the Olympian
victors of more recent times appear, compared with the older, inferior
and common, partly no doubt owing to the fault of the artists, but
chiefly because they are just what they are." The bodily training of
the youth had been carried in this promised land of ephebi and athletes
to such an extent, as if the very aim of the communal constitution
were to rear the boys as gymnasts and the men as boxers; but, if no
province possessed so many artists for the ring, none supplied so
few soldiers to the imperial army. Even from the instruction of the
Athenian youth--which in the olden time embraced spear-throwing,
shooting with the bow, the use of missiles, the marching out and
pitching of the camp--this playing at soldiers on the part of the
boys now disappears. The Greek towns of the empire were virtually not
taken account of in the levy, whether because their recruits appeared
physically incapable, or because this element appeared dangerous in the
army; it was an imperial pleasantry that the caricature of Alexander,
Severus Antoninus, reinforced the Roman army for the conflict with the
Persians by some companies of Spartiates.[170] Whatever was done for
internal order and security must have emanated from the individual
communities, as Roman troops were not stationed in the province;
Athens, for example, maintained a garrison in the island of Delos,
and probably a division of militia lay also in the citadel.[171] In
the crises of the third century the general levy of Elateia (p. 242)
and that of Athens (p. 246) valiantly repulsed the Costoboci and the
Goths; and, after a worthier fashion than the grandchildren of the
combatants of Thermopylae in Caracalla's Persian war, in the Gothic the
grandchildren of the victors of Marathon inscribed their names for the
last time in the annals of ancient history. But, though such incidents
must preclude us from treating the Greeks of this epoch absolutely as
a decayed rabble, yet the decline of the population as regards number
and vigour steadily continued even during the better imperial period,
until, from the end of the second century, the diseases which severely
visited these lands, likewise the inroads of land and sea pirates who
particularly affected the east coast, and lastly, the collapse of the
imperial power in the time of Gallienus, raised the chronic suffering
into an acute catastrophe.

[Sidenote: Greek tone of feeling.]

The decay of Hellas, and the feelings which it called forth among the
best men, come before us after a striking manner in the appeal which
one of these, the Bithynian Dio, addressed about the time of Vespasian
to the Rhodians. These were not unjustly regarded as the most excellent
of the Hellenes. In no city were the lower population better cared
for, and nowhere did that care bear more the stamp of giving not alms
but work. When, after the great civil war, Augustus made all private
debts irrecoverable at law in the East, the Rhodians alone rejected
the dangerous favour. Although the great epoch of Rhodian commerce
was over, there were still in Rhodes numerous flourishing branches of
business and wealthy houses.[172] But many evils had invaded the place,
and the philosopher demands that they be done away, not so much, as he
says, for the sake of the Rhodians, as for the sake of the Hellenes in
common. "Once upon a time the honour of Hellas rested on many, and many
increased its renown--you, the Athenians, the Lacedaemonians, Thebes,
Corinth for a time, at a remote period Argos. But now the others are
as nothing; for some are totally decayed and destroyed, others conduct
themselves as you know, and are dishonoured and destroyers of their
old renown. You are surviving; you alone are still somewhat and are not
utterly despised; for, after the way in which those go to work, all
Hellenes would long ago have sunken more deeply than the Phrygians and
the Thracians. As when a great and noble family is reduced to a single
survivor, and the sin which this last of the house commits brings all
his ancestors into dishonour, so you stand in Hellas. Believe not that
you are the first of the Greeks; you are the only ones. If we look
at those pitiful scoundrels, the great destinies of the past become
themselves inconceivable; the stones and ruins of cities show more
clearly the pride and the greatness of Hellas than these descendants
not even worthy of Mysian ancestors; and better than with towns
inhabited by such as these has it fared with those cities which lie
in ruins, for their memory remains in honour and their well-acquired
renown unstained--better burn the carcase than allow it to lie
rotting."[173]

[Sidenote: The good old manners.]

We shall not disparage this noble spirit of a scholar who measured
the petty present by the great past, and, as could not fail to be
the case, looked at the one with indignant eyes and at the other
in the transfigured glory of what had been, if we point out the
fact that the good old Hellenic habits were at that time and even
long afterwards not merely to be found in Rhodes, but were in many
respects still everywhere alive. The inward independence, the well
warranted self-esteem of the nation that was still standing at the
head of civilisation had not disappeared in the Hellenes even of
this age, amidst all the pliancy of subjection and all the humility
of parasitism. The Romans borrowed the gods from the old Hellenes
and the form of administration from the Alexandrines; they sought to
master the Greek language and to Hellenise their own in measure and
style. The Hellenes even of the imperial period did not pursue a like
course; the national deities of Italy, like Silvanus and the Lares,
were not adored in Greece, and it never entered into the mind of any
Greek urban community to introduce at home the political organisation
which their Polybius celebrates as the best. So far as the knowledge
of Latin was a condition for the career of the higher as of the lower
magistracies, the Greeks who entered upon this career acquired it; for,
though practically it only occurred to the emperor Claudius to withdraw
the Roman franchise from the Greeks who did not understand Latin,
certainly the real execution of the rights and duties connected with it
was possible only for one who was master of the imperial language. But,
apart from public life, Latin was never so learned in Greece as Greek
in Rome. Plutarch, who, as an author, joined as it were in marriage
the two halves of the empire, and whose parallel biographies of famous
Greeks and Romans recommended themselves and were effective above all
by this juxtaposition, understood not very much more of Latin than
Diderot of Russian, and at least, as he himself says, did not master
the language; the Greek literati having a real command of Latin were
either officials, like Appian and Dio Cassius, or neutrals, like king
Juba.

Really Greece was far less changed in itself than in its external
position. The government of Athens was truly bad, but even in the time
of Athenian greatness it had not been at all exemplary. "There is,"
says Plutarch, "the same national type, the same disorders, earnest and
jest, charm and malice, as among their ancestors." This epoch, too,
still exhibits in the life of the Greek people individual features
which are worthy of its civilising leadership. The gladiatorial
games, which spread from Italy everywhere, especially to Asia Minor
and to Syria, found admission to Greece latest of all lands; for a
considerable period they were confined to the half-Italian Corinth, and
when the Athenians, in order not to be behind that city, introduced
them also among themselves without listening to the voice of one of
their best men, who asked them whether they would not first set up
an altar to the God of compassion, several of the noblest turned
indignantly away from the city of their fathers that so dishonoured
itself. In no country of the ancient world were slaves treated with
such humanity as in Hellas; it was not the law, but custom that
forbade the Greek to sell his slaves to a non-Greek master, and so
banished from this region the slave-trade proper. Only here in the
imperial period do we find the non-free people provided for in the
burgess-feasts and in largesses of oil to the burgesses.[174] Only
here could one who was not free, like Epictetus under Trajan, in his
more than modest outward existence in the Epirot Nicopolis, hold
intercourse with respected men of senatorial rank, after the manner
of Socrates with Critias and Alcibiades, so that they listened to
his oral instructions as disciples to the master, and took notes of,
and published, his conversations. The alleviations of slavery by the
imperial law are essentially traceable to the influence of Greek views,
_e.g._ with the emperor Marcus, who looked up to that Nicopolitan slave
as his master and model.

[Sidenote: Parallel between Roman and Athenian life.]

The author of a dialogue preserved among those of Lucian gives an
unsurpassed description of the demeanour of the polished Athenian
citizen, amidst his narrow circumstances, overagainst the genteel
and rich travelling public of doubtful culture or else undoubted
coarseness; how the rich foreigner has been weaned from appearing in
the public bath with a host of attendants, as if he were not otherwise
certain of his life in Athens and there were no peace in the land; and
how he was weaned from showing himself on the street with his purple
dress by people making the friendly inquiry whether it was not that of
his mamma. He draws a parallel between Roman and Athenian existence;
in the former the burdensome banquets and the still more burdensome
brothels, the inconvenient convenience of the swarms of menials and
the domestic luxury, the troubles of a dissolute life, the torments of
ambition, all the superfluity, the multifariousness, the unrest of the
doings of the capital; in the latter the charm of poverty, the free
talk in the friendly circle, the leisure for intellectual enjoyment,
the possibility of peace and of joy in life--"How couldest thou," one
Greek in Rome asks another, "leave the light of the sun, Hellas, and
its happiness and its freedom for the sake of this crowd?" In this
fundamental keynote all the more finely and purely organised natures of
this epoch are agreed; the very best Hellenes would rather not exchange
with the Romans. There is hardly anything equally pleasing in the
literature of the imperial period with the already mentioned Euboean
idyll of Dio; it depicts the existence of two families of hunters
in the lonely forest, whose property consists of eight goats, a cow
without a horn, and a fine calf, four sickles and three hunting-spears,
who know nothing either of gold or of taxes, and who, when placed
before the raging burgess-assembly of the city, are by the latter
dismissed at length unmolested to joy and to freedom.

[Sidenote: Plutarch.]

The real embodiment of this poetically transfigured conception of
life is Plutarch of Chaeronea, one of the most charming, most fully
informed, and withal most effective writers of antiquity. Sprung from
a family of means in that small Boeotian country-town, and introduced
to the full Hellenic culture, first at home and then at Athens and
at Alexandria; familiar, moreover, with Roman affairs through his
studies and manifold personal relations, as well as by his travels in
Italy, he disdained to enter into the service of the state or to adopt
the professional career after the usual manner of gifted Greeks; he
remained faithful to his home, enjoying domestic life, in the finest
sense of the word, with his excellent wife and his children, and with
his friends, male and female; contenting himself with the offices
and honours which his own Boeotia was able to offer to him, and with
the moderate property which he had inherited. In this Chaeronean the
contrast between the Hellenes and the Hellenised finds expression;
such a type of Greek life was not possible in Smyrna or in Antioch;
it belonged to the soil like the honey of Hymettus. There are men
enough of more powerful talents and of deeper natures, but hardly any
second author has known in so happy a measure how to reconcile himself
serenely to necessity, and how to impress upon his writings the stamp
of his tranquillity of spirit and his blessedness of life.

[Sidenote: Misgovernment of the provincial administration.]

The self-mastery of Hellenism cannot manifest itself in the field of
public life with the purity and beauty which it presents in the quiet
homestead, after which history happily does not inquire any more than
it inquires after history. When we turn to public affairs, there is
more to be told of misrule than of rule, both as regards the Roman
government and the Greek autonomy. There was no want of goodwill on
the part of the former, in so far as Roman Philhellenism dominated
the imperial period even much more decidedly than the republican.
It expresses itself everywhere in great matters as in small, in the
prosecution of the Hellenising of the Eastern provinces and the
recognition of a double official language for the empire, as well as
in the courteous forms in which the government dealt, and enjoined
its officials to deal, even with the pettiest Greek community.[175]
Nor did the emperors fail to favour this province with gifts and
buildings; and, though most things of this sort came to Athens, Hadrian
at any rate constructed a great aqueduct for the benefit of Corinth,
and Pius the hospital at Epidaurus. But the considerate treatment of
the Greeks in general, and the special kindness which was shown by
the imperial government to Hellas proper, because it was accounted
in a certain sense as, like Italy, "motherland," did not redound
to the true benefit either of the government or of the country. The
annual changes of the chief magistrates, and the remiss control of the
central position, made all the senatorial provinces, so far as rule by
governors went, feel rather the oppression than the blessing of unity
of administration, and doubly so in proportion to their smallness and
their poverty. Even under Augustus himself these evils prevailed to
such a degree that it was one of the first acts of the reign of his
successor to take Greece as well as Macedonia into his own power,[176]
as it was alleged, temporarily, but in fact for the whole duration of
his reign. It was very constitutional, but perhaps not quite so wise
on the part of the emperor Claudius, when he came to power, that he
re-established the old arrangement. Thenceforward the matter remained
on this footing, and Achaia was administered by magistrates not
nominated, but chosen by lot, till this form of administration fell
altogether into abeyance.

[Sidenote: Misgovernment of the free towns.]

[Sidenote: Administration of Athens.]

But the case was far worse with the communities of Greece exempted
from the rule of the governor. The design of favouring these
commonwealths--by freeing them from tribute and levy, and not less
by the slightest possible restriction of the rights of the sovereign
state--led at least in many cases to the opposite result. The intrinsic
falseness of the institutions avenged itself. No doubt among the less
privileged or better administered communities the communal autonomy
may have fulfilled its aim; at least we do not learn that Sparta,
Corinth, Patrae fared specially ill in this respect. But Athens was not
made for self-administration, and affords the disheartening picture
of a commonwealth pampered by the supreme power, and financially as
well as morally ruined. By rights it ought to have found itself in a
flourishing condition. If the Athenians were unsuccessful in uniting
the nation under their hegemony, this city was the only one in Greece,
as in Italy, which carried out completely the union of its territory:
no city of antiquity elsewhere possessed a domain of its own, such as
was Attica, of about 700 square miles, double the size of the island
of Rügen. But even beyond Attica they retained what they possessed,
as well after the Mithradatic war by favour of Sulla, as after the
Pharsalian battle, in which they had taken the side of Pompeius, by
the favour of Caesar--he asked them only how often they would still
ruin themselves and trust to be saved by the renown of their ancestors.
To the city there still belonged not merely the territory, formerly
possessed by Haliartus, in Boeotia (ii. 329) {ii. 309}, but also on
their own coast Salamis, the old starting-point of their dominion of
the sea, and in the Thracian Sea the lucrative islands Scyros, Lemnos,
and Imbros, as well as Delos in the Aegean; it is true this island,
after the end of the republic, was no longer the central emporium of
trade with the East, now that the traffic had been drawn away from it
to the ports of the west coast of Italy, and this was an irreparable
loss for the Athenians. Of the further grants, which they had the
skill to draw by flattery from Antonius, Augustus, against whom they
had taken part, took from them certainly Aegina and Eretria in Euboea,
but they were allowed to retain the smaller islands of the Thracian
Sea, Icus, Peparethus, Sciathus, and further Ceos confronting the
promontory of Sunium; and Hadrian, moreover, gave to them the best part
of the great island Cephallenia in the Ionian Sea. It was only by the
emperor Severus, who bore them no good will, that a portion of these
extraneous possessions was withdrawn from them. Hadrian further granted
to the Athenians the delivery of a certain quantity of grain at the
expense of the empire, and by the extension of this privilege, hitherto
reserved for the capital, acknowledged Athens, as it were, as another
imperial metropolis. Not less was the blissful institute of alimentary
endowments, which Italy had enjoyed since Trajan's time, extended
by Hadrian to Athens, and the capital requisite for this purpose
certainly presented to the Athenians from his purse. An aqueduct, which
he likewise dedicated to his Athens, was only completed after his death
by Pius. To this falls to be added the conflux of travellers and of
students, and the endowments bestowed on the city in ever increasing
number by Roman grandees and by foreign princes.

[Sidenote: Its difficulties.]

Yet the community was in constant distress. The right of citizenship
was dealt with not merely in the way everywhere usual of giving and
taking, but was made formally and openly a matter of traffic, so that
Augustus interfered to prohibit the evil. Once and again the council
of Athens resolved to sell this or that one of its islands; and not
always was there found a rich man ready to make sacrifices like Julius
Nicanor, who, under Augustus, bought back for the bankrupt Athenians
the island of Salamis, thereby earning from its senate the honorary
title of the "new Themistocles," as well as, seeing that he also
made verses, that of the "new Homer," and--together with the noble
councillors--from the public well-merited derision. The magnificent
buildings with which Athens continued to embellish herself were
obtained without exception from foreigners, among others from the
rich kings Antiochus of Commagene and Herod of Judaea, but above all
from the emperor Hadrian, who laid out a complete "new town" (_novae
Athenae_) on the Ilisus, and--besides numberless other buildings,
including the already mentioned Panhellenion--worthily brought to
completion the wonder of the world, seven centuries after it had
been begun, the gigantic building, commenced by Pisistratus, of the
Olympieion, with its 120 columns partly still standing, the largest of
all that are erect at the present day. This city itself was without
money, not merely for its harbour-walls, which now certainly might
be dispensed with, but even for its harbour. In Augustus's time the
Piraeus was a small village of a few houses, only visited for the sake
of the masterpieces of painting in the halls of the temples. There was
hardly any longer commerce or industry in Athens; or rather for the
citizens as a body as well as individually there was but a single
flourishing trade--begging.

[Sidenote: Street-riots.]

Nor did the matter end with financial distress. The world doubtless
had peace, but not the streets and squares of Athens. Even under
Augustus an insurrection in Athens assumed such proportions that the
Roman government had to take steps against the free city;[177] and
though this event stands isolated, riots on the street on account of
the price of bread and on other trifling occasions belonged in Athens
to the order of the day. The prospect must not have been much better
in numerous other free towns, of which there is less mention. To give
criminal justice absolutely into the hands of such a burgess-body could
hardly be justified; and yet it belonged _de jure_ to the communities
admitted to international federation, like Athens and Rhodes. When the
Athenian Areopagus in the time of Augustus refused to release from
punishment on the intercession of a Roman of rank a Greek condemned for
forgery, it must have been within its right; but when the Cyzicenes
under Tiberius imprisoned Roman burgesses, and under Claudius the
Rhodians even nailed a Roman burgess to the cross, these were formal
violations of law, and a similar occurrence under Augustus cost the
Thessalians their autonomy. Arrogance and aggression are not excluded
by absence of power--are not seldom even ventured on by weak clients.
With all respect for great memories and sworn treaties, these free
states could not but appear to every conscientious government not much
less than an infringement of the general order of the empire, like the
still more time-hallowed right of asylum in the temples.

[Sidenote: Correctores.]

Ultimately the government acted with decision, and placed the free
towns, as regards their economy, under the superintendence of officials
of imperial nomination, who, at all events in the first instance,
are described as extraordinary commissioners "for the correction of
evils prevailing in the free towns," and thence subsequently bear the
designation "Correctores" as their title. The germs of this office
may be traced back to the time of Trajan; we find them as standing
officials in Achaia in the third century. These officials, appointed
by the emperor, and acting alongside of the proconsuls, occur in no
part of the Roman empire so early, and are in no case found so early
permanent, as in Achaia, which half consisted of free cities.

[Sidenote: Clinging to memories of the past.]

The self-esteem of the Hellenes, well-warranted in itself and fostered
by the attitude of the Roman government, and perhaps still more by that
of the Roman public--the consciousness of intellectual primacy--called
into life among them a _cultus_ of the past, which was compounded of a
faithful clinging to the memories of greater and happier times and a
quaint reverting of matured civilisation to its in part very primitive
beginnings.

[Sidenote: Religion.]

To foreign worships, if we keep out of view the service of the
Egyptian deities already earlier naturalised by trading intercourse,
particularly that of Isis, the Greeks in Hellas proper sustained
throughout the attitude of declining them; if this held least true in
the case of Corinth, Corinth was also the least Greek town of Hellas.
The old religion of the country was not protected by hearty faith, from
which this age had long since broken off;[178] but the habits of home
and the memory of the past clung to it by preference, and therefore
it was not merely retained with tenacity, but it even became--in good
part by the process of erudite retouching--always more rigid and more
antique as time went on, always more a distinctive possession of such
as made it a study.

[Sidenote: Pedigrees.]

It was the same with the worship of pedigrees, in which the Hellenes
of this age performed uncommon feats, and left the most aristocratic
of the Romans far behind them. In Athens the family of the Eumolpidae
played a prominent part at the reorganisation of the Eleusinian
festival under Marcus. His son Commodus conferred on the head of the
clan of the Kerykes the Roman franchise, and from him descended the
brave and learned Athenian, who, almost like Thucydides, fought with
the Goths and then described the Gothic war (p. 246). A contemporary of
Marcus, the professor and consular Herodes Atticus, belonged to this
same clan, and his court-poet sings of him, that the red shoe of the
Roman patriciate well befitted the high-born Athenian, the descendant
of Hermes and of Cecrops's daughter Herse, while one of his panegyrists
in prose celebrates him as Aeacides, and at the same time as a
descendant of Miltiades and Cimon. But even Athens was far outbidden in
this respect by Sparta; on several occasions we meet with Spartiates
who boast of descent from the Dioscuri, Herakles, Poseidon, and of the
priesthood of these ancestors hereditary for forty generations and more
in their house. It is significant of this nobility, that it in the main
presents itself only with the end of the second century; the heraldic
draughtsmen who projected these genealogical tables cannot have been
very punctilious as to vouchers either in Athens or in Sparta.

[Sidenote: Language; archaism and barbarism.]

The same tendency appears in the treatment of the language or rather
of the dialects. While at this time in the other Greek-speaking lands
and also in Hellas the so-called common Greek, debased in the main from
the Attic dialect, predominated in ordinary intercourse, not merely
did the written language of this epoch strive to set aside prevalent
faults and innovations, but in many cases dialectic peculiarities were
again taken up in opposition to common usage, and here, where it was
least of all warranted, the old particularism was in semblance brought
back. On the statues which the Thespians set up to the Muses in the
grove of Helicon, there were inscribed in good Boeotian the names
Orania and Thalea, while the epigrams belonging to them, composed by
a poet of Roman name, called them in good Ionic Uranie and Thaleie,
and the non-learned Boeotians, if they knew them, like all other
Greeks called them Urania and Thaleia. By the Spartans especially
incredible things were done in this way, and not seldom more was
written for the shade of Lycurgus than for the Aelii and Aurelii living
at the time.[179] Moreover, the correct use of the language at this
period appears gradually losing ground even in Hellas; archaisms and
barbarisms often stand peacefully side by side in the documents of the
imperial period. The population of Athens, much mixed with foreigners,
has at no time specially distinguished itself in this respect,[180]
and, although the civic documents keep themselves comparatively pure,
yet from the time of Augustus the gradually increasing corruption of
language here also makes itself felt. The strict grammarians of the
time filled whole books with the linguistic slips with which the much
celebrated rhetorician Herodes Atticus just mentioned and the other
famous school-orators of the second century were chargeable,[181] quite
apart from the quaint artificiality and the affected point of their
discourse. But barbarism proper as regards language and writing set in
in Athens and all Greece, just as in Rome, with Septimius Severus.[182]

[Sidenote: The public career.]

[Sidenote: Great families.]

[Sidenote: The career of state-offices.]

The bane of Hellenic existence lay in the limitation of its sphere;
high ambition lacked a corresponding aim, and therefore the low and
degrading ambition flourished luxuriantly. Even in Hellas there
was no lack of native families of great wealth and considerable
influence.[183] The country was doubtless on the whole poor, but there
were houses of extensive possessions and old-established prosperity.
In Sparta, for example, that of Lachares occupied, from Augustus down
at least to the time of Hadrian, a position which in point of fact was
not far removed from that of a prince. Antonius had caused Lachares to
be put to death for exaction. Thereupon his son Eurycles was one of the
most decided partisans of Augustus, and one of the bravest captains in
the decisive naval battle, who had almost made the conquered general
personally a captive; he received from the victor, among other rich
gifts as private property, the island of Cythera (Cerigo). Later he
played a prominent and hazardous part not merely in his native land,
over which he must have exercised a permanent presidency, but also at
the courts of Jerusalem and Caesarea, to which the respect paid to a
Spartiate by the Orientals contributed not a little. For that reason
brought to trial several times at the bar of the emperor, he was at
length condemned and sent into exile; but death seasonably withdrew him
from the consequences of the sentence, and his son Lacon came into the
property, and substantially also, though in a more cautious form, into
the position of power of his father. The family of the often-mentioned
Herodes had a similar standing in Athens; we can trace it going back
through four generations to the time of Caesar, and confiscation was
decreed, just as over the Spartan Eurycles, over the grandfather of
Herodes on account of his exorbitant position of power in Athens.
The enormous landed estates which the grandson possessed in his poor
native country, the extensive spaces applied for the sake of erecting
tombs for his boy-favourites, excited the indignation even of the
Roman governors. It may be presumed that there were powerful families
of this sort in most districts of Hellas, and, while they as a rule
decided matters at the diet of the province, they were not without
connections and influence even in Rome. But although those legal bars,
which excluded the Gaul and the Alexandrian even after obtaining the
franchise from the imperial senate, hardly stood in the way of those
Greeks of rank, but on the contrary the political and military career
which offered itself to the Italian likewise stood open in law to the
Hellenes, these in point of fact entered only at a late period and to
a limited extent into the service of the state; partly, doubtless,
because the Roman government of the earlier imperial period reluctantly
admitted the Greeks as foreigners, partly because these themselves
shunned the translation to Rome that was associated with entrance on
this career, and preferred to be the first at home instead of one the
more among the many senators. It was the great-grandson of Lachares,
Herclanus, who first in the time of Trajan entered the Roman senate;
and in the family of Herodes probably his father was the first to do so
about the same time.[184]

[Sidenote: Personal service of the emperor.]

The other career, which only opened up in the imperial period--the
personal service of the emperor--gave doubtless in favourable
circumstances riches and influence, and was earlier and more frequently
pursued by the Greeks; but, as most, and the most important, of these
positions were associated with service as officers, there seems to
have been for a considerable time a _de facto_ preference of Italians
for these places, and the direct way was here also in some measure
barred to Greeks. In subordinate positions Greeks were employed at the
imperial court from the first and in great numbers, and they often in
circuitous ways attained to trust and influence; but such persons came
more from the Hellenised regions than from Hellas itself, and least of
all from the better Hellenic houses. For the legitimate ambition of
the young man of ancestry and estate there was, if he was a Greek, but
limited scope in the Roman empire.

[Sidenote: Municipal administration.]

[Sidenote: Plutarch's view of its duties.]

There remained to him his native land, and in its case to be active
for the common weal was certainly a duty and an honour. But the duties
were very modest and the honours more modest still. "Your task," Dio
says further to his Rhodians, "is a different one from that of your
ancestors. They could develop their ability on many sides, aspire to
government, aid the oppressed, gain allies, found cities, make war
and conquer; of all this you can no longer do aught. There is left
for you the conduct of the household, the administration of the city,
the bestowal of honours and distinctions with choice and moderation,
a seat in council and in court, sacrifice to the gods and celebration
of festivals; in all this you may distinguish yourselves above other
towns. Nor are these slight matters: the decorous bearing, the care
for the hair and beard, the sedate pace in the street, so that the
foreigners accustomed to other things may by your side unlearn their
haste, the becoming dress, even, though it may seem ridiculous, the
narrow and neat purple-border, the calmness in the theatre, the
moderation in applause--all this forms the honour of your town;
therein more than in your ports and walls and docks appears the good
old Hellenic habit; and thereby even the barbarian, who knows not the
name of the city, perceives that he is in Greece and not in Syria
or Cilicia." All this was to the point; but, if it was no longer
required now of the citizen to die for the city of his fathers, the
question was at any rate not without warrant, whether it was still
worth the trouble to live for that city. There exists a disquisition
by Plutarch as to the position of the Greek municipal official in
his time, wherein he discusses these relations with the fairness and
circumspection characteristic of him. The old difficulty of conducting
the good administration of public affairs by means of majorities of
the citizens--uncertain, capricious, often bethinking them more of
their own advantage than of that of the commonwealth--or even of the
very numerous council-board--the Athenian numbered in the imperial
period first 600, then 700, later 750 town-councillors--subsisted
now, as formerly: it is the duty of the capable magistrate to prevent
the "people" from inflicting wrong on the individual burgess, from
appropriating to themselves unallowably private property, from
distributing among them the municipal property--tasks which are not
rendered the easier by the fact that the magistrate has no means for
the purpose but judicious admonition and the art of the demagogue,
that it is further suggested to him not to be too punctilious in such
things, and, if at a city festival a moderate largess to the burgesses
is proposed, not to spoil matters with the people on account of such a
trifle. But in other respects the circumstances had entirely changed,
and the official must learn to adapt himself to things as they are.
First of all he has to keep the powerlessness of the Hellenes present
at every moment to himself and to his fellow-citizens. The freedom of
the community reaches so far as the rulers allow it, and anything more
would doubtless be evil. When Pericles put on the robes of office, he
called to himself not to forget that he was ruling over free men and
Greeks; to-day the magistrate has to say to himself that he rules under
a ruler, over a town subject to proconsuls and imperial procurators,
that he can and may be nothing but the organ of the government, that
a stroke of the governor's pen suffices to annul any one of his
decrees. Therefore it is the first duty of a good magistrate to place
himself on a good understanding with the Romans, and, if possible,
to form influential connections in Rome, that these may benefit
his native place. It is true that the upright man warns urgently
against servility; in case of need the magistrate ought courageously
to confront the bad governor, and the resolute championship of the
community in such conflicts at Rome before the emperor appears as
the highest service. In a significant way he sharply censures those
Greeks who--quite as in the times of the Achaean league--call for
the intervention of the Roman governor in every local quarrel, and
urgently exhorts them rather to settle the communal affairs within
the community than by appeal to give themselves into the hands, not
so much of the supreme authority, as of the pleaders and advocates
that practise before it. All this is judicious and patriotic, as
judicious and patriotic as was formerly the policy of Polybius, which
is expressly referred to. At this epoch of complete world-peace, when
there was neither a Greek nor a barbarian war anywhere, when civic
commands, civic treaties of peace and alliances belonged solely to
history, the advice was very reasonable to leave Marathon and Plataeae
to the schoolmasters, and not to heat the heads of the Ecclesia by
such grand words, but rather to content themselves with the narrow
circle of the free movement still allowed to them. The world, however,
belongs not to reason but to passion. The Hellenic burgess could
still even now do his duty towards his fatherland; but for the true
political ambition striving after what was great, for the passion of
Pericles and Alcibiades, there was in this Hellas--apart perhaps from
the writing-desk--nowhere any room; and in the vacant space there
flourished the poisonous herbs which, wherever high effort is arrested
in the bud, harden and embitter the human heart.

[Sidenote: Games.]

Therefore Hellas was the motherland of the degenerate, empty
ambition which was perhaps the most general, and certainly among
the most pernicious, of the many sore evils of the decaying ancient
civilisation. Here in the first rank stood the popular festivals with
their prize competitions. The Olympic rivalries well beseemed the
youthful people of the Hellenes; the general gymnastic festival of
the Greek tribes and towns, and the chaplet plaited from the branches
of the olive for the ablest runner according to the decision of the
"Hellas-judges," were the innocent and simple expression of the young
nation as a collective unity. But their political development had
soon carried them beyond this early dawn. Already in the days of the
Athenian naval league, or at least of the monarchy of Alexander, that
festival of the Hellenes was an anachronism, a childs' play continued
in the age of manhood; the fact, that the possessor of that olive
wreath passed at least with himself and his fellow-citizens as holder
of the national primacy, had nearly as much significance, as if in
England the victors in the students' boat races were to be placed on
a level with Pitt and Beaconsfield. The extension of the Hellenic
nation by colonising and Hellenising found, amidst its ideal unity
and real disruption, its true expression in this dreamy realm of the
olive-wreath; and the materialist policy of the time of the Diadochi
thereupon gave itself, as was meet, but little trouble on the subject.
But when the imperial period after its fashion took up the Panhellenic
idea, and the Romans entered into the rights and duties of the
Hellenes, then Olympia remained or became the true symbol for the Roman
"All-Hellas"; at any rate the first Roman Olympic victor appears under
Augustus, and in the person of no less than Augustus's stepson, the
subsequent emperor Tiberius.[185] The far from pure marriage-alliance,
which Allhellenism entered into with the demon of play, converted
these festivals into an institution as powerful and lasting as it was
injurious in general, and especially for Hellas. The whole Hellenic
and Hellenising world took part therein, sending deputies to them
and imitating them; everywhere similar festivals destined for the
whole Greek world sprang from the soil, and the zealous participation
of the masses at large, the general interest felt in the individual
competitors, the pride not merely of the victor but of his adherents
and of his native land, made people almost forget what in the strict
sense were the things contended for.

[Sidenote: Universal interest in them.]

Not merely did the Roman government allow free scope to this rivalry in
gymnastic and other competitions, but the empire took part in them; the
right solemnly to fetch home the victor to his native city did not in
the imperial period depend on the pleasure of the burgesses concerned,
but was conferred on the individual agonistic institutes by imperial
charter,[186] and in this case also the yearly pension (σίτησις)
assigned to the victor was charged upon the imperial exchequer, and the
more important agonistic institutes were treated directly as imperial
institutions. This interest in games seized all the provinces as well
as the empire itself; but Greece proper was always the ideal centre of
such contests and victories. Here was their home on the Alpheus; here
the seat of the oldest imitations, of the Pythia, Isthmia, and Nemea,
still belonging to the great times of the Hellenic name and glorified
by its classic poets, and no less of a number of more recent but richly
equipped similar festivals, the Euryclea, which the just-mentioned
lord of Sparta had founded under Augustus, the Athenian Panathenaea,
the Panhellenia, endowed by Hadrian with imperial munificence and
likewise celebrated at Athens. It might be matter for wonder that the
whole world of the wide empire seemed to revolve round these gymnastic
festivals, but not that the Hellenes above all got intoxicated over
this rare cup of enchantment, and that the life of political quiet,
which their best men recommended to them, was in the most injurious
way disturbed by the wreaths and the statues and the privileges of the
festal victors.

[Sidenote: Municipal ambition.]

Civic institutions took a similar course, certainly in the empire as
a whole, but again more especially in Hellas. When great aims and
an ambition still existed there, in Hellas, just as in Rome, the
pursuit of public offices and public honours had formed the centre of
political emulation, and had called forth, along with much that was
empty, ridiculous, mischievous, also the ablest and noblest services.
Now the kernel had vanished and the husk remained; in Panopeus, in the
Phocian territory, the houses were roofless, and the citizens dwelt in
huts, but it was still a city, indeed a state, and in the procession
of the Phocian communities the Panopeans were not wanting. These
towns, with their magistracies and priesthoods, with their laudatory
decrees proclaimed by herald and their seats of honour in the public
assemblies, with the purple dress and the diadem, with statues on foot
and on horseback, drove a trade in vanity and money-jobbing worse
than the pettiest paltry prince of modern times with his orders and
titles. There would not be wanting even amidst these incidents real
merit and honourable gratitude; but generally it was a trade of giving
and taking, or, to use Plutarch's language, an affair as between a
courtesan and her customers. As at the present day private munificence
in the positive degree procures an order, in the superlative a patent
of nobility, so it then procured the priestly purple and the statue in
the market place; and it is not with impunity that the state issues a
spurious coinage of its honours.

[Sidenote: Its honours and their evils.]

As regards the scale of conducting such proceedings and the grossness
of their forms the doings of the present day fall considerably behind
those of the ancient world, as is natural, seeing that the seeming
autonomy of the community, not sufficiently restrained by the idea
of the State, bore unhindered sway in this domain, and the decreeing
authorities throughout were the burgesses or the councils of petty
towns. The consequences were pernicious on both sides; the municipal
offices were given away more according to the ability to pay than
according to the aptitude of the candidates; the banquets and largesses
made the recipients none the richer, and often impoverished the donor;
to the increased aversion for labour and the decay in the means of good
families, this evil habit contributed its full share. The economy of
the communities themselves also suffered severely under the spreading
evil of adulation. No doubt the honours, with which the community
thanked the individual benefactor, were measured in great part by the
same rational principle of cheapness which governs at the present
day similar decorative favours; and, when that was not the case, the
benefactor frequently found himself ready, for example, personally to
pay for the statue to be erected in his honour. But the same did not
apply to the marks of honour which the community showed to foreigners
of rank, above all to the governors and the emperors, and to the
members of the imperial house. The tendency of the time to set value
even on meaningless and enforced homage did not dominate the imperial
court and the Roman senators so much as the circles of ambition in the
petty town, but yet it did so in a very perceptible way; and, as a
matter of course, the honours and the homage grew withal in the course
of time through misuses to which they were put, and, further, in the
same proportion as the worthlessness of the personages governing or
taking part in the government. In this respect, as might be conceived,
the supply of honours was always stronger than the demand for them,
and those who correctly valued such marks of homage, in order to
remain spared from it, were compelled to decline them, which seems to
have been done often enough in individual cases,[187] but seldom with
consistency--for Tiberius, the small number of statues erected to him
may perhaps be recorded among his titles to honour. The disbursements
for honorary memorials, which often went far beyond the simple statue,
and for honorary embassies,[188] were a cancer, and became ever more
so, in the municipal economy of all the provinces. But none perhaps
expended uselessly sums so large in proportion to its slender ability
to furnish them as the province of Hellas, the motherland of municipal
honours as of rewards for the festal victor, and unexcelled at this
period in one pre-eminence--that of menial humility and abject homage.

[Sidenote: Trade and intercourse.]

That the economic circumstances of Greece were not favourable,
scarce needs to be specially set forth in detail. The land, taken
on the whole, was but of moderate fertility, the agricultural
portions of limited extent, the culture of the vine on the mainland
not of prominent importance, that of the olive more so. As the
quarries of the famous marble--the shining white Attic and the green
Carystian--belonged, like most others, to the domanial possessions,
the working of them by imperial slaves tended little to benefit the
population.

The most assiduous of the Greek districts from an industrial point
of view was that of the Achaeans, where the manufacture of woollen
stuffs, that had long existed, maintained its ground, and in the
well-peopled town of Patrae numerous looms worked up the fine flax
of Elis into clothing and head-dresses. Art and art-handiwork still
continued chiefly in the hands of the Greeks; and of the masses in
particular of Pentelic marble, which the imperial period made use of,
no small portion must have been worked up on the spot. But it was
predominantly abroad that the Greeks practised both; of the export of
Greek art-products formerly so important there is little mention at
this period. The city of the two seas, Corinth--the metropolis common
to all Hellenes, constantly swarming with foreigners, as a rhetorician
describes it--had the most stirring traffic. In the two Roman
colonies of Corinth and Patrae, and, moreover, in Athens constantly
filled by strangers seeing and learning, was concentrated the larger
banking-business of the province, which, in the imperial period, as in
the republican, lay largely in the hands of Italians settled there.
In places too of the second rank, as in Argos, Elis, Mantinea in the
Peloponnesus, the Roman merchants who were settled formed societies
of their own, standing alongside of the burgesses. In general trade
and commerce were at a low ebb in Achaia, particularly since Rhodes
and Delos had ceased to be emporia for the carrying traffic between
Asia and Europe, and the latter had been drawn to Italy. Piracy was
restrained, and even the land-routes were tolerably secure;[189] but
withal the old happy times did not return. The desolation of the
Piraeus has been already mentioned; it was an event when one of the
great Egyptian corn ships once strayed thither. Nauplia, the port of
Argos, the most considerable coast town of the Peloponnesus after
Patrae, lay likewise desolate.[190]

[Sidenote: Roads.]

It is in accordance with this state of things that virtually nothing
was done for the roads of this province in the imperial period; Roman
milestones have been found only in the immediate vicinity of Patrae
and of Athens, and even these belong to the emperors of the end of the
third and of the fourth century; evidently the earlier governments
renounced the idea of restoring communications here. Hadrian
alone undertook at least to make the equally important and short
land-connection between Corinth and Megara--by way of the wretched pass
of the "Scironian cliffs"--into a practicable road by means of huge
embankments thrown into the sea.

[Sidenote: Piercing of the Isthmus.]

The long-discussed plan of piercing the Corinthian isthmus, which the
dictator Caesar had conceived, was subsequently attempted, first by
the emperor Gaius and then by Nero. The latter even, on occasion of
his abode in Greece, personally took the first step towards the canal,
and caused 6000 Jewish captives to work at it for a series of months.
In connection with the cutting operations resumed in our own day,
considerable remains of these buildings have been brought to light,
which show that the works were tolerably far advanced when they were
broken off, probably not in consequence of the revolution that broke
out some time afterwards in the West, but because here, just as with
the similar Egyptian canal, in consequence of the difference of level
that was erroneously assumed to exist between the two seas, there were
apprehensions of the destruction of the island of Aegina and of further
mischief on the completion of the canal. No doubt had this canal been
completed, it would have shortened the course of traffic between Asia
and Italy, but it would not have tended specially to benefit Greece
itself.

       *       *       *       *       *

[Sidenote: Epirus.]

[Sidenote: Nicopolis.]

It has already been remarked (p. 256) that the regions to the north
of Hellas, Thessaly, and Macedonia, and at least from Trajan's time
Epirus, were in the imperial period separated administratively from
Greece. Of these the small Epirot province, which was administered
by an imperial governor of the second rank, never recovered from
the devastation to which it had been subjected in the course of
the third Macedonian war (ii. 329) {ii. 309.}. The mountainous and
poor interior possessed no city of note and a thinly-scattered
population. Augustus had endeavoured to raise the not less desolated
coast by the construction of two towns--by the completion of the
colony of Roman citizens already resolved on by Caesar in Buthrotum
overagainst Corcyra, which, however, attained no true prosperity,
and by the founding of the Greek town Nicopolis, just at the spot
where the headquarters had been stationed before the decisive battle
of Actium, at the southernmost point of Epirus, about an hour and a
half north of Prevesa, according to the design of Augustus, at once
a permanent memorial of the great naval victory and the centre of
a newly flourishing Hellenic life. This foundation was new in its
kind as Roman.[191] The words of a contemporary Greek poet, which we
quote below, simply express what Augustus here did; he united the
whole surrounding territory, southern Epirus, the opposite region of
Acarnania with the island of Leucas, and even a portion of Aetolia
into one urban domain, and transferred the inhabitants still left in
the decaying townships there existing to the new city of Nicopolis,
opposite to which on the Acarnanian shore the old temple of the Actian
Apollo was magnificently renewed and enlarged.

[Sidenote: Its character and privileges.]

A Roman city had never been founded in this way; this was the
_synoekismos_ of the successors of Alexander. Quite in the same way
had king Cassander constituted the Macedonian towns Thessalonica and
Cassandreia, Demetrius Poliorcetes the Thessalian town Demetrias,
and Lysimachus the town of Lysimachia on the Thracian Chersonese out
of a number of surrounding townships divested of their independence.
In keeping with the Greek character of the foundation Nicopolis was,
according to the intention of its founder, to become a Greek city on
a great scale.[192] It obtained freedom and autonomy like Athens and
Sparta, and was intended, as already stated, to wield the fifth part
of the votes in the Amphictiony representing all Hellas, and to do so,
like Athens, without alternating with other towns (p. 254). This new
Actian shrine of Apollo was erected quite after the model of Olympia,
with a quadriennial festival, which even bore the name of "Olympia"
alongside of its own, had equal rank and equal privileges, and even its
Actiads as the former had its Olympiads;[193] the town of Nicopolis
stood related to it like the town of Elis to the Olympian temple.[194]
Everything properly Italian was carefully avoided in the erection of
the town as well as in the religious arrangements, however natural
it might be to mould after the Roman fashion the "city of victory"
so intimately associated with the founding of the empire. Whoever
considers the arrangements of Augustus in Hellas in this connection,
and especially this remarkable corner-stone, will not be able to
resist the conviction that Augustus believed that a reorganisation of
Hellas under the protection of the Roman principate was practicable,
and wished to carry it out. The locality at least was well chosen for
it, as at that time, before the foundation of Patrae, there was no
larger city on the whole Greek west coast. But what Augustus may have
hoped for at the commencement of his sole rule, he did not attain,
and perhaps even subsequently abandoned, when he gave to Patrae the
form of a Roman colony. Nicopolis remained, as the extensive ruins and
the numerous coins show, comparatively populous and flourishing;[195]
but its citizens do not appear to have taken a prominent part in
commerce and manufactures or otherwise. Northern Epirus, which, like
the adjoining Illyricum bordering on Macedonia, was in greater part
inhabited by Albanian tribes and was not placed under Nicopolis,
continued during the imperial period in its primitive condition,
which still subsists in some measure at the present day. "Epirus and
Illyricum," says Strabo, "are in great part a desert; where men are
found, they dwell in villages and in ruins of earlier towns; even the
oracle of Dodona,"--laid waste in the Mithradatic war by the Thracians
(iii. 312) {iii. 296.},--"is extinct like everything else."[196]

       *       *       *       *       *

[Sidenote: Thessaly.]

Thessaly, in itself a purely Hellenic district as well as Aetolia and
Acarnania, was in the imperial period separated administratively from
the province of Achaia and placed under the governor of Macedonia.
What holds true of northern Greece applies also to Thessaly. The
freedom and autonomy which Caesar had allowed generally to the
Thessalians, or rather had not withdrawn from them, seem to have
been withdrawn, on account of misuse, from them by Augustus, so that
subsequently Pharsalus alone retained this legal position;[197] Roman
colonists were not settled in the district. It retained its separate
diet in Larisa, and civic self-administration was left with the
Thessalians, as with the dependent Greeks in Achaia. Thessaly was far
the most fertile region of the whole peninsula, and still exported
grain in the fourth century; nevertheless Dio of Prusa says that even
the Peneus flows through waste land; and in the imperial period money
was coined in this region only to a very small extent. Hadrian and
Diocletian exerted themselves to restore the roads of the country, but
they alone, so far as we see, of the Roman emperors did so.

       *       *       *       *       *

[Sidenote: Macedonia.]

Macedonia, as a Roman administrative district under the empire, was
materially curtailed as compared with the Macedonia of the republic.
Certainly, like the latter, it reached from sea to sea, inasmuch as the
coast as well of the Aegean Sea from the region of Thessaly belonging
to Macedonia as far as the mouth of the Nestus (Mesta), as of the
Adriatic from the Aous[198] as far as the Drilon (Drin), was reckoned
to this district; the latter territory, not properly Macedonian but
Illyrian land, but already in the republican period assigned to the
governor of Macedonia (iii. 44) {iii. 42.}, remained with the province
also during the time of the empire. But we have already stated that
Greece south of Oeta was separated from it. The northern frontier
towards Moesia and the east frontier towards Thrace remained indeed in
so far unaltered, as the province in the imperial period reached as
far as the Macedonia proper of the republic had reached, viz. on the
north almost as far as the vale of the Erigon, eastward as far as the
river Nestus; but while in the time of the republic the Dardani and the
Thracians, and all the tribes of the north and north-east adjoining
the Macedonian territory, had to do with this governor in their
circumstances of peaceful or warlike contact, and in so far it could be
said that the Macedonian boundary reached as far as the Roman lances,
the Macedonian governor of the imperial period bore sway only over the
district assigned to him, which no longer bordered on neighbours half
or wholly independent. As the defence of the frontier was transferred
in the first instance to the kingdom of the Thracians which had come
under allegiance to Rome, and soon to the governor of the new province
Moesia, the governor of Macedonia was from the outset relieved of his
command. There was hardly any fighting on Macedonian soil under the
empire; only the barbarian Dardani on the upper Axius (Vardar) still at
times pillaged the peaceful neighbouring province. There is no report,
moreover, from this province of any local revolts.

[Sidenote: Nationalities.]

From the more southerly Greek districts this--the most northerly--stood
aloof as well in its national basis as in the stage of its
civilisation. While the Macedonians proper on the lower course of the
Haliacmon (Vistritza) and the Axius (Vardar), as far as the Strymon,
were an originally Greek stock, whose diversity from the more southern
Hellenes had no further significance for the present epoch, and while
the Hellenic colonisation embraced within its sphere both coasts--on
the west with Apollonia and Dyrrachium, on the east in particular
with the townships of the Chalcidian peninsula--the interior of the
province, on the other hand, was filled with a confused mass of
non-Greek peoples, which must have differed from the present state of
things in the same region more as to elements than as to results. After
the Celts who had pushed forward into this region, the Scordisci, had
been driven back by the generals of the Roman republic, the interior
of Macedonia fell to the share especially of Illyrian stocks in the
west and north, of Thracian in the east. Of both we have already spoken
previously; here they come into consideration only so far as the Greek
organisation, at least the urban, was probably introduced--as in the
earlier,[199] so also in the imperial period--among these stocks only
in a very limited measure. On the whole, an energetic impulse of urban
development never pervaded the interior of Macedonia; the more remote
districts hardly reached--at least as in a real sense--beyond the
village-system.

[Sidenote: Greek polity.]

The Greek polity itself was not a spontaneous growth in this
monarchical country, as it was in Hellas proper, but was introduced by
the princes, who were more Hellenes than their subjects. What shape it
had is little known; yet the civic presidency of politarchs uniformly
recurring in Thessalonica, Edessa, Lete, and not met with elsewhere,
leads us to infer a perceptible, and indeed in itself probable,
diversity of the Macedonian urban constitution from that elsewhere
usual in Hellas. The Greek cities, which the Romans found existing,
retained their organisation and their rights; Thessalonica, the most
considerable of them, also freedom and autonomy. There existed a league
and a diet (κοινόν) of the Macedonian towns, similar to those in Achaia
and Thessaly. It deserves mention, as an evidence of the continued
working of the memories of the old and great times, that still in the
middle of the third century after Christ the diet of Macedonia and
individual Macedonian towns issued coins on which, in place of the
head and the name of the reigning emperor, came those of Alexander the
Great. The pretty numerous colonies of Roman burgesses which Augustus
established in Macedonia, Byllis not far from Apollonia, Dyrrachium
on the Adriatic, on the other coast Dium, Pella, Cassandreia, in the
region of Thrace proper Philippi, were all of them older Greek towns,
which obtained merely a number of new burgesses and a different legal
position, and were called into life primarily by the need of providing
quarters in a civilised and not greatly populous province for Italian
soldiers who had served their time, and for whom there was no longer
room in Italy itself. The granting of Italian rights certainly took
place only to gild for the veterans their settlement abroad. That it
was never intended to draw Macedonia into the development of Italian
culture is evinced, apart from all else, by the fact that Thessalonica
remained Greek and the capital of the country. By its side flourished
Philippi, properly a mining town, constituted on account of the
neighbouring gold mines, favoured by the emperors as the seat of the
battle which definitively founded the monarchy, and on account of the
numerous veterans who took part in it and subsequently settled there.
A Roman, not colonial, municipal constitution was obtained already in
the first period of the empire by Stobi, the already mentioned most
northerly frontier-town of Macedonia towards Moesia, at the confluence
of the Erigon with the Axius, in a commercial as in a military point
of view an important position, and which, it may be conjectured, had
already in the Macedonian time attained to Greek polity.

[Sidenote: Economy. Roads and levy.]

In an economic point of view little was done on the part of the state
for Macedonia under the emperors; at least there is no appearance of
any special care on their part for this province, which was not put
under their own administration. The military road already constructed
under the republic right across the country from Dyrrachium to
Thessalonica, one of the most important arteries of intercourse in the
whole empire, called forth renewed effort, so far as we know, only
from emperors of the third century, and first from Severus Antoninus;
the towns adjacent to it, Lychnidus on the Ochrida-lake and Heraclea
Lyncestis (Bitolia), were never of much account. Yet Macedonia
was, economically, better situated than Greece. It far excelled it
in fertility; as still at present the province of Thessalonica is
relatively well cultivated and well peopled, so in the description
of the empire from the time of Constantius, at all events when
Constantinople was already in existence, Macedonia is reckoned among
the specially wealthy districts. If for Achaia and Thessaly our
documents concerning the Roman levy are absolutely silent, Macedonia on
the other hand was drawn upon, in particular for the imperial guard,
to a considerable extent, more strongly than the most of the Greek
districts--on which, no doubt, the familiarity of the Macedonians with
regular war-service and their excellent qualifications for it, and
probably also the relatively small development of the urban system in
this province, had an important bearing. Thessalonica, the metropolis
of the province, and its most populous and most industrial town at this
time, represented likewise under various forms in literature, has also
secured to itself an honourable place in political history by the brave
resistance which its citizens opposed to the barbarians in the terrible
times of the Gothic invasions (p. 248).

       *       *       *       *       *

[Sidenote: Thrace.]

[Sidenote: Philip and Alexander.]

[Sidenote: Lysimachus.]

[Sidenote: Empire of Tylis.]

If Macedonia was a half-Greek, Thrace was a non-Greek land. Of the
great but for us vanished Thracian stock we have formerly (p. 207)
spoken. Into its domain Hellenism came simply from without; and it
will not be superfluous in the first instance to glance back and to
set forth how often Hellenism had previously knocked at the gates
of the most southerly region which this stock possessed, and which
we still name after it, and how little it had hitherto penetrated
into the interior, in order to make clear what was left for Rome
here to overtake and what it did overtake. Philip, the father of
Alexander, first subjected Thrace, and founded not merely Calybe in
the neighbourhood of Byzantium, but also in the heart of the land
the town which thenceforth bore his name. Alexander, here too the
precursor of Roman policy, arrived at and crossed the Danube, and
made this stream the northern boundary of his empire; the Thracians
in his army played by no means the least part in the subjugation of
Asia. After his death the Hellespont seemed as though it would become
one of the great centres of the new formation of states, and the wide
domain from thence to the Danube[200] as though it would become the
northern half of a Greek empire, and would promise for the capital of
Lysimachus, the former governor of Thrace--the town of Lysimachia,
newly established in the Thracian Chersonese--a like future as for the
capitals of the marshals of Syria and Egypt. But this result was not
attained; the independence of this kingdom did not survive the fall
of its first ruler (281 B.C., 473 U.C.). In the century which elapsed
from that time to the establishment of the ascendancy of Rome in the
East, attempts were made, sometimes by the Seleucids, sometimes by the
Ptolemies, sometimes by the Attalids, to bring the European possessions
of Lysimachus under their power, but all of them without lasting
result. The empire of Tylis in the Haemus, which the Celts not long
after the death of Alexander, and nearly at the same time with their
permanent settlement in Asia Minor, had founded in the Moeso-Thracian
territory, destroyed the seed of Greek civilisation within its sphere,
and itself succumbed during the Hannibalic war to the assaults of the
Thracians, who extirpated these intruders to the last man. Thenceforth
there was not in Thrace any leading power at all; the relations
subsisting between the Greek coast-towns and the princes of the several
tribes, which would probably correspond approximately to those before
Alexander's time, are illustrated by the description which Polybius
gives of the most important of these towns: "Where the Byzantines had
sowed, there the Thracian barbarians reaped, and against these neither
the sword nor money is of avail; if the citizens kill one of the
princes, three others thereupon invade their territory, and, if they
buy off one, five more demand the like annual payment."

[Sidenote: Later Macedonian rulers.]

The efforts on the part of the later Macedonian rulers to gain once
more a firm footing in Thrace, and in particular to bring under
their power the Greek towns of the south coast, were opposed by the
Romans, partly in order to keep down the development of Macedonia's
power generally, partly in order not to allow the important "royal
road" leading to the East--that along which Xerxes marched to Greece
and the Scipios marched against Antiochus--to fall in all its extent
into Macedonian hands. Already, after the battle at Cynoscephalae,
the frontier-line was drawn nearly such as it thenceforth remained.
The two last Macedonian rulers made several attempts, either directly
to establish themselves in Thrace or to attach to themselves its
individual rulers by treaties; the last Philip even gained over
Philippopolis once more, and put into it a garrison, which, it is true,
the Odrysae soon drove out afresh. Neither he nor his son succeeded in
placing matters on a permanent footing; and the independence conceded
by Rome to the Thracians after the breaking up of Macedonia destroyed
whatever Hellenic germs might still be left there. Thrace itself
became--in part already in the republican, and more decidedly in the
imperial period--a Roman vassal-principality, and then in 46 a Roman
province (p. 211); but the Hellenising of the land had not passed
beyond the fringe of Greek colonial towns, which in the earliest period
had been established round this coast, and in course of time had sunk
rather than risen. Powerful and permanent as was the hold of Macedonian
civilisation on the East, as weak and perishable was its contact with
Thrace; Philip and Alexander themselves appear to have reluctantly
undertaken, and to have but lightly valued, their settlements in this
land.[201] Till far into the imperial period the land remained with the
natives; the Greek towns that were still left along the coast, almost
all on the decline, remained without any Greek land in their rear.

[Sidenote: Greek towns in Thrace and on the Black Sea.]

This belt of Hellenic towns stretching from the Macedonian frontier to
the Tauric Chersonese was of very unequal texture. In the south it was
close and compact from Abdera onward to Byzantium on the Dardanelles;
yet none of these towns held a prominent position in later times
with the exception of Byzantium, which through the fertility of its
territory, its productive tunny fisheries, its uncommonly favourable
position for trade, its industrial diligence, and the energy of its
citizens--heightened merely and hardened by its exposed situation--was
enabled to defy even the worst times of Hellenic anarchy. Far more
scantily had the settlements developed themselves on the west coast
of the Black Sea; among those subsequently belonging to the Roman
province of Thrace Mesembria alone was of some importance; among those
subsequently Moesian Odessus (Varna) and Tomis (Küstendje). Beyond
the mouths of the Danube and the boundary of the Roman empire, on the
northern shore of the Pontus, there lay amidst the barbarian land
Tyra[202] and Olbia; further on, the old and great Greek mercantile
cities in what is now the Crimea--Heraclea or Chersonesus and
Panticapaeum--formed a stately copestone.

[Sidenote: Under Roman protection.]

All these settlements enjoyed Roman protection, after the Romans had
become generally the leading power on the Graeco-Asiatic continent;
and the strong arm, which often came down heavily on the Hellenic land
proper, prevented here at least disasters like the destruction of
Lysimachia. The protection of these Greeks devolved in the republican
period partly on the governor of Macedonia, partly on the governor of
Bithynia, after this became Roman; Byzantium subsequently remained
with Bithynia.[203] We may add that in the imperial period, after the
erection of the governorship of Moesia and subsequently of that of
Thrace, the supplying of protection devolved on these.

[Sidenote: Philippopolis and other towns with civic rights.]

Protection and favour were granted by Rome to these Greeks from the
first; but neither the republic nor the earlier imperial period made
efforts for the extension of Hellenism.[204] After Thrace had become
Roman, it was divided into land-districts;[205] and almost down to
the end of the first century there is no record of the laying out
of a town there, with the exception of two colonies of Claudius and
Vespasian--Apri in the interior not far from Perinthus, and Deultus
on the most northern coast.[206] Domitian began by introducing the
Greek urban constitution into the interior, at first for the capital
of the country, Philippopolis. Under Trajan a series of other Thracian
townships obtained like civic rights; Topirus not far from Abdera,
Nicopolis on the Nestus, Plotinopolis on the Hebrus, Pautalia near
Köstendil, Serdica now Sofia, Augusta Traiana near Alt-Zagora, a
second Nicopolis on the northern slope of Haemus,[207] besides, on the
coast, Traianopolis at the mouth of the Hebrus; further, under Hadrian
Adrianopolis, the modern Adrianople. All these towns were not colonies
of foreigners but polities of Greek organisation, composed after the
model set up by Augustus in the Epirot Nicopolis; it was a civilising
and Hellenising of the province from above downwards. A Thracian diet
existed thenceforth in Philippopolis just as in the properly Greek
provinces. This last offshoot of Hellenism was not the weakest. The
country was rich and charming--a coin of the town Pautalia praises the
fourfold blessing of the ears of grain, of the grapes, of the silver,
and of the gold; and Philippopolis as well as the beautiful valley
of the Tundja were the home of rose-culture and of rose-oil--and the
vigour of the Thracian type was not broken. Here was developed a dense
and prosperous population; we have already mentioned the largeness
of the levy in Thrace, and few territories stand on an equality
with Thrace at this epoch in the activity of the urban mints. When
Philippopolis succumbed in the year 251 to the Goths (p. 240), it is
said to have numbered 100,000 inhabitants. The energetic part taken by
the Byzantines in favour of the emperor of the Greek East, Pescennius
Niger, and the several years' resistance which the town even after his
defeat opposed to the victor, show the resources and the courage of
these Thracian townsmen. If the Byzantines here, too, succumbed and
lost even for a season their civic rights, the time, for which the rise
of the Thracian land paved the way, was soon to set in, when Byzantium
should become the new Hellenic Rome and the chief capital of the
remodelled empire.

[Sidenote: Lower Moesia.]

[Sidenote: Tomis and the Pontic Pentapolis.]

In the neighbouring province of lower Moesia a similar development
took place, although on a smaller scale. The Greek coast-towns, the
metropolis of which, at least in the Roman period, was Tomis, were,
probably on the constituting of the Roman province of Moesia, grouped
as the "Five-cities-league of the left shore of the Black Sea," or
as it was also called, "of the Greeks," that is, the Greeks of this
province. Later there was annexed to this league, as a sixth town,
that of Marcianopolis, constructed by Trajan not far from the coast on
the Thracian frontier, and organised, like the Thracian towns, after
the Greek model.[208] We have already observed that the camp-towns
on the bank of the Danube, and generally the townships called into
life by Rome in the interior, were instituted after the Italian model;
lower Moesia was the only Roman province intersected by the linguistic
boundary, inasmuch as the Tomitanian cities-league belonged to the
Greek, the Danubian towns, like Durostorum and Oescus to the Latin,
linguistic domain. In other respects essentially the same holds true of
this Moesian cities-league, as was remarked regarding Thrace. We have a
description of Tomis from the last years of Augustus, doubtless by one
banished thither for punishment, but certainly true in substance. The
population consists for the greater part of Getae and Sarmatae; they
wear, like the Dacians on Trajan's column, skins and trousers, long
waving hair and unshorn beard, and appear in the street on horseback
and armed with the bow, with the quiver on their shoulder, and the
knife in their girdle. The few Greeks who are found among them have
adopted the barbarian customs, including the trousers, and are able
to express themselves as well or better in Getic than in Greek; he
is lost, who cannot make himself intelligible in Getic, and no man
understands a word of Latin. Before the gates rove predatory bands of
the most various peoples, and their arrows not seldom fly over the
protecting city-walls; he who ventures to till his field does it at the
peril of his life, and ploughs in armour--at anyrate about the time of
Caesar's dictatorship; on occasion of the raid of Burebista, the town
had fallen into the hands of the barbarians, and a few years before
that exile came to Tomis, during the Dalmato-Pannonian insurrection,
the fury of war had once more raged over this region. The coins and the
inscriptions of that city accord well with these accounts, in so far
as the metropolis of the "left-Pontic cities-league" in the pre-Roman
period coined no silver, which several other of these towns did; and,
in general, coins and inscriptions from the time before Trajan occur
only in an isolated way. But in the second and third centuries it was
remodelled and may be termed a foundation of Trajan with very much
the same warrant as Marcianopolis, which likewise quickly attained
to considerable development. The barrier formerly mentioned (p. 227)
in the Dobrudscha served at the same time as a protecting wall for
the town of Tomis. Behind this wall commerce and navigation were
flourishing. There was in the town a society of Alexandrian merchants
with its own chapel of Serapis;[209] in municipal liberality and
municipal ambition the town was inferior to no Greek town of middle
size; it was still even now bilingual, but in such a way that,
alongside of the Greek language always retained on the coins, here on
the border, where the two languages of the empire came into contact,
the Latin is also often employed even in public monuments.

[Sidenote: Tyra.]

[Sidenote: Olbia.]

Beyond the imperial frontier, between the mouths of the Danube and the
Crimea, the Greek merchant had made few settlements on the coast; there
were here only two Greek towns of note, both founded in remote times by
Miletus, Tyra at the mouth of the river of the same name, the modern
Dniester, and Olbia on the bay into which the Borysthenes (Dnieper) and
the Hypanis (Bug) fall. The forlorn position of these Hellenes amidst
the barbarians pressing around them, in the time of the Diadochi as
well as during the earlier rule of the Roman republic, has already
been described (iii. 297) {iii. 282.}. The emperors brought help. In
the year 56, that is, in the exemplary beginning of Nero's government,
Tyra was annexed to the province of Moesia. Of the more remote Olbia
we possess a description from the age of Trajan;[210] the town was
still bleeding from its old wounds; the wretched walls enclosed equally
wretched houses, and the quarter then inhabited filled but a small
portion of the old considerable city-circuit, of which individual
towers that were left stood far off in the desolate plain; in the
temples there was no statue of the gods which did not bear traces of
the hands of the barbarians; the inhabitants had not forgotten their
Hellenic character, but they dressed and fought after the manner of the
Scythians, with whom they were daily in conflict. Just as often as by
Greek names, they designated themselves by Scythian, _i.e._ by those
of Sarmatian stocks akin to the Iranians;[211] in fact, in the royal
house itself Sauromates was a common name. These towns were indebted
doubtless for their very continued existence less to their own power
than to the good-will or rather the self-interest of the natives. The
tribes settled on this coast were neither in a position to carry on
foreign trade from emporia of their own, nor could they dispense with
it; in the Hellenic coast-towns they bought salt, articles of clothing
and wine, and the more civilised princes protected in some measure the
strangers against the attacks of the barbarians proper. The earlier
rulers of Rome must have had scruples at undertaking the difficult
protection of this remote settlement; nevertheless Pius, when the
Scythians once more besieged them, sent to them Roman auxiliary troops,
and compelled the barbarians to offer peace and furnish hostages.
The town must have been incorporated directly with the empire by
Severus, from whom onward Olbia struck coins with the image of the
Roman rulers. As a matter of course this annexation extended only to
the town-territories themselves, and it never was intended to bring
the barbarian dwellers around Tyra and Olbia under the Roman sceptre.
It has already been remarked (p. 239) that these towns were the first
which, presumably under Alexander († 235), succumbed to the incipient
Gothic invasion.

[Sidenote: Bosporus.]

[Sidenote: Asander.]

[Sidenote: Polemon.]

If the Greeks had but sparingly settled on the mainland to the north
of the Black Sea, the great peninsula projecting from this coast, the
Tauric Chersonesus--the modern Crimea--had for long been in great
part in their hands. Separated by the mountains, which the Taurians
occupied, the two centres of the Greek settlement upon it were,
at the western end the Doric free town of Heraclea or Chersonesus
(Sebastopol), at the eastern the principality of Panticapaeum or
Bosporus (Kertch). King Mithradates had at the summit of his power
united the two, and here established for himself a second northern
empire (iii. 298), which then, after the collapse of his power, was
left as the only remnant of it to his son and murderer Pharnaces.
When the latter, after the war between Caesar and Pompeius, attempted
to regain his father's dominion in Asia Minor, Caesar had vanquished
him (iv. 439), and declared him to have forfeited also the Bosporan
empire. In the meanwhile Asander, the governor left there by Pharnaces,
had renounced allegiance to the king in the hope of acquiring the
kingdom for himself by this service rendered to Caesar. When Pharnaces
after his defeat returned to his Bosporan kingdom, he at first indeed
repossessed himself of his capital, but ultimately was worsted, and
fell bravely fighting in the last battle--as a soldier at least, not
unequal to his father. The succession was contested between Asander,
who was in fact master of the land, and Mithradates of Pergamus, an
able officer of Caesar, whom the latter had invested with the Bosporan
principality; both sought at the same time to lean for support on
the dynasty heretofore ruling in the Bosporus and on the great
Mithradates, inasmuch as Asander married Dynamis, the daughter of
Pharnaces, while Mithradates, sprung from a Pergamene burgess-family,
asserted that he was an illegitimate son of the great Mithradates
Eupator--whether it was that this rumour determined the selection, or
that it was put into circulation in order to justify it. As Caesar
himself was called in the first instance to attend to more important
tasks, arms decided between the legitimate and the illegitimate
Caesarian, and once more in favour of the latter; Mithradates fell
in combat, and Asander remained master in the Bosporus. In the
outset--without doubt, because he had not the confirmation of the
lord-paramount--he avoided assuming the name of king, and contented
himself with the title of archon, borne by the older princes of
Panticapaeum; but he soon procured, probably even from Caesar himself,
the confirmation of his rule and the royal title.[212] At his death
(737-738 U.C.) {17-16.} he left his kingdom to his wife Dynamis. So
strong was still the power of hereditary succession and of the name
of Mithradates, that both a certain Scribonianus, who first attempted
to occupy Asander's place, and after him king Polemon of Pontus, to
whom Augustus promised the Bosporan kingdom, conjoined with the taking
up of the dominion a marriage-alliance with Dynamis; moreover, the
former asserted that he was himself a grandson of Mithradates, while
king Polemon, soon after the death of Dynamis, married a granddaughter
of Antonius, and consequently a kinswoman of the imperial house.
After his early death--he fell in conflict with the Aspurgiani on the
Asiatic coast--his children under age did not succeed him; and even
with his grandson of the same name, whom the emperor Gaius reinstated,
notwithstanding his boyish age, in the year 38, into the two
principalities of his father, the Bosporan kingdom did not long remain.
In his place the emperor Claudius called a real or alleged descendant
of Mithradates Eupator, and in this house, apparently, the principality
thenceforth continued.[213]

[Sidenote: The Eupatorids.]

[Sidenote: Extent of the Bosporan rule.]

While in the Roman state elsewhere the dependent principality
disappears after the end of the first dynasty, and from Trajan's time
the principle of direct government is carried out through the whole
extent of the Roman empire, the Bosporan kingdom subsisted under
Roman supremacy down to the fourth century. It was only after the
centre of gravity of the empire was shifted to Constantinople that
this state became merged in the empire at large,[214] in order to be
soon thereafter abandoned by it and to become, at least in greater
part, the prey of the Huns.[215] The Bosporus, however, in reality
was and continued to be more a town than a kingdom, and had more
similarity with the town-districts of Tyra and Olbia than with the
kingdoms of Cappadocia and Numidia. Here, too, the Romans protected
only the Hellenic town Panticapaeum, and did not aim at enlargement
of the bounds and subjugation of the interior any more than in Tyra
and Olbia. To the domain of the prince of Panticapaeum belonged the
Greek settlements of Theudosia on the peninsula itself, and Phanagoria
(Taman) on the opposite Asiatic coast, but not Chersonesus[216]--or at
least only somewhat as Athens belonged to the province of the governor
of Achaia. The town had obtained autonomy from the Romans, and saw
in the prince its immediate protector, not its sovereign; as a free
town, too, in the imperial period, it never coined with the stamp
either of king or emperor. On the mainland, not even the town which
the Greeks called Tanais--a stirring emporium at the mouth of the Don,
but hardly a Greek foundation--stood permanently under subjection to
the Roman vassal-princes.[217] Of the more or less barbarian tribes on
the peninsula itself, and on the European and Asiatic coast southward
from Tanais, probably only the nearest stood in a fixed relation of
dependence.[218]

[Sidenote: Military position of the Bosporus.]

The territory of Panticapaeum was too extensive and too important,
especially for mercantile intercourse, to be left like Olbia and
Tyra to the administration of changing municipal officials and a far
distant governor; therefore it was entrusted to hereditary princes--a
course further recommended by the circumstance that it might not seem
advisable to transfer directly to the empire the relations which this
region sustained to the surrounding tribes. The rulers of the Bosporan
house, in spite of their Achaemenid pedigree and their Achaemenid mode
of reckoning time, felt themselves thoroughly as Greek princes, and
traced back their origin, after the good Hellenic fashion, to Herakles
and the Eumolpids. The dependence of these Greeks on Rome--the royal
in Panticapaeum, as the republican in Chersonesus--was implied in
the nature of things, and they never thought of rising against the
protecting arm of the empire; if once, under the emperor Claudius,
the Roman troops had to march against an insubordinate prince of the
Bosporus,[219] yet withal this region itself, amidst the fearful
confusion in the middle of the third century, which especially affected
it, never broke away from the empire even when it was falling to
pieces.[220] The prosperous merchant-towns, permanently in need of
military protection amidst a flux of barbaric peoples, held to Rome as
the advanced posts to the main army. The garrison was doubtless chiefly
raised in the land itself, and to create and manage it was beyond
doubt the main task of the king of the Bosporus. The coins, which were
struck on occasion of the investiture of such a king, exhibit doubtless
the curule chair and the other honorary presents usual at such
investiture, but also by their side shield, helmet, sword, battle-axe,
and war-horse; it was no peaceful office which this prince undertook.
The first of them, whom Augustus appointed, fell in conflict with the
barbarians, and of his successors, _e.g._ king Sauromates, son of
Rhoemetalces, fought in the first years of Severus with the Siracae and
the Scythians--perhaps it was not quite without reason that he stamped
his coins with the feats of Herakles. By sea, too, he had to be active,
especially in keeping down the piracy which never ceased in the Black
Sea (p. 242); that Sauromates likewise is credited with having brought
the Taurians to order and chastised piracy. Roman troops, however, were
also stationed in the peninsula, perhaps a division of the Pontic
fleet, certainly a detachment of the Moesian army; their presence even
in small numbers showed to the barbarians that the dreaded legionary
stood behind these Greeks. In another way still the empire protected
them; at least in the later period there were regularly paid from
the imperial chest to the princes of the Bosporus sums of money, of
which they stood in need, in so far as the buying off of the hostile
incursions by stated annual payments probably became a standing
practice here--in what was not directly territory of the empire--still
earlier than elsewhere.[221]

[Sidenote: Position of this vassal-prince.]

That the centralisation of the government had its application also
in reference to this prince, and he stood to the Roman Caesar on a
footing not much different from that of the burgomaster of Athens, is
in various ways apparent; it deserves mention that king Asander and
the queen Dynamis struck gold coins with their name and their effigy,
whereas king Polemon and his immediate successors, while retaining
the right of coining gold, seeing that this territory as well as the
adjoining barbarians were for long accustomed exclusively to gold
currency, were induced to furnish their gold pieces with the name
and the image of the reigning emperor. In like manner from Polemon's
time the prince of this land was at the same time the chief priest
for life of the emperor and of the imperial house. In other respects
the administration and the court retained the forms introduced under
Mithradates after the model of the Persian grand monarchy, although
the chief secretary (ἀρχιγραμματεύς) and the chief chamberlain
(ἀρχικοιτωνείτης) of the court of Panticapaeum stood related to the
leading court-officers of the great kings, as the enemy of the Romans
Mithradates Eupator to his descendant Tiberius Julius Eupator, who, on
account of his claim to the Bosporan throne, appeared as a suitor at
Rome at the bar of the emperor Pius.

[Sidenote: Trade and commerce in the Bosporus.]

This northern Greece remained valuable for the empire on account of its
commercial relations. Though these at this epoch were doubtless less
important than in earlier times,[222] yet the mercantile intercourse
continued very lively. In the Augustan period the tribes of the
steppes brought slaves and skins,[223] the merchants of civilisation
articles of clothing, wine, and other luxuries to Tanais; in a still
higher degree Phanagoria was the depôt for the exports of the natives,
Panticapaeum for the imports of the Greeks. Those troubles in the
Bosporus in the Claudian age were a severe blow for the merchants of
Byzantium. That the Goths began their piratic voyages in the third
century by pressing the Bosporan vessels to lend them involuntary aid,
has been already mentioned (p. 244). It was doubtless in consequence of
this traffic, indispensable for the barbarian neighbours themselves,
that the citizens of Chersonesus maintained their ground even after the
withdrawal of the Roman garrisons, and were able subsequently--when in
Justinian's time the power of the empire once more asserted itself in
this direction--to return as Greeks into the Greek empire.




Footnotes.


[146: The organisation of the Delphic Amphictiony under the Roman
republic is especially clear from the Delphic inscription, _C. I. L._
iii. p. 987 (comp. _Bull. de Corr. Hell._ vii. 427 ff.). The union was
formed at that time of seventeen tribes with--together--twenty-four
votes, all of them belonging to Greece proper or Thessaly; Aetolia,
Epirus, Macedonia were wanting. After the remodelling by Augustus
(Pausanias, x. 8) this organisation continued to subsist in other
respects, except only that by restriction of the disproportionately
numerous Thessalian votes those of the tribes hitherto represented were
reduced to eighteen; to these were now added Nicopolis in Epirus with
six, and Macedonia likewise with six votes. Moreover the six votes of
Nicopolis were to be given on each occasion, just as this continued
to be the case, for the two of Delphi and the one of Athens; whereas
the other votes were given by the groups, so that, _e.g._ the one
vote of the Peloponnesian Dorians alternated between Argos, Sicyon,
Corinth, and Megara. The Amphictionies were even now not a collective
representation of the European Hellenes, in so far as the tribes
earlier excluded in Greece proper, a portion of the Peloponnesians, and
the Aetolians not attached to Nicopolis, were not represented in it.]

[147: The stated meetings in Delphi and at Thermopylae continued
(Pausanias, vii. 24, 3; Philostratus, _Vita Apoll._ iv. 23),
and of course also the carrying out of the Pythian games, along
with the conferring of the prizes by the _collegium_ of the
Amphictiones (Philostratus, _Vitae Soph._ ii. 27); the same body
has the administration of the "interest and revenues" of the temple
(inscription of Delphi, _Rhein. Mus. N. F._ ii. 111), and fits up
from it, for example at Delphi, a library (Lebas, ii. 845) or puts up
statues there.]

[148: The members of the college of the Ἀμφικτίονες, or, as they were
called at this epoch, Ἀμφικτύονες, were appointed by the several
towns in the way previously described, sometimes from time to time
(iteration: _C. I. Gr._ 1058), sometimes for life (Plutarch, _An
seni_, 10), which probably depended on whether the vote was constant
or alternating (Wilamowitz). Its president was termed in earlier times
ἐπιμελητὴς τοῦ κοινοῦ τῶν Ἀμφικτυόνων (Delphic inscriptions, _Rhein.
Mus. N. F._ ii. 111; _C. I. Gr._ 1713), subsequently Ἑλλαδάρχης τῶν
Ἀμφικτυόνων (_C. I. Gr._ 1124).]

[149: The original bounds of the province are indicated by Strabo,
xvii. 3, 25, p. 840, in the enumeration of the senatorial provinces:
Ἀχαία μέχρι Θετταλίας καὶ Αἰτωλῶν καὶ Ἀκαρνάνων καὶ τινων Ἠπειρωτικῶν
ἐθνῶν ὅσα τῇ Μακεδονίᾳ προσώριστο, in which case the remaining
part of Epirus appears to be assigned to the province of Illyricum
(reckoned here by Strabo--erroneously as regards his time--among the
senatorial). To take μέχρι inclusively is--apart from considerations
of fact--unsuitable for this very reason, because according to the
closing words the regions previously named "are assigned to Macedonia."
Subsequently we find the Aetolians annexed to Achaia (Ptolem. iii. 14).
That Epirus also for a time belonged to it, is possible, not so much
on account of the statement in Dio, liii. 12, which cannot be defended
either for Augustus's time or for that of Dio, but because Tacitus on
the year 17 (_Ann._ ii. 53) reckons Nicopolis to Achaia. But at least
from the time of Trajan Epirus with Acarnania forms a procuratorial
province of its own (Ptolem. iii. 13; _C. I. L._ iii. 536; Marquardt,
_Staatsalth._ v. I, 331). Thessaly and all the country northward of
Oeta constantly remained with Macedonia.]

[150: Nothing gives a clearer idea of the position of the Greeks in
the last century of the Roman republic than the letter of one of these
governors to the Achaean community of Dyme (_C. I. Gr._ 1543). Because
this community had given to itself laws that ran counter to the freedom
granted in general to the Greeks (ἡ ἀποδεδομένη κατὰ κοινὸν τοῖς
Ἕλλησιν ἐλευθερία) and to the organisation given by the Romans to the
Achaeans (ἡ ἀποδοθεῖσα τοῖς Ἀχαιοῖς ὑπὸ Ῥωμαίων πολιτεία; probably with
the co-operation of Polybius, Pausan. viii. 30, 9), whereupon at all
events tumults had arisen, the governor informs the community that he
had caused the two ringleaders to be executed, and that a less guilty
third person was exiled to Rome.]

[151: Comp. iii. 312, 316. {iii. 297, 300} The Delian excavations of
recent years have furnished the proofs that the island, after the
Romans had once given it to Athens (ii. 329) {ii. 309}, remained
constantly Athenian, and constituted itself, doubtless in consequence
of the defection of the Athenians from Rome, as a community of the
"Delians" (_Eph. epig._ v. p. 604), but already six years after the
capitulation of Athens was again Athenian (_Eph. epig._ v. 184 f.;
Homolle, _Bull. de corr. Hell._ viii. p. 142).]

[152: Whether the κοινὸν τῶν Ἀχαιῶν, which naturally does not occur
in the republican period proper, was reconstituted already at the end
of it or not till after the introduction of the imperial provincial
organisation, is doubtful. Inscriptions like the Olympian one of the
proquaestor Q. Ancharius Q. f. (_Arch. Zeitung_, 1878, p. 38, n. 114)
speak rather in favour of the former supposition; yet it cannot with
certainty be designated as pre-Augustan. The oldest sure evidence for
the existence of this union is the inscription set up by it to Augustus
in Olympia (_Arch. Zeitung_, 1877, p. 36, n. 33). Perhaps these were
arrangements of the dictator Caesar, and in connection with the
governor of "Greece,"--probably the Achaia of the imperial period--to
be met with under him (Cicero, _Ad fam._ vi. 6, 10).--We may add that
certainly also under the republic, according to the discretion of
each governor for the time being, several communities might meet for
a definite object by deputies and adopt resolutions; as the κοινόν of
the Siceliots thus decreed a statue to Verres (Cicero, _Verr._ i. 2,
46, 114), similar things must have occurred in Greece also under the
republic. But the regular provincial diets with their fixed officers
and priests were an institution of the imperial period.]

[153: This is the κοινὸν Βοιωτῶν Εὐβοέων Λοκρῶν Φωκέων Δωριέων of the
remarkable inscription probably set up shortly before the battle of
Actium (_C. I. Att._ iii. 568). We cannot possibly with Dittenberger
(_Arch. Zeitung_, 1876, p. 220) refer to this league the notice of
Pausanias (vii. 16, 10), that the Romans "not many years" after the
destruction of Corinth had compassion on the Hellenes, and had again
allowed them the provincial unions (συνέδρια κατὰ ἔθνος ἑκάστοις τὰ
ἀρχαῖα); this applies to the minor individual leagues.]

[154: To it belonged not merely the neighbouring Amyclae, but also
Cardamyle (by gift of Augustus, Pausan. iii. 26, 7), Pherae (Pausan.
iv. 30, 2), Thuria (_ib._ iv. 31, 1), and for a time also Corone (_C.
I. Gr._ 1258; comp. Lebas-Foucart, ii. 305) on the Messenian gulf; and
further the island of Cythera (Dio, liv. 7).]

[155: In the republican period this district appears as τὸ κοινὸν τῶν
Λακεδαιμονίων (Foucart on Lebas, ii. p. 110); Pausanias (iii. 21,
6) is therefore wrong when he makes it only released from Sparta by
Augustus. But they term themselves Ἐλευθερολάκωνες only from the time
of Augustus, and the bestowal of their freedom is therefore justly
traced to him.]

[156: There are coins of this city with the legend _c[olonia] I[ulia]
D[ume]_ and the head of Caesar, others with the legend _c[olonia]
I[ulia] A[ugusta] Dum[e]_ and the head of Augustus along with that of
Tiberius (Imhoof-Blumer, _Monnaies grecques_, p. 165). That Augustus
assigned Dyme to the colony of Patrae, is probably an error of
Pausanias (vii. 17, 5); it remains indeed possible that Augustus in his
later years ordained this union.]

[157: This is shown, at least for the time of Pius, by the African
inscription _C. I. L._ viii. 7059 (comp. Plutarch, _Arist._ 21). The
accounts of authors as to the freed communities give no guarantee at
all for the completeness of the list. Probably Elis also belonged
to them, which was not affected by the catastrophe of the Achaeans,
and even subsequently dated still by Olympiads, not by the era of
the province; besides, it is incredible that the town of the Olympic
festival should not have had the best of legal rights.]

[158: This is pointedly expressed by Aristides in the panegyric on Rome
p. 224 Jebb: διατελεῖτε τῶν μὲν Ἑλλήνων ὥσπερ τροφέων ἐπιμελόμενοι ...
τοὺς μὲν ἀρίστους καὶ πάλαι ἡγεμόνας (Athens and Sparta) ἐλευθέρους καὶ
αὐτονόμους ἀφεικότες αὐτῶν, τῶν δ' ἄλλων μετρίως ... ἐξηγούμενοι, τοὺς
δὲ βαρβάρους πρὸς τὴν ἑκάστοις αὐτῶν οὖσαν φύσιν παιδεύοντες.]

[159: But the Hellenic literati remained grateful to their colleague
and patron. In the Apollonius-romance (v. 41) the great sage from
Cappadocia refuses Vespasian the honour of his company, because he
had made the Hellenes slaves, just as they were on the point of again
speaking Ionic or Doric, and writes to him various _billets_ of
delectable coarseness. A man of Soloi, who broke his neck and then
became alive again, and on this occasion saw all that Dante beheld,
reported that he had met with Nero's soul, into which the agents of the
world-judgment had driven flaming nails, and were employed in turning
it into a viper; but a heavenly voice had interposed, and ordered
them to transform the man--on account of his Philhellenism when on
earth--into a less repulsive animal (Plutarch, _De sera num. vind._, at
the end).]

[160: At least in the ordinance of Hadrian regarding the deliveries
of oil to the community incumbent on the Athenian landowners (_C. I.
A._ iii. 18), the decision was indeed given to the _Boule_ and the
_Ekklesia_, but appeal to the emperor or the proconsul was allowed.]

[161: What Strabo reports (xiv. 3, 3, p. 665) of the Lycian
cities-league, in his time autonomous--that it had not the right of war
and peace and that of alliance, except when the Romans allowed it or it
operated for their advantage--may probably be, without ceremony, held
to relate also to Athens.]

[162: At all events the hitherto known presidents of the κοινὸν τῶν
Ἀχαιῶν, whose home is made out, are from Argos, Messene, Corone in
Messenia (Foucart-Lebas, ii. 305), and there have been hitherto
found among them not merely no citizens of the freed communities,
such as Athens and Sparta, but also none of those belonging to the
confederation of the Boeotians and allies (p. 259). Perhaps this
κοινόν was legally restricted to the territory, which the Romans
called the republic of Achaia--that is, that of the Achaean league
at its overthrow--and the Boeotians and allies were united with the
κοινόν proper of the Achaeans into that wider league, whose existence
and diets in Argos are vouched for by the inscriptions of Acraephia
mentioned in the next note. We may add that alongside of this κοινόν
of the Achaeans there subsisted a still narrower one of the district
of Achaia in the proper sense, whose representatives met in Aegium
(Pausanias, vii. 24, 4), just as the κοινὸν τῶν Ἀρκάδων (_Arch. Zeit._
1879, p. 139, n. 274), and numerous others. If, according to Pausanias,
v. 12, 6, οἱ πάντες Ἕλληνες set up statues in Olympia to Trajan, and αἱ
ἐς τὸ Ἀχαικὸν τελοῦσαι πόλεις to Hadrian, and no misunderstanding has
here crept in, the latter dedication must have taken place at the diet
of Aegium.]

[163: So (only that the Dorians are wanting; comp. p. 259, note 2) the
union is termed on the inscription of Acraephia (Keil, _Syll. Inscr.
Boeot._ n. 31). But this very document, along with the contemporary
one, _C. I. Gr._ 1625, furnishes a proof that the union under the
emperor Gaius, instead of this doubtless strictly official appellation,
designated itself also on the one hand as union of the Achaeans, on the
other as τὸ κοινὸν τῶν Πανελλήνων, or ἡ σύνοδος τῶν Ἑλλήνων, also τὸ
τῶν Ἀχαιῶν καὶ Πανελλήνων συνέδριον. This grandiloquence is nowhere so
glaringly prominent as in those Boeotian petty country-towns; but even
in Olympia, where the union especially set up its memorials, it names
itself for the most part no doubt τὸ κοινὸν τῶν Ἀχαιῶν, but shows often
enough the same tendency; _e.g._ when τὸ κοινὸν τῶν Ἀχαιῶν Π. Αἴλιον
Ἀρίστωνα ... σύνπαντες οἱ Ἕλληνες ἀνέστησαν (_Arch. Zeit._ 1880, p. 86,
n. 344). So too in Sparta, οἱ Ἕλληνες set up a statue to Caesar Marcus
ἀπὸ τοῦ κοινοῦ τῶν Ἀχαιῶν (_C. I. Gr._ 1318).]

[164: In Asia, Bithynia, lower Moesia, the president of the Greek towns
belonging to the province is also called Ἑλλαδάρχης, without more
being thereby expressed than the contrast with the non-Greeks. But, as
the name of Hellenes is employed in Greece in a certain contrast to
the strictly correct one of Achaeans, this is certainly suggested by
the same tendency which was most clearly marked in the Panhellenes of
Argos. Thus we find στρατηγὸς τοῦ κοινοῦ τῶν Ἀχαιῶν καὶ προστάτης διὰ
βίου τῶν Ἑλλήνων (_Arch. Zeit._ 1877, p. 192, n. 98), or on another
document of the same man προστάτης διὰ βίου τοῦ κοινοῦ τῶν Ἀχαιῶν
(Lebas-Foucart, n. 305); an ἄρξας τοῖς Ἕλλησιν σύνπασιν (_Arch. Zeit._
p. 195, n. 106) στρατηγὸς ἀσυνκρίτως ἄρξας τῆς Ἑλλάδος (_ib._ 1877, p.
40, n. 42) στρατηγὸς καὶ Ἑλλαδάρχης (_ib._ 1876, n. 8, p. 226), all
likewise on inscriptions of the κοινὸν τῶν Ἀχαιῶν. That in this κοινόν,
though it may perhaps be deemed to refer merely to the Peloponnesus (p.
264, note), the Panhellenic tendency none the less asserted itself, may
well be conceived.]

[165: The Hadrianic Panhellenes name themselves τὸ κοινὸν συνέδριον τῶν
Ἑλλήνων τῶν εἰς Πλατηὰς συνιόντων (Thebes: Keil, _Syll. Inscr. Boeot._
n. 31, comp. Plutarch, _Arist._ 19, 21); κοινὸν τῆς Ἑλλάδος (_C. I.
Gr._ 5852); τὸ Πανελλήνιον (_ib._). Its president is termed ὁ ἄρχων
τῶν Πανελλήνων (_C. I. A._ iii. 681, 682; _C. I. Gr._ 3832, comp. _C.
I. A._ iii. 10: ἀ[ντ]άρχων τοῦ ἱερωτάτου ἀ[γῶνος τοῦ Π]αν[ελ]ληνίου),
the individual deputy Πανέλλην (_e.g._ _C. I. A._ iii. 534; _C. I.
Gr._ 1124). Alongside of these in the period subsequent to Hadrian the
κοινὸν τῶν Ἀχαιῶν and its στρατηγός or Ἑλλαδάρχης still occur, who are
probably to be distinguished from those just mentioned, although the
latter now sets up his honorary decrees not merely in Olympia, but also
in Athens (_C. I. A._ 18; second example in Olympia, _Arch. Zeit._
1879, p. 52).]

[166: That the remark of Dio of Prusa, _Or._ xxxviii. p. 148 R.,
as to the dispute of the Athenians and the Lacedaemonians ὑπὲρ τῆς
προπομπείας, refers to the festival at Plataeae, is evident from
(Lucian) Ἔρωτες 18, ὡς περὶ προπομπείας ἀγωνιούμενοι Πλαταιᾶσιν. The
sophist Irenaeus also wrote περὶ τῆς Αθηναίων προπομπείας (Suidas, _s.
v._), and Hermogenes, _de ideis_, ii. p. 373. Walz gives as the topic
spoken of Ἀθηναῖοι καὶ Λακεδαιμόνιοι περὶ τῆς προπομπείας κατὰ τὰ
Μηδικὰ (communication from Wilamowitz).]

[167: Two of these are preserved, for Cibyra in Phrygia (_C. I. Gr._
5882), issued from the κοινὸν τῆς Ἑλλάδος by a δόγμα τοῦ Πανελληνίου;
and for Magnesia on the Maeander (_C. I. Att._ iii. 16). In both the
good Hellenic descent of the corporations concerned is brought out
along with their other services to the Hellenes. Characteristic are
also the letters of recommendation, with which these Panhellenes
furnish a man who had merited well of their commonwealth to the
community of his home Aezani in Phrygia, to the emperor Pius, and to
the Hellenes in Asia generally (_C. I. Gr._ 3832, 3833, 3834).]

[168: Beyond doubt Plutarch in these words (_de defectu orac._ 8) does
not mean to say that Greece was not able at all to furnish 3000 men
capable of arms, but that, if burgess-armies of the old sort were to be
formed, they would not be in a position to set on foot 3000 "hoplites."
In this sense the expression may well be correct, so far as correctness
can be expected at all in the case of general complaints of this sort.
The number of communities of the province amounted nearly to a hundred.]

[169: [Dio, _Orat._ xxi. 501 R.]]

[170: This is told to us by Herodian, iv. 8, 3, c. 9, 4, and we have
the inscriptions of two of these Spartiates, Nicocles, ἐστρατευμένος
δὶς κατὰ Περσῶν (_C. I. Gr._ 1253), and Dioscoras, ἀπελθὼν εἰς τὴν
εὐτυχεστάτην συμμαχίαν (= expeditio) τὴν κατὰ Περσῶν (_C. I. Gr._
1495).]

[171: The φρούριον (_C. I. A._ iii. 826) cannot well be understood
otherwise.]

[172: "You have no want of means," says Dio (_Or._ xxxi. p. 566),
"and there are thousands upon thousands here, for whom it would be
advantageous to be less rich;" and further on (p. 620), "you are richer
than any one else in Hellas. Your ancestors possessed not more than you
do. The island has not become worse; you draw the profit of Caria and
a part of Lycia; a number of towns are tributary to you; the city is
always receiving rich gifts from numerous citizens." He further states
that new expenses had not been added, but the earlier outlays for army
and fleet had almost fallen into abeyance; they had to supply annually
at Corinth (and so to the Roman fleet) but one or two small vessels.]

[173: [Dio, _Orat._ xxxi. 649, 650.]]

[174: At the popular festivals, which in Tiberius's time a rich
man gave at Acraephia in Boeotia, he invited the grown-up slaves,
and his wife the female slaves, as guests along with the free (_C.
I. Gr._ 1625). In an endowment for the distribution of oil at the
fencing-institute (γυμνάσιον) of Gytheion in Laconia it is ordained
that on six days in the year the slaves should also partake in it
(Lebas-Foucart n. 243_a_). Similar largesses occur in Argos (_C. I.
Gr._ 1122, 1123).]

[175: In answer to one of the numerous complaints, with which the towns
of Asia Minor plagued the government on account of their disputes as to
titles and rank, Pius tells the Ephesians (Waddington, _Aristide_, p.
51), that he was glad to hear that the Pergamenes had given to them the
new title; that the Smyrnaeans had doubtless merely by accident omitted
it, and would certainly in future be ready to do what was correct, if
they--the Ephesians--would accord to them their right titles. To a
small Lycian town, which applied to the proconsul for the confirmation
of a resolution adopted by it, the latter replied (Benndorf, _Lykische
Reise_, i. 71), that excellent ordinances require only praise, not
confirmation; the latter is implied in the case. The rhetorical
schools of this epoch furnished also the draughtsmen for the imperial
chancery; but this alone mattered little. It belonged to the essence of
the principate not to accentuate outwardly the subject-relation, and
especially not against the Greeks.]

[176: A formal alteration of the tax-organisation does not follow of
itself from this change, and is not hinted at in Tacitus, _Ann._ i. 76;
if the arrangement was made because the provincials complained of the
pressure of taxation (_onera deprecantes_), better governors might help
the provinces by suitable redistribution, and eventually by procuring
remission. That the furtherance of the imperial postal service was felt
specially in this province as an oppressive burden is shown by the
edict of Claudius from Tegea (_Ephem. ep._ v. p. 69).]

[177: The Athenian insurrection under Augustus is certainly attested
by the notice derived from Africanus in Eusebius, _ad ann. Abr._ 2025
(whence Orosius, vi. 22, 2). The riots against the _strategoi_ are
often mentioned; Plutarch, _Q. sympos._ viii. 3, _init._; (Lucian),
_Demonax_, 11, 64; Philostratus, _Vit. soph._ i. 23, ii. 8, 11.]

[178: The magistrate even of culture, that is the freethinker, is
advised to attach the largesses which he makes to the religious
festivals; for the multitude is strengthened in its faith, when it sees
that the men of rank in the city lay some stress on the worship of the
gods, and can expend something upon it (Plutarch, _Praec. ger. reip._
30).]

[179: A model sample is the inscription (Lebas-Foucart, ii. p. 142 n.,
162 _j._) of Μ[ᾶρκορ] Αὐρ[ήλιορ] Ζεύξιππορ ὁ καὶ Κλέανδρορ Φιλομούσω, a
contemporary therefore of Pius and Marcus, who was ἱερεὺς Λευκιππίδων
καὶ Τινδαριδᾶν, of the Dioscuri and their wives, the daughters of
Leukippos, but--in order that with the old the new might not be
wanting--also ἀρχιερέος τῶ Σεβαστῶ καὶ τῶν θείων προγόνων ὠτῶ. He
had in his youth, moreover, been βουαγὸρ μικκιχιδδομένων, literally
herd-leader of the little ones, namely, director of three-year-old
boys--the "herds" of boys of Lycurgus began with the seventh year, but
his successors had overtaken what was wanting, and embraced in the
"herd" and provided with "leaders" all from one year old onward. This
same man was victorious (νεικάαρ = νικήσας) κασσηρατοριν, μωαν καὶ
λωαν: what this means, may be known perhaps to Lycurgus.]

[180: "Inland Attica," says an inhabitant of it in Philostratus, _Vitae
Soph._ ii. 7, "is a good school for one who would learn to speak; the
inhabitants of the city of Athens on the other hand, who hire out
lodgings to the young people flocking thither from Thrace and Pontus
and other barbarian regions, allow their language to be corrupted by
these more than they impart to them good speaking. But in the interior,
whose inhabitants are not mixed with barbarians, the pronunciation and
language are good."]

[181: Karl Keil (Pauly, _Realencycl._ 1² p. 2100) points to τινός for
ἧς τινός and τὰ χωρία γέγοναν in the inscription of the wife of Herodes
(_C. I. L._ vi. 1342).]

[182: Dittenberger, _Hermes_, i. 414. Here, too, may be adduced
what the stupid champion of Apollonius makes his hero write to the
Alexandrian professors (_Ep._ 34), that he has left Argos, Sicyon,
Megara, Phocis, Locris, in order that he might not, by staying longer
in Hellas, become utterly a barbarian.]

[183: Tacitus (on the year 62, _Ann._ xv. 20) characterises one of
these rich and influential provincials, Claudius Timarchides from
Crete, who is all powerful in his sphere (_ut solent praevalidi
provincialium et opibus nimiis ad iniurias minorum elati_), and
has at his disposal the diet and consequently also the decree of
thanks--a due accompaniment very desirable for the departing proconsul
in view of possible actions of reckoning (_in sua potestate situm
an proconsulibus, qui Cretam obtinuissent, grates agerentur_). The
opposition proposes that this decree of thanks be refused, but does not
succeed in bringing the proposal to a vote. From another side Plutarch
(_Praec. ger. reip._ c. 19, 3) depicts these Greeks of rank.]

[184: Herodes was ἐξ ὑπάτων (Philostratus, _Vit. Soph._ i. 25, 5,
p. 526), ἐτέλει ἐκ πατέρων ἐς τοὺς δισυπάτους (_ib._ ii. _init._ p.
545). Otherwise nothing is known of consulships of his ancestors; but
certainly his grandfather Hipparchus was not a senator. Possibly the
question is even only as to cognate ascendants. The family did not
receive the Roman franchise under the Julii (comp. _C. I. A._ iii.
489), but only under the Claudii.]

[185: The first Roman Olympionices, of whom we know, is Ti. Claudius
Ti. f. Nero, beyond doubt the subsequent emperor, with the four-in-hand
(_Arch. Zeit._ 1880, p. 53); this victory falls probably in Ol. 195
(A.D. 1), not in Ol. 99 (A.D. 17), as the list of Africanus states
(Euseb. i. p. 214, Schöne). In this year the conqueror was rather his
son Germanicus, likewise with the four-in-hand (_Arch. Zeit._ 1879, p.
36). Among the eponymous Olympionicae, the victors in the stadium, no
Roman is found; this wounding of the Greek national feeling seems to
have been avoided.]

[186: An agonistic institute thus privileged is termed ἀγὼν ἱερός,
_certamen sacrum_ (that is, with pensioning: Dio, li. 1), or ἀγὼν
εἰσελαστικός, _certamen iselasticum_ (comp. among others, Plin. _ad
Trai._ 118, 119; _C. I. L._ x. 515). The Xystarchia too is, at least
in certain cases, conferred by the emperor (Dittenberger, _Hermes_,
xii. 17 f.). Not without warrant these institutes called themselves
"world-games" (ἀγὼν οἰκουμενικός).]

[187: The emperor Gaius declines, in his letter to the diet of Achaia,
the "great number" of statues adjudged to him, and contents himself
with the four of Olympia, Nemea, Delphi, and the Isthmus (Keil, _Inscr.
Boeot._ n. 31). The same diet resolves to set up a statue to the
emperor Hadrian in each of its towns, of which the base of that set up
at Abea in Messenia has been preserved (_C. I. Gr._ 1307). Imperial
authorisation for such erections was required from the first.]

[188: At the revision of the town-accounts of Byzantium, Pliny found
that annually 12,000 sesterces (£125) were set down for the conveyance
of new-year's good wishes by a special deputation to the emperor, and
3000 sesterces (£32) for the same to the governor of Moesia. Pliny
instructs the authorities to send these congratulations thenceforth
only in writing, which Trajan approves (_Ep. ad Trai._ 43, 44).]

[189: That the land-routes of Greece were specially unsafe, we do not
learn; as to what was the nature of the insurrection in Achaia under
Pius (_Vita_, 5, 4), we are quite in the dark. If the robber-chief
generally--and not precisely the Greek one--plays a prominent part in
the light literature of the epoch, this vehicle is common to the bad
romance-writers of all ages. The Euboean desert of the more polished
Dio was not a robber's nest, but it was the wreck of a great landed
estate, whose possessor had been condemned on account of his wealth
by the emperor, and which thenceforth lay waste. Moreover it is
here apparent--as indeed needs no proof, at least for those who are
non-scholars--that this history is just as true as most which begin by
stating that the narrator himself had it from the person concerned; if
the confiscation were historical, the possession would have come to the
exchequer, not to the town, which the narrator accordingly takes good
care not to name.]

[190: The naive description of Achaia by an Egyptian merchant of
Constantius's time may find a place here:--"The land of Achaia,
Greece, and Laconia has much of learning, but is inadequate for other
things needful; for it is a small and mountainous province, and cannot
furnish much corn, but produces some oil and the Attic honey, and can
be praised more on account of the schools and eloquence, but not so
in most other respects. Of towns it has Corinth and Athens. Corinth
has much commerce, and a fine building, the amphitheatre; but Athens
has old pictures (_historias antiquas_), and a work worth mentioning,
the citadel, where many statues stand and wonderfully set forth the
war-deeds of the forefathers (_ubi multis statuis stantibus mirabile
est videre dicendum antiquorum bellum_). Laconia is said alone to have
the marble of Croceae to show, which people call the Lacedaemonian."
The barbarism of expression is to be set down to the account, not of
the writer, but of the much later translator.]

[191:

  Λευκάδος ἀντί με Καῖσαρ, ἰδ' Ἀμβρακίης ἐριβώλου,
  Θυῤῥείου τε πέλειν, ἀντί τ' Ἀνακτορίου,
  Ἄργεος Ἀμφιλόχου τε, καὶ ὁππόσα ῥαίσατο κύκλῳ
  ἄστε' ἐπιθρώσκων δουρομανὴς πόλεμος,
  εἵσατο Νικόπολιν, θείην πόλιν· ἀντὶ δὲ νίκης
  φοῖβος ἄναξ ταύτην δέχνυται Ἀκτιάδος.

    _Anthol. Gr._ ix. 553.]

[192: When Tacitus, _Ann._ v. 10, names Nicopolis a _colonia Romana_,
the statement is one liable to be misunderstood, but not exactly
incorrect; but that of Pliny (_H. N._ iv. 1, 5), _colonia Augusti
Actium cum ... civitate libera Nicopolitana_, is erroneous, as Actium
was as little a town as Olympia.]

[193: Ὁ ἀγὼν Ὀλύμπιος τὰ Ἄκτια, Strabo, vii. 7, 6, p. 325; Ἀκτιάς
Josephus, _Bell. Jud._ i. 20, 4; Ἀκτιονίκης oftener. As the four great
Greek national festivals are, as is well known, termed ἡ περίοδος, and
the victor crowned in all four περιοδονίκης, so in _C. I. Gr._ 4472 τῆς
περιόδου is appended also to the games of Nicopolis, and the former
περιόδος is designated as the ancient (ἀρχαία). As competitive games
are frequently called ἰσολύμπια, so we find also ἀγὼν ἰσάκτιος (_C. I.
Gr._ 4472), or _certamen ad exemplar Actiacae religionis_ (Tacitus,
_Ann._ xv. 23).

[194: Thus a Nicopolite terms himself ἄρχων τῆς ἱερᾶς Ἀκτιακῆς βουλῆς
(Delphi, _Rhein. Mus._ N. F. ii. 111), as in Elis the expression is
used: ἡ πόλις Ἠλείων καὶ ἡ Ὀλυμπικὴ βουλή (_Arch. Zeit._ 1876, p. 57;
similarly _ibid._ 1877, pp. 40, 41 elsewhere). Moreover the Spartans,
as the only Hellenes that took part in the victory at Actium, obtained
the conduct (ἐπιμέλεια) of the Actian games (Strabo, vii. 7, 6 p. 325):
their relation to the βουλὴ Ἀκτιακή of Nicopolis we do not know.]

[195: The description of its decay in the time of Constantius (_Paneg._
11, 9) is an evidence to the opposite effect for the earlier times of
the empire.]

[196: The excavations at Dodona have confirmed this; all the articles
found belong to the pre-Roman period except some coins. Certainly a
restoration of the building took place, the time of which cannot be
determined; perhaps it was quite late. When Hadrian, who is named
Ζεὺς Δωδοναῖος (_C. I. Gr._ 1822), visited Dodona (Dürr, _Reisen
Hadrians_, p. 56) he did so as an archaeologist. A consultation of
the oracle during the imperial period is only reported--and that not
after the most trustworthy manner--in the case of the emperor Julian
(Theodoretus, _Hist. Eccl._ iii. 21).]

[197: The ordinance of Caesar is attested by Appian, _B. C._ ii.
88, and Plutarch, _Caes._ 48, and it very well accords with his own
account, _B. C._ iii. 80; whereas Pliny, _H. N._ iv. 8, 29, names only
Pharsalus as a free town. In Augustus' time a Thessalian of note,
Petraeos (probably the partisan of Caesar, _B. C._ iii. 35), was burnt
alive (Plutarch, _Praec. ger. reip._ 19), doubtless not by a private
crime, but according to resolution of the diet, and so the Thessalians
were brought before the tribunal of the emperor (Suetonius, _Tib._ 8).
Presumably the two incidents and likewise the loss of freedom stand
connected.]

[198: In the time of the republic Scodra seems to have belonged to
Macedonia (iii. 181) {iii. 173.}; in the imperial period this and
Lissus are Dalmatian towns, and the mouth of the Drin forms the
boundary on the west.]

[199: The towns founded in these regions outside of Macedonia proper
bear quite the character of colonies proper; _e.g._ that of Philippi in
the Thracian land, and especially that of Derriopus in Paeonia (Liv.
xxxix. 53), for which latter place also the distinctively Macedonian
politarchs have epigraphic attestation (inscription of the year 197
A.D., τῶν περὶ Ἀλέξανδρον Φιλίππου ἐν Δερριόπῳ πολιταρχῶν, Duchesne and
Bayet, _Mission au mont Athos_, p. 103).]

[200: That for Lysimachus the Danube was the boundary of the empire, is
evident from Pausanias, i. 9, 6.]

[201: Calybe near Byzantium arose according to Strabo (vii. 6, 2,
p. 320) φιλίππου τοῦ Ἀμύντου τοὺς πονηροτάτους ἐνταῦθα ἱδρύσαντος.
Philippopolis is alleged even according to the account of Theopompus
(fr. 122 Müller) to have been founded as Πονηρόπολις, and to have
received colonists corresponding with that description. However little
these reports deserve trust, they yet in their coincidence express the
Botany-Bay character of these foundations.]

[202: Yet the northern Bessarabian line, which perhaps is Roman,
reaches as far as Tyra (p. 226).]

[203: That Byzantium was still in Trajan's time under the governor of
Bithynia, follows from Plin. _ad Trai._ 43. From the congratulations of
the Byzantines to the legates of Moesia we cannot infer their having
belonged to this governorship, which from their situation was hardly
possible; the relations to the governor of Moesia may be explained from
the commercial connections of the city with the Moesian ports. That
Byzantium was in the year 53 under the senate, and so did not belong
to Thrace, is plain from Tacitus, _Ann._ xii. 62. Cicero (_in Pis._
35, 86; _de prov. cons._ 4, 6) does not attest its having belonged
to Macedonia under the republic, since the town was then free. This
freedom seems, as in the case of Rhodes, to have been often given and
often taken away. Cicero, _l.c._, ascribes freedom to it; in the year
53 it is tributary, Pliny (_H. N._ iv. 11, 46) adduces it as a free
city; Vespasian withdraws its freedom (Suetonius, _Vesp._ 8).]

[204: This is proved by the absence of coins of the inland Thracian
towns, which could be assigned by metal and style to the older period.
That a number of Thracian, especially Odrysian, princes coined in
part even at a very early period, proves only that they ruled over
places on the coast with a Greek or half-Greek population. A similar
judgment must be formed as to the tetradrachms of the "Thracians,"
which stand quite isolated (Sallet, _Num. Zeitschrift_, iii. 241).--The
inscriptions also found in the interior of Thrace are throughout of
Roman times. The decree of a town not named found at Bessapara, now
Tatar Bazarjik, to the west of Philippopolis, by Dumont (_Inscr. de la
Thrace_, p. 7), is indeed assigned to a good Macedonian time, but only
from the character of the writing, which is perhaps deceptive.]

[205: The fifty strategies of Thrace (Plin. _H. N._ iv. 11, 40; Ptolem.
iii. 11, 6) are not military districts, but, as is apparent with
special clearness in Ptolemy, land-districts, which correspond with
the tribes (στρατηγία Μαιδική, Βεσσική κ. τ. λ.) and form a contrast
to the towns. The designation στρατηγός has, just like _praetor_, lost
subsequently its original military value. Here perhaps the analogy
of Egypt, which likewise was divided into urban domains under urban
magistrates and into land-districts under _strategoi_, served primarily
as a basis. A στρατηγὸς Ἀστικῆς περὶ Πέρινθον from the Roman period
occurs in _Eph. epigr._ ii. p. 252.]

[206: In Deultus, the _colonia Flavia Pacis Deultensium_, veterans of
the eighth legion, were provided for (_C. I. L._ vi. 3828). Flaviopolis
on the Chersonese, the old Coela, was certainly not a colony (Plin. iv.
11, 47), but belongs to the peculiar settlement of the imperial menials
on this domanial possession (_Eph. epigr._ v. p. 83).]

[207: This town Νικόπολις ἡ περὶ Αἷμον of Ptolem. iii. 11, 7, Νικόπολις
πρὸς Ἴστρον of the coins, the modern Nikup on the Jantra, belongs
to lower Moesia geographically, and, as the names of governors on
the coins show, since Severus also administratively; but not merely
does Ptolemy adduce it in Thrace, but the places where the Hadrianic
terminal stones (_C. I. L._ iii. 749, comp. p. 992) are found, appear
to assign it likewise to Thrace. As this Greek inland town fitted
neither the Latin town-communities of lower Moesia nor the κοινόν of
the Moesian Pontus, it was assigned at the first organising of the
relations to the κοινόν of the Thracians. Subsequently it must, no
doubt, have been attached to one or the other of those Moesian groups.]

[208: The κοινὸν τῆς Πενταπόλεως is found on an inscription of Odessus,
_C. I. Gr._ 2056 _c._, which may fairly belong to the earlier imperial
period, the Pontic Hexapolis, on two inscriptions of Tomis probably
of the second century A.D. (Marquardt, _Staatsverw._ i.² p. 305;
Hirschfeld, _Arch. epigr. Mitth._ vi. 22). The Hexapolis in any case,
and in accordance therewith probably also the Pentapolis, must have
been brought into harmony with the Roman provincial boundaries, that
is, must have included in it the Greek towns of lower Moesia. These
are also found, if we follow the surest guides,--the coins of the
imperial period. There were six mints (apart from Nicopolis, p. 282,
note) in lower Moesia: Istros, Tomis, Callatis, Dionysopolis, Odessus,
and Marcianopolis, and, as the last town was founded by Trajan, the
Pentapolis is thereby explained. Tyra and Olbia hardly belonged to
it; at least the numerous and loquacious monuments of the latter town
nowhere show any link of connection with this city-league. It is
called κοινὸν τῶν Ἑλλήνων on an inscription of Tomis, printed in the
Athenian _Pandora_ of 1st June 1868 [and in _Anc. Gr. Inscr. in the
British Museum_, ii. n. 175]: Ἀγαθῆ τύχη. Κατὰ τὰ δόξαντα τῆ κρατήστη
βουλῆ καὶ τῶ λαμπροτάτω δήμω τῆς λαμπροτάτης μητροπόλεως καὶ αʹ τοῦ
εὐωνύμου πόντου Τόμεως τὸν Ποντάρχην Αὐρ. Πρείσκιον Ἀννιανὸν ἄρξαντα
τοῦ κοινοῦ τῶν Ἑλλήνων καὶ τῆς μητρ[ο]πόλεως τήν αʹ ἀρχὴν ἁγνῶς, καὶ
ἀρχιερασάμενον, τῆν δι' ὅπλων καὶ κυνηγεσίων ἐνδόξως φιλοτειμίαν μὴ
διαλιπόντα, ἀλλὰ καὶ βουλευτὴν καὶ τῶν πρωτευόντων φλαβίας Νέας πόλεως,
καὶ τὴν ἀρχιέρειαν σύμβιον αὐτοῦ Ἰουλίαν Ἀπολαύστην πάσης τειμῆς χάριν.]

[209: This is shown by the remarkable inscription in Allard (_La
Bulgarie orientale_, Paris, 1863, p. 263): Θεῶ μεγάλω Σαράπ[ιδι καὶ]
τοῖς συννάοις θεοῖς [καὶ τῶ αὐ]τοκράτορι Τ. Αἰλίω Ἀδριαν[ῶ Ἀ]ντωνείνω
Σεβαστῶ Εὐσεβ[εῖ] καὶ Μ. Αὐρηλίω Οὐήρω Καίσαρι Καρπίων Ἀνουβίωνος τῶ
οἴκω τῶν Ἀλεξανδρέων τὸν βωμὸν ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων ἀνέθηκεν ἔτους κγʹ [μηνὸς]
φαρμουθὶ αʹ ἐπὶ ἱερέων [Κ]ορνούτου τοῦ καὶ Σαραπίωνος [Πολύ]μνου τοῦ
καὶ Λον[γείνου]. The mariner's guild of Tomis meets us several times in
the inscriptions of the town.]

[210: Olbia, constantly assailed in war and often destroyed, suffered,
according to the statement of Dio (_Borysth._ p. 75, n.), about 150
years before his time, _i.e._ somewhat before the year 100 A.D., and so
probably in the expedition of Burebista (iv. 305), its last and most
severe conquest (τὴν τελευταίαν καὶ μεγίστην ἅλωσιν). Εἷλον δὲ, Dio
continues, καὶ ταύτην Γέται καὶ τὰς ἄλλας τὰς ἐν τοῖς ἀριστεροῖς τοῦ
Πόντου πόλεις μέχρι Ἀπολλωνίας (Sozopolis or Sizebolu, the last Greek
town of note on the Pontic west coast): ὅθεν δὴ καὶ σφόδρα ταπεινὰ
τὰ πράγματα κατέστη τῶν ταύτῃ Ελλήνων, τῶν μὲν οὐκέτι συνοικισθεισῶν
πόλεων, τῶν δὲ φαύλως καὶ τῶν πλείστων βαρβάρων εἰς αὐτὰς συῤῥυέντων.
The young citizen of rank with a marked Ionic physiognomy, with whom
Dio then meets, who has slain or captured numerous Sarmatians, and
though not acquainted with Phocylides, knows Homer by heart, wears
mantle and trousers after the Scythian fashion, and a knife in his
girdle. The townsmen all wear long hair and a long beard, and only
one has shorn both, which is suspected in him as a token of servile
attitude towards the Romans. Thus a century later matters there looked
quite such as Ovid describes them at Tomis.]

[211: Quite commonly the father has a Scythian name and the son a
Greek, or conversely; _e.g._ an inscription of Olbia set up under or
after Trajan (_C. I. Gr._ 2074) records six _strategoi_, M. Ulpius
Pyrrhus son of Arseuaches, Demetrios son of Xessagaros, Zoilos son of
Arsakes, Badakes son of Radanpson, Epikrates son of Koxuros, Ariston
son of Vargadakes.]

[212: As Asander reckoned his archonship probably from the very time
of his revolt from Pharnaces, and so from the summer of 707 {47.}, and
assumes the royal title already in the fourth year of his reign, this
year may warrantably be put in the autumn 709-710 {45-44.}, and the
confirmation have thus been the work of Caesar. Antonius cannot well
have bestowed it, as he only came to Asia at the end of 712 { 42.};
still less can we think of Augustus, whom the pseudo-Lucian (_Macrob._
15) names, interchanging father and son.]

[213: Mithradates, whom Claudius in the year 41 made king of Bosporus,
traced back his descent to Eupator (Dio, lx. 8; Tacitus, _Ann._ xii.
18), and he was followed by his brother Cotys (Tacitus, _l.c._). Their
father was called Aspurgus (_C. I. Gr._ ii. p. 95), but need not on
that account have been an Aspurgian (Strabo, xi. 2, 19, p. 415). Of
a subsequent change of dynasty there is no mention; king Eupator in
the time of Pius (Lucian, _Alex._ 57; _vita Pii_, 9) points to the
same house. Probably, we may add, these later Bosporan kings, as
well as the immediate successors of Polemon not even known to us by
name, stood in relations of affinity to the Polemonids, as indeed the
first Polemon himself had as his wife a granddaughter of Eupator.
The Thracian royal names, such as Cotys and Rhascuporis, which are
common in the Bosporan royal house, connect themselves doubtless with
the son-in-law of Polemon, the Thracian king Cotys. The appellation
Sauromates, which frequently occurs after the end of the first century,
has doubtless arisen through intermarriage with Sarmatian princely
houses, but, of course, does not prove that those who bore it were
themselves Sarmatians. If Zosimus, i. 31, blames the petty and unworthy
princes who attained to government after the extinction of the old
royal family, for the fact that the Goths under Valerian could carry
out their piratical expeditions in Bosporan ships, this may be correct,
and in the first instance Pharnaces may be meant, of whom there are
coins from the years 254 and 255. But even these, too, are marked with
the image of the Roman emperor, and later there are again found the old
family names (all the Bosporan kings are Tiberii Julii), and the old
surnames, such as Sauromates and Rhascuporis. Taken as a whole, the old
traditions as well as the Roman protectorate were still at that time
here retained.]

[214: The last Bosporan coin is of the year 631, of the Achaemenid
era, A.D. 335; this is certainly connected with the installation,
which falls in this very year, of Hanniballianus, the nephew of
Constantine I., as "king," although this kingdom embraced chiefly the
east of Asia Minor and had as its capital Caesarea in Cappadocia.
After this king and his kingdom had perished in the bloody catastrophe
after Constantine's death, the Bosporus was placed directly under
Constantinople.]

[215: The Bosporus was still in Roman possession in the year 366
(Ammianus, xxvi. 10, 6); soon afterwards the Greeks on the north shore
of the Black Sea must have been left to themselves, until Justinian
reoccupied the peninsula (Procopius, _Bell. Goth._ iv. 5). In the
interval Panticapaeum perished under the assaults of the Huns.]

[216: The coins of the town Chersonesus from the imperial period have
the legend Χερσονήσου ἐλευθέρας, once even βασιλευούσης, and neither
name nor head of king or emperor (A. v. Sallet, _Zeitschrift für Num._
i. 27; iv. 273). The independence of the town evidences itself also in
the fact that it coins in gold no less than the kings of the Bosporus.
As the era of the town appears correctly fixed at the year 36 B.C. (_C.
I. Gr._ n. 8621), in which freedom was conferred upon it presumably by
Antonius, the gold coin of the "ruling city" dated from the year 109
was struck in 75 A.D.]

[217: According to Strabo's representation (xi. 2, 11, p. 495)
the rulers of Tanais stand independently by the side of those of
Panticapaeum, and the tribes to the south of the Don depend sometimes
on the latter, sometimes on the former; when he adds that several of
the Panticapaean princes ruled as far as Tanais, and particularly the
last, Pharnaces, Asander, Polemon, this seems more exception than rule.
In the inscription quoted in the next note the Tanaites stand among the
subject stocks, and a series of Tanaitic inscriptions confirms this
for the time from Marcus to Gordian; but the Ἕλληνες καὶ Ταναεῖται
alongside of the ἄρχοντες Ταναειτῶν and of the frequently mentioned
Ἑλληνάρχαι confirm the view that the town even then remained non-Greek.]

[218: In the only vivid narrative from the Bosporan history which
we possess, that of Tacitus, _Ann._ xii. 15-31, concerning the two
rival brothers, Mithradates and Cotys, the neighbouring tribes, the
Dandaridae, Siracae, Aorsi, are under rulers of their own not legally
dependent on the Roman prince of Panticapaeum.--As to titles, the
older Panticapaean princes are wont to call themselves archons of the
Bosporus, that is, of Panticapaeum, and of Theudosia, and kings of the
Sindi and of all the Maitae and other non-Greek tribes. In like manner
what is, so far as I know, the oldest among the royal inscriptions
of the Roman epoch names Aspurgos, son of Asandrochos (Stephani,
_Comptes rendus de la comm. pour 1866_, p. 128), as βασιλεύοντα παντὸς
Βοοσπόρου, Θεοδοσίης καὶ Σίνδων καί Μαϊτῶν καί Τορετῶν Ψησῶν τε καὶ
Ταναειτῶν, ὑποτάσαντα Σκύθας καὶ Ταύρους. No inference as to the extent
of the territory may be drawn from the simplified title.--In the
inscriptions of the later period there is found once under Trajan the
doubtless adulatory title βασιλεὺς βασιλέων μέγας τοῦ παντὸς Βοοσπόρου
(_C. I. Gr._ 2123). The coins generally, from Asander onward, know no
title but βασιλεύς, while yet Pharnaces calls himself βασιλεὺς βασιλέων
μέγας. Beyond doubt this was the effect of the Roman sovereignty,
with which a vassal-prince placed over other princes was not very
compatible.]

[219: This was the king Mithradates, installed by Claudius in the year
41, who some years afterwards was deposed and replaced by his brother
Cotys; he lived afterwards in Rome, and perished in the confusions
of the four-emperor-year (Plutarch, _Galba_, 13, 15). The state of
the matter, however, is not clear either from the hints in Tacitus,
_Ann._ xii. 15 (comp. Plin. _H. N._ vi. 5, 17), or from the report
(confused by the interchange of the two, Mithradates of Bosporus, and
Mithradates of Iberia) in Petrus Patricius _fr._ 3. The Chersonese
tales in the late Constantinus Porphyrogenitus, _de adm. imp._ c. 53,
do not, of course, come into account. The bad Bosporan king Sauromates,
Κρισκωνόρου (not Ῥησκοπόρου) υἱός, who with the Sarmatians wages war
against the emperors Diocletian and Constantius, as well as against
the Chersonese faithful to the empire, has evidently arisen from a
confusion of names between the Bosporan king and people; and just as
historical as the variation on the history of David and Goliath, is the
despatch of the mighty king of the Bosporans, Sauromates, by the small
Chersonesite Pharnaces. The kings' names alone, _e.g._ besides those
named, the Asander, who comes in after the extinction of the family of
the Sauromatae, suffice. The civic privileges and the localities of
the city, for the explanation of which these _mirabilia_ are invented,
certainly deserve attention.]

[220: There are no Bosporan gold or pseudo-gold coins without the head
of the Roman emperor, and this is always that of the ruler recognised
by the Roman senate. That in the years 263 and 265, when in the empire
elsewhere after the captivity of Valerian Gallienus was officially
regarded as sole ruler, two heads here appear on the coins, is perhaps
due only to want of information; yet the Bosporans may at that time
have made another choice amid the many pretenders. The names are at
this time not appended, and the effigies are not to be certainly
distinguished.]

[221: This we may be allowed to believe at the hands of the Scythian
Toxaris in the dialogue placed among those of Lucian (c. 44); for the
rest he narrates not merely μύθοις ὅμοια, but a very myth, of whose
kings Leucanor and Eubiotes the coins, as may well be conceived, have
no knowledge.]

[222: As respects the export of grain, the notice in the report of
Plautius (p. 218), deserves attention.]

[223: From the offer of a township of the Siracae (on the Sea of Azoff)
hard pressed by the Roman troops to deliver 10,000 slaves (Tacitus,
_Ann._ xii. 17), it may be allowable to infer a lively import of slaves
from these regions.]




CHAPTER VIII.

ASIA MINOR.


The great peninsula which is washed on three sides by the three seas,
the Black, the Aegean, and the Mediterranean, and which is connected
towards the east with the Asiatic continent proper, will, so far as
it belongs to the frontier-territory of the empire, be dealt with in
the next section, which treats of the region of the Euphrates and the
relations between the Romans and Parthians. Here we have to set forth
the peaceful relations, more especially of the western districts, under
the imperial government.

[Sidenote: The natives and the colonists.]

The original, or at any rate pre-Greek, population of these wide
regions held its ground in many places to a considerable extent down to
the imperial period. The greatest part of Bithynia certainly belonged
to the formerly discussed Thracian stock; Phrygia, Lydia, Cilicia,
Cappadocia, show very manifold and not easily unravelled survivals of
older linguistic epochs, which in various forms reach down to the Roman
period; strange names of gods, men, and places meet us everywhere. But,
so far as our view reaches--and it is but seldom allowed to penetrate
here very deeply--these elements appear only losing ground and waning,
essentially as a negation of civilisation or--what seems to us here at
least to coincide with it--Hellenising. We shall return at the fitting
place to the individual groups of this category; so far as concerns the
historical development of Asia Minor in the imperial period there were
but two active nationalities, the two which were the last immigrants,
the Hellenes in the beginnings of the historical period, and the Celts
during the troublous times of the Diadochi.

[Sidenote: Hellenic and Hellenistic culture.]

The history of the Hellenes of Asia Minor, so far as it forms a part
of Roman history, has already been set forth. In the remote age, when
the coasts of the Mediterranean were first navigated and settled, and
the world began to be apportioned among the progressive nations at the
expense of those left behind, the flood of Hellenic emigration had
poured no doubt over all the shores of the Mediterranean Sea, but yet
nowhere--not even towards Italy and Sicily,--in so broad a stream as
over the Aegean Sea rich in islands, and the adjacent charming coast
of anterior Asia rich in harbours. Thereafter the west-Asiatic Greeks
themselves had taken an active part, above all the rest, in the further
conquest of the world, and had helped to settle from Miletus the coasts
of the Black, and from Phocaea and Cnidus those of the Western, Sea.
In Asia Hellenic civilisation doubtless laid hold of the inhabitants
of the interior, the Mysians, Lydians, Carians, Lycians; and even the
Persian great power remained not unaffected by it. But the Hellenes
themselves possessed nothing but the fringe of coast, including at the
utmost the lower course of the larger rivers and the islands. They
were not able here to gain continental conquests and a power of their
own by land overagainst the powerful native princes; moreover the
interior of Asia Minor, highlying and in great part but little capable
of cultivation, was not so attractive for settlement as the coasts,
and the communications of the latter with the interior were difficult.
Essentially in consequence of this, the Asiatic Hellenes attained still
less than the European to inward union and to great power of their
own, and early learned submissiveness in presence of the lords of the
continent. The national Hellenic idea first came to them from Athens;
they became its allies only after the victory, and did not remain so
in the hour of danger. What Athens had wished to provide, and had not
been able to furnish for these clients of the nation, was accomplished
by Alexander; Hellas he was obliged to conquer, Asia Minor saw in the
conqueror simply its deliverer.

[Sidenote: Formation of new centres.]

Alexander's victory in fact not merely made Asiatic Hellenism secure,
but opened up for it a wide, almost boundless, future; in the process
of continental settlement, which, in contrast to the merely littoral,
marked this second stage of Hellenic world-conquest, Asia Minor took
part to a considerable extent. Yet of the great centres for the newly
formed states there was none that came to the old Greek towns of the
coast.[224] The new period required new formations in general, and
above all, new towns, to serve at once as Greek royal residences and as
centres of populations hitherto non-Greek, that were to be brought to
Greek habits. The great political development moves around the towns of
royal foundation and of royal name, Thessalonica, Antioch, Alexandria.
With their masters the Romans had to contend; the possession of Asia
Minor they gained almost throughout, as a man gets an estate from
relations or friends, by bequest in a testament; and, however heavy was
the burden at times of Roman government on the regions thus acquired,
there was not added here the sting of foreign rule. Doubtless the
Achaemenid Mithradates confronted the Romans in Asia Minor with a
national opposition, and the Roman misrule drove the Hellenes into his
arms; but the Hellenes themselves never undertook anything similar.
Therefore there is little to be told of this great, rich, and important
possession in a political respect; and all the less, inasmuch as what
has been remarked in the previous section concerning the national
relations of the Hellenes generally to the Romans holds good in
substance also for those of Asia Minor.

[Sidenote: The provinces of Asia Minor.]

The Roman administration of Asia Minor was never organised in a
systematic way, but the several territories were, just as they came
to the empire, established without material change of their limits as
Roman administrative districts. The states which king Attalus III.
of Pergamus bequeathed to the Romans, formed the province of Asia;
those of king Nicomedes, which likewise fell to them by inheritance,
formed the province of Bithynia; the territory taken from Mithradates
Eupator formed the province of Pontus united with Bithynia. Crete was
occupied by the Romans on occasion of the great war with the pirates;
Cyrene, which may also be mentioned here, was taken over by them
according to the last will of its ruler. The same legal title gave to
the republic the island of Cyprus; to which was here added the need
for the suppression of piracy. This had also laid a basis for the
formation of the governorship of Cilicia; the land was annexed to Rome
completely by Pompeius at the same time with Syria, and the two were
administered jointly during the first century. Possession of all these
lands was already acquired by the republic. In the imperial period
a number of territories were added, which had formerly belonged but
indirectly to the empire: in 729 U.C. {25.} the kingdom of Galatia,
with which there had been united a part of Phrygia, Lycaonia, Pisidia,
and Pamphylia; in 747 U.C. {7.} the lordship of king Deiotarus, son of
Castor, which embraced Gangra in Paphlagonia and probably also Amasia
and other neighbouring places; in 17 A.D. the kingdom of Cappadocia; in
43 the territory of the confederation of the Lycian towns; in 63 the
north-east of Asia Minor from the valley of the Iris to the Armenian
frontier; Lesser Armenia and some smaller principalities in Cilicia
probably by Vespasian. Thereby the direct imperial administration was
carried out throughout Asia Minor. As dependent principalities, there
remained only the Tauric Bosporus, of which we have already spoken, and
Great Armenia, of which the next section will treat.

[Sidenote: Senatorial and imperial government.]

When, on the introduction of the imperial government, the
administrative partition was made between it and that of the senate,
the whole territory of Asia Minor, so far as it was at that time
directly under the empire, fell to the latter body; the island of
Cyprus, which at first had come under imperial administration, was
likewise transferred, a few years later, to the senate. Thus arose the
four senatorial governorships of Asia, Bithynia and Pontus, Cyprus,
Crete and Cyrene. Only Cilicia, as part of the Syrian province, was
placed at first under imperial administration. But the territories that
subsequently came to be directly administered as parts of the empire
were here, as throughout the empire, placed under imperial governors;
thus even under Augustus there was formed from the inland districts of
the Galatian kingdom the province of Galatia, and the coast district of
Pamphylia was assigned to another governor, under which latter Lycia
was also placed under Claudius. Moreover Cappadocia became an imperial
governorship under Tiberius. Cilicia also naturally remained, when it
obtained governors of its own, under imperial administration. Apart
from the fact that Hadrian exchanged the important province of Bithynia
and Pontus for the unimportant Lycio-Pamphylian one, this arrangement
remained in force, until towards the end of the third century the
senatorial share in administration generally was, with the exception
of some slight remnants, superseded. The frontier was in the first
period of the empire formed throughout by the dependent principalities;
after their annexation the imperial frontier did not, apart from
Cyrene, touch any of these administrative districts, excepting only the
Cappadocian, so far as to this at that time was apportioned also the
north-eastern border-district as far as Trapezus;[225] and even this
governorship bordered not with the foreign land proper, but in the
north with the dependent tribes on the Phasis, and farther on with the
vassal-kingdom of Armenia, which belonged _de jure_ and in more than
one sense _de facto_ to the empire.

In order to gain a conception of the condition and the development of
Asia Minor in the first three centuries of our era, so far as this
is possible in the case of a country as to which we have no direct
historical tradition, we must, looking to the conservative character
of the Roman provincial government, begin with the older territorial
divisions and the previous history of the several regions.

[Sidenote: Asia.]

[Sidenote: The coast-towns.]

The province of Asia was the old kingdom of the Attalids, the west of
Asia Minor as far north as the Bithynian and as far south as the Lycian
frontier; the eastern districts at first separated from it, the Great
Phrygia, had already in the republican period been again attached to
it (iii. 288) {iii. 274.}, and the province thenceforth reached as far
as the country of the Galatians and the Pisidian mountains. Rhodes
too and the other smaller islands of the Aegean Sea belonged to this
province. The original Hellenic settlement had, besides the islands
and the coast proper, occupied also the lower valleys of the larger
rivers; Magnesia on the Sipylus, in the valley of the Hermus, the other
Magnesia and Tralles in the valley of the Maeander, had already before
Alexander been founded as Greek towns, or had at any rate become such;
the Carians, Lydians, Mysians, became early at least half Hellenes.
The Greek rule, when it set in, found not much to do in the coast
districts; Smyrna, which centuries before had been destroyed by the
barbarians of the interior, rose at that time from its ruins, in order
speedily to become one of the first stars in the brilliant belt of the
cities of Asia Minor; and if the rebuilding of Ilion at the sepulchral
mound of Hector was more a work of piety than of policy, the laying out
of Alexandria on the coast of the Troas was of enduring importance.
Pergamus in the valley of the Caicus flourished as the court-residence
of the Attalids.

[Sidenote: The interior.]

In the great work of Hellenising the interior of this province in
keeping with the intentions of Alexander, all the Hellenic governments,
Lysimachus, the Seleucids, the Attalids vied with each other. The
details of the foundations have disappeared from our tradition still
more than the warlike events of the same epoch; we are left dependent
mainly on the names and the surnames of the towns; but even these
suffice to make known to us the general outlines of this activity
continuing for centuries, and yet homogeneous and throughout conscious
of its aim. A series of inland townships, Stratonicea in Caria, Peltae,
Blaundus, Docimeium, Cadi in Phrygia, the Mysomacedonians in the
district of Ephesus, Thyatira, Hyrcania, Nacrasa in the region of the
Hermus, the Ascylaces in the district of Adramytium, are designated in
documents or other credible testimonies as cities of the Macedonians;
and these notices are of a nature so accidental, and the townships in
part so unimportant, that the like designation certainly extended to
a great number of other settlements in this region; and we may infer
an extensive settling of Greek soldiers in the districts indicated,
probably connected with the protection of anterior Asia against the
Galatians and Pisidians. If, moreover, the coins of the considerable
Phrygian town Synnada combine with the name of their city that of
the Ionians and the Dorians as well as that of the common Zeus (Ζεὺς
πάνδημος), one of the Alexandrids must have summoned the Greeks in
common to settle there; and the summons was certainly not confined to
this single town. The numerous towns, chiefly of the interior, the
names of which are traceable to the royal houses of the Seleucids or
the Attalids, or which have otherwise Greek names, need not here
be adduced; there are found in particular among the towns certainly
founded or reorganised by the Seleucids several that were in later
times the most flourishing and most civilised in the interior, _e.g._
in southern Phrygia Laodicea, and above all Apamea, the old Celaenae on
the great military road from the west coast of Asia Minor to the middle
Euphrates, already in the Persian period the entrepôt for this traffic,
and under Augustus, next to Ephesus, the most considerable city of the
province of Asia. Although every case of assigning a Greek name is not
to be connected with a settlement by Greek colonists, we may be allowed
at any rate to reckon a considerable portion of these townships among
Greek colonies. But even the urban settlements of non-Greek origin,
which the Alexandrids found in existence, turned of themselves into the
paths of Hellenising, as indeed the residence of the Persian governor,
Sardes, was organised even by Alexander himself as a Greek commonwealth.

[Sidenote: Its position under the Romans.]

This urban development was completed when the Romans entered upon the
rule of interior Asia; they themselves did not make special exertions
to promote it. That a great number of the urban communities in the
eastern half of the province reckon their years from that of the
city 670 {84.}, is due to the fact that then, after the close of the
Mithradatic war, these districts were brought by Sulla under direct
Roman administration (iii. 328) {iii. 312.}; these townships did not
receive city-rights only then for the first time. Augustus occupied the
town of Parium on the Hellespont and the already-mentioned Alexandria
in Troas with veterans of his army, and assigned to both the rights of
Roman burgess-communities; the latter was thenceforth in Greek Asia
an Italian island like Corinth in Greece and Berytus in Syria. But
this was nothing but a provision for soldiers; of the foundation of
towns proper in the Roman province of Asia under the emperors there
is little mention. Among the not numerous towns named after emperors
there it is only perhaps in the case of Sebaste and Tiberiopolis, both
in Phrygia, and of Hadrianoi on the Bithynian frontier, that no older
name of the city can be pointed out. Here, in the mountain-region
between Ida and Olympus, dwelt Cleon in the time of the triumvirate,
and a certain Tilliborus under Hadrian, both half robber-chiefs, half
popular princes, of whom the former even played a part in politics; in
this asylum of criminals the foundation of an organised urban community
by Hadrian was at all events a benefit. Otherwise in this province,
with its five hundred urban communities, the province richest in cities
of the whole state, not much more was left to be done in the way of
foundation; there was room at the most perhaps for division, that is,
for detaching such hamlets as developed themselves _de facto_ into
urban communities, from the earlier communal union and making them
independent, as we can point to a case of the kind in Phrygia under
Constantine I. But from Hellenising proper the sequestered districts
were still far remote when the Roman government began; especially in
Phrygia the language of the country, perhaps similar in character to
the Armenian, held its ground. If from the absence of Greek coins and
of Greek inscriptions we may not with certainty infer the absence of
Hellenising,[226] yet the fact that the Phrygian coins belong almost
throughout to the Roman imperial period, and the Phrygian inscriptions
as regards the great majority to the later times of the empire, points
to the conclusion that, so far as Hellenic habits found their way at
all into the regions of the province of Asia that were remote and
difficult of access to civilisation, they did so in the main only under
the emperors. For direct interference on the part of the imperial
administration this process, accomplishing itself in silence, gave
little opportunity, and traces of such interference we are not able to
show. Asia, it is true, was a senatorial province, and we may here
bear in mind that with the government of the senate all initiative fell
into abeyance.

[Sidenote: Urban rivalries.]

Syria, and still more, Egypt, became merged in their capitals; the
province of Asia and Asia Minor generally had no single town to show
like Antioch and Alexandria, but their prosperity rested on the
numerous middle-sized towns. The division of the towns into three
classes, which are distinguished as to the right of voting at the
diet, as to the apportionment of the contributions to be furnished
by the whole province, even as to the number of town-physicians and
town-teachers to be appointed,[227] is eminently peculiar to these
regions. The urban rivalries, which appear in Asia Minor so emphatic
and in part so childish, occasionally even so odious--as, for example,
the war between Severus and Niger in Bithynia was properly a war of the
two rival capitals Nicomedia and Nicaea--belong to the character of
Hellenic politics in general, but especially of those in Asia Minor. We
shall mention further on the emulation as to temples of the emperors;
in a similar way the ranking of the urban deputations at the common
festivals in Asia Minor was a vital question--Magnesia on the Maeander
calls itself on the coins the "seventh city of Asia"--and above all the
first place was one so much desired, that the government ultimately
agreed to admit several first cities. It fared similarly with the
designation of "metropolis." The proper metropolis of the province was
Pergamus, the residence of the Attalids and the seat of the diet. But
Ephesus, the _de facto_ capital of the province, where the governor
was obliged to enter on his office, and which boasts of this "right of
reception at landing" on its coins; Smyrna, in constant rivalship with
its Ephesian neighbour, and, in defiance of the legitimate right of the
Ephesians to primacy, naming itself on coins "the first in greatness
and beauty;" the very ancient Sardis, Cyzicus, and several others
strove after the same honorary right. With these their wranglings, on
account of which the senate and the emperor were regularly appealed
to--the "Greek follies," as men were wont to say in Rome--the people of
Asia Minor were the standing annoyance and the standing laughing-stock
of the Romans of mark.[228]

[Sidenote: Bithynia.]

Bithynia did not stand on a like level with the Attalid kingdom. The
older Greek colonising had here confined itself merely to the coast.
In the Hellenistic epoch at first the Macedonian rulers, and later the
native dynasty which walked entirely in their steps, had--along with
a regulation of the places on the coast, which perhaps on the whole
amounted to a changing of their names--also opened up in some measure
the interior, in particular by the two successful foundations of Nicaea
(Isnik) and Prusa on Olympia (Broussa); of the former it is stated
that the first settlers were of good Macedonian and Hellenic descent.
But in the intensity of the Hellenising the kingdom of Nicomedes was
far behind that of the citizen prince of Pergamus; in particular the
eastern interior can have been but little settled before Augustus.
This was otherwise in the time of the empire. In the Augustan age a
successful robber-chief, who became a convert to order, reconstructed
on the Galatian frontier the utterly decayed township Gordiou
Kome, under the name of Juliopolis; in the same region the towns
Bithynion-Claudiopolis and Crateia-Flaviopolis probably attained Greek
civic rights in the course of the first century. Generally in Bithynia
Hellenism took a mighty upward impulse under the imperial period, and
the tough Thracian stamp of the natives gave a good foundation for it.
The fact that, among the inscribed stones of this province known in
great number, not more than four belong to the pre-Roman epoch, cannot
well be explained solely from the circumstance that urban ambition was
only fostered under the emperors. In the literature of the imperial
period a number of the best authors and the least carried away by
exuberant rhetoric, such as the philosopher Dio of Prusa, the historian
Memnon of Heraclea, Arrianus of Nicomedia, Cassius Dio of Nicaea,
belong to Bithynia.

[Sidenote: Pontus.]

The eastern half of the south coast of the Black Sea, the Roman
province of Pontus, had as its basis that portion of the kingdom of
Mithradates, of which Pompeius took direct possession immediately after
the victory. The numerous smaller principalities, which Pompeius at the
same time gave away in the interior of Paphlagonia and thence eastward
to the Armenian frontier, were, after a shorter or longer subsistence,
on their annexation partly attached to the same province, partly joined
to Galatia or Cappadocia. The former kingdom of Mithradates had been
far less affected than the western regions either by the older or by
the younger Hellenism. When the Romans took possession directly or
indirectly of this territory, there were, strictly speaking, no towns
of Greek organisation there; Amasia, the old capital of the Pontic
Achaemenids, and still their burial-place, was not such; the two old
Greek coast-towns, Amisus and Sinope that once commanded the Black Sea,
had become royal residences, and Greek polity would hardly be given to
the few townships laid out by Mithradates, _e.g._ Eupatoria (iv. 152).
But here, as was already shown in detail (iv. 151 f.) {iv. 146.}, the
Roman conquest was at the same time the Hellenising; Pompeius organised
the province in such a way as to make the eleven chief townships of
it into towns, and to distribute the territory among them. Certainly
these artificially created towns with their immense districts--that of
Sinope had along the coast an extent of 70 miles, and bordered on the
Halys with that of Amisus--resembled more the Celtic cantons than the
Hellenic and Italian urban communities proper. But at any rate Sinope
and Amisus were then reinstated in their old positions, and other
towns in the interior, such as Pompeiopolis, Nicopolis, Megalopolis,
the later Sebasteia, were called into life. Sinope obtained from the
dictator Caesar the rights of a Roman colony, and beyond doubt also
Italian settlers (iv. 574) {iv. 544.}. More important for the Roman
administration was Trapezus, an old colony of Sinope; the town, which
in the year 63 was joined to the province of Cappadocia (p. 324, note),
was both the station of the Roman Black Sea fleet and in a certain
measure the base of operations for the military corps of this province,
which was the only corps in all Asia Minor.

[Sidenote: Cappadocia.]

Inland Cappadocia was in the Roman power after the erection of the
provinces of Pontus and Syria; of its annexation in the beginning of
the reign of Tiberius, which was primarily occasioned by the attempt
of Armenia to release itself from the Roman suzerainty, we shall have
to give an account in the following section. The court, and those
immediately connected with it, had become Hellenised (iii. 59) {iii.
57.}, somewhat as the German courts of the eighteenth century adapted
themselves to French habits. The capital, Caesarea, the ancient
Mazaca, like the Phrygian Apamea, an intermediate station for the
great traffic between the ports of the west coast and the lands of
the Euphrates, and in the Roman period, as still at the present day,
one of the most flourishing commercial cities of Asia Minor, was, at
the instigation of Pompeius, not merely rebuilt after the Mithradatic
war, but probably also furnished at that time with civic rights after
the Greek type. Cappadocia itself was at the beginning of the imperial
period hardly more Greek than Brandenburg and Pomerania under Frederick
the Great were French. When the country became Roman, it was divided,
according to the statements of the contemporary Strabo, not into
city-districts, but into ten prefectures, of which only two had towns,
the already-mentioned capital and Tyana; and this arrangement was
here on the whole not more changed than in Egypt, though individual
townships subsequently received Greek civic rights; _e.g._ the emperor
Marcus made the Cappadocian village, in which his wife had died, into
the town Faustinopolis. It is true that the Cappadocians now spoke
Greek; but the students from Cappadocia had much to endure abroad on
account of their uncouth accent, and of their defects in pronunciation
and modulation; and, if they learned to speak after an Attic fashion,
their countrymen found their language affected.[229] It was only in
the Christian period that the comrades in study of the emperor Julian,
Gregory of Nazianzus and Basil of Caesarea, gave a better sound to the
Cappadocian name.

[Sidenote: Lycia.]

The Lycian cities in their secluded mountain-land did not open
their coast for Greek settlement, but did not on that account debar
themselves from Hellenic influence. Lycia was the only district of Asia
Minor in which early civilising did not set aside the native language,
and which, almost like the Romans, entered into Greek habits without
becoming externally Hellenised. It is characteristic of their position,
that the Lycian confederation as such joined the Attic naval league and
paid its tribute to the Athenian leading power. The Lycians not merely
practised their art after Hellenic models, but probably also regulated
their political organisation early in the same way. The conversion
of the cities-league, once subject to Rhodes, but which had become
independent after the third Macedonian war (ii. 325) {ii. 307.} into a
Roman province, which was ordained by the emperor Claudius on account
of the endless quarrels among the allies, must have furthered the
progress of Hellenism; in the course of the imperial period the Lycians
thereupon became completely Greeks.

[Sidenote: Pamphylia and Cilicia.]

The Pamphylian coast-towns, like Aspendus and Perga, Greek foundations
of the oldest times, subsequently left to themselves, and attaining
under favourable circumstances prosperous development, had either
conserved, or moulded specially on their own part, the oldest Hellenic
character in such a way that the Pamphylians might be regarded as an
independent nation in language and writing not much less than the
neighbouring Lycians. Then, when Asia was gained for the Hellenes, they
found gradually their way back into the common Greek civilisation,
and so also into the general political organisation. The rulers
in this region and on the neighbouring Cilician coast were in the
Hellenistic period partly the Egyptians, whose royal house gave its
name to different townships in Pamphylia and Cilicia, partly the
Seleucids, after whom the most considerable town of west Cilicia was
named Seleucia on the Calycadnus, partly the Pergamenes, of whose rule
Attalia (Adalia) in Pamphylia testifies.

[Sidenote: Pisidia and Isauria.]

On the other hand the tribes in the mountains of Pisidia, Isauria and
western Cilicia substantially maintained their independence down to
the beginning of the imperial period. Here hostilities never ceased.
Not merely by land had the civilised governments continued troubles
with the Pisidians and their comrades, but these pursued still more
zealously than robbery by land the trade of piracy, particularly from
western Cilicia, where the mountains immediately approach the sea.
When, on the decline of the Egyptian naval power, the south coast
of Asia Minor became entirely an asylum of the pirates, the Romans
interfered and erected the province of Cilicia, which embraced also,
or was at any rate intended to embrace, the Pamphylian coast, for the
sake of suppressing piracy. But what they did showed more what ought
to have been done than that anything was really accomplished; the
intervention took place too late and too fitfully. Though a blow was
once struck against the corsairs, and Roman troops penetrated even into
the Isaurian mountains, and broke up the pirates' strongholds far into
the interior (iv. 47) {iv. 44.}, the Roman republic did not attain
true permanent establishment in these districts reluctantly annexed
by it. Here everything was left for the empire to do. Antonius, when
he took in hand the East, entrusted an able Galatian officer, Amyntas,
with the subjugation of the refractory Pisidian region,[230] and, when
the latter proved his quality,[231] he made him king of Galatia,--the
region of Asia Minor which was best organised in a military point of
view, and most ready for action--and at the same time extended his
government from thence as far as the south coast, and so as to include
Lycaonia, Pisidia, Isauria, Pamphylia, and western Cilicia, while the
civilised east half of Cilicia was left with Syria. Even when Augustus,
after the battle of Actium, entered upon rule in the East, he left the
Celtic prince in his position. The latter made essential progress as
well in the suppression of the bad corsairs harbouring in the lurking
places of western Cilicia, as also in the extirpation of the brigands,
killed one of the worst of these robber-chiefs, Antipater, the ruler of
Derbe and Laranda in southern Lycaonia, built for himself a residence
in Isauria, and not merely drove the Pisidians out from the adjoining
Phrygian territories, but invaded their own land, and took Cremna in
the heart of it. But some years after (729 U.C.) {25.} he lost his
life on an expedition against one of the west Cicilian tribes, the
Homonadenses; after he had taken most of the townships and their prince
had fallen, he perished through a plot directed against him by the
wife of the latter. After this disaster Augustus himself undertook
the difficult business of pacifying the interior of Asia Minor. If
in doing so he, as was already observed (p. 324), assigned the small
Pamphylian coast-district to a governor of its own and separated it
from Galatia, this was evidently done because the mountain-land lying
between the coast and the Galato-Lycaonian steppe was so little under
control that the administration of the coast region could not well be
conducted from Galatia. Roman troops were not stationed in Galatia;
yet the levy of the warlike Galatians must have meant more than in the
case of most provincials. Moreover, as western Cilicia was then placed
under Cappadocia, the troops of this dependent prince had to take part
in the work. The Syrian army carried out the chastisement in the first
place of the Homonadenses; the governor, Publius Sulpicius Quirinius,
advanced some years later into their territory, cut off their
supplies, and compelled them to submit _en masse_, whereupon they were
distributed to the surrounding townships and their former territory
was laid waste. The Clitae, another stock settled in western Cilicia
nearer to the coast, met with similar chastisements in the years 36 and
52; as they refused obedience to the vassal-prince placed over them
by Rome, and pillaged land and sea, and as the so-called rulers of
the land could not dispose of them, the imperial troops were on both
occasions brought in from Syria to subdue them. These accounts have
been accidentally preserved; numerous similar incidents have certainly
been lost to remembrance.

[Sidenote: Pisidian colonies.]

But Augustus attempted the pacification of this region also by way of
settlement. The Hellenistic governments had, so to speak, isolated
it; not merely retained or seized a footing everywhere on the coast,
but also founded in the north-west a series of towns--on the Phrygian
frontier Apollonia, alleged to have been founded by Alexander himself,
Seleucia Siderus and Antiochia, both from the time of the Seleucids,
further in Lycaonia, Laodicea Katakekaumene, and the capital of this
district which doubtless originated at the same time, Iconium. But in
the mountain-land proper no trace of Hellenistic settlement is found,
and still less did the Roman senate apply itself to this difficult
task. Augustus did so; and only here in the whole Greek coast we meet
a series of colonies of Roman veterans evidently intended to acquire
this district for peaceful settlement. Of the older settlements just
mentioned, Antiochia was supplied with veterans and reorganised in
Roman fashion, while there were newly laid out in southern Lycaonia
Parlais, in Pisidia itself the already-mentioned Cremna, as well as
further to the south Olbasa and Comama. The later governments did
not continue with equal energy the work so begun; yet under Claudius
the "iron Seleucia" of Pisidia was made the "Claudian;" while in the
interior of western Cilicia Claudiopolis, and not far from it, perhaps
at the same time, Germanicopolis were called into life, and Iconium,
in the time of Augustus a small place, was brought to considerable
development. The newly-founded towns remained indeed unimportant, but
still notably restricted the field of the free inhabitants of the
mountains, and general peace must at length have made its triumphal
entrance also here. As well the plains and mountain-terraces of
Pamphylia as the mountain-towns of Pisidia itself, _e.g._ Selga and
Sagalassus, were during the imperial period well peopled and the
territory carefully cultivated; the remains of mighty aqueducts and
singularly large theatres, all of them structures of the Roman imperial
period, show, it is true, only mechanical skill, but bear traces of a
peaceful prosperity richly developed.

[Sidenote: Isaurians.]

The government, it is true, never quite mastered brigandage in these
regions, and if in the earlier period of the empire its ravages were
kept in moderate bounds, the bands once more emerge as a warlike power
in the troubles of the third century. They now pass under the name
of Isaurians, and have their chief seat in the mountains of Cilicia,
from whence they plunder land and sea. They are mentioned first
under Severus Alexander. That under Gallienus they proclaimed their
robber-chief emperor, is probably a fable; but certainly under the
emperor Probus such an one, by name Lydius, who for long had pillaged
Lycia and Pamphylia, was subdued in the Roman colony Cremna, which
he had occupied, after a long and obstinate siege by a Roman army. In
later times we find a military cordon drawn round their territory,
and a special commanding general appointed for the Isaurians. Their
savage valour even procured for those of them, who chose to take
service at the Byzantine court, for a time a position there such as the
Macedonians had possessed at the court of the Ptolemies; in fact one
from their ranks, Zeno, died as emperor of Byzantium.[232]

[Sidenote: Galatia.]

Lastly, the region of Galatia, at a remote period the chief seat of
the Oriental rule over anterior Asia, and preserving in the famed
rock-sculptures of the modern Boghazköi, formerly the royal town of
Pteria, reminiscences of an almost forgotten glory, had in the course
of centuries become in language and manners a Celtic island amidst the
waves of eastern peoples, and remained so in internal organisation
even under the empire. The three Celtic tribes, which, on the great
migration of the nation about the time of the war between Pyrrhus and
the Romans, had arrived in the heart of Asia Minor, and there, like the
Franks in the East during the middle ages, had consolidated themselves
into a firmly knit soldier-state, and after prolonged roving had
taken up their definitive abode on either side of the Halys, had long
since left behind the times when they issued forth thence to pillage
Asia Minor, and were in conflict with the kings of Asia and Pergamus,
provided that they did not serve them as mercenaries. They too were
shattered before the superior power of the Romans (ii. 290) {ii. 273.},
and became not less subject to them in Asia than their countrymen in
the valley of the Po and on the Rhone and Seine. But in spite of their
sojourn of several hundred years in Asia Minor, a deep gulf still
separated these Occidentals from the Asiatics. It was not merely that
they retained their native language and their nationality, that still
each of the three cantons was governed by its four hereditary princes,
and the federal assembly, to which deputies were sent by all in
common, presided in the sacred oak-grove as supreme authority over the
Galatian land (ii. 232) {ii. 219.}; nor was it that continued rudeness
as well as warlike valour distinguished them to advantage as well as
to disadvantage from their neighbours; such contrasts between culture
and barbarism existed elsewhere in Asia Minor, and the superficial and
external Hellenising--such as neighbourhood, commercial relations,
the Phrygian cultus adopted by the immigrants, and mercenary service
brought in their train--must have set in not much later in Galatia than
_e.g._ in the neighbouring Cappadocia. The contrast was of a different
kind; the Celtic and the Hellenic invasion came into competition in
Asia Minor, and to the distinction of nationality was added the spur of
rival conquest. This was brought clearly to light in the Mithradatic
crisis; by the side of the command of Mithradates to murder the
Italians went the massacre of the whole Galatian nobility (iii. 322)
{iii. 306.}, and, in keeping therewith, the Romans in the wars against
the Oriental liberator of the Hellenes had no more faithful ally than
the Galatians of Asia Minor (iv. 56, 149) {iv. 53, 143.}.

[Sidenote: The Galatian kingdom.]

For that reason the success of the Romans was theirs also, and the
victory gave to them for a time a leading position in the affairs of
Asia Minor. The old tetrarchate was done away, apparently by Pompeius.
One of the new cantonal princes, who had approved himself most in the
Mithradatic wars, Deiotarus, attached to himself, besides his own
territory, Lesser Armenia and other portions of the former Mithradatic
empire, and became an inconvenient neighbour to the other Galatian
princes, and the most powerful among the dynasts of Asia Minor (iv.
149) {iv. 143.}. After the victory of Caesar, to whom he occupied an
attitude of hostility, and whose favour he was unable to gain even by
help rendered against Pharnaces, the possessions gained by him with
or without consent of the Roman government were for the most part
again withdrawn; the Caesarian Mithradates of Pergamus, who on the
mother's side was sprung from the Galatian royal house, obtained the
most of what Deiotarus lost, and was even placed by his side in Galatia
itself. But, after the latter had shortly afterwards met his end in the
Tauric Chersonese (p. 313), and Caesar himself had not long afterwards
been murdered, Deiotarus reinstated himself unbidden in possession of
what he had lost, and, as he knew how to submit to the Roman party
predominant on each occasion in the East as well as how to change it
at the right time, he died at an advanced age in the year 714 {40.} as
lord of all Galatia. His descendants were portioned off with a small
lordship in Paphlagonia; his kingdom, further enlarged towards the
south by Lycaonia and all the country down to the coast of Pamphylia,
was transferred, as was already said, in the year 718 {36.} by Antonius
to Amyntas, who seems to have conducted the government already in the
last years of Deiotarus as his secretary and general, and, as such,
had before the battle of Philippi effected the transition from the
republican generals to the triumvirs. His further fortunes have been
already told. Equal to his predecessor in sagacity and bravery, he
served first Antonius, and then Augustus as chief instrument for the
pacification of the territory not yet subject in Asia Minor, till he
there met his death in the year 729 {25.}. With him ended the Galatian
kingdom, and it was converted into the Roman province of Galatia.

[Sidenote: The inhabitants.]

Its inhabitants were called Gallograeci among the Romans even in the
last age of the republic; they were, adds Livy, a mixed people, as
they were called, and degenerate. A good portion of them must have
descended from the older Phrygian inhabitants of these regions. Of
still more weight is the fact, that the zealous worship of the gods in
Galatia and the priesthood there have nothing in common with the ritual
institutions of the European Celts; not merely was the Great Mother,
whose sacred symbol the Romans of Hannibal's time asked and received
from the Tolistobogi, of a Phrygian type, but her priests belonged in
part at least to the Galatian nobility. Nevertheless, even in the Roman
province of Galatia the internal organisation was predominantly Celtic.
The fact that even under Pius the strict paternal power foreign to
Hellenic law subsisted in Galatia, is a proof of this from the sphere
of private law. In public relations there were in this country still
only the three old communities of the Tectosages, the Tolistobogi, the
Trocmi, who perhaps appended to their names those of the three chief
places, Ancyra, Pessinus, and Tavium, but were essentially nothing but
the well-known Gallic cantons, which also indeed were not without their
chief place. If among the Celts of Asia the conception of the community
as town gains the predominance earlier than among the European,[233]
and the name Ancyra more quickly dispossesses that of the Tectosages
than in Europe the name Burdigala dispossesses that of the Bituriges,
and there Ancyra even as foremost place of the whole country calls
itself the "mother-city" μητρόπολις, this certainly shows--what could
not in fact be otherwise--the influence of Greek neighbourhood and the
incipient process of assimilation, the several phases of which the
superficial information that survives to us does not allow us to follow
out. The Celtic names keep their hold down to the time of Tiberius;
afterwards they appear only isolated in the houses of rank.

[Sidenote: Language under the Romans.]

That the Romans after the erection of the province--as in Gaul they
allowed only the Latin language--allowed in Galatia alongside of
this only the Greek in business-dealings, was a matter of course.
What course was taken earlier we know not, as we do not meet with
pre-Roman written monuments in this country at all. As the language of
conversation the Celtic maintained its ground with tenacity also in
Asia;[234] yet the Greek gradually gained the upper hand. In the fourth
century Ancyra was one of the chief centres of Greek culture; "the
small towns in Greek Galatia," says the man of letters, Themistius,
who had grown gray in addressing the cultivated public, "cannot
indeed cope with Antioch; but the people appropriate to themselves
culture more zealously than the genuine Hellenes, and, wherever the
philosopher's cloak appears, they cling to it like the iron to the
magnet." Yet the national language may have preserved itself in the
lower circles down even to this period, particularly beyond the Halys
among the Trocmi evidently much later Hellenised.[235] It has already
been mentioned (p. 101) that, according to the testimony of the
far-travelled church-father Jerome, still at the end of the fourth
century the Asiatic Galatian spoke the same language, although corrupt,
which was then spoken in Treves. That as soldiers the Galatians, though
sustaining no comparison with the Occidentals, were yet far more useful
than the Greek Asiatics, is attested as well by the legion which king
Deiotarus raised from his subjects after the Roman model, and which
Augustus took over with the kingdom and incorporated with the Roman
army under its previous name, as by the fact, that in the Oriental
recruiting of the imperial period the Galatians were drawn upon by
preference just as the Batavians were in the West.[236]

[Sidenote: The Greek islands.]

To the extra-European Hellenes belong further the two great islands
of the eastern Mediterranean, Crete and Cyprus, as well as the
numerous islets of the sea between Greece and Asia Minor; the Cyrenaic
Pentapolis also on the opposite African coast is so separated by the
surrounding desert from the interior that it may be in some measure
ranked along with those Greek islands. These constituent elements,
however, of the enormous mass of lands united under the sceptre of the
emperors do not add essentially new features to the general historical
conception. The minor islands, Hellenised earlier and more completely
than the continent, belong as regards their essential character more to
European Greece than to the colonial field of Asia Minor; as indeed we
have already several times mentioned the Hellenic model-state, Rhodes,
in connection with the former. The islands are chiefly noticed at this
epoch, inasmuch as it was usual in the imperial period to banish men
of the better classes to them by way of punishment. They chose, where
the case was specially severe, rocks like Gyarus and Donussa; but
Andros, Cythnus, Amorgos, once flourishing centres of Greek culture,
were now places of punishment, while in Lesbos and Samos not seldom
Romans of rank and even members of the imperial house voluntarily took
up a somewhat lengthened abode. Crete and Cyprus, whose old Hellenism
had under the Persian rule or in complete isolation lost contact with
home, organised themselves--Cyprus as a dependency of Egypt, the Cretan
towns as autonomous--in the Hellenistic and later in the Roman epochs
according to the general forms of Greek polity. In the Cyrenaic towns
the system of the Lagids prevailed; we find in them not merely, as
in the strictly Greek towns, Hellenic burgesses and _metoeci_, but
alongside of them, as with the Egyptians in Alexandria, the "peasants,"
that is the native Africans, and among the _metoeci_ the Jews form, as
they do likewise in Alexandria, a numerous and privileged class.

[Sidenote: Leagues of the Hellenes in Asia Minor.]

To the Greeks in common the Roman imperial government never granted
a constitution. The Augustan Amphictiony was restricted, as we
saw (p. 254), to the Hellenes in Achaia, Epirus, and Macedonia.
If the Hadrianic Panhellenes in Athens acted as though they were
representative of all the Hellenes, they yet encroached on the other
Greek provinces only in so far as they decreed, so to speak, honorary
Hellenism to individual towns in Asia (p. 267); and the fact that they
did so, just shows that the extraneous communities of Greeks were by
no means included among those Panhellenes. If in Asia Minor there is
mention of representation or representatives of the Hellenes, what
is meant by this in the provinces of Asia and Bithynia organised
completely after the Hellenic manner, is the diet and the president
of the diet of these provinces, in so far as these proceed from the
deputies of the towns belonging to each of them, and all of these towns
are Greek polities;[237] while in the non-Greek province of Galatia the
representatives of the Greeks sojourning there, placed alongside of the
Galatian diet, are designated as "presidents of the Greeks."[238]

[Sidenote: Land-diets and land festivals.]

To the confederation of towns the Roman government in Asia Minor had
no occasion to oppose special obstacles. In Roman as in pre-Roman
times nine towns of the Troad performed in common religious functions
and celebrated common festivals.[239] The diets of the different
provinces of Asia Minor, which were here as in the whole empire called
into existence as a fixed institution by Augustus, were not different
in themselves from those of the other provinces. Yet this institution
developed itself, or rather changed its nature, here in a peculiar
fashion. With the immediate purpose of these annual assemblies of
the civic deputies of each province[240]--to bring its wishes to the
knowledge of the governor or the government, and generally to serve
as organ of the province--was here first combined the celebration of
the annual festival for the governing emperor and the imperial system
generally. Augustus in the year 725 {29.} allowed the diets of Asia and
Bithynia to erect temples and show divine honour to him at their places
of assembly, Pergamus and Nicomedia. This new arrangement soon extended
to the whole empire, and the blending of the ritual institution with
the administrative became a leading idea of the provincial organisation
of the imperial period. But as regards pomp of priests and festivals
and civic rivalries, this institution nowhere developed itself so much
as in the province of Asia and, analogously, in the other provinces of
Asia Minor; and nowhere, consequently, has there subsisted alongside
of, and above, municipal ambition a provincial ambition of the towns
still more than of the individuals, such as in Asia Minor dominates the
whole public life.

[Sidenote: Provincial priests and Asiarchs.]

The high priest (ἀρχιερεύς) of the new temple appointed from year
to year in the province is not merely the most eminent dignitary of
the province, but throughout its bounds the year is designated after
him.[241] The system of festivals and games after the model of the
Olympic festival, which spread more and more as we saw among all
the Hellenes, was associated in Asia Minor predominantly with the
festivals and games of the provincial worship of the emperor. The
conduct of these fell to the president of the diet, in Asia to the
Asiarch, in Bithynia to the Bithyniarch, and so on; and not less he had
chiefly to bear the costs of the annual festival, although a portion
of these, like the remaining expenses of this equally brilliant and
loyal worship, was covered by voluntary gifts and endowments, or was
apportioned among the several towns. Hence these presidentships were
only accessible to rich people; the prosperity of the town Tralles
is indicated by the fact, that it never wanted Asiarchs--the title
remained even after the expiry of the official year--and the repute
of the Apostle Paul in Ephesus is indicated by his connection with
different Asiarchs there. In spite of the expense this was an honorary
position much sought after, not on account of the privileges attached
to it, _e.g._ of exemption from trusteeship, but on account of its
outward splendour; the festal entrance into the town, in purple dress
and with chaplet on the head, preceded by a procession of boys swinging
their vessels of incense, was in the horizon of the Greeks of Asia
Minor what the olive-branch of Olympia was among the Hellenes. On
several occasions this or that Asiatic of quality boasts of having
been not merely himself Asiarch but descended also from Asiarchs. If
this cultus was at the outset confined to the provincial capitals, the
municipal ambition, which in the province of Asia in particular assumed
incredible proportions, very soon broke through those limits. Here
already in the year 23 a second temple was decreed by the province to
the then reigning emperor Tiberius as well as to his mother and to the
senate, and after long quarrelling of the towns was, by decree of the
senate, erected at Smyrna. The other larger towns followed the example
on later occasions.[242] If hitherto the province had had only one
president and one chief priest, as only one temple, now not merely
had as many chief priests to be appointed as there were provincial
temples, but also, seeing that the conduct of the temple-festival and
the execution of the games pertained not to the chief priest but to the
land-president, and the rival great towns were chiefly concerned about
the festivals and games, there was given to all the chief priests at
the same time the title and the right of presidency, so that at least
in Asia the Asiarchy and the chief priesthood of the provincial temples
coincided.[243] Therewith the diet and the civil functions, from which
the institution had its origin, fell into the background; the Asiarch
was soon nothing more than the provider of a popular festival annexed
to the divine worship of the former and present emperors, on which
account indeed his wife--the Asiarchess--might and zealously did take
part in the celebration.

[Sidenote: Superintendence of worship by the provincial priests.]

A practical importance, increased in Asia Minor by the high estimation
in which this institution was held, may have attached to the provincial
chief-priesthood for the worship of the emperors through the religious
superintendence associated with it. After the diet had once resolved on
the worship of the emperors, and the government had given its consent,
action on the part of the towns followed as a matter of course; in
Asia already under Augustus at least all the chief places of judicial
circuit had their Caesareum and their emperors' festival.[244] It was
the right and duty of the chief priest to watch over the execution
of these provincial and municipal decrees and the practice of the
cultus in his district; what this might mean, is elucidated by the
fact, that the autonomy of the free city of Cyzicus in Asia was set
aside under Tiberius for this among other reasons, that it had allowed
the decree for building the temple of the god Augustus to remain
unfulfilled--perhaps just because it as a free town was not under the
diet. It is probable that this superintendence, although it primarily
concerned the emperor-worship, extended to the affairs of religion in
general.[245] Then, when the old and the new faith began to contend in
the empire for the mastery, it was probably, in the first instance,
through the provincial chief priesthood that the contrast between
them was converted into conflict. These priests, appointed from
the provincials of mark by the diet of the province, were by their
traditions and by their official duties far more called and inclined
than were the imperial magistrates to animadvert on neglect of the
recognised worship, and, where dissuasion did not avail, as they had
not themselves a power of punishment, to bring the act punishable by
civil law to the notice of the local or imperial authorities and to
invoke the aid of the secular arm--above all, to force the Christians
to comply with the demands of the imperial cultus. In the later period
the regents adhering to the old faith even expressly enjoin these chief
priests personally, and through the priests of the towns placed under
them, to punish contraventions of the existing religious arrangements,
and assign to them exactly the part which under the emperors of the new
faith is taken by the metropolitan and his urban bishops.[246] Probably
here it was not the heathen organisation that copied the Christian
institutions; but, conversely, the conquering Christian church that
took its hierarchic weapons from the arsenal of the enemy. All this
applied, as we have already observed, to the whole empire; but the very
practical consequences of the provincial regulation of the imperial
cultus--the exercise of religious superintendence and the persecution
of persons of another faith--were drawn pre-eminently in Asia Minor.

[Sidenote: System of religion.]

Alongside of the cultus of the emperors the worship of the gods proper
found its favoured abode in Asia Minor, and all its extravagances
in particular there found a refuge. The mischief of asylums and of
miraculous cures had here its seat in a quite special sense. Under
Tiberius the limitation of the former was enjoined by the Roman senate;
the god of healing, Asklepios, nowhere performed more and greater
wonders than in his much-loved city of Pergamus, which worshipped him
as Zeus Asklepios, and owed to him a good part of its prosperity in
the imperial period. The most active wonder-workers of the time of the
empire--the subsequently canonised Cappadocian Apollonius of Tyana
and the Paphlagonian serpent-man Alexander of Abonuteichos--belonged
to Asia Minor. If the general prohibition of associations was carried
out, as we shall see, with special strictness in Asia Minor, the reason
must doubtless be sought mainly in the religious conditions which gave
special occasion to the abuse of such unions there.

[Sidenote: Public safety.]

[Sidenote: Eirenarchs.]

The public safety was left to depend in the main on the land itself.
In the earlier imperial period, apart from the Syrian command which
included eastern Cilicia, there was stationed in all Asia Minor simply
a detachment of 5000 auxiliary troops, which served as a garrison in
the province of Galatia,[247] along with a fleet of 40 ships; this
command was destined partly to keep in check the restless Pisidians,
partly to cover the north-eastern frontier of the empire, and to watch
over the coast of the Black Sea as far as the Crimea. Vespasian raised
this troop to the status of an army corps of two legions and placed
their staffs in the province of Cappadocia on the upper Euphrates.
Besides these forces destined to guard the frontier there were not
then any garrisons of note in anterior Asia; in the imperial province
of Lycia and Pamphylia, _e.g._ there lay a single cohort of 500 men,
in the senatorial provinces, at the most, individual soldiers told off
from the imperial guard or from the neighbouring imperial provinces
for special purposes.[248] If this testifies, on the one hand, most
emphatically to the internal peace of these provinces, and clearly
brings before our eyes the enormous contrast of the citizens of Asia
Minor with the constantly unsettled capitals of Syria and Egypt, it
explains, on the other hand, the subsistence, already noticed in
another connection, of brigandage in a country mountainous throughout
and in the interior partly desolate, particularly on the Myso-Bithynian
frontier and in the mountain valleys of Pisidia and Isauria. There was
no civic militia proper in Asia Minor. In spite of the flourishing
of gymnastic institutes for boys, youths, and men, the Hellenes of
this period in Asia remained as unwarlike as in Europe.[249] They
restricted themselves to creating for the maintenance of public safety
civic peace-masters (Eirenarchs), and placing at their disposal a
number of civic _gens d'armes_, partly mounted mercenaries of small
repute, but which must yet have been useful, since the emperor Marcus
did not disdain, in the sorely felt want of tried soldiers during the
Marcomanian war, to incorporate these town-soldiers of Asia Minor among
the imperial troops.[250]

[Sidenote: Administration of justice.]

The administration of justice on the part as well of the civic
authorities as of the governors left at this epoch much to be desired;
yet the emergence of the imperial rule marks a turn in it for the
better. The interference of the supreme power had under the republic
confined itself to the penal control of the public officials, and
exercised this, especially in later times, feebly and factiously,
or rather not at all. Now not merely were the reins drawn tighter
in Rome, inasmuch as the strict superintendence of its own officers
was inseparable from the unity of military government, and even
the imperial senate was induced to watch more sharply over the
administration of its mandatories; but it became now possible to set
aside the miscarriages of the provincial courts by way of the newly
introduced appeal, or else, where an impartial trial could not be
expected in the province, to carry the process to Rome before the bar
of the emperor.[251] Both of these steps applied also to the senatorial
provinces, and were to all appearance predominantly felt as a benefit.

[Sidenote: The constitution of towns in Asia Minor.]

[Sidenote: Logistae.]

[Sidenote: Gerusia, Neoi.]

As in the case of the Hellenes of Europe, so in Asia Minor the Roman
province was essentially an aggregate of urban communities. Here,
as in Hellas, the traditional received forms of democratic polity
were in general retained, _e.g._ the magistrates continued to be
chosen by the burgesses, but everywhere the determining influence
was placed in the hands of the wealthy, and no free play was allowed
to the pleasure of the multitude any more than to serious political
ambition. Among the limitations of municipal autonomy it was peculiar
to the towns of Asia Minor, that the already mentioned Eirenarch, the
police-master of the city, was subsequently nominated by the governor
from a list of ten names proposed by the council of the city. The
government-trusteeship of civic finance-administration--the imperial
appointment of one not belonging to the city itself as a guardian
of property (_curator rei publicae_, λογιστής), whose consent the
civic authorities had to procure in the more important dealings with
property--was never generally ordained, but only for this or that
city according to need; in Asia Minor, however, in keeping with the
importance of its urban development, it was introduced specially early,
_i.e._ from the beginning of the second century, and on a specially
comprehensive scale. At least in the third century here, as elsewhere,
other important decrees of the communal administration had to be laid
before the governor to be confirmed. The Roman government did not
insist anywhere, and least of all in the Hellenic lands, on uniformity
of municipal constitution; in Asia Minor there prevailed great variety,
according, it may be conjectured, in many cases with the pleasure of
the individual burgess-bodies, although for the communities belonging
to the same province the law organising each province prescribed
general rules. Whatever institutions of this sort may be looked upon as
diffused in Asia Minor, and predominantly peculiar to the land, bear
no political character, but are merely significant as regards social
relations, such as the unions spread over all Asia Minor, partly of
the older, partly of the younger citizens, the Gerusia and the Neoi,
clubs for the two classes of age with corresponding places of gymnastic
exercise and festivals.[252] Of autonomous communities there were
from the outset far fewer in Asia Minor than in Hellas proper; and,
in particular, the most important towns of Asia Minor never had this
doubtful distinction, or at any rate early lost it, such as Cyzicus
under Tiberius (p. 348), Samos through Vespasian. Asia Minor was just
old subject-territory and, under its Persian as under its Hellenic
rulers, accustomed to monarchic organisation; here less than in Hellas
did useless recollections and vague hopes carry men away beyond the
limited municipal horizon of the present, and there was not much of
this sort to disturb the peaceful enjoyment of such happiness in life
as was possible under the existing circumstances.

[Sidenote: Urban life.]

Of this happiness of life there was abundance in Asia Minor under the
Roman imperial government. "No province of them all," says an author
living in Smyrna under the Antonines, "has so many towns to show as
ours, and none such towns as our largest. It has the advantage of a
charming country, a favourable climate, varied products, a position in
the centre of the empire, a girdle of peaceful people all round, good
order, rarity of crime, gentle treatment of slaves, consideration and
goodwill from the rulers." Asia was called, as we have already said,
the province of the five hundred towns; and, if the arid interior,
in part fitted only for pasture, of Phrygia, Lycaonia, Galatia, and
Cappadocia was even at that time but thinly peopled, the rest of the
coast was not far behind Asia. The enduring prosperity of the regions
capable of cultivation in Asia Minor did not extend merely to the
cities of illustrious name, such as Ephesus, Smyrna, Laodicea, Apamea;
wherever a corner of the country, neglected under the desolation of the
fifteen hundred years which separate us from that time, is opened up to
investigation, there the first and the most powerful feeling is that
of astonishment, one might almost say of shame, at the contrast of the
wretched and pitiful present with the happiness and splendour of the
past Roman age.

[Sidenote: Cragus, Sidyma.]

On a secluded mountain-top not far from the Lycian coast, where
according to the Greek fable dwelt the Chimaera, lay the ancient
Cragus, probably built only of beams and clay tiles, and having for
that reason no trace of it left excepting the Cyclopian fortress-walls
at the foot of the hill. Below the summit spreads a pleasant fertile
valley with fresh Alpine air and southern vegetation, surrounded by
mountains rich in woods and game. When under the emperor Claudius
Lycia became a province, the Roman government transferred the
mountain-town--the "green Cragus" of Horace--to this plain; in the
market-place of the new town, Sidyma, the remains still stand of the
tetrastyle temple then dedicated to the emperor, and of a stately
colonnade, which a native of the place who had acquired means as a
physician built in his early home. Statues of the emperors and of
deserving fellow-citizens adorned the market; there were in the town
a temple to its protecting gods, Artemis and Apollo, baths, gymnastic
institutions (γυμνάσια) for the older as for the younger citizens; from
the gates along the main road, which led steeply down the mountain
side to the harbour Calabatia, there stretched on both sides rows of
stone sepulchral monuments, more stately and more costly than those of
Pompeii, and for the most part still erect, while the houses presumably
built, like those of the ancient city, from perishable materials,
have disappeared. We may draw an inference as to the position and
habits of the former inhabitants from a municipal decree recently
found there, probably drawn up under Commodus, as to constituting the
club for the elder citizens; it was composed of a hundred members,
taken one half from the town-council and the other from the rest of
the citizens, including not more than three freedmen and one person
of illegitimate birth, all the rest begotten in lawful wedlock and
belonging in part to demonstrably old and wealthy burgess-houses.
Some of these families attained to Roman citizenship, one even to the
senate of the empire. But even abroad this senatorial house, as well
as different physicians of Sidyma employed in other lands and even at
the imperial court, remained mindful of their home, and several of
them closed their lives there; one of these distinguished denizens has
put together the legends of the town and the prophecies concerning
it in a compilation not exactly excellent, but very learned and very
patriotic, and caused these memorabilia to be publicly exhibited. This
Cragus-Sidyma did not vote among towns of the first class at the diet
of the small Lycian province, was without a theatre, without honorary
titles, and without those general festivals which in the world, as it
then was, marked a great town; was even, according to the conception
of the ancients, a small provincial town and thoroughly a creation of
the Roman imperial period. But in the whole Vilajet Aïdin there is
at the present day no inland place which can be even remotely placed
by the side of this little mountain-town, such as it was, as regards
civilised existence. What still stands vividly to-day before our eyes
in this secluded village has disappeared, with the exception of slight
remains, or even without a trace, in an untold number of other towns
under the devastating hand of man. The coinage of the imperial period,
freely given to the towns in copper, allows us a certain glance at this
abundance; no province can even remotely vie with Asia in the number
of mints and the variety of the representations.

[Sidenote: Defects of municipal administration.]

No doubt this merging of all interests in the petty town of one's birth
was not without its reverse side in Asia Minor, any more than among
the European Greeks. What was said of their communal administration
holds good in the main also here. The urban finance-system, which knows
itself to be without right control, lacks steadiness and frugality
and often even honesty; as to buildings--sometimes the resources of
the town are exceeded, sometimes even what is most needful is left
undone; the humbler citizens become accustomed to the largesses of
the town-chest, or of men of wealth, to free oil in the baths, to
public banquets and popular recreations out of others' pockets; the
good houses become used to the clientage of the multitude, with its
abject demonstrations of homage, its begging intrigues, its divisions;
rivalries exist, as between town and town (p. 329), so in every town
between the several circles and the several houses; the government
in Asia Minor dares not to introduce the formation of poor-clubs and
of voluntary fire-brigades, such as everywhere existed in the west,
because the spirit of faction here at once takes possession of every
association. The calm sea easily becomes a swamp, and the lack of the
great pulsation of general interest is clearly discernible also in Asia
Minor.

[Sidenote: Prosperity.]

Asia Minor, especially in its anterior portion, was one of the richest
domains of the great Roman state. It is true that the misgovernment of
the republic, the disasters of the Mithradatic time thereby produced,
thereafter the evil of piracy, and lastly the many years of civil war
which had financially affected few provinces so severely as these, had
doubtless so utterly disorganised the means of the communities and of
individuals there, that Augustus resorted to the extreme expedient of
striking off all claims of debt; all the Asiatics, with the exception
of the Rhodians, made use of this dangerous remedy. But the peaceful
government which again set in made up for much. Not everywhere--the
islands of the Aegean Sea, for example, never thereafter revived--but
in most places, already when Augustus died, the wounds as well as the
remedies were forgotten; and in this state the land remained for three
centuries down to the epoch of the Gothic wars. The sums at which the
towns of Asia Minor were assessed, and which they themselves, certainly
under control of the governor, had to allocate and raise, formed one
of the most considerable sources of income for the imperial exchequer.
How the burden of taxation stood related to the ability of the taxed
to pay, we are unable to ascertain; but permanent overburdening in the
strict sense is not compatible with the circumstances in which we find
the land down to the middle of the third century. The remissness of
the government, still more perhaps than its intentional forbearance,
may have kept within bounds the fiscal restriction of traffic and the
application of a tax-screw which was inconvenient not merely for the
taxed. In great calamities, particularly on occasion of the earthquakes
which under Tiberius fearfully devastated twelve flourishing cities
of Asia, especially Sardis, and under Pius a number of Carian and
Lycian towns and the islands of Cos and Rhodes, private and above all
imperial help was rendered with great liberality, and bestowed upon
the natives of Asia Minor the full blessing of a great state--the
collective guarantee of all for all. The construction of roads, which
the Romans had taken in hand on the first erection of the province of
Asia by Manius Aquillius (iii. 59) {iii. 56.}, was seriously prosecuted
during the imperial period in Asia Minor only where larger garrisons
were stationed, particularly in Cappadocia and the neighbouring
Galatia, after Vespasian had instituted a legionary camp on the
middle Euphrates.[253] In the other provinces not much was done for
it, partly, doubtless, in consequence of the laxity of the senatorial
government; wherever roads were here constructed on the part of the
state, it was done on imperial ordinance.[254]

This prosperity of Asia Minor was not the work of a government of
superior insight and energetic activity. The political institutions,
the incitements of trade and commerce, the initiative in literature
and art belong throughout Asia Minor to the old free towns or to
the Attalids. What the Roman government gave to the land, was
essentially the permanence of a state of peace, the toleration of
inward prosperity, the absence of that governing wisdom which regards
every sound pair of arms and every saved piece of money as rightfully
subservient to its immediate aims--negative virtues of personages far
from prominent, but often more conducive to the common weal than the
great deeds of the self-constituted guardians of mankind.

[Sidenote: Trade and commerce.]

The prosperity of Asia Minor was in beautiful equipoise, dependent
as much on agriculture as on industry and commerce. The favours of
nature were bestowed in richest measure, especially on the regions of
the coast; and there are many evidences with how laborious diligence,
even under more difficult circumstances, every at all useable piece
of ground was turned to account, _e.g._ in the rocky valley of the
Eurymedon in Pamphylia by the citizens of Selga. The products of the
industry of Asia Minor are too numerous and too manifold to be dwelt
upon in detail;[255] we may mention that the immense pastures of the
interior, with their flocks of sheep and goats, made Asia Minor the
headquarters of woollen manufactures and of weaving generally--it
suffices to recall the Milesian and the Galatian, that is, the Angora,
wool, the Attalic gold-embroideries, the cloths prepared in the
workshops of Phrygian Laodicea after the Nervian, that is the Flemish,
style. It is well-known that an insurrection had almost broken out in
Ephesus because the goldsmiths dreaded injury to their sale of sacred
images from the new Christian faith. In Philadelphia, a considerable
town of Lydia, we know the names of two out of the seven districts:
they are those of the wool-weavers and the shoemakers. Probably there
is here brought to light what in the case of the other towns is hidden
under older and more genteel names, that the more considerable towns of
Asia included throughout not merely a multitude of labourers, but also
a numerous manufacturing population.

The money-dealing and traffic were in Asia Minor dependent chiefly on
its own products. The great foreign import and export trade of Syria
and Egypt was in the main excluded, though from the eastern lands
various articles were introduced into Asia Minor, _e.g._ a considerable
number of slaves through the Galatian traders.[256] But, if the Roman
merchants were to be found here apparently in every large and small
town, even at places like Ilium and Assus in Mysia, Prymnessus and
Traianopolis in Phrygia, in such numbers that their associations were
in the habit of taking part along with the town's burgesses in public
acts; if in Hierapolis, in the interior of Phrygia, a manufacturer
(ἐργαστής) caused it to be inscribed on his tomb that he had in his
lifetime sailed seventy-two times round Cape Malea to Italy, and a
Roman poet describes the merchant of the capital who hastens to the
port, in order not to let his business-friend from Cibyra, not far
distant from Hierapolis, fall into the hands of rivals, there is thus
opened up a glimpse into a stirring manufacturing and mercantile life
not merely at the seaports. Language also testifies to the constant
intercourse with Italy; among the Latin words that became current
in Asia Minor not a few proceed from such intercourse, as indeed
in Ephesus even the guild of the wool-weavers gives itself a Latin
name.[257] Teachers of all sorts and physicians came especially from
this quarter to Italy and the other lands of the Latin tongue, and not
merely gained often considerable wealth, but also brought it back to
their native place; among those to whom the towns of Asia Minor owe
buildings or endowments, the physicians who had become rich,[258] and
literati, occupy a prominent position. Lastly, the emigration of the
great families to Italy affected Asia Minor less and later than the
West; it was easier for people from Vienna and Narbo to transplant
themselves to the capital of the empire than from the Greek towns; nor
was the government in the earlier period quite inclined to bring the
municipals of mark from Asia Minor to the court, and to introduce them
into the Roman aristocracy.

[Sidenote: Literary activity.]

If we leave out of view the marvellous period of early bloom, in
which the Ionic epos and the Aeolic lyric poetry, the beginnings
of historical composition and of philosophy, of plastic art and of
painting, had their rise on these shores, in science as in the practice
of art the great age of Asia Minor was that of the Attalids, which
faithfully cherished the memory of that still greater epoch. If Smyrna
showed divine honours to its citizen Homer, struck coins for him and
named them after him, there was thus expressed the feeling, which
dominated all Ionia and all Asia Minor, that divine art had come down
to earth in Hellas generally, and in Ionia in particular.

[Sidenote: Instruction.]

How early and to what extent elementary instruction was an object of
public care in these regions is clearly shown by a decree of the town
Teos in Lydia[259] concerning it. According to this, after the gift of
capital by a rich citizen had provided the town with means, there was
to be instituted in future, alongside of the inspector of gymnastics
(γυμνασιάρχης), also the honorary office of a school-inspector
(παιδονόμος). Further, there were to be appointed three paid teachers
of writing with salaries, according to the three classes respectively,
of 600, 550, and 500 drachmae, in order that all the free boys and
girls might be instructed in writing; likewise two gymnastic masters,
each with a salary of 500 drachmae; a teacher of music with a salary
of 700 drachmae, who should instruct the boys of the last two years at
school and the youths that had left school in playing the lute and the
cithara; a boxing master with 300 drachmae, and a teacher for archery
and throwing of the spear with a pay of 250 drachmae. The teachers of
writing and music are to hold a public examination of the scholars
annually in the town-hall. Such was the Asia Minor of the time of
the Attalids; but the Roman republic did not continue their work.
It did not cause its victories over the Galatians to be immortalised
by the chisel, and the Pergamene library went shortly before the
battle of Actium to Alexandria; many of the best germs perished in the
devastation of the Mithradatic and the civil wars. It was only in the
time of the empire that the care of art, and above all of literature,
revived at least outwardly with the prosperity of Asia Minor. To a
primacy proper, such as was possessed by Athens as a university-town,
by Alexandria in the sphere of scientific research, and by the
frivolous capital of Syria for the drama and the _ballet_, none of
the numerous cities of Asia Minor could lay claim in any direction
whatever; but general culture was probably nowhere more widely diffused
and more influential. It must have been very early the custom in Asia
to grant to teachers and physicians exemption from the civic offices
and functions that involved expense; to this province was directed the
edict of the emperor Pius (p. 329), which, in order to set limits to
an exemption that was evidently very burdensome for the city finances,
prescribes maximal numbers for it: _e.g._ allows towns of the first
class to grant this immunity to the extent of ten physicians, five
instructors in rhetoric, and five in grammar.

[Sidenote: Addresses of the sophists.]

The position of Asia Minor as occupying the first rank in the literary
world of the imperial period was based on the system of the rhetors,
or, according to the expression later in use, the sophists of this
epoch--a system which we moderns cannot easily realise. The place of
written works, which pretty nearly ceased to have any significance, was
taken by the public discourse, somewhat of the nature of our modern
university and academic addresses, eternally producing itself anew
and preserved only by way of exception, once heard and applauded, and
then for ever forgotten. The contents were furnished frequently by the
occasion of the birthday of the emperor, the arrival of the governor,
or any analogous event, public or private; still more frequently
without any occasion they talked at large on everything, which was not
practical and not instructive. The political address had no existence
for this age at all, not even in the Roman senate. The forensic speech
was no longer for the Greeks the goal of oratory, but stood alongside
of the speech for speaking's sake as a neglected and plebeian sister,
to which a master of that art might occasionally condescend. From
poetry, philosophy, history, there was borrowed whatever admitted of
being dealt with by way of common-place, while these all themselves,
little cultivated in general, least of all in Asia Minor, and still
less esteemed, languish by the side of the pure art of words and
beneath its infection. The great past of the nation is regarded by
these orators, so to speak, as their special property; they reverence
and treat Homer in some measure as the Rabbins do the books of Moses,
and even in religion they study the most zealous orthodoxy. These
discourses are sustained by all the allowed and unallowed resources
of the theatre, by the art of gesticulation and of modulation of the
voice, by the magnificence of the orator's costume, by the artifices
of the virtuoso and the methods of partisanship, by competition, by
the _claque_. To the boundless self-conceit of these word-artists
corresponds the lively sympathetic interest of the public--which is
but little inferior to that felt for race-horses--and the expression
given to this sympathy quite after the fashion of the theatre; and the
frequency with which such exhibitions were brought before the cultured
in the larger places entitles them, just like the theatre, to rank
everywhere among the customary doings of urban life. If perhaps our
understanding of this extinct phenomenon may be somewhat helped by
connecting it with the impression called forth in our most susceptible
great cities by the discourses of their learned bodies, as they fall
due, there is yet wholly wanting in the modern state of things what
was by far the main matter in the ancient world--the didactic element,
and the connection of the aimless public discourse with the higher
instruction of youth. If the latter at present, as we say, educates the
boy of the cultured class to be a professor of philology, it educated
him then to be a professor of eloquence, and, in fact, of this sort of
eloquence. For the school-training conduced more and more to equip the
boy for holding just such discourses, as we have now described, on his
own part, if possible, in two languages; and, whoever had finished the
course with profit, applauded in similar performances the recollection
of his own time at school.

[Sidenote: Asia Minor leads the fashion.]

This production embraced East and West, but Asia Minor stood in the van
and led the fashion. When in the age of Augustus the school-rhetoric
gained a footing in the Latin instruction of the youth of the capital,
its chief pillars alongside of Italians and Spaniards were two natives
of Asia Minor, Arellius Fuscus and Cestius Pius. At that same place,
where the grave forensic address maintained its ground in the better
imperial period by the side of this parasite, an ingenious advocate of
the Flavian age points to the enormous gulf which separates Nicetes of
Smyrna and the other rhetoricians applauded in Ephesus and Mytilene
from Aeschines and Demosthenes. By far the most, and most noted, of the
famous rhetors of this sort are from the coast of western Asia. We have
already observed how much the supply of schoolmasters for the whole
empire told upon the finances of the towns of Asia Minor. In the course
of the imperial period the number and the estimation of these sophists
were constantly on the increase, and they gained ground more and more
in the west. The cause of this lies partly doubtless in the changed
attitude of the government, which in the second century--especially
after the Hadrianic epoch exhibiting not so much a Hellenising as a bad
cosmopolitan type--stood less averse to Greek and Oriental habits than
in the first; but chiefly in the ever increasing general diffusion of
higher culture, and the rapidly enlarging number of institutes for the
higher instruction of youth. The sophistic system thus belongs, at all
events especially, to Asia Minor, and particularly to the Asia Minor
of the second and third centuries; only there may not be found in this
literary primacy any special peculiarity of these Greeks and of this
epoch, or even a national characteristic. The sophistic system appears
everywhere alike, in Smyrna and Athens as in Rome and Carthage; the
masters of eloquence were sent out like patterns of lamps, and the
manufacture was organised everywhere in the same way, Greek or Latin,
according to desire, the supply being raised in accordance with the
need. But no doubt those Greek districts, which took precedence in
prosperity and culture, furnished this article of export of the best
quality and in greatest quantity; this holds true of Asia Minor for the
times of Sulla and Cicero no less than for those of Hadrian and the
Antonines.

[Sidenote: Galenus.]

Here, however, all is not shadow. Those same regions possess, not
indeed among the professional sophists, but yet among the _literati_
of a different type, who are still found there in comparatively large
numbers, the best representatives of Hellenism which this epoch has at
all to show, the teacher of philosophy, Dio of Prusa in Bithynia, under
Vespasian and Trajan, and the medical man Galenus of Pergamus, imperial
physician in ordinary at the courts of Marcus and Severus. What is
particularly pleasing in the case of Galen is the polished manner of
the man of the world and the courtier, in connection with a general
and philosophical culture, such as is frequently conspicuous in the
physicians of this period.[260]

[Sidenote: Dio of Prusa.]

In purity of sentiment and clear grasp of the position of things,
the Bithynian Dio is nowise inferior to the scholar of Chaeronea; in
plastic power, in elegance and apt vigour of speech, in earnest meaning
underlying lightness of form, in practical energy, he is superior to
him. The best of his writings--the fancies of the ideal Hellene before
the invention of the city and of money; the appeal to the Rhodians, the
only surviving representatives of genuine Hellenism; the description
of the Hellenes of his time in the solitude of Olbia as in the luxury
of Nicomedia and of Tarsus; the exhortations to the individual as to
an earnest conduct of life, and to all as to their keeping together in
unity--form the best evidence that even of the Hellenism of Asia Minor
in the time of the empire the word of the poet holds good: "The sun
even in setting is ever the same."




Footnotes.


[224: Had the state of Lysimachus endured it would probably have been
otherwise. His foundations, Alexandria in the Troad and Lysimachia,
Ephesos-Arsinoe strengthened by the transference of the inhabitants of
Colophon and Lebedos, tended in the direction indicated.]

[225: Nowhere have the boundaries of the vassal states and even of
the provinces changed more than in the north-east of Asia Minor.
Direct imperial administration was introduced here for the districts
of king Polemon, to which Zela, Neocaesarea, Trapezus belonged,
in the year 63; for Lesser Armenia, we do not know exactly when,
probably at the beginning of the reign of Vespasian. The last vassal
king of Lesser Armenia, of whom there is mention, was the Herodian
Aristobulus (Tacitus, _Ann._ xiii. 7, xiv. 26; Josephus, _Ant._ xx.
8, 4), who still possessed it in the year 60; in the year 75 the
district was Roman (_C. I. L._ iii. 306), and probably one of the
legions garrisoning Cappadocia from Vespasian's time was stationed
from the first in the Lesser-Armenian Satala. Vespasian combined the
regions mentioned, as well as Galatia and Cappadocia, into one large
governorship. At the end of the reign of Domitian we find Galatia
and Cappadocia separated and the north-eastern provinces attached to
Galatia. Under Trajan at first the whole district is once more in one
hand, subsequently (_Eph. Ep. V._ n. 1345) it is divided in such a way
that the north-east coast belongs to Cappadocia. On that footing it
remained, at least in so far that Trapezus and so also Lesser Armenia
were thenceforth constantly under this governor. Consequently--apart
from a short interruption under Domitian--the legate of Galatia had
nothing to do with the defence of the frontier, and this, as was
implied in the nature of the case, was always combined with the command
of Cappadocia and of its legions.]

[226: Urban coining and setting up of inscriptions are subject to
so manifold conditions that the want or the abundance of the one or
the other do not _per se_ warrant inferences as to the absence or
the intensity of a definite phase of civilisation. For Asia Minor in
particular we must take note that it was the promised land of municipal
vanity, and our memorials, including even the coins, have for by far
the greatest part been called forth by the fact that the government of
the Roman emperors allowed free scope to this vanity.]

[227: "The ordinance," says the jurist Modestinus, who reports it (Dig.
xxvii. 1, 6, 3) "interests all provinces, although it is directed to
the people of Asia." It is suitable, in fact, only where there are
classes of towns, and the jurist adds an instruction how it is to be
applied to provinces otherwise organised. What the biographer of Pius,
c. 11, reports as to the distinctions and salaries granted by Pius to
the rhetoricians, has nothing to do with this enactment.]

[228: Dio of Prusa, in his address to the citizens of Nicomedia and
of Tarsus, excellently lays it down that no man of culture would have
such empty distinctions for himself, and that the greedy quest of the
towns for titles was altogether inconceivable; how it is the sign of
the true petty-townsman to cause a display of such attestations of rank
on his behalf; how the bad governor always screens himself under this
quarrelling of towns, as Nicaea and Nicomedia never act together. "The
Romans deal with you as with children, to whom one presents trifling
toys; you put up with bad treatment in order to obtain a name; they
name your town the first in order to treat it as the last. By this you
have become a laughing-stock to the Romans, and they call your doings
'Greek follies'" (Ἑλληνικὰ ἁμαρτήματα).]

[229: Pausanias of Caesarea in Philostratus (_Vitae soph._ ii. 13)
places before Herodes Atticus his faults: παχείᾳ τῇ γλώττῃ καὶ ὡς
Καππαδόκαις ξύνηθες, ξυγκρούων μὲν τὰ σύμφωνα τῶν στοιχείων. συστέλλων
δὲ τὰ μηκυνόμενα καὶ μηκύνων τὰ βραχέα. _Vita Apoll._ i. 7; ἡ γλῶττα
Ἀττικῶς εἶχεν, οὐδ' ἀπήχθη τὴν φωνὴν ὑπὸ τοῦ ἔθνους.

[230: Amyntas was placed over the Pisidians as early as 715 {39.}
before Antonius returned to Asia (Appian, _B. C._ v. 75), doubtless
because these had once more undertaken one of their predatory
expeditions. From the fact that he first ruled there is explained the
circumstance that he built for himself a residence in Isaura (Strabo,
xii. 6, 3, p. 569). Galatia went in the first instance to the heirs of
Deiotarus (Dio, xlviii. 33). It was not till the year 718 {36.} that
Amyntas obtained Galatia, Lycaonia, and Pamphylia (Dio, xlix. 32).]

[231: That this was the cause why these regions were not placed under
Roman governors is expressly stated by Strabo (xiv. 5, 5, p. 671),
who was near in time and place to the matters dealt with: ἐδόκει πρὸς
ἅπαν τὸ τοιοῦτο (for the suppression of the robbers and pirates)
βασιλεύεσθαι μᾶλλον τοὺς τόπους ἢ ὑπὸ τοῖς Ῥωμαίοις ἡγεμόσιν εἶναι τοῖς
ἐπὶ τὰς κρίσεις πεμπομένοις, οἳ μήτ' ἀεὶ παρεῖναι ἔμελλον (on account
of the travelling on circuit) μήτε μεθ' ὅπλων (which at all events were
wanting to the later legate of Galatia).]

[232: Amidst the great unnamed ruins of Sarajik, in the upper valley of
the Limyrus, in eastern Lycia (comp. Ritter, _Erdkunde_ xix. p. 1172),
stands a considerable temple-shaped tomb, certainly not older than the
third century after Christ, on which mutilated parts of men--heads,
arms, legs--are produced in relief, as emblems we might imagine, as the
coat of arms of a civilised robber-chief (communication from Benndorf).]

[233: The famous list of services rendered to the community of
Ancyra of the time of Tiberius (_C. I. Gr._ 4039) designates the
Galatian communities usually by ἔθνος, sometimes by πόλις. The former
appellation subsequently disappears; but in the full title, _e.g._ of
the inscription, _C. I. Gr._ 4011, from the second century, Ancyra
always bears the name of the people: ἡ μητρόπολις τῆς Γαλατίας Σεβαστὴ
Τεκτοσάγων Ἄγκυρα.]

[234: According to Pausanius, x. 36, 1, among the Γαλάται ὑπὲρ φρυγίας
φωνῇ τῇ ἐπιχωρίῳ σφίσιν the scarlet berry is termed ὗς; and Lucian,
_Alex._ 51, tells of the perplexities of the soothsaying Paphlagonian,
when questions were proposed to him Συριστὶ ἢ Κελτιστὶ and people
conversant with this language were not just at hand.]

[235: If in the list mentioned at p. 314, note, from the time of
Tiberius the largesses are given but seldom to three peoples, mostly to
two peoples or two cities, the latter are, as Perrot correctly remarks
(_de Galatia_, p. 83), Ancyra and Pessinus, and Tavium of the Trocmi is
in the matter of largesses postponed to them. Perhaps there was at that
time among these no township which could be treated as a town.]

[236: Cicero (_ad Att._ vi. 5, 3) writes of his army in Cilicia:
_exercitum infirmum habebam, auxilia sane bona, sed ea Galatarum,
Pisidarum, Lyciorum: haec enim sunt nostra robora_.]

[237: Decrees of the ἐπὶ τῆς Ἀσίας Ἕλληνες, _C. I. A._ 3487, 3957; a
Lycian honoured ὑπὸ τοῦ κο[ινο]ῦ τῶν ἐπὶ τῆς Ἀσίας Ἑλλήνων καὶ ὑπὸ
τῶν ἐ[ν Πα]μφυλίᾳ πόλεων, Benndorf, _Lyk. Reise_, i. 122; letters to
the Hellenes in Asia, _C. I. Gr._ 3832, 3833; ὦ ἄνδρες Ἕλληνες in the
address to the diet of Pergamus, Aristides, p. 517.--An ἄρξας τοῦ
κοινοῦ τῶν ἐν Βιθυνίᾳ Ἑλλήνων, Perrot, _Expl. de la Galatie_, p. 32;
letter of the emperor Alexander to the same, _Dig._ xlix. 1, 25.--Dio,
li. 20: τοῖς ξένοις, Ἕλληνας σφᾶς ἐπικαλέσας, ἑαυτῷ τινα, τοῖς μὲν
Ἀσιανοῖς ἐν Περγάμῳ, τοῖς δὲ Βιθυνοῖς ἐν Νικομηδείᾳ τεμενίσαι ἐπέτρεψε.]

[238: Besides the Galatarchs (Marquardt, _Staatsverw._ i. 515) we meet
in Galatia even under Hadrian Helladarchae (_Bull. de corr. Hell._ vii.
18), who can only be taken here like the Hellenarchs in Tanais (p. 315,
note 2).]

[239: The συνέδριον τῶν ἐννέα δήμων (Schliemann, _Troia_, 1884, p. 256)
calls itself elsewhere Ἰλιεῖς καὶ πόλεις αἱ κοινωνοῦσαι τῆς θυσίας
καὶ τοῦ ἀγῶνος καὶ τῆς πανηγύρεως (_ib._ p. 254). Another document
of the same league from the time of Antigonus is given in Droysen,
_Hellenismus_, ii. 2, 382 ff. So too other κοινά are to be taken,
which refer to a narrower circle than the province, such as the old
one of the thirteen Ionic cities, that of the Lesbians (Marquardt,
_Staatsverw._ i. p. 516), that of the Phrygians on the coins of Apamea.
These have also had their magisterial presidents, as indeed there has
recently been found a Lesbiarch (Marquardt, _l.c._), and likewise
the Moesian Hellenes were under a Pontarch (p. 308). Yet it is not
improbable that, where the archonship is named, the league is more
than a mere festal association; the Lesbians as well as the Moesian
Pentapolis may have had a special diet, over which these officers
presided. On the other hand the κοινὸν τοῦ Ὑργαλέου πεδίου (Ramsay,
_Cities and bishoprics of Phrygia_, p. 10), which stands alongside of
several δῆμοι, is a quasi-community destitute of civic rights.]

[240: The composition of the diets of Asia Minor is most clearly
apparent in Strabo's account of the Lyciarchy (xiv. 3, 3, p. 664) and
in the narrative of Aristides (_Or._ 26, p. 344) as to his election to
one of the Asiatic provincial priesthoods.]

[241: See examples for Asia, _C. I. Gr._ 3487; for Lycia, Benndorf,
_Lyk. Reise_, i. p. 71. But the Lycian federal assembly designates the
years not by the Archiereus but by the Lyciarch.]

[242: Tacitus, _Ann._ iv. 15, 55. The town which possesses a temple
dedicated by the diet of the province (the κοινὸν τῆς Ἀσίας κ. τ.
λ.) bears on that account the honorary predicate of the "(imperial)
temple-keeper" (νεωκόρος); and, if one of them has several to show,
the number is appended. In this institution one may clearly discern
how the imperial worship obtained its full elaboration in Asia Minor.
In reality the _neocorate_ is general, applicable to any deity and any
town; titularly, as an honorary surname of the town, it meets us with
vanishing exceptions only in the imperial cultus of Asia Minor--only
some Greek towns of the neighbouring provinces, such as Tripolis in
Syria, Thessalonica in Macedonia, participated in it.]

[243: However little the original diversity of the presidency of
the diet and the provincial chief-priesthood for the cultus of the
emperor can be called in question, yet not merely in the case of the
former does the magisterial character of the president, still clearly
recognisable in Hellas, whence the organisation of the κοινά generally
proceeds, fall completely into the shade in Asia Minor, but here in
fact, where the κοινόν has several ritual centres, the Ἀσιάρχης and
the ἀρχιερεὺς τῆς Ἀσίας seem to have amalgamated. The president of
the κοινόν never bears in Asia Minor the title of στρατηγός, which
sharply emphasises the civil office, and ἄρξας τοῦ κοινοῦ (p. 344,
note) or τοῦ ἔθνους (_C. I. Gr._ 4380_ᵏ_⁴, p. 1168) is rare; the
compounds Ἀσιάρχης, Λυκιάρχης, analogous to the Ἑλλαδάρχης of Achaia,
are already in Strabo's time the usual designation. That in the minor
provinces, like Galatia and Lycia, the Archon and the Archiereus of
the province remained separate, is certain. But in Asia the existence
of Asiarchs for Ephesus and Smyrna is established by inscriptions
(Marquardt, _Staatsverw._ i. 514), while yet according to the nature of
the institution there could only be one Asiarch for the whole province.
Here, too, the Agonothesia of the Archiereus is attested (Galen on
Hippocrates _de part._ 18, 2, p. 567, Kühn: παρ' ἡμῖν ἐν Περγάμῳ τῶν
ἀρχιερέων τὰς καλουμένας μονομαχίας ἐπιτελούντων), while it is the
very essence of the Asiarchate. To all appearance the rivalries of
the towns have here led to the result, that, after there were several
temples of the emperor dedicated by the province in different towns,
the Agonothesia was taken from the real president of the diet, and,
instead, the titular Asiarchate and the Agonothesia were committed
to the chief priest of each temple. In that case the Ἀσιάρχης καὶ
ἀρχιερεὺς ιγʹ πόλεων is explained on the coins of the thirteen Ionic
towns (Mionnet, iii. 61, 1), and on Ephesian inscriptions the same Ti.
Julius Reginus may be named sometimes Ἀσιάρχης βʹ ναῶν τῶν ἐν Ἐφέσῳ
(Wood, _Inscr. from the great theatre_, p. 18), sometimes ἀρχιερεὺς βʹ
ναῶν τῶν ἐν Ἐφέσῳ (_ib._ n. 8. 14, similarly 9).--Only in this way,
too, are the institutions of the fourth century to be comprehended.
Here a chief priest appears in every province, in Asia with the title
of Asiarch, in Syria with that of Syriarch, and so forth. If the
amalgamation of the Archon and the Archiereus had already begun earlier
in the province of Asia, nothing was more natural than now, on the
diminution of the provinces, to combine them everywhere in this way.]

[244: _C. I. Gr._ 3902_ᵇ_.]

[245: Dio of Prusa, _Or._ 35, p. 66 R., names the Asiarchs and the
analogous archons (he designates clearly their _Agonothesia_, and to it
also point the corrupt words τοὺς ἐπωνύμους τῶν δύο ἠπείρων τῆς ἑσπέρας
ὅλης, for which probably we should read τῆς ἑτέρας ὅλης) τοὺς ἁπάντων
ἄρχοντας τῶν ἱερέων. There is, as is well known, an almost constant
absence in the designation of the provincial priests of express
reference to the worship of the emperors; there was good reason for
that absence, if they were expected to play in their spheres the part
of the Pontifex Maximus in Rome.]

[246: Maximinus for this purpose placed military help at the disposal
of the chief priest of the individual province (Eusebius, _Hist. Eccl._
viii. 14, 9); and the famous letter of Julian (_Ep._ 49, comp. _Ep._
63) to the Galatarch of the time gives a clear view of his obligations.
He is to superintend the whole religious matters of the province; to
preserve his independence in contradistinction to the governor, not to
dance attendance upon him, not to allow him to appear in the temple
with military escort, to receive him not in front of, but in, the
temple, within which he is lord and the governor a private man. Of the
subsidies which the government has settled on the province (30,000
bushels of corn and 60,000 sextarii of wine), he is to expend the fifth
part on the poor persons who become clients of the heathen priests,
and to employ the rest otherwise on charitable objects; in every town
of the province, if possible, with the aid of private persons, to call
into existence hospitals (ξενοδοχεῖα), not merely for heathens, but
for everybody, and no longer to allow the Christians the monopoly of
good works. He is to urge all the priests of the province by example
and exhortation generally to maintain a religious walk, to avoid the
frequenting of theatres and taverns, and in particular to frequent
the temples diligently with their family and their attendants, or
else, if they should not amend their ways, to depose them. It is a
pastoral letter in the best form, only with the address altered, and
with quotations from Homer instead of the Bible. Clearly as these
arrangements bear on their face the stamp of heathenism already
collapsing, and certainly as in this extent they are foreign to the
earlier epoch, the foundation at any rate--the general superintendence
of the chief priest of the province over matters of worship--by no
means appears as a new institution.]

[247: This troop, according to its position in Josephus, _Bell.
Jud._ ii. 16, 4, between the provinces of Asia and Cappadocia not
provided with garrisons, can only be referred to Galatia. Of course it
furnished also the detachments, which were stationed in the dependent
territories on the Caucasus, at that time--under Nero--apparently also
those stationed on the Bosporus itself, in which, it is true, also the
Moesian corps took part (p. 318).]

[248: Praetorian _stationarius Ephesi_, _Eph. epigr._ iv. n. 70. A
soldier _in statione Nicomedensi_, Plin. _ad Trai._ 74. A legionary
centurion in Byzantium, _ib._ 77, 78.]

[249: In the municipal matters of Asia Minor everything occurs except
what relates to arms. The Smyrnaean στρατηγὸς ἐπὶ τῶν ὅπλων is of
course a reminiscence equally with the cultus of Herakles ὁπλοφύλαξ
(_C. I. Gr._ 3162).]

[250: The Eirenarch of Smyrna sends out these _gens d'armes_ to arrest
Polycarp: ἐξῆλθον διωγμῖται καὶ ἱππεῖς μετὰ τῶν συνήθων αὐτοῖς ὅπλων,
ὡς ἐπὶ λῃστὴν τρέχοντες (_Acta mart._, ed. Ruinart, p. 39). That they
had not the armour of soldiers proper, is also elsewhere remarked
(_Ammian._ xxvii. 9, 6: _adhibitis semiermibus quibusdam_--against
the Isaurians--_quos diogmitas appellant_). Their employment in the
Marcomanian war is reported by the biographer of Marcus, c. 26:
_armavit et diogmitas_, and by the inscription of Aezani in Phrygia,
_C. I. Gr._ 3031 _a_ 8 = Lebas-Waddington, 992: παρασχὼν τῷ κυρίῳ
Καίσαρι σύμμαχον διωγμείτην παρ' ἑαυτοῦ.]

[251: In Cnidus (_Bull. de corr. Hell._ vii. 62), in the year 741-742
U.C. {13-12.}, some apparently respectable burgesses had during three
nights assailed the house of one with whom they had a personal feud; in
repelling the attack one of the slaves of the besieged house had killed
one of the assailants by a vessel thrown from the window. The occupants
of the besieged house were thereupon accused of manslaughter, but, as
they had public opinion against them, they dreaded the civic tribunal
and desired the matter to be decided by the verdict of the emperor
Augustus. The latter had the case investigated by a commissioner,
and acquitted the accused, of which he informed the authorities in
Cnidus, with the remark that they would not have handled the matter
impartially, and directed them to act in accordance with his verdict.
This was certainly, as Cnidus was a free town, an encroachment on its
sovereign rights, as also in Athens appeal to the emperor and even to
the proconsul was in Hadrian's time allowable (p. 262, note 2). But any
one who considers the state of things as to justice in a Greek town
of this epoch and of this position, will not doubt that, while such
encroachment gave doubtless occasion to various unjust decisions, it
much more frequently prevented them.]

[252: The Gerusia often mentioned in inscriptions of Asia Minor has
nothing but the name in common with the political institution founded
by Lysimachus in Ephesus (Strabo, xiv. 1, 21, p. 640; Wood, _Ephesus,
inscr. from the temple of Diana_, n. 19); its character in Roman
times is indicated partly by Vitruvius, ii. 8, 10; _Croesi (domum)
Sardiani civibus ad requiescendum aetatis otio seniorum collegio
gerusiam dedicaverunt_, partly by the inscription recently found in
the Lycian town Sidyma (Benndorf, _Lyk. Reise_, i. 71), according to
which council and people resolve, as the law requires, to institute
a Gerusia, and to elect to it 50 Buleutae and 50 other citizens, who
then appoint a gymnasiarch for the new Gerusia. This gymnasiarch, who
meets us elsewhere, as well as the Hymnode of the Gerusia (Menadier,
_qua condic. Ephesii usi sint_, p. 51), are, among the office-bearers
of this body known to us, the only ones characteristic of its nature.
Analogous, but of less estimation, are the _collegia_ of the νέοι,
which also have their own gymnasiarchs. To the two overseers of the
places of gymnastic exercise for the grown-up citizens the gymnasiarchs
of the Ephebi form the contrast (Menadier, p. 91). Common repasts
and festivals (to which the Hymnodes has reference) were of course
not wanting, particularly in the case of the Gerusia. It was not
a provision for the poor, nor yet a _collegium_ reserved for the
municipal aristocracy; but characteristic for the mode of civil
intercourse among the Greeks, with whom the gymnasium was nearly what
the citizens' assembly-rooms are in our small towns.]

[253: The milestones begin here with Vespasian (_C. I. L._ iii. 306),
and are thenceforth numerous, particularly from Domitian down to
Hadrian.]

[254: This is most clearly shown by the road-constructions executed in
the senatorial province of Bithynia under Nero and Vespasian by the
imperial procurator (_C. I. L._ iii. 346; _Eph._ v. n. 96). But even in
the case of the roads constructed in the senatorial provinces of Asia
and Cyprus the senate is never named, and the same may be assumed for
them. In the third century here, as everywhere, the construction even
of the imperial highways was transferred to the communes (Smyrna: _C.
I. L._ iii. 471; Thyatira, _Bull. de corr. Hell._ i. 101; Paphos, _C.
I. L._ iii. 218).]

[255: The Christians of the little town of Corycus in the Rough
Cilicia were wont, contrary to the general custom, to append regularly
in their tomb-inscriptions the station in life. On the epitaphs
recovered there by Langlois and recently by Duchesne (_Bull. de
corr. Hell._ vii. 230 ff.), there are found a writer (νοτάριος), a
wine-dealer (οἰνέμπορος), two oil-dealers (ἐλεοπώλης), a green-grocer
(λαχανοπώλης), a fruit-dealer (ὀπωροπώλης), two retail dealers
(κάπηλος), five goldsmiths (αὐράριος thrice, χρυσόχοος twice), one of
whom is also presbyter, four coppersmiths (χαλκότυπος once, χαλκεύς
thrice), two instrument-makers (ἀρμενοράφος), five potters (κεραμεύς),
of which one is designated as work-giver (ἐργοδότης), another is at the
same time presbyter, a clothes-dealer (ἱματιοπώλης), two linen-dealers
(λινοπώλης), three weavers (ὀθονιακός), a worker in wool (ἐρεουργός),
two shoemakers (καλιγάριος, καλτάριος), a skinner (ἱνιοράφος,
doubtless for ἡνιοράφος, _pellio_), a mariner (ναύκληρος), a mid-wife (
ἰατρινή); further a joint tomb of the highly reputable money-changers
(σύσστεμα τῶν εὐγενεστάτων τραπεζιτῶν). Such was the look of things
there in the fifth and sixth centuries.]

[256: This traffic attested for the fourth century (Ammianus, xxii.
7, 8; Claudianus in Eutrop. i. 59) is beyond doubt older. Of another
nature is the fact, that, as Philostratus states (_Vita Apoll._ viii.
7, 12), the non-Greek inhabitants of Phrygia sold their children to the
slave-dealers.]

[257: Συνεργασία τῶν λαναρίων (Wood, _Ephesus_, city, n. 4). On the
inscriptions of Corycus (p. 359) Latin descriptions of artisans abound.
The stair is called γράδος in the Phrygian inscriptions, _C. I. Gr._
3900, 3902 _i_.]

[258: One of these is Xenophon son of Heraclitus of Cos, well known
from Tacitus (_Ann._ xii. 61, 67) and Pliny, _H. N._ xxix. 1, 7, and
from a series of monuments of his native place (_Bull. de corr. Hell._
v. 468). As physician-in-ordinary (ἀρχιατρός, which title first occurs
here) to the emperor he acquired such influence that he combined with
his medical activity the position of imperial cabinet-secretary for
Greek correspondence (ἐπὶ τῶν Ἑλληνικῶν ἀποκριμάτων; comp. Suidas _s.
v._ Διονύσιος Ἀλεξανδρεύς), and he procured not merely for his brother
and uncle the Roman franchise and posts as officers of equestrian
rank, and for himself, besides the horse of a knight and the rank
of officer, the decoration of the golden chaplet and the spear on
occasion of the triumph over Britain, but also for his native place
freedom from taxation. His tomb stands on the island, and his grateful
countrymen set up statues to him and to his, and struck in memory of
him coins with his effigy. He it is who is alleged to have put an end
to Claudius, when dead-sick, by further poisoning, and accordingly,
as equally valuable to him and to his successor, he is termed on his
monuments not merely, as usual, "friend of the emperor" (φιλοσεβαστός),
but specially friend of Claudius (φιλοκλαύδιος) and of Nero (φιλονέρων;
so according to certain restoration). His brother, whom he followed in
this position, drew a salary of 500,000 sesterces (£5000), but assured
the emperor that he had only taken the position to please him, as his
town-practice brought in to him 100,000 sesterces more. In spite of the
enormous sums which the brothers had expended on Naples in particular,
as well as on Cos, they left behind an estate of 30,000,000 sesterces
(£325,000).]

[259: The document is given by Dittenberger, n. 349. Attalus II. made a
similar endowment in Delphi (_Bull. de corr. Hell._ v. 157).]

[260: A physician of Smyrna, Hermogenes, son of Charidemus (_C. I.
Gr._ 3311), wrote not merely 77 volumes of a medical tenor, but, in
addition, as his epitaph tells, historical writings: on Smyrna, on the
native country of Homer, on the wisdom of Homer, on the foundation of
cities in Asia, in Europe, on the islands, itineraries of Asia and
Europe, on stratagems, chronological tables on the history of Rome
and of Smyrna. A physician of the imperial household, Menecrates (_C.
I. Gr._ 6607), whose descent is not specified, founded, as his Roman
admirers attest, the new logical and at the same time empiric medicine
(ἰδίας λογικῆς ἐναργοῦς ἰατρικῆς κτίστης) in his writings, which ran to
156 volumes.]


END OF VOL. I.


_Printed by_ R. & R. CLARK, LIMITED, _Edinburgh_.




[Illustration:

  Mommsen Röm. Gesch. V.      I.

  DAS RÖMISCHE REICH UND DIE NACHBARSTAATEN
  im I-III Jahrh.

  H.K. 1885.]


[Illustration:

  Mommsen Röm. Gesch. V.      II.

  HISPANIA UND AFRICA.

  H.K. 1884.]


[Illustration:

  Mommsen Röm. Gesch. V.     III.

  GALLIA.

  H.K. 1884.]


[Illustration:

  Mommsen Röm. Gesch. V.      IV.

  BRITANNIA.

  H.K. 1884.]


[Illustration:

  Mommsen Röm. Gesch. V.       V.

  GERMANIA mit dem Rhein- u. Donau-Limes.

  H.K. 1884.]


[Illustration:

  Mommsen Röm. Gesch. V.      VI.

  DONAU- UND PONTUS-PROVINZEN.

  H.K. 1884.]

[Illustration:

  Mommsen Röm. Gesch. V.     VII.

  GRIECHENLAND.

  H.K. 1884.]


[Illustration:

  Mommsen Röm. Gesch. V.    VIII.

  KLEIN-ASIEN.

  H.K. 1884.]

       *       *       *       *       *




INDEX


  Abdagaeses, ii. 44.

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

  Abrinca, rivulet, i. 119 _n._

  Achaeans, diet, i. 264.

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

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

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

  Actiads, i. 296 _n._

  Actian games, i. 296 _n._

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

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

  _Adiabenicus_, ii. 78 _n._

  Adminius, i. 174.

  Adrianopolis, i. 307.

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

  Aedemon, ii. 313.

  Aegium, diet of, ii. 264 _n._

  Aeizanas, ii. 284 _n._

  Aelana, ii. 288.

  Aemilianus, Marcus Aemilius, i. 241.

  Aemilianus, Egyptian tyrant, ii. 251.

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

  _Afer_, ii. 304 _n._

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

  Agonistic institutes, i. 289 _n._

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

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

  Agrippa;
    _see_ Herod Agrippa.

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

  Agrippa, Marcus Fonteius, i. 218.

  Agrippina (Cologne), i. 119.

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

  Ahuramazda, ii. 10 f., 84.

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

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

  Albani, ii. 72 f.

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

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

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

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

  Alexander of Abonoteichos, i. 350.

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

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

  Alexandria, in Troas, i. 326 f.

  Alexandropolis, ii. 15.

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

  Allegorical interpretation, Jewish, ii. 168 f.

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

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

  Amasia, i. 331.

  Amâzigh, ii. 303.

  _Ambubaia_, ii. 133.

  Amida, ii. 115.

  Amisus, i. 331 f.

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

  Amsivarii, i. 124.

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

  Ananias, ii. 102 f.

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

  Anthedon, ii. 210.

  Antigonea, ii. 127 _n._

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

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

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

  Antioch in Pisidia, i. 336 f.

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

  Antiochus Epiphanes, ii. 196.

  Antipater the Idumaean, ii. 174-177.

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

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

  Apamea in Phrygia, i. 327.

  Apamea in Syria, ii. 136, 141.

  Aper, Marcus, i. 113.

  Apharban, ii. 114.

  Apion, ii. 193, 194 _n._

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

  Apollinaris, Gaius Sulpicius, ii. 342.

  Apollo, Actian, i. 295 f.

  Apollonia, i. 201 f., 299.

  Apollonius of Tyana, i. 350.

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

  Appuleius of Madaura, ii. 341, 342.

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

  Apri, i. 306.

  Apronius, Lucius, i. 125.

  Apulum, i. 228.

  Aquae Sextiae, i. 78, 81.

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

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

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

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

  Arachosia, ii. 13, 15.

  Aradus, ii. 138 _n._

  Aramaic language, ii. 164.

  Arbela, ii. 4, 88.

  Archaism, Greek, i. 282 _n._

  Archelaus of Cappadocia, ii. 41.

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

  Architecture, Syrian, ii. 156 f.

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

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

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

  Argentoratum, i. 119, 147, 159.

  Ariarathes of Cappadocia, ii. 33.

  Ariobarzanes, ii. 38, 39.

  Aristobulus, of Chalcis, ii. 49.

  Aristobulus, prince of Judaea, ii. 175 f.

  Aristotle's recommendation to Alexander, ii. 241.

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

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

  Arnobius, ii. 345.

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

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

  Arsaces, son of Artabanus, ii. 42.

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

  Arsamosata, ii. 56, 59.

  Arsinoe, ii. 280, 291 f.

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

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

  Artabanus (IV.), ii. 87 f.

  Artageira, ii. 40.

  Artavazdes of Armenia, ii. 28-33.

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

  Artaxares;
    _see_ Ardashir.

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

  Artaxes, ii. 33-38.

  Artaxias of Armenia, ii. 42 f.

  Asander, i. 312, 313 _n._

  Ascalon, ii. 212.

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

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

  Asiarchs, i. 345-347 _n._

  Asklepios, i. 350.

  Asoka, ii. 13, 14 _n._

  Astarte, ii. 331.

  Astingi, i. 237.

  Astures, i. 65, 71.

  Asturica Augusta, i. 66.

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

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

  Attalia, i. 334.

  Augusta Emerita, i. 64 _n._

  Augusta Praetoria (Aosta), i. 19 f.

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

  Augustamnica, ii. 298.

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Aures, ii. 317, 318, 320.

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

  Autonomy, idea of, ii. 120.

  Autricum, i. 91.

  Auzia, ii. 319, 325.

  Aventicum, i. 129.

  Avestâ, ii. 10.

  Axidares, ii. 66 _n._

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

  Azania, ii. 289.


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

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

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

  Bagradas, ii. 336.

  Balbus, Lucius Cornelius, ii. 315 _n._

  Ballomarius, i. 230 _n._

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

  Baquates, ii. 324, 325 _n._

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

  Barley-wine, i. 108 _n._

  Barsemias of Hatra, ii. 78.

  Barygaza, ii. 16 _n._, 300.

  Basil of Caesarea, i. 333.

  Bassus, Caecilius, ii. 21 f.

  Bassus, Publius Ventidius, ii. 23, 27.

  Bastarnae, i. 12, 217, 238.

  Batanaea, ii. 144;
    _see_ Haurân.

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

  Bato, the Dalmatian, i. 39, 41.

  Bato, the Pannonian, i. 39-42.

  Beads, glass, ii. 255.

  Beer, i. 108.

  Belatucadrus (Mars), i. 193.

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

  Belus, ii. 266.

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

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

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

  Beroe, i. 240.

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

  Bescera, ii. 319.

  Bessi, i. 12, 209 _n._

  Bether, ii. 225.

  Betriacum, i. 130, 143.

  Biriparach, ii. 80.

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

  Bithyniarch, i. 346.

  Blaesus, Quintus Junius, ii. 318.

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

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

  Boeotian league, i. 259, 265.

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

  Borani, i. 243, 245.

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

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

  Boudicca, i. 179, 181.

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

  Bracara, i. 16.

  Breuci, i. 23.

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

  Brigetio, i. 228.

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

  Brixia, i. 191.

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

  Burdigala, i. 113.

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

  Burgundiones, i. 167.

  Buri, i. 221, 224.

  Burnum, i. 203.

  Burrus, ii. 206.

  Busiris, ii. 251.

  Buthrotum, i. 295.

  Byzacene, ii. 336.

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


  Cabinet-secretary, imperial, ii. 272 f.

  Cadusians, ii. 88 _n._

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

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

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

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

  Caesaraugusta, i. 68.

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

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

  Caesarea Paneas, ii. 65, 147, 151.

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

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

  Caesian Forest, i. 124.

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

  Calceus Herculis, ii. 319.

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

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

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

  Callistus, ii. 102 _n._, 103.

  Calybe, i. 303, 305 _n._

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

  Camels in Africa, ii. 340.

  Camunni, i. 15 f.

  _Canabae_, i. 168.

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

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

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

  Cane, ii. 296.

  Canius Rufus, i. 76.

  Cannenefates, i. 36, 97 _n._, 121, 126 f., 131, 139, 141.

  Canopus, ii. 258 _n._;
    decree of, 260.

  Cantabri, i. 65, 66, 67.

  Cantonal system of Spain, i. 71, 72 _n._;
    of Gaul, 90 f.;
    influence of, 94;
    cantons represented in diet, 95 _n._, 96 _n._;
    in Britain, 191.

  Cappadocia, i. 323, 324;
    inland, 332;
    division into praefectures, 332;
    Greek accent of, 333; ii. 19, 41, 63.

  Caracalla, Severus Antoninus, campaign against Alamanni, i. 162;
    named _Geticus_, 139;
    Parthian war, ii. 87;
    assassinated, 88;
    treatment of Alexandria, 263;
    uniting the vices of three races, 126, 340.

  Caratacus, i. 175 f., 178.

  Caravans, Palmyrene, ii. 98 _n._

  Carên, ii. 6, 46, 84.

  Carnuntum, i. 23, 198, 206.

  Carnutes, i. 91.

  Carpi, i. 238 f.

  Carrhae, ii. 21, 22, 23, 77, 114.

  Carteia, i. 68.

  Carthage, ii. 307, 330, 331, 341.

  Carthage, New, i. 68.

  Cartimandus, i. 182 f.

  Carus, Marcus Aurelius, Persian war, ii. 112 f.;
    death, 113.

  Caspian gates, ii. 62 _n._

  Cassius, Avidius, ii. 75 _n._, 262.

  Cassivellannus, i. 170.

  Castra Regina, i. 197.

  Cattigara, ii. 302.

  Catualda, i. 61, 215.

  Caucasian tribes, ii. 35, 36, 61, 68, 72 _n._, 73, 91 _n._

  Cavalry recruited mainly from Gaul, i. 107.

  Celtic inscriptions, i. 100 _n._;
    divinities, 104 f.;
    language;
    _see_ Gaul.

  Cenomani, i. 91.

  Census of Gaul, i. 84.

  Cerialis, Quintus Petillius, i. 140 f., 142, 180, 183.

  Cernunnos, i. 104.

  Chaeremon, ii. 259, 273 _n._

  Chaeronea in the civil wars, i. 267.

  Chalcedon, i. 245.

  Chalcidian peninsula, i. 300.

  Chandragupta, ii. 13.

  Charax Spasinu, ii. 68, 98 _n._

  Charibael, ii. 294 _n._

  Chariomerus, i. 146.

  Chastisement, corporal, in Egypt, ii. 240 _n._

  Chatramotitis, ii. 286, 290, 295.

  Chatti, i. 27, 28, 29, 51, 133;
    take the lead, 149;
    Chattan wars, 150 _n._;
    under Domitian, 151 _n._, 158;
    under Marcus, 161, 197, 230 f.

  Chauci, i. 28, 29;
    renewed rising, 36, 43;
    settlements and attitude, 121;
    revolt, 125.

  _Chemi_, ii. 251.

  Chemmis, ii. 235.

  Cherusci, i. 27, 28, 29;
    rising, 36;
    under Arminius, 43, 52, 60;
    later position, 146.

  China, embassy to, ii. 302.

  Chosroes, ii. 66.

  Chosroes Nushirvan, ii. 135.

  Chrestus, ii. 199 _n._

  Christianity in Syria, ii. 126;
    Syriac Christian literature, 124;
    Christian symbols, 141;
    effect on Christians of destruction of Jerusalem, 220 f.;
    Christians not, like Jews, a nation, 226 _n._;
    Christianity and Judaism, 229 f.;
    Christians and the imperial cultus, i. 348;
    conception of the persecutions of the Christians, ii. 198 _n._

  Chrysogonus, i. 245.

  Cidamus, ii. 316.

  Cilicia, i. 323, 324;
    piracy in, 334;
    becomes province, 334.

  Cimbri, i. 37.

  Cinithii, ii. 317.

  Circesium, ii. 91, 95 _n._

  Circumcision, ii. 224;
    prohibited, 228 _n._, 229.

  Cirta, ii. 310, 311 _n._, 319, 332, 342.

  Civilis, i. 130 f.;
    siege of Vetera, 133 f.;
    capitulation of Romans, 138;
    last struggles, 141 f.

  Classieus, Julius, i. 137 f., 139.

  Claudius I., emperor, a true Gaul, i. 98;
    cancels restriction of Gallic franchise, 99;
    rising of Chauci, 125;
    directs withdrawal from right bank of Rhine, 125;
    occupation of Britain, 172, 175 f.;
    Jazyges under, 216;
    re-establishes old arrangement in Greece, 276;
    policy of Claudius in the East, ii. 45;
    death, 49;
    policy towards the Jews, 199 f.;
    directs his works to be read publicly, 271.

  Claudius Gothicus, Gothic victories of, i. 247 f.;
    renewed fortifying of Danubian frontier, 248.

  Cleopatra, ii. 25 _n._, 27, 178 f.

  Clitae, i. 336.

  Clubs, i. 353, 354 _n._, 356.

  Cnidus, appeal to the Emperor from, 352 _n._

  Cogidumnus, i. 176.

  Colonate, i. 237.

  Columella, i. 76.

  Column of Trajan, i. 124 f.

  Commagene, ii. 19;
    annexed, 41;
    kingdom revived by Gaius, 45;
    province, 63 _n._, 118.

  Commodus, conflicts in Britain under, i. 188;
    frontier-regulation in Dacia, 228;
    character, 236;
    peace with Marcomani, 236.

  Concordia, coemeterium of, ii. 140.

  Coptic, ii. 244.

  Coptos, ii. 251, 280, 288, 297 _n._

  Corbulo, Gnaeus Domitius, reduces Frisians, i. 125;
    directed to withdraw from right bank of Rhine, 125;
    sent to Cappadocia, ii. 49;
    character of troops, 50;
    offensive against Tiridates, 52;
    in Armenia, 53 _n._;
    capitulation of Paetus, 57 _n._, 58 _n._;
    conclusion of peace, 58-60;
    partiality of Tacitus's account, 57 _n._, 58 _n._, 60 _n._

  Corduba in Latin literature, i. 75.

  Corinth, treatment of, i. 257;
    Caesar's atonement, 260 f.

  Corn drawn from Egypt, ii. 239 f.

  _Correctores_, i. 279 f.

  Corycus, epitaphs of Christians at, i. 359 _n._, 361 _n._

  Costoboci, i. 242.

  Cottius of Segusio, i. 16, 18.

  Cotys, i. 210 _n._

  Cragus-Sidyma, i. 355 f.

  Cremna, i. 335, 337, 338.

  Crete, i. 323, 324, 343.

  Ctesiphon, ii. 3, 8, 28, 77, 79, 83, 113.

  Cugerni, i. 33, 124 _n._

  Cunobelinus, i. 171 _n._, 174, 175.

  Cyprian, ii. 345.

  Cyprus, i. 323, 324, 343;
    Jews in, ii. 221 f., 223, 226.

  Cyrene, i. 323 f.;
    Pentapolis, 343;
    "peasants," 343;
    categories of population, ii. 165 _n._;
    Jewish rising in, 221, 223, 234 _n._

  Cyzicus, i. 330, 348.


  Dabel, ii. 149 _n._, 151.

  Daci and Dacia: preparations for Dacian war, i. 10;
    internal troubles, 11;
    raid to Apollonia, 13;
    war of Lentulus, 42;
    Dacian language, 208;
    Daci under Tiberius, 217;
    war under Domitian, 219;
    chronology of it, 220 _n._;
    war under Trajan, 221 f.;
    second war, 222 f.;
    Dacia an advanced position, 228 f.;
    loss of Dacia, 241.

  Daesitiatae, i. 38 f., 41.

  Dalmatia, war, i. 8 f.;
    towns with Roman franchise, 10;
    Dalmato-Pannonian rising, 38 f.;
    Italian civilisation, 201;
    ports, 202;
    state of interior, 203;
    prosperity under Diocletian, 203 f.

  Damascus, environs of, ii. 144;
    Greek, 146;
    under Nabataean protection, 148 _n._;
    relation to Aretas, 149 _n._;
    Jews in, 167;
    Jews put to death, 209.

  Danava, ii. 95, 153.

  Danube, region of, i. 21 f.;
    boundary of empire, 23, 195 f.;
    fleet, 205;
    army, 218 f.;
    military position after Trajan, 225;
    primacy of Danubian armies, 250.

  Daphne, ii. 109;
    pleasure-garden, 128, 129 _n._

  Dardani, i. 9, 12, 299.

  Decapolis, ii. 146 _n._

  Decebalus, i. 220 f., 223.

  Decianus, i. 76.

  Decianus Catus, i. 180.

  Decius Traianus proclaimed emperor, i. 240;
    conflicts with Goths and relief of Nicopolis, 240;
    death, 241.

  Declamations in Gaul, i. 114.

  _Decumates_ (_agri_), i. 152 _n._, 196 f.

  Deiotarus, i. 339 f.

  Dellius, ii. 32 _n._

  Delminium, i. 203.

  Delos, i. 258, 269;
    Delian inscriptions, ii. 257 f.

  Dentheletae, i. 12.

  Deultus, i. 307.

  Deva, camp of, i. 178, 193.

  Dexippus, i. 239 _n._, 241 _n._, 243 _n._, 246 _n._, 247 _n._, 281.

  Diegis, i. 221.

  Dio of Prusa, i. 268 f., 274, 293 _n._, 366 f.;
    address to Rhodians, i. 270 f.

  Diocletianus: favour for Dalmatia and Salonae, i. 203 f.;
    Sarmatian victories, 250;
    Persian war under, ii. 110 f.;
    terms of peace, 115;
    revolt in Egypt, 251;
    edict, as to grain, 251 f.;
    as to linen, 254 _n._;
    resolves to cede the Dodecaschoinos to Nubians, 277 f.

  Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria, ii. 250 _n._

  Dionysius, cabinet secretary, ii. 273 _n._

  Dionysos, Thracian shrine of, i. 14, 24;
    Thracian god, 209.

  Dioscorides, island of, ii. 289, 296.

  Dioscurias, i. 242.

  Dmêr, ii. 149, 153.

  Dodecaschoinos, ii. 274 _n._, 277 _n._, 278 _n._

  Dodona, i. 297 _n._

  Dolabella, Publius Cornelius, ii. 318.

  Domitianus: careful administration, i. 108;
    restricts number of vines, 108 f.;
    wars with the Chatti, 150 f.;
    construction of the "Flavian altars," 153;
    Dacian war, 219 f.;
    defeated by Marcomani, 221;
    gives urban rights to Philippopolis, 307.

  Domitius Afer, Gnaeus, i. 111.

  Double names in Egypt, ii. 244.

  Drobetae, bridge at, i. 222.

  Druids and Druidism in Gaul, i. 104 f.;
    prohibited by Tiberius and Claudius, 105;
    schools of priests, 112;
    in Anglesey, 185.

  Druidesses, i. 106.

  Drusus, Nero Claudius: victory over Raeti, i. 16, 17;
    sent to the Rhine, 22;
    German war, 26 f.;
    expedition to North Sea, 28;
    death of, 29 f.;
    character, 26, 30;
    German tribes subdued, 123 f.

  Dubnovellaunus, i. 171 _n._

  Durocortorum, i. 89, 90.

  Durostorum, i. 227, 309.

  Dusaris, ii. 153;
    Dusaria, 153 _n._

  Dyarchy not applied in Egypt, ii. 233.

  Dyme, letter of governor to, i. 237 _n._, 260 _n._

  Dynamis, i. 313.

  Dyrrachium, i. 201, 299, 301.


  Earthquakes in Asia Minor, i. 358.

  Eburacum, i. 183, 186, 193, 194.

  Ecbatana, ii. 4, 28.

  Edessa, ii. 68 f., 76, 77, 79, 100, 102, 125 _n._

  Education in Gaul, i. 112 f.;
    in Asia Minor, 362 f.;
    in Africa, ii. 341 f.

  Egypt: annexation, ii. 232 f.;
    exclusively an imperial possession, 233 f.;
    twofold nationality, 234;
    land-districts and Greek cities, 235 f.;
    coinage, 237 _n._;
    absence of land-diet, 238;
    government of Lagids, 238 f.;
    imperial administration financially, 239 f.;
    revenues, 239 f.;
    privileged position of Hellenes, 240 f.;
    personal privileges in Roman period, 242;
    native language, 243;
    titles of Augustus in, 244 _n._;
    abolition of resident court, 244 f.;
    officials, general and local, 246-248;
    insurrections, 249;
    in the Palmyrene period (ii. 107 f.), 249 f.;
    revolt under Diocletian, 251;
    opposition emperors, 251;
    agriculture, 251;
    granary of Rome, 252 f.;
    revenue from imperial domains, 253 _n._, 254;
    trades, 254;
    linen, 254;
    papyrus, 255;
    building materials, 256;
    navigation of Mediterranean, 257 f.;
    population, 258;
    manners, 258 f.;
    religious customs, 259 f.;
    sorcery, 261;
    other abuses connected with the cultus, 261;
    revolt of the "Herdsmen," 261 f.;
    Alexandria, 262-273;
    strength of occupying army, 273 f.;
    recruited from camp-children, 274;
    task of the troops, 274;
    east coast and general commerce, 278 f.;
    canal, 279 f.;
    sea-route to India, 279;
    eastern ports, 280;
    relations with west coast of Arabia, 284 f.;
    land-routes and harbours, 297;
    piracy repressed, 298;
    active traffic to the east, 298 f.

  Eirenarchs, i. 351 _n._, 353.

  Elagabalus, origin of name, ii. 123.

  Elateia, i. 242.

  Eleazar, ii. 207, 208, 214, 215.

  Eleazar of Modein, ii. 224 _n._

  Elegeia, battle of, ii. 74.

  Elentherolacones, i. 260.

  Elis, i. 261;
    flax of, 292.

  Elymais, ii. 7.

  Emmaus, ii. 212 f., 218.

  Emona, i. 10, 20, 198, 206.

  Ephesus, i. 329, 360, 361.

  Epictetus, i. 273.

  _Epidaphne_, a blunder of Tacitus, ii. 128 _n._

  Epirus, i. 294 f.;
    northern, i. 297.

  Equestrian offices in Egypt, ii. 233 _n._, 242 _n._, 246, 247, 249.

  Eratosthenes, ii. 241 _n._

  Esus, i. 104.

  Ethnarch of the Jews in Alexandria, ii. 193 _n._

  Euergetes, title of, ii. 238.

  Eumolpidae, i. 281.

  Eupatorids, i. 314.

  Euphorion, librarian to Antiochus the Great, ii. 130.

  Euphrates, frontier of the, ii. 1;
    Romano-Parthian frontier-regions, 19;
    recognised as boundary, 21;
    customs-district, 70 f., 97 _n._;
    Romans on left bank, 77;
    need of watch, 118 f.;
    as route for commerce, 278 f.

  Europus, battle at, ii. 76.

  Eurycles, i. 283.

  _Exegetes_ in Alexandria, ii. 248 _n._

  Eziongeber, ii. 288 _n._

  Ezra, ii. 161.


  Fadus, Cuspius, ii. 204.

  Faustinopolis, i. 333.

  Favorinus, polymath, i. 110 f.

  Felix, Antonius, ii. 202, 204.

  _Filosofi locus_, ii. 342.

  Firmus in Egypt, ii. 111 _n._

  Flaccus, Avillius, ii. 192 _n._, 193.

  "Flavian altars," i. 153 _n._

  Floras, Gessius, ii. 206.

  Forath, ii. 98 _n._

  Forum Julii, i. 86.

  Frankincense routes, ii. 286 _n._, 288 _n._, 299.

  Franks, i. 163, 165, 167;
    settled on Black Sea, 250.

  Frontinus, Sextus Julius, i. 181.

  Fronto, Marcus Claudius, i. 234.

  Fronto, Marcus Cornelius, ii. 342.

  Frisians, i. 27, 28, 43, 97 _n._, 121, 124, 126 _n._, 129, 131, 145.

  Furtius, i. 233 f.

  Fuscus, Arellius, i. 365.

  Fuscus, Cornelius, i. 220.


  Gabinius, Aulus, ii. 174 f., 232.

  Gades, i. 68, 74 f.;
    Gaditanian songs, 75.

  Gaetulians, ii. 304, 322 _n._, 323 f.

  Galatia, i. 323 f., 336, 338 f.;
    Galatian kingdom, 339 f.;
    province, 340;
    inhabitants, 340;
    former cantons, 341;
    language under the Romans, 341 f.;
    Galatians as soldiers, 342;
    garrison of, 350.

  Galatarchs, i. 344 _n._;
    Julian's letter to, 349 _n._

  Galba, i. 130; ii. 198 _n._, 213.

  Galenus of Pergamus, i. 366.

  Gallicus, Gaius Rutilius, ii. 64 _n._

  Gallienus, energetic action in Germany, i. 163;
    victory over pirates at Thrace, 246;
    character, 247;
    murder, 247;
    recognition of Odaenathus, ii. 103 f.

  Gallus, Gaius Aelius, expedition of, ii. 290 f.;
    Strabo's account of it, 291 _n._

  Gallus, Gaius Cestius, ii. 209 f.

  Gallus, Trebonianus, i. 240 f.

  Ganna, i. 146.

  Gannascus, i. 125.

  Garamantes, ii. 309, 315, 318.

  Gaul, administrative partition of, i. 33 _n._;
    acquisition of Southern, 78;
    later conflicts in three Gauls, 79 f.;
    Celtic rising under Tiberius, 80;
    gradual pacification, 81;
    rising after Nero's death, 82, 136 f.;
    Romanising policy, 82 f.;
    organisation of the three Gauls, 84 f.;
    law and justice, 85;
    Romanising of Southern province, 88 f.;
    cantonal organisation, 90 f.;
    influence of cantonal constitution, 92;
    smaller client-unions, 92 _n._;
    diet, 94;
    altar and priest, 94;
    composition of the diets, 95 f.;
    officials, 94 _n._, 95 _n._;
    restricted Roman franchise, 98 f.;
    Latin rights conferred on individual communities, 99;
    Celtic language, 99 f.;
    evidences of its continued use, 101;
    Romanising stronger in Eastern Gaul, 102;
    land measurement, 102;
    religion, 103;
    economic condition, 106;
    culture of vine, 108;
    network of roads, 109;
    Hellenism in South Gaul, 110;
    Latin literature in Southern province, 111;
    literature in imperial Gaul, 112;
    constructive and plastic art, 114;
    extent of the three Gauls, 117;
    attempt to establish a Gallic empire, 137-141.

  Gaza, ii. 210.

  Gedrosia, ii. 13.

  Gelduba, camp at, i. 144 f.

  Geneva, i. 91.

  _Gens_ and _civitas_, ii. 334 _n._

  Georgius, murder of, ii. 265.

  Gerba, ii. 338.

  Germanicus, associated with Tiberius, i. 41;
    in sole command on the Rhine, 49;
    course after death of Augustus, 50;
    renewed offensive, 51 f.;
    expedition to the Ems, 50 f.;
    campaign of the year 16, 53 f.;
    disaster to his fleet, 54;
    recall, 55;
    aims and results of campaigns, 55-59;
    triumph, 62;
    mission to the East, ii. 40;
    its results, 41 f.

  Germany and Germans: Rhine-boundary, i. 25 f.;
    war of Drusus, 26 f.;
    Roman camps and base, 31 f.;
    organisation of province, 35;
    altar for Germanic cantons, 35, 118;
    rising under Arminius, 42 f.;
    character of Romano-German conflict, 49;
    abolition of command-in-chief on the Rhine, 55;
    Elbe frontier and its abandonment, 56-59;
    Germans against Germans, 60;
    original province, 117;
    Upper and Lower, 118 f.;
    strength of the armies, 119 _n._;
    right bank of Rhine abandoned, 125 f.;
    position after fall of Nero, 127;
    consequences of Batavian war, 143 f.;
    later attitude of Romano-Germans on left bank, 144 f.;
    free Germans there, 145;
    Upper Germany, 147 f.;
    _Limes_, 154-160;
    distribution of troops, 156 _n._, 159 _n._;
    under Marcus, 160;
    later wars, 161-167;
    Romanising of, 167;
    towns arising out of encampments, 168;
    Germanising of the Roman state, its beginnings and progress, 168 f.;
    picture of, by Tacitus, 169.

  Gerusia, i. 353, 354 _n._

  Geta, Gnaeus Hosidius, ii. 323.

  Getae, language of, i. 208.

  Gibbon, i. 6.

  Gindarus, battle of, ii. 23.

  Gladiatorial games, latest in Greece, i. 272.

  Glass of Sidon, ii. 137;
    glass-wares, 255.

  Gods, Iberian, i. 75;
    Celtic, in Spain, 75 _n._;
    British, 193;
    Syrian, ii. 123;
    Egyptian, 235, 260 f.

  Gondopharus, ii. 15, 16 _n._

  Gordianus, "conqueror of Goths," i. 239;
    Persian wars of, ii. 91.

  Gordiou Kome, i. 330.

  Gorneae, ii. 48 _n._

  Gotarzes, ii. 7 _n._, 12 _n._, 46, 47.

  Goths: migrations, i. 238;
    Gothic wars, 239;
    under Decius, 240 f.;
    invasions of Macedonia and Thrace, 240;
    maritime expeditions, 243 f.;
    victories of Claudius, 247 f.;
    character of these wars, 248.

  Graupian Mount, battle of, i. 183 f., 190.

  Great-king, ii. 7.

  Greece: Hellas and Rome, i. 253;
    towns under republic, 256;
    city-leagues broken up, 256 f.;
    revived, 259;
    freed communities and colonies, 258-261;
    decay of, 261;
    decrease of population, 268;
    statements of Plutarch, Dio, and Strabo, 268 f.;
    tone of feeling, 270 f.;
    good old manners, 271 f.;
    parallel between Roman and Athenian life, 273;
    misrule of provincial administration, 275;
    misrule in towns, 276;
    clinging to memories of past, 280;
    religion, 280;
    worship of pedigrees, 280 f.;
    language--archaism and barbarism, 281 f.;
    great families, 283 f.;
    career of state-offices, 284 f.;
    personal service of the emperor, 285;
    municipal administration, 285;
    Plutarch on its duties, 286;
    games, universal interest in, 287-290;
    municipal ambition, its honours and toils, 290 f.;
    trade and commerce, 292 f.;
    roads, 294;
    piratic invasions, i. 245 f.;
    description of Greece from the time of Constantius, i. 293 _n._

  Greek islands, places of punishment, i. 343.

  Gregorius Nazianzenus, i. 333.


  Hadrianoi, i. 328.

  Hadrianus: Hadrian's wall, i. 186;
    disaster at Eburacum, 188 _n._;
    Panhellenism at Athens, 266;
    grants to Athens, 277 f.;
    his _Novae Athenae_, 278;
    Olympieion, 278;
    evacuates Assyria and Mesopotamia, and restores Armenia as
      vassal-state, ii. 71, 72;
    Jewish rising under, 223 f.;
    lays out Antinoopolis, 236;
    gives exceptional right of coining, 237;
    alleged letter to Servianus, 256 _n._;
    "Hadrian's road" in Egypt, 297 _n._

  Haedui, i. 80, 99.

  Hairanes, Septimius, ii. 97 _n._

  Harmozika, ii. 64.

  Hasmonaeans, ii. 161.

  Hatra, ii. 69, 78, 79, 89.

  Haurân, red soil, ii. 144;
    mountain-pastures, 145;
    cave-towns, 147;
    robbers, 147 _n._;
    bilingual inscriptions, 148 _n._;
    forts, 153;
    agriculture, 154;
    Ledjâ, 154;
    aqueducts, 155;
    buildings, 156.

  Hebron, ii. 213.

  Hecatompylos, ii. 4.

  Heliopolis, ii. 121, 123.

  Helladarch, i. 255, 265 _n._, 344 _n._

  Hellenism and Panhellenism, i. 252 f.

  Helvetii, i. 27, 92, 93, 99, 117, 119, 128;
    "Helvetian desert," 152.

  Hemesa, ii. 103, 106, 109 f.;
    oil-presses near, 136 _n._

  Heraclea (Chersonesus), i. 305, 312;
    coins of, 315 _n._

  Hercules in Gaul, i. 106.

  Hermogenes of Smyrna, i. 366 _n._

  Hermunduri, i. 31, 38, 150 f., 158, 214 f.

  Herod the Great, ii. 176 f.;
    confirmed by Antonius as tetrarch, 177;
    king of Judaea, 178;
    under Augustus, 179;
    government in relation to the Romans, 179 f.;
    in relation to the Jews, 180;
    character and aims, 180 f.;
    energy of his rule, 182;
    extent of his dominions, 182;
    partition of his kingdom, 183;
    revenues of, 187 _n._;
    territory beyond the Jordan, ii. 146 f.;
    represses brigandage, 147.

  Herod Agrippa I., ii. 49, 191, 194 f., 200.

  Herod Agrippa II., ii. 152, 171, 173 _n._, 181, 183, 207, 208,
      209, 219.

  Herod Antipas, ii. 150.

  Herod of Chalcis, ii. 201.

  Herodes Atticus, i. 281, 282, 283 _n._, 284.

  Herodians, ii. 218.

  Heroonpolis, ii. 261.

  Heruli, i. 246 f.

  Hiera Sycaminos, ii. 276 _n._

  Hieronymus, i. 101.

  Hilary of Poitiers, opinion of his countrymen, i. 83.

  Hippalus, ii. 299.

  Hippo, ii. 310, 319, 328, 339.

  Homerites, ii. 286 f.;
    coinage, 287 f., 290;
    later fortunes, 294;
    united with kingdom of Axomites, 295 _n._;
    commercial intercourse of, 296.

  Homonadenses, i. 335 f.

  Hordeonius Flaccus, i. 132.

  Hyginus, i. 75.

  Hypatia, murder of, ii. 265.

  Hyrcanus, ii. 174, 175 _n._, 177, 179.


  Iapydes, i. 9.

  Iazyges, i. 216, 220, 230, 234.

  Iberians, range and language, i. 69;
    Romanising, 69 f.;
    north of Pyrenees, 79;
    coinage, 79 _n._

  Iceni, i. 179.

  Iconium, i. 336 f.

  _Idiologus_, ii. 247 _n._

  Idumaea, ii. 213, 214.

  Igel column, i. 115 f.

  Igilgili, ii. 324.

  Illyrian stock, i. 199 f.;
    range and character, 199 f.;
    admixture of Celtic elements, 200 f.

  Illyricum, relation to Moesia, i. 14 _n._;
    erection and extent of province, 20 f.;
    rising in, 39;
    administrative subdivision, 195, 201;
    excellence of Illyrian soldiers, 250 f.;
    Illyrian emperors, 251.

  India, commercial intercourse with, ii. 300 f.

  Indus, region of, ii. 13 f.

  Inguiomerus, i. 52, 60, 61.

  Insubres, i. 91.

  Iol (Caesarea), ii. 311, 321.

  Iran, empire of: Iranian stocks and rule, ii. 1 f.;
    religion, 9 f.;
    Bactria bulwark of Iran, 18.  _See_ Persia.

  Irenaeus, i. 101.

  Isauria, i. 334 f., 337.

  Isca, camp of, i. 178, 193.

  Isidorus (leader of "herdsmen"), ii. 262.

  Isidorus, geographer, ii. 39.

  Isis, i. 280; ii. 266.

  Istachr;
    _see_ Persepolis.

  Isthmus of Corinth, piercing of, i. 294.

  Istria, i. 200.

  Istros, i. 239.

  Istropolis, i. 13.

  _Itala_ version of Bible, by whom prepared, ii. 343 _n._

  Italica, i. 67.

  Italicus, i. 146.

  Italy, northern frontier of, i. 7 f.;
    ceases to be military, 251.

  Ivernia, i. 178, 182, 184.

  Izates of Adiabene, ii. 46, 167.

  Jahve, ii. 160, 161, 169.

  Jamblichus, ii. 76 _n._, 123 _n._, 131.

  Jannaeus Alexander, ii. 162.

  Jerusalem, standing garrison, ii. 186;
    destruction of, 215, 218;
    colony of Hadrian, 224 _n._  _See_ Judaea.

  Jews: Jewish traffic, ii. 141 f.;
    Pariah position in Rome, 142 f.;
    Diaspora, 142, 162 f.;
    at Alexandria, 162 _n._, 163;
    at Antioch, 163;
    in Asia Minor, 163 _n._;
    Greek language compulsory, 163 f.;
    retention of nationality, 164 f.;
    self-governing community in Alexandria, 165;
    extent of the Diaspora, 166 f.;
    proselytism, 166 f.;
    Hellenising tendencies, 167;
    Jewish-Alexandrian philosophy, 168;
    Neo-Judaism, 168 f.;
    fellowship of, as a body, 169 f.;
    Philo, 170;
    Roman government and Judaism, 171 f.;
    policy of Augustus, 171 f.;
    of Tiberius, 172;
    treatment in the West, 172;
    and in the East, 173 f.;
    treatment by Gaius, 191 f.;
    Jew-hunt at Alexandria, 192 f.;
    statue of emperor in the Temple, 194 f.;
    impression produced by the attempt, 195;
    hatred of emperor-worship depicted in the Apocalypse, 196-198 _n._;
    treatment by Claudius, 199 f.;
    preparations for the insurrection, 201 f.;
    high-priestly rule, 202;
    Zealots, 203 f.;
    outbreak in Caesarea, 205 f.;
    and in Jerusalem, 206 f.;
    struggle of parties, 208 f.;
    extension of the war, 209;
    war of Vespasian, 210 f.;
    forces, 211 _n._;
    first and second campaigns, 213;
    Titus against Jerusalem, 213;
    task of assailants, 214 f.;
    destruction of Jerusalem, 215;
    breaking up of Jewish central power, 216;
    central worship set aside, 216 f.;
    tribute transferred to Capitoline Jupiter, 217 f.;
    territory becomes domain-land, 218 _n._;
    further treatment, 219 f.;
    consequences of catastrophe, 220;
    Palestinian Jews, 220 f.;
    rising under Trajan, 221;
    under Hadrian, 223, 225 _n._;
    position in second and third centuries, 225 f.;
    toleration of worship, 226;
    corporative unions, 226 f.;
    patriarchs, 227 _n._;
    exemptions from, and obligations to, public services, 227, 228 _n._;
    circumcision prohibited, 228 _n._;
    altered position of Jews and altered character of Judaism in the
      imperial period, 229, 230.

  John of Gischala, ii. 214.

  Joppa, ii. 175 _n._, 176.

  Josephus, on cave-towns of Haurân, ii. 147;
    account of Titus's council of war, 217 _n._;
    value of statements in the preface to his History of the Jewish
      War, ii. 205 _n._

  Jotapata, ii. 212.

  Juba I., ii. 308.

  Juba II., ii. 312, 313, 338 _n._;
    his Collectanea, ii. 39, 293 _n._

  Judaea: distinction between Jewish land and Jewish people, ii. 160;
    priestly rule under Seleucids, 160 f.;
    kingdom of Hasmonaeans, 161;
    Pharisees and Sadducees, 161;
    under the republic, 174;
    Caesar's arrangements, 175 f.;
    freedom from dues, 175 _n._;
    Parthians in Judaea, 177 f.;
    under Herod, 180-182;
    under Archelaus, 183 f.;
    Roman province, 184, 185 _n._;
    provincial organisation, 186;
    military force in, 186;
    tribute, 186 f.;
    native authorities, 187;
    deference to Jewish scruples, 189 f.;
    the Jewish opposition, 190 f.
    _See also_ Jews.

  Judaism;
    _see_ Jews _and_ Judaea.

  Judas, the Galilean, ii. 195, 198.

  Jugurtha, war with, ii. 307.

  Julianus defeats Dacians at Tapae, i. 220.

  Julianus, Emperor, epigram on barley-wine, i. 108;
    reply to "beard-mockers" of Antioch, ii. 135.

  Julii, tomb of, at S. Remy, i. 115.

  _Juridicus_, ii. 247 _n._

  Jurisprudence, studied at Berytus, ii. 130.

  Juthungi, i. 161, 166.


  Kainepolis, ii. 75 _n._

  Kanata and Canatha, ii. 146 _n._

  Kanerku, ii. 16, 17 _n._

  Kerykes, i. 246, 281.

  King of kings, ii. 11.


  Labeo, Claudius, i. 136.

  Labienus, Quintus, ii. 22, 23.

  Lachares, i. 283.

  Lactantius, ii. 345.

  Lactora, i. 97 _n._

  Laetus, ii. 79.

  Lagids, government of, ii. 238;
    finance of, 239 f., 241.

  Lambaesis, ii. 319.

  Lancia, i. 66.

  Langobardi, i. 35, 37, 146, 230.

  Laodicea, i. 327, 360; ii. 130.

  Larisa, i. 298.

  _Latifundia_, ii. 334.

  Latin version of Bible, ii. 343 _n._

  Latobici in Carniola, i. 200.

  Latro, Marcus Porcius, i. 76.

  Lauriacum, i. 198.

  Leagues of Greek cities, i. 259, 264 _n._;
    diets, 264 f.

  Lentulus, Gnaeus, Dacian war, i. 42.

  Leptis, Great, ii. 316, 326, 327, 328.

  Leuce Come, ii. 148, 280, 285, 288, 291.

  _Leuga_, i. 103.

  _Lex Julia_ II., i. 10.

  Libanius, description of Antioch, ii. 129 _n._

  Library of Alexandria, ii. 271 f.

  Libyans, ii. 304, 317.

  Licinianus, Valerius, i. 76.

  _Limes_, meaning of, i. 122 _n._;
    _Limes Germaniae_, 122 f.;
    Upper Germanic, 154 f.;
    _Raetiae_, 155 f.;
    construction of, 156, 197;
    object and effect of these structures, i. 157-160.

  Lindum, i. 182.

  Linen, Syrian, ii. 137, 138;
    Egyptian, 254 _n._

  Lingones, i. 102, 139, 140;
    testament of man of rank among, i. 107.

  _Logistae_, i. 353.

  Lollius, Marcus, defeat of, i. 26.

  Londinium, i. 177, 180, 192.

  Longinus (Pseudo-), on the Sublime, ii. 168, 231.

  Lucanus, i. 76.

  Lucian of Commagene, ii. 131;
    on the Syrian goddess, 134 _n._;
    (Pseudo-), parallel between Roman and Athenian life, 273 f.

  Lugii, i. 37, 215, 220.

  Lugudunum, i. 87-90.

  Lusitania, i. 63, 64;
    towns with burgess-rights in, 68.

  Lutetia described by Julian, i. 109.

  Lycia, i. 323 f., 333;
    Lycian cities-league, 333.

  Lydius, robber-chief, i. 337.

  Lysimachia, i. 303, 322 _n._

  Macedonia, frontier of, i. 11 f.;
    extent under the empire, 298 f.;
    nationalities, 299 f.;
    Greek polity, 300 f.;
    diet, 300;
    economy, roads and levy, 301 f.;
    Macedonians at Alexandria, ii. 164, 165 _n._

  Machaerus, ii. 215.

  Macrianus, Fulvius, ii. 102 _n._, 103.

  Macrinus, ii. 88.

  Mactaris, ii. 339 _n._

  Madaura, ii. 341.

  Madeira, dyeworks at, ii. 323, 338 _n._

  Maeates, i. 189.

  Magians, ii. 10, 84.

  Magnesia on Maeander, i. 325, 329.

  Malchus, ii. 151.

  Mamaea, ii. 90.

  Marble quarries, i. 292.

  Marcianopolis, i. 308, 310.

  Marcomani, i. 27;
    retire to Bohemia, 29;
    isolated, 31;
    under Maroboduus, 37, 60 f.;
    under Roman clientship, 214 f.;
    war under Marcus Aurelius, 229 f.;
    invasion of Italy, 231;
    pestilence, 231;
    progress of war, 232;
    submission of Quadi, 233;
    terms of, 234;
    second war, 235;
    results, 235 f.;
    conclusion of peace by Commodus, 236.

  Mareades, ii. 101 _n._

  Margiane (Merv), ii. 18.

  Mariaba, ii. 287 _n._, 292, 295.

  Mariamne, ii. 177, 181.

  Mariccus, i. 129.

  Marmarica, ii. 315.

  Marnus, temple of, ii. 133.

  Maroboduus, i. 37, 43, 48, 60 f.

  Marsi, i. 51.

  Martialis, Valerius, i. 76.

  Mascula, ii. 319.

  Massada, ii. 215.

  Massilia, i. 78, 79, 86, 110.

  Massinissa, ii. 305, 309.

  Mattiaci, i. 33, 133, 149 _n._

  Mauretania, Roman dependency, ii. 308;
    two Mauretanian kingdoms, 310 f.;
    Roman civilisation in, 320 f.;
    Gaetulian wars, 322;
    incursions of Moors into Spain, 324 _n._;
    colonisation of Augustus, 333;
    large landed estates, 333 f.

  Mauri, ii. 304.

  Maximianus, Galerius, ii. 114.

  Maximinus, expedition into heart of Germany, i. 162;
    Mesopotamia falls to Ardashir, ii. 91.

  Maximus, Terentius, ii. 65.

  Mazices, ii. 303, 324.

  Media, ii. 4, 6, 10.

  Mediolanum, i. 91.

  Mediomatrici, i. 141.

  Megasthenes sent to India, ii. 130.

  _Megistanes_, ii. 5 f.

  Meherdates, ii. 46.

  Mela, Pomponius, i. 76.

  Menahim, ii. 208.

  Menecrates, physician, i. 366 _n._

  Menippus of Gadara, ii. 131.

  Meroe, ii. 275, 277.

  Mesembria, i. 305.

  Mesene, ii. 68.

  Mesopotamia ceded to Parthians, ii. 21;
    Vologasus in, 55;
    occupied by Trajan, 68;
    revolt of Seleucia and siege, 68 f.;
    Roman province, 68, 70 f.;
    evacuated by Hadrian, 72;
    again Roman province under Severus, 79;
    battle of Nisibis, 88;
    falls to Ardashir, 91;
    reconquered by Gordian, 91;
    but ceded by Philippus, 92;
    struggle under Valerian, 100;
    action of Odaenathus, 104;
    once more Roman under Carus, 113 _n._;
    invaded by Narseh, but recovered by Diocletian, 113-115.

  Messalla, Marcus Valerius, vanquishes the Aquitanians, i. 80.

  Minaeans, ii. 285 _n._, 286 _n._, 290, 295.

  Minnagara, ii. 15, 16 _n._

  Minucius, Felix, ii. 345.

  Mithra, worship of, ii. 126.

  Mithradates I., ii. 4, 5.

  Mithradates, brother of Pharasmanes, ii. 43, 45, 46 _n._, 47.

  Mithradates of Pergamus, i. 313, 340.

  Moesia, i. 12;
    subjugation by Crassus, 13, 212;
    relation to Illyricum, 14 _n._;
    province, 22;
    Latin civilisation of, 213;
    legionary camps, 213 _n._, 218, 227;
    Greek towns in lower, 308 f.;
    mints in, 308 _n._

  Mogontiacum, i. 32, 49, 118, 149, 168.

  Mona, i. 178, 179, 180, 182.

  Monachism cradled in Egypt, ii. 267.

  Monaeses, ii. 24, 26, 28, 29, 31.

  Monobazus of Adiabene, ii. 54.

  Montanus, Votienus, i. 111.

  Months, Persian names of, ii. 85 _n._;
    Palmyrene, 96 _n._

  Morini, i. 80.

  Mosaic pavements in Britain, i. 194.

  Moselle valley, i. 115 f.

  Museum of Alexandria, president of the, ii. 248 _n._;
    _savants_ of the, 268 f., 271 _n._, 272.

  Musulamii, ii. 317, 318, 319 _n._

  Muza, ii. 289, 296, 299 _n._

  Muziris, ii. 301.

  Myos Hormos, ii. 280, 288, 297, 298.


  Nabata, ii. 275, 281, 282 _n._

  Nabataea: language and writing, ii. 146;
    kingdom of Nabat, 148;
    its extent and power, 148 f.;
    Nabataean inscriptions, 148, 149 _n._;
    king subject to the Romans, 150;
    coins of, 150 _n._;
    Greek designations of magistrates, 181 f.;
    merged partly in Roman province of Arabia by Trajan, 152;
    worship, 153;
    Phylarchs, 154.

  Naissus, i. 248.

  Namara, stronghold of, ii. 153, 157.

  Napoca, i. 228.

  Narbo, i. 78 f., 86.

  Narcissus, i. 175.

  Naristae, i. 237.

  Narona, i. 202.

  Narseh, ii. 114 _n._

  Nasamones, ii. 316.

  Nattabutes, ii. 319 _n._

  Naucratis, ii. 235 _n._, 236 _n._

  Nauplia, i. 293.

  Nauportus, i. 8, 198.

  Neapolis, Flavia, ii. 218.

  Necho, ii. 278.

  Neckar, region of the, i. 152 f.

  Negrin, oasis of, ii. 320.

  Neith, sanctuary of, ii. 260.

  Nelcynda, ii. 301.

  Nemausus, i. 87;
    temples, 106;
    coins, 110.

  Neocorate, i. 346 f.
  _Neoi_, i. 353.

  Neo-Judaism, ii. 269.

  Neo-Platonism, ii. 126, 209.

  Neo-Pythagoreanism, ii. 269.

  Nero, report of Aelianus as to Moesia, i. 217;
    attempt to pierce the Isthmus of Corinth, 294;
    under Burrus and Seneca, ii. 49;
    aims of the government in the East, 50, 51;
    Parthian war under, 55 f.;
    intended Oriental expedition, 61 f.;
    Vologasus on Nero's memory, 62;
    confiscations in Africa, 334;
    Pseudo-Nero, ii. 62, 64.

  Nicaea, i. 245, 329.

  Nicanor, Julius, buys back Salamis, i. 278.

  Nicephorium, ii. 76, 94, 114.

  Nicetes of Smyrna, i. 365.

  Nicolaus of Damascus, ii. 167 f.

  Nicomedia, i. 245, 329, 345;
    Dio's address to, 330 _n._

  Nicopolis, Epirot, i. 254, 295 f.

  Nicopolis on Haemus, i. 240, 307.

  Nicopolis, suburb of Alexandria, ii. 274.

  Niger, Pescennius, ii. 77, 78 _n._, 118.

  Nile: Nile-flood, ii. 252, 253;
    Nile-route for commerce, 278.

  Nisibis, ii. 68 f., 76, 78 _n._, 79, 115;
    battle at, 88, 91.

  Nomes, constitution and distinctive features of, ii. 235 f.;
    agoranomy in, 235 f., 239 _n._;
    presidents of the nomes, 248 f.

  Nonnus, epic of, ii. 268.

  Noreia, i. 198.

  Noricum, province of, i. 18, 196;
    Italising of, 197 f.;
    military arrangements, 198;
    townships, 199.

  Novae, i. 227.

  Novaesium, i. 132-136, 141, 142.

  Novempopulana, i. 197.

  Noviodunum, i. 87 _n._

  Noviomagus, i. 119, 120.

  Nubians, ii. 275, 278.

  Numidians, ii. 304;
    Numidia in civil wars, 307;
    a province, 307, 310.


  Obodas, ii. 150, 290.

  Octavia, ii. 27, 32.

  Odaenathus, Septimius, ii. 97 _n._

  Odaenathus, king of Palmyra, ii. 103 _n._;
    campaign against Persians, 104 f.;
    assassination, 106 _n._

  Odessus, i. 13, 315.

  Odrysae, i. 11, 209 f., 304, 306 _n._

  Oea, ii. 316, 327.

  Oescus, i. 214, 309.

  Ogmius, i. 104.

  Olbia, i. 239, 242, 305, 310 _n._, 311.

  Olympic games, i. 288 f.

  Ombites, ii. 261, 262.

  Onias, temple of, closed, ii. 217.

  Ordovici, i. 178, 182.

  Orodes, ii. 21, 22, 23 f., 43.

  Orontes valley, ii. 134, 141.

  Osicerda, coin of, i. 70.

  Osiris worship, ii. 266 _n._

  Osrhoene, ii. 88.

  Otho, defeat of, i. 128.

  Oxus, ii. 83.


  Pacorus I., son of Orodes, ii. 21, 22, 23.

  Pacorus, Parthian king in time of Trajan, ii. 65 _n._

  Paetus, Lucius Caesennius, ii. 56 f.;
    capitulation at Rhandeia, 57 f.;
    recalled, 59.

  Pahlavi language, ii. 11, 12 _n._, 85.

  Palikars, i. 207.

  Palma, Aulus Cornelius, ii. 152.

  Palmyra, ii. 92 f.;
    predatory expedition of Antonius, 93;
    military independence, 93, 94 _n._;
    distinctive position, 93 f.;
    administrative independence, 95 f.;
    language, 95 f.;
    votive inscriptions, 96 _n._;
    magistrates, 96 f.;
    "Headman," 97;
    official titles, 97 _n._;
    customs-district, 97 _n._;
    commercial position, 98;
    under Odaenathus, 103 f.;
    under Zenobia, 106-110;
    destruction, 111 f.;
    chronology, 111 _n._

  Pamphylia, i. 324;
    coast towns, 333 f.;
    earlier rulers, 334;
    assigned to governor of its own, 336.

  Panhellenism, i. 252 f.;
    Panhellenes, 265;
    Panhellenion of Hadrian, 266 _n._;
    letters of recommendation, 267 _n._;
    Olympia, 288 f.

  Pannonia, province, i. 22;
    first Pannonian war, 22 f.;
    Dalmatio-Pannonian rising, 38 f.;
    military arrangements, 204 f.;
    urban development, 206 f.;
    camps advanced, 219;
    prosperity, 229.

  Panopeus, i. 290.

  Panopolis, ii. 235.

  Panticapaeum, i. 305, 312, 313, 315 _n._, 316 f., 318, 319.

  Papak, ii. 87 _n._

  Papyrus, ii. 255 _n._

  Paraetonium, ii. 235 _n._

  Paropanisus, ii. 14.

  Parthamaspates, ii. 69.

  Parthia and Parthians, rule of, ii. 2 f.;
    Parthians Scythian, 3;
    regal office, 5;
    Megistanes, 5, 6 _n._;
    satraps, 6;
    as vassals, 7;
    Greek towns, 8;
    counterpart to Roman empire, 9;
    language, 11 f.;
    coinage, 12;
    extent of empire, 12 f.;
    wars between Parthians and Scythians, 18;
    Romano-Parthian frontier-region, 19;
    during the civil wars, 21;
    at Philippi, 22;
    in Syria and Asia Minor, 22;
    [Judaea, 177 f.];
    seizure of Armenia, 45 _n._;
    occupation of Armenia, 47 f.;
    war under Nero, 55 f.;
    the East under the Flavians, 61 f.;
    coinage of pretenders, 65 _n._;
    war under Trajan, 65 f.;
    his oriental policy, 70 f.;
    reaction under Hadrian and Pius, 71 f.;
    war under Marcus and Verus, 74 f.;
    wars under Severus, 77 f.;
    wars of Severus Antoninus, 87;
    beginning of Sassanid dynasty, 80 f., 89;
    Partho-Indian empire, ii. 15 f., 17 _n._

  Parthini, i. 9.

  Parthomasiris, ii. 66 _n._, 67.

  Patrae, i. 260 f., 292 f., 297.

  Patriarchs of Jews, ii. 227 _n._

  Patrocles, Admiral, exploring Caspian, ii. 130.

  _Patronatus_, contracts of, ii. 329 _n._, 330 _n._

  Paul at Damascus, chronology of, ii. 149 _n._

  Paullinus, Gaius Suetonius, i. 179 f., 181, 182; ii. 313, 323.

  Pedigrees, i. 287 f.

  Pentapolis, Pontic, i. 308 f.;
    coinage of, 309.

  Pergamus, i. 326, 329, 345, 350.

  Persepolis (Istachr), ii. 83.

  Persian empire, extent of, ii. 1 f.;
    _see_ Sassanids.

  Persis, viceroys of, how named, ii. 5 _n._;
    king of, 7;
    royal dynasty, Sassanids, 81.

  Pertinax, Helvius, i. 233.

  Petra, client-state of Nabat, ii. 65;
    residence of king, 148;
    traffic-route, 151 _n._, 288;
    constitution under Hadrian, 155;
    structures of, 156;
    rock-tombs, 157.

  Petronius, Gaius, governor of Egypt, ii. 276.

  Petronius, Publius, governor of Syria, ii. 194.

  Pessinus, i. 341, 342 _n._

  Phanagoria, i. 315, 319.

  Pharasmanes (I.), ii. 43, 47, 53.

  Pharasmanes (II.), ii. 73.

  Pharisees, ii. 161, 183, 188, 208.

  Pharnaces, i. 312, 339.

  Pharnapates, ii. 23.

  Pharsalus, i. 298 _n._

  Phasael, ii. 177 f.

  Philadelphia (in Lydia), i. 360.

  Philadelphia (in Syria), ii. 146.

  Philae, ii. 276, 278.

  Philhellenism of the Romans, i. 276 f.

  Philippi, i. 301, 303.

  Philippopolis, i. 211, 232, 260, 304, 307.

  Philippus, Marcus Julius, proclaimed emperor, ii. 91 f.;
    cession of Euphrates frontier, 92.

  Philo, Neo-Judaism, ii. 170;
    deputations to Gaius, 193;
    silence accounted for, 196 _n._

  Phoenician language in Africa, ii. 326 f., 328 _n._

  Phraataces, ii. 39.

  Phraates, ii. 24, 28 f., 34, 37, 38.

  Phrygia, Great, i. 325;
    language, i. 328;
    coins and inscriptions, 328.

  Phylarchs, ii. 154, 158 _n._

  _Picti_, i. 189.

  Piracy in Black Sea, i. 242 f.;
    expeditions to Asia Minor and Greece, 245 f.;
    in Pisidia, 334 f.;
    in Red Sea, ii. 298.

  Piraeus, i. 278, 293.

  Pirustae, i. 41.

  Pisidia, independence, i. 334;
    subdued by Augustus, 335;
    Pisidian colonies, 336;
    brigandage in, 351.

  Piso, Lucius, Thracian war, i. 24 f.

  Pityus, i. 242, 243 f.

  Pius, Cestius, i. 365.

  Plataeae, i. 266 _n._, 267 _n._

  Plautius, Aulus, i. 175, 177.

  Plotinus, ii. 126.

  Plutarch, knowledge of Latin, i. 272;
    account of his countrymen, 272;
    on population of Greece, 268;
    character of, 274 f.;
    view of municipal duties, 286, 290.

  Poetovio, i. 18, 23, 205, 206.

  Polemon, i. 313; ii. 24, 35.

  _Polis_ and _Nomos_, ii. 237.

  Politarchs, i. 300 _n._

  Pollio, Coelius, ii. 48.

  Pompeianus, Tiberius Claudius, i. 233.

  Pompeiopolis, ii. 102.

  Pontus, province organised by Pompeius, i. 331 f.;
    annexation of kingdom of, ii. 61.

  Poppaea Sabina, ii. 167.

  Porphyrius, ii. 126.

  Portus, mariners' guild at, ii. 257 _n._

  Posidonius of Apamea, quoted, ii. 133.

  Postumus, Marcus Cassianius Latinius, proclaimed emperor
      in Gaul, i. 164;
    takes Cologne, 165;
    falsifications of the Imperial Biographies in his case, 164 _n._

  Potaissa, i. 228.

  Praaspa, ii. 29.
  _Praefectus_, ii. 233 _n._, 246, 247 _n._

  Prasutagus, i. 176.

  Premis, ii. 276.

  Priests in Asia Minor, i. 348.

  Princeps: position as to Egypt, ii. 233 f.;
    _princeps et undecim primus_, 335 _n._

  Priscus, Statius, ii. 75.

  Priscus, governor of Macedonia, i. 240.

  Proaeresios, ii. 268 _n._

  Probus, opens vine-culture to provincials, i. 109;
    resumes aggression against the Germans, 166 f.;
    transfers Bastarnae to Roman bank, 249;
    subdues Lydus in Isauria, 337;
    delivers Egypt from Palmyrenes, ii. 108, 250, 277;
    restores water-works on Nile, 253.

  _Provincia_, alleged use of term, ii. 233 _n._

  Prucheion, ii. 250, 251.

  Pselchis, ii. 276.

  Pseudo-Nero, ii. 62, 64 f.

  Ptolemaeus Philadelphus, son of Antonius, ii. 25.

  Ptolemaeus Philadelphus, ii. 280.

  Ptolemaeus, king of Mauretania, ii. 312 f.

  Ptolemais, "Greek" city in Egypt, ii. 235, 236.

  Ptolemais "for the Chase," on Red Sea, ii. 280.

  Ptolemies, court of the, ii. 245 f.

  Punic inscriptions, ii. 326 _n._

  Punt, ii. 285 _n._

  Purple dyeworks, Syrian, ii. 137.

  Puteoli, called little Delos, ii. 139 _n._


  Quadi, i. 214, 229, 230, 233, 234, 237.

  Quadratus, Ummidius, ii. 48 f., 202.

  Quarries, Egyptian, ii. 256.

  Quietus, Fulvius, ii. 103.

  Quietus, Lusius, i. 222; ii. 69, 223, 322 _n._

  Quinquegentiani, ii. 325 _n._

  Quintilianus, Marcus Fabius, i. 77.

  Quirinius, Publius Sulpicius, i. 336; ii. 136, 188, 315.


  Raetia, affinity of Raeti, i. 196;
    subjugation, 16, 17;
    organisation, 17 f.;
    war in Raetia, 161;
    late civilisation, 196;
    military arrangements, 197;
    Raetian _limes_, 197.

  Ratiaria, i. 214.

  Religion in Spain, i. 75;
    in Gaul, 103 f.;
    in Britain, 193;
    in Greece, 280;
    in Asia Minor, 350;
    in Iran, ii. 9 f.;
    in Syria, 123;
    in Egypt, 265, 266 _n._

  Resaina, battle at, ii. 91, 95.

  Rhadamistus, ii. 47 f.

  Rhagae, ii. 4, 28.

  Rhandeia, capitulation of, ii. 56, 57 f.

  Rhapta, ii. 289.

  Rhetoric, professors of, at Treves, i. 89 _n._;
    professorship of Greek, at Rome, ii. 272.

  Rhetors in Alexandria, ii. 264 _n._

  Rhine, boundary, i. 25;
    camps on left bank, 31 f.;
    positions on right bank, 33 f.;
    canal to Zuider-Zee, 28, 34;
    dyke between Ems and Lower Rhine, 34;
    Rhine-army as bearing on Gaul, 81;
    Rhine fleet, 119;
    army of Lower Rhine, 147 _n._

  Rhodians, Dio's address to, i. 270 f., 285.

  Rhoemetalces, i. 40, 209 f.

  Riff in Morocco, ii. 321, 324.

  Roads in Spain, i. 74;
    in Gaul, 109 f.;
    road-measurement in Gaul and Germany, 102 f.;
    in Britain, 192;
    in Greece, 294;
    in Asia Minor, 358;
    in Egypt, ii. 297;
    in Africa, 339.

  Roman empire, character of its history as compared with that of the
      republic, i. 3 f.;
    value of authorities for it, 4;
    nature of task assigned to it, 4 f.;
    object and limits of the present work, 4-6;
    its divisions, 6;
    northern frontier of, 7 f.

  Roxolani, i. 217, 238.


  Sabaeans, ii. 158, 286, 290.

  Sabinus, Julius, i. 137, 139.

  Sabinus, Oppius, i. 220.

  Sacae, ii. 14;
    Sacastane, 15;
    empire on Indus, 16, 17 _n._

  Sacrovir, Julius, rising of, i. 80 f.

  Sadducees, ii. 161.

  Sagalassus, i. 337.

  Salabus, ii. 323.

  Salassi, i. 15;
    extirpated by Augustus, 19.

  Salice (Ceylon), ii. 301.

  Salonae, i. 202, 204, 232.

  Samaria, ii. 187.

  Samaritans, ii. 160.

  Sanabarus, ii. 16 _n._

  Sapor, ii. 91;
    title and policy of conquest, 99 f.

  Sapphar, ii. 295.

  Saracens, ii. 158 f.

  Sarapis, ii. 265, 266 _n._, 268;
    festival of, ii. 258 _n._

  Sardes, i. 327, 330.

  Sarmatae, ii. 43.

  Sarmizegetusa, i. 221, 228.

  Sassanids, ii. 3 f.;
    official historiography, 3 _n._;
    legend of, 81, 85 f.;
    dynasty of Persis, 81;
    extent of Sassanid kingdom, 82;
    distinction between Sassanid and Arsacid kingdoms, 82 _n._;
    official titles of ruler, 83 _n._;
    church and priesthood, 84 f.;
    languages of the country under, 85 f.;
    new Persians and Romans, 86;
    strike gold pieces, 86 f.;
    chronology, 89 _n._;
    East forfeited to Persians, 101.

  Satraps, ii. 6.

  Saturninus, Gaius Sentius, i. 38.

  Saturninus, Lucius Antonius, i. 150.

  Sauromates, i. 311, 314 _n._, 317 _n._

  Savaria, i. 205, 206.

  Saxa, Decidius, ii. 22.

  Saxons, i. 60 f., 167.

  Scapula, Publius Ostorius, i. 178.

  Scarbantia, i. 206.

  Scaurus, Marcus, expedition against Nabataeans, ii. 149 f.

  Scironian cliffs, i. 294.

  Scodra, i. 200.

  Scordisci, i. 200 f., 300.

  Scoti, i. 189.

  Scythians, i. 239, 242, 243 _n._, 311;
    (Asiatic), ii. 14, 15, 17.

  Segestes, i. 43, 46, 51, 62.

  Segusiavi, i. 88 _n._, 92 _n._

  Sejanus, ii. 172 _n._, 173.

  Seleucia (in western Cilicia), i. 334.

  Seleucia Siderus (in Pisidia), i. 336, 337.

  Seleucia (in Syria), ii. 127 _n._, 128.

  Seleucia (on the Tigris), ii. 8, 11, 43, 44, 45, 68, 77, 79, 85,
      113, 127.

  Seleucids, ii. 3 _al._

  Seleucus, saying of, ii. 245.

  Selga, i. 337, 359.

  "Seminumidians and Semigaetulians," ii. 341.

  Semnones, i. 146, 161.

  Senate and senators excluded from Egypt, ii. 233 _n._

  Seneca, M. Annaeus and L. Annaeus, i. 76.

  Septuagint, ii. 164.

  Sequani, i. 80, 99, 139.

  Seres, i. 302.

  Servianus, letter (of Hadrian?) to, ii. 256 _n._

  Severianus, ii. 74.

  Severus, Alexander;
    _see_ Alexander Severus.

  Severus Antoninus;
    _see_ Caracalla.

  Severus, Septimius, Wall of Severus, i. 187 _n._;
    conflicts in Britain, 189;
    death at Eburacum, 189, 269;
    Parthian wars under, ii. 77 f.;
    title of _Parthicus_, 78 _n._;
    partition of Syria, 118.

  Severus, Sextus Julius, ii. 224 f.

  Sicca, ii. 332.

  Sido, i. 216, 229.

  Silk, Chinese, ii. 302;
    silk of Berytus, ii. 137 f.

  Silures, i. 177 f., 179, 181.

  Silvanus Aelianus, Tiberius Plautius, i. 217.

  Simon, son of Gioras, ii. 214.

  Singidunum, i. 213, 228.

  Sinnaces, ii. 44.

  Sinope, i. 331 f.

  Siraci, i. 316 _n._, 317, 319.

  Siscia, i. 9, 205.

  Sittius, Publius, ii. 311 _n._, 332.

  Skipetars, i. 199.

  Slaves, treatment of, in Greece, i. 273;
    traffic in, through Galatia, ii. 360.

  Smyrna, i. 325 f., 329, 346, 354;
    Jews at, ii. 163 _n._

  Sohaemus of Hemesa, ii. 49.

  Sohaemus, king of Armenia, ii. 75 _n._, 126.

  Sophene, ii. 115.

  Sophists, addresses of, i. 363 f.;
    Asia Minor takes the lead in, 365.

  Sostra, dam at, ii. 102.

  Spain, conclusion of its conquest, i. 63 f.;
    visit of Augustus to organise, 64;
    triumphs over, 63 _n._, 64;
    warfare in north of Spain, 64 f.;
    military organisation and distribution of legions, 65 _n._, 66;
    incursions of Moors, 67;
    introduction of Italian municipal law, 67;
    diffusion of Roman language, 70;
    cantons, 71;
    broken up, 72;
    levy, 73;
    traffic and roads, 73 f.;
    religious rites, 75;
    Spaniards in Latin literature, 75-77.

  Sparta, treatment of, i. 259 f.

  Statianus, Oppius, ii. 29.

  Statues, honorary, i. 291 _n._

  Stobi, i. 301.

  Successianus, i. 244.

  Suebi, i. 60 f., 206, 214, 216, 220.

  Sufetes, ii. 329, 330 _n._

  Sugambri, i. 26, 27, 28, 30, 33, 124;
    probably = Cugerni, 124 _n._

  Sulis, i. 177, 194.

  Surên, ii. 6, 84.

  Syene, ii. 256, 280.

  Syllaeos, ii. 291 _n._

  Symmachus, i. 113.

  Synhedrion of Jerusalem, constitution and jurisdiction, ii. 187 f.;
    disappears, 217.

  Synnada, i. 326.

  _Synoekismos_, i. 295 f.

  Syria, conquest of, ii. 116;
    boundaries of territory, 117;
    provincial government, and its changes, 117 f.;
    partition into Coele-Syria and Syro-Phoenicia, 118;
    troops and quarters of legions, 63 _n._, 118 _n._;
    inferiority in discipline, 66 _n._, 119 f.;
    Hellenising of, 120 f.;
    Syria = New Macedonia, 121;
    continuance of native language, 121 f.;
    Macedonian native and Greek names, 121 f.;
    worship, 123;
    later Syriac literature, 124 _n._;
    Syro-Hellenic mixed culture, 125;
    minor Syrian authorship, 130 f.;
    epigram and _feuilleton_, 130 f.;
    culture of soil, 133 f.;
    wines of, 137;
    manufactures, 137;
    commerce, 137 f.;
    ship-captains, 138 _n._;
    Syrian factories abroad, 138 f.;
    Syrian merchants in the West, 139 _n._;
    Syro-Christian Diaspora, 140 _n._;
    wealth of Syrian traders, 140;
    country houses in valley of Orontes, 141;
    military arrangements after 63 A.D., 210 _n._

  Syria, Eastern, conditions of culture in, ii. 144 f.;
    Greek influence in, 145 f.;
    inhabitants of Arabian stock, 145;
    Pompeius strengthens Greek urban system, 146;
    civilisation under Roman rule, 153 f.;
    agriculture and commerce, 154;
    buildings, 156;
    south Arabian immigration, 158.

  Syrtis, Great, ii. 306, 316.


  Tacapae, ii. 314.

  Tacfarinas, ii. 313, 314, 317, 318.

  Tacitus, dialogue on oratory, i. 113;
    picture of the Germans, 169;
    narrative of war in Britain criticised, 181 _n._

  Tadmor, ii. 92 _n._

  Talmud, beginnings of, ii. 219, 231.

  Tanais, i. 315 _n._, 319.

  Tarraco, i. 64.

  Tarraconensis, towns in the, i. 68.

  Tarsus, ii. 101, 122.

  Taunus, i. 33, 148.

  Tava (Tay), i. 183, 186.

  Tavium, i. 341, 342 _n._

  Taxila, ii. 14 _n._

  Teachers and salaries at Teos, i. 362.

  Teimâ, description of, ii. 285 _n._

  Temple-tribute, Jewish, ii. 169, 173;
    temple-screen, tablets of warning on, 189 _n._

  Tencteri, i. 26, 27, 124, 133, 139 f.

  Tenelium, ii. 335.

  Teos, decree as to instruction, i. 362.

  Tertullian, ii. 342, 345.

  Tetrarch, title of, ii. 177 _n._

  Tetricus submits to Aurelian, i. 166.

  Teutoburg forest, i. 53, 55.

  Thaema, ii. 148 _n._

  Thagaste, ii. 341.

  Thamugadi, ii. 319.

  Themistius, i. 342.

  Theocracy, Mosaic, ii. 160.

  Thessalonica, i. 300 f., 302.

  Thessaly, i. 297 f.;
    diet in Larisa, 298.

  Theudas, ii. 204.

  Theudosia, i. 315.

  Theveste, ii. 317, 320, 339.

  Thrace: dynasts and tribes, i. 13 f.;
    vassal-princes, 14;
    war of Piso, 24 f., 210;
    Thracian stock, 207 f.;
    language, 208;
    worship, 209;
    principate, 209 f.;
    province, 210 f.;
    rising under Tiberius, 211;
    garrison and roads, 212 f.;
    Hellenism and Romanism in, 212 f.;
    Hellenism imported, 302, 304;
    Philip and Alexander, 303;
    Lysimachus, 303;
    empire of Tylis, 303;
    later Macedonian rulers, 304;
    Roman province, 304 f.;
    Greek towns in, 305;
    strategies of, 306 _n._;
    townships receiving civic rights from Trajan, 307;
    "Thracian shore," i. 212.

  Thubursicum, ii. 336.

  Thubusuctu, ii. 325 _n._

  Tiberias, ii. 183.

  Tiberius, assists Drusus in Raetia, i. 16, 17;
    first Pannonian war, 22 f., 205;
    German war, 30 f.;
    resigns command on Rhine, 35;
    reconciliation with Augustus, 36;
    resumes command, 36;
    further campaigns in Germany, 36 f.;
    expedition to North Sea, 37;
    campaign against Maroboduus, 37 f.;
    return to Illyricum, 40 f.;
    again on Rhine after defeat of Varus, 48 f.;
    recall of Germanicus, 55;
    German policy, 55;
    motives for changing it, 56-59;
    Gallic rising under, 80;
    Frisian rising, 124;
    road-making in Dalmatia, 203;
    procures recognition for Vannius, 215;
    Dacians under, 217;
    takes Greece into his own power, 276;
    small number of statues, 291 f.;
    leads force into Armenia, ii. 37 f.;
    again commissioned to the East, but declines, 39;
    mission of Germanicus to the East, 40 f.;
    Artabanus and Tiberius, 40 f.;
    mission of Vitellius, 42 f.;
    movement against Aretas, 151;
    treatment of the Jews, 172;
    attitude towards Jewish customs, 189, 190;
    war against Tacfarinas, 317 f.

  Tigranes, brother of Artaxias, invested with Armenia by Tiberius,
      ii. 37, 38.

  Tigranes, installed in Armenia by Corbulo, ii. 54 f.

  Tigranocerta, ii. 45, 54.

  Tigris, boundary of, ii. 71, 115 _n._

  Timagenes, ii. 106.

  Timarchides, Claudius, i. 283 _n._

  Timesitheus, Furius, ii. 91.

  Tingi, i. 67; ii. 360 f., 312 f., 314, 321, 331.

  Tiridates, proclaimed king of Parthia under Augustus, ii. 34, 35, 37.

  Tiridates set up as king of Parthia in opposition to Artabanus, under
      Tiberius, and superseded, ii. 44.

  Tiridates I., king of Armenia, brother of Vologasus I., ii. 52, 53,
      54, 55, 58, 59, 60 [and ii. 11].

  Tiridates II., king of Armenia under Caracalla, ii. 87.

  Tiridates, king of Armenia under Sapor, ii. 99.

  Titus, against Jerusalem, ii. 213 f.;
    Arch of, 216;
    refuses to eject Jews at Antioch, 219.

  Togodumnus, i. 175 f.

  Tombstones, Gallic, i. 116.

  Tomis, i. 13, 227 _n._, 305, 308;
    Ovid's description of, 309;
    Mariners' guild, 310 _n._

  Town-districts in Egypt, ii. 235 f.

  Trachonitis, ii. 144;
    _see_ Haurân.

  Trajanus, M. Ulpius:
    military road from Mentz towards Offenburg, i. 153;
    settlements in Upper Germany, 160;
    mission thither, 160 _n._;
    Dacian war, 221 f.;
    second Dacian war, 222 f.;
    column in Rome, 224 f.;
    confers civic rights on Thracian townships, 309;
    Parthian war, ii. 65 f.;
    death, 69 f.;
    triumph accorded after death, 70;
    Oriental policy, 70 f.;
    erects province of Arabia, 143;
    Jewish rising under, 221 f.;
    enlargement of Egyptian canal, 297 f.

  Transport-ship, Egyptian, ii. 256, 257 _n._

  Trapezus, i. 245, 332; ii. 35, 53.

  Trebellianus Rufus, Titus, i. 211.

  Treveri, i. 80, 93, 94, 102, 136, 137, 139, 140.

  Treves, primacy in Belgica, i. 89;
    subsequently capital of Gaul, 89;
    receives Italian rights, 99.

  Triballi, i. 12.

  Triboci, i. 117, 140, 147.

  Trinovantes, i. 170, 171 _n._, 180.

  Tripolis, ii. 314 f.

  Trismegistus, Hermes, ii. 261, 266 _n._, 268.

  Troesmis, i. 227.

  Trogodytes, ii. 280, 286.

  Trogus Pompeius, historian of Hellenic type, i. 110.

  Trumpilini, i. 15.

  Tungri, i. 133, 136.

  Turan, ii. 12, 17, 45.

  Turbo, Quintus Marcius, ii. 223.

  Tyana, i. 333; ii. 109.

  Tylis, empire of, i. 303.


  Tyra, i. 226, 239, 242, 244, 305, 310.

  Tyrian factories in Italy, ii. 138 _n._


  Ubii, i. 25, 35, 97, 98 f., 102, 117, 118, 119, 134, 136;
    Roman town of, 168.

  Ulpia Noviomagus, i. 168.

  Ulpia Traiana, i. 168.

  Universe, anonymous treatise on, ii. 168.

  Usipes, i. 26, 27, 51, 124, 133, 150.

  Utica, ii. 331.


  Vaballathus, ii. 106 _n._, 108.

  Valerianus, Publius Licinius, conquers Aemilianus, i. 241;
    piratical expedition of Goths, 243 f.;
    character, 247; ii. 100;
    capture by the Persians, 100 _n._, 101 _n._

  Vangio, i. 215, 229.

  Vannius, i. 215, 216.

  Vardanes, ii. 45, 46.

  Varus, Publius Quintilius, character, i. 44;
    defeat and death, 45-47;
    locality of the disaster, 47 _n._;
    governor of Syria, ii. 184.

  Vascones, i. 66.

  Vatinius, Publius, i. 89.

  Veleda, i. 140, 142, 145.

  Veneti, i. 200.

  Verulamium, i. 179, 180, 193.

  Verus, Lucius, character of, i. 232 f.;
    in the East, ii. 75.

  Verus, Martius, ii. 75.

  Vespasianus: municipal organisation in Spain, i. 69, 73;
    proclaimed as emperor, 128;
    instigation of Civilis, 130 f.;
    consequences of Batavian war, 143 f.;
    takes possession of "Helvetian desert," 152;
    pushes forward camps on the Danube, 219;
    Eastern arrangements, ii. 62 f.;
    Jewish war, 210 f.;
    possessing himself of Rome through corn-fleet, 252;
    nicknamed the "sardine-dealer" and "six-farthing-man," 263.

  Vestinus, L. Julius, ii. 273 _n._

  Vetera (Castra), i. 32, 49, 118, 133, 138.

  Via Augusta in Spain, i. 74;
    in Gaul, 109 f.

  Via Claudian, i. 20.

  Via Egnatia, i. 302.

  Victorinus, Gaius Aufidius, i. 230.

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

  Viminacium, i. 212, 213, 228, 241.

  Vindelici, i. 16, 17, 196.

  Vindex, rising of, i. 82, 127, 128 f.

  Vindex, Marcus Macrinius, i. 234.

  Vindobona, i. 206.

  Vindonissa, i. 18, 119, 140, 159.

  Vine-culture in Gaul, i. 108 f.;
    restricted by Domitian, 108;
    on Moselle, 109.

  Viroconium, camp of, i. 178, 182.

  Vitellius, Lucius, i. 128, 129, 130; ii. 42, 43, 44, 213.

  Vocula, Villius, i. 132, 134-136, 137, 138.

  Volcae, i. 86 f., 93.

  Vologasias, ii. 47, 65, 98 _n._

  Vologasus I., ii. 47, 49, 52, 54 f., 57, 62, 63, 64, 65 _n._

  Vologasus IV., ii. 74.

  Vologasus V., ii. 77 f.

  Vonones, ii. 40, 41.

  Vorodes, Septimius, ii. 104 _n._


  Weaving in Asia Minor, i. 360.

  Wines, Gallic, i. 109.


  Xenophon, of Cos, physician, i. 361 _n._


  Zabdas, ii. 105 _n._, 107, 109.

  Zaitha, ii. 92.

  Zarai, tariff of, ii. 338 _n._

  Zealots, ii. 191, 203 f., 207, 208.

  Zenobia, government of, ii. 106 f.;
    claim to joint-rule, 106 _n._;
    occupation of Egypt, 107, 249 f.;
    Aurelian against, 108;
    battle of Hemesa, 109 f.;
    capture, 110.

  Zenodorus, of Abila, ii. 147.

  Zimises, ii. 322 _n._

  Zoelae, i. 73 _n._

  Zoskales, ii. 283.

  Zula, ii. 280.




Transcriber's Notes:

Notes, originally in the margin, relating to dates have been moved to
follow the U.C. (_ab urbe condita_) dates in the text to which they
refer. These notes are clothed in { }, and refer to the 'B.C.' era.
There are four exceptions, where 'A.D.' has been added prior to the
numeral as clarification for the reader. Similar notes in the margins,
relating to other works, have also been moved into the text, again
clothed with { }. The Index from Volume II. has been added at the end
of the book. References to the maps and index have been added to the
Table of Contents.

In the paragraph which follows Sidenote: Celtic and Latin languages;
the 'special sign (Ð)' in the original has a bar through the whole
character.