Obrazy na stronie

nature has not been counteracted by misgovernment and absurd legislation. But Etruria was not, like Campania, a land of spontaneous fertility; the industry and ingenuity of man were required to adapt cultivation to the various qualities of the land, and to curb the inundations of the Po in the provinces on the Adriatic. Their primitive manners were simple ; the distaff of Tanaquil was long preserved in the temple of Sancus at Rome; and a passage of Juvenal (6, 288) seems to imply, that in domestic industry and virtue there was a close resemblance between the Tuscan and the Roman nations in early times. Their extensive conquests, and bold and skilful navigation, are a sufficient proof of the energy of their national character. But when commerce and conquests in Southern Italy had placed in their reach the means of indulgence, they seized upon them with the avidity of a half-barbarous people : and luxury, instead of being the handmaid of refinement and elegance, ministered to vain splendour and sensual voluptuousness. Diodorus (5, 40) describes, from Posidonius, their tables loaded twice a day (which, to abstemious Greeks, seemed the excess of gluttony), their embroidered draperies, their drinking-vessels of gold and silver, and their hosts of slaves. Athenaeus gives much darker shades to his picture of the corruption of manners produced by wealth expended wholly in the gratification of the senses. That the epithets of pinguis and obesus, which the Romans applied to the Etruscans, were not wholly suggested by national malice, is evident from the recumbent figures on the covers of the sarcophagi. From the Etruscans the Romans borrowed their combats of gladiators. It should seem, however, that the horrible practice of introducing them at banquets belonged chiefly to the Etrurians of Campania, and especially to Capua; the focus of all the vices which spring from luxury, neither softened by humanity nor refined by taste. Of the Etrurian music we have spoken in mentioning the proofs of their Lydian origin. It was almost the only branch of art in which invention is attributed to them by the ancients; and even here the invention related only to the instrument; we read of no mood ascribed to them. Their celebrity, both in this and the plastic art, was owing, in a great measure, to their being the neighbours of a people whose genius was so decidedly averse from both as that of the Romans; who, till they became acquainted with the Greeks, derived all the decorative part of their system of public and private life from the Etrurians. We have no historical means of determining whether the Etrurians borrowed from the Greeks their successive improvements in sculpture and statuary, or proceeded in an independent track: the fact which we shall have to produce respecting their alphabet, renders the former supposition more probable. If this communication existed, it was only to a certain point: the Tuscan style in art always bore a resemblance to that of Egypt, and their most perfect works had that rigidity, and want of varied and living expression, which characterized Grecian sculpture before Phidias had fired his imagination with Homer's description of Jupiter and Minerva, or Praxiteles had imbodied in marble his vision of the Queen of Beauty. In all that department of art, or the contrary, in which mechanism without mind may attain perfection, the Etrurians were little inferior to the Greeks themselves. An Athenian poet (ap. Athen., 1, 28) celebrated their works in metal as the best of their kind; alluding probably to their drinking-vessels and lamps, candelabra and tripods. The religion of the Greeks lent a powerful aid in perfecting the plastic art; that of the Etrurians, as far as it was peculiar to them, had nothing to impregnate the native fancy of the artist, or to exalt his conceptions to sublimity. . They appear to have held an opinion, which we find both in the Northern and Hindu theology, that the gods themselves were like the *..." over which they presided, the effects 2

of a power exerted only at long intervals in the production of being, and absorbing into itself all that it had produced, to create again. The symbols of this power were the Dii involuti of Etrurian theology, whose names were unknown, and who were not objects of popular worship; of them Jupiter himself asked counsel : the Dii Consantes, twelve in number, six of either sex, presided over the existing order of things, and received homage and sacrifice. Their intervention in human affairs was chiefly manifested in omens of impending evil, to be averted by gloomy, and often cruel expiations. If morality may have gained something by the Etrurian religion's having furnished nothing answering to the sportive, but licentious mythology of the Greeks, poetry and art undoubtedly suffered. The same want of lively and cheerful imagination characterized their doctrine of the immortality of the soul: their subterranean world was a Tartarus without an Elysium. Nowhere was superstition reduced so completely to system. The regions of the heavens were divided and subdivided according to the Etrurian discipline, that every portent might have its accurate interpretation; the phenomena of the atmosphere, especially thunder and lightning, were observed and classed with a minuteness which might have furnished the rudiments of a science, had the observers been philosophers instead of priests; but which, in fact, only augmented the subservience of the multitude to those who claimed the exclusive knowledge of the methods by which the gods might be propitiated. It is unnecessary to say that philosophy, in the Grecian sense of the word, free speculation on man, nature, and providence, combining its results into a system, was unknown in Etruria. Some practical knowledge of the laws of nature cannot be denied to a people who executed such works in architecture and hydraulics as the Etruscans; but we are not aware that the discovery or demonstration of a single scientific truth can be claimed for them. The form of the Etrurian government, in which the same order were both aristocracy and priesthood, effectually prevented the mind of the nation from expending itself in its natural

rowth. To the Lucumones, an hereditary nobility, #. revealed the religious usages which the people were to observe; and they kept to themselves the knowledge of this system, with the power of applying it as they thought best for perpetuating their own monopoly. In their civil capacity, the Lucumones formed the ruling body in all the cities of Etruria. In earlier times we read of kings, not of the whole country, but of separate states, whose power, no doubt, was greatly narrowed by that of the aristocracy; but they disappear after a time altogether, as from the Grecian and Roman history; while no body corresponding to the plebs arose to represent the popular element of the constitution. It is difficult to fix the exact relation of the great body of the ruling caste. Muller inclines to the opinion, that the cultivators of the soil were chiefly bondsmen to the land-owners, as the Penesto in Thessaly, and the Helots in Sparta. That such a class existed in Etruria is certain; that it includes so large a proportion of the people is not probable; and the only argument adduced in support of it is the very doubtful assumption that the clients at Rome were bondsmen of the patricians. Unquestionably the Etrurian aristocracy kept the lower orders in political subjection, and the nation was thus prevented from rising to that eminence to which it might have attained; but its general prosperity is a proof that the government was not tyrannically exercised. The spirit of democracy appears not even to have stirred, so as to awaken the fears of the ruling caste, and lead them to severity. The insurrections of which we read are especially attributed to the slaves. Etruria was fertile in corn, especially in spelt, the far or ador of the Romans; of which the meal furnished the puls, which was the ancient food of the inhabitants of all this part of Italy; and agriculture formed the most honourable occupation. The iron-mines of Ilva, now Elba, and others on the mainland of Etruria connected with them, furnished a richer supply, and of a purer quality than any other in the ancient world; the same island produced the copper for their coinage, and for their works in brass.

Works of Art, Antiquities, &c., of the Etrurians.

Enough remains of Etruscan art to justify what ancient authors have said of the population, wealth, and luxury of this people. The walls of their cities rarely exhibit that gigantic species of dike-building which has been called the Cyclopean architecture, and which is found in Asia Minor, in the Peloponnesus, and the remains of the ancient towns of Latium and Samnium. Micali considers the walls of Cosa as the only specimen in Etruria of the Cyclopean manner; but if the criterion be the use of polygonal masses of stone without cement, instead of parallelopipedal, the plate (pl. 12) which he has given of the gate and wall of Signium (Segni) shows that it partakes of the character of this class. But, in general, they built their walls, as may be seen at Wolterra, Populonia, and Rusellae, of vast blocks of parallelopipedal form, which their own weight retained in their places, without the use of mortar. The gate of Segni, before mentioned, shows something of the earliest attempt at constructing an arch, by the gradual approximation of the stones which form the sides. Etruria does not exhibit any specimens of the mode of building practised in the treasuries of Atreus and Minyas, in which the walls of a circular building converge so as to meet at the top in the form of a beehive. A recent traveller, Della Marmora, has discovered several of this kind in the island of Sardinia. We are indebted for by far the most numerous of our Etruscan antiquities to the care with which this people provided themselves with durable places of sepulture, and their custom of interring with the body various articles of metal and of clay. To the opening of the hypogea of Wolterra, we owe the revival of this branch of antiquarian lore. Some of these repositories belonged to ancient towns, whose existence might have been unknown but for the necropolis which marks their vicinity. Inghirami has given an interesting account (Ser. 4) of two of these ; one at Castellaccio, not far from Viterbo, the other at Orchia, about fourteen miles to the southwest of that city. Castellaccio was the Castellum Axium mentioned by Cicero in his oration for Caecina (c. 7), the site of which Cluverius declared to be unknown. The traces of the walls themselves are very visible in the large oblong blocks of peperino joined without cement, and convex outward, in the usual style of the old Etruscan fortifications. The steep banks of the stream, being composed of a tufo easily wrought, have been hewn out for nearly a mile into grotto-sepulchres, the face of the rock being cut into the representation of a doorway, while the real entrance to the hypogeum is below, and closed with large stones. Examples of this kind of sepulchre are found in Persia, in Palestine, and in Asia Minor (Walpole's Memoirs, vol. 1, p. 231 ; vol. 2, p. 206, 524); but in these the entrance is by the sculptured portal, which in the Etrurian sepulchres served only as an ornament. The architecture of these tombs is evidently of an age when the Greek embellishments had become known in Etruria; but the shortness of the pillars, the length of the intercolumniation, and the heaviness of the upper parts, agree very well with the character which Vitruvius (3, 3) gives to the Tuscan buildings, “Varica, baricephalae et humiles et latae.” As time has not spared a single public edifice of the Etrurians, it is only by means of their sepulchres, or the representations of their buildings in paintings and bas-reliefs, that we can

judge what their architecture really was; and even here we find very few traces of it. (Muller, Etrusker, vol. 2, p. 24.) It is nearly allied to the Doric, and not properly a distinct order; whether so allied in consequence of the affinity of the Etrurians and Greeks, or borrowed by the former, and varied to adapt it to edifices of wood, as theirs commonly were, appears doubtful. Within these sepulchral chambers were disposed cinerary urns of stone, sometimes ranged around the sides on the ground; sometimes on an amphitheatre of steps; and sometimes in niches, like the Roman columbaria. Instances of bodies interred without burning are very rare. The urns themselves are commonly of tufo or alabaster, and of an oblong form, about two feet in length, and of the same height, including the cover, on which the recumbent figure of the deceased is often carved. In the sepulchres of Volterra, urns of baked earth are very rare, stone being there abundant; in those of Chusium and Montepulciano they are common. The urns of baked clay were meant to contain ashes, and must not be confounded with the fictile rases which are very commonly found in the Etrurian sepulchres. As they were first discovered in Etruria, the name of Etruscan was given to them, and continued to be used after it was known that they were found more abundantly in the sepulchres of Magna Græcia, and even in Attica and the islands of the AEgean. That the custom of depositing them in sepulchres, for whatever purpose, was common to Etruria and to the south of ''. is certain ; but there is no reason to suppose that it originated in Etruria, or that those which are found in Campanian or Sicilian sepulchres are of Etrurian manufacture. On the contrary, it is probable that those found in Etruria are the production of Greek artists; their subject, their style of painting and design, are completely Greek; and though the Etruscans have inscribed every other work of art with their own characters, no painted vase has yet been found with any other than a Greek inscription. The single exception found probably at Volterra, and mentioned by Inghirami (Ser. 5, Tab. 55, N. 8), is Greek both in its style and its words. The ancients frequently celebrate the pottery of the Etrurians, but do not attribute to them any particular skill in painting them. The vases of Arretium, so frequently. mentioned in the classics, are of quite a different kind from those found in sepulchres; fragments of them abound in the neighbourhood of Arezzo, and Inghirami has engraved some of them. They are of very fine clay, of a bright red colour, and with figures in relief, modelled after Greek patterns probably, but with Latin inscriptions. Statues of the gods in clay, of Tuscan fabric, were the chief ornaments of the Roman temples in the earliest times. (Juv., 11, 115.) Every collection of antiquities contains specimens of what are called Etruscan paterae, very generally found with the urns and vases in the sepulchral chambers. They are shallow disks of brass, frequently without any concavity, but bordered by a rim slightly raised, and having a handle of the same metal. On the disk are generally engraved scenes of mythological and heroic history, with legends in the heroic character; a circumstance which has rendered them peculiarly important to the antiquary for comparing the Etruscan mythology with the Greek. It seems singular that the name of patera should ever have been applied to them; far from being suitable for drinking-vessels, they could not even hold the small quantity of wine necessary for a libation; and, wherever a libation is represented on ancient monuments, it is performed with a vessel, comparatively shallow, indeed, as its name implies, but very different from an Etruscan patera, and always without a handle, except in some unskilful restorations. Inghirami, who has published two series of these antiquities, contends at great length against the common name, and calls *:* mis

tici. That they were really mirrors we have little doubt; Inghirami easily finds a mystical meaning for everything belonging to them. The metal of which they are invariably composed, brass, alludes to the firmament, conceived by the ancients to be a xažkobarèg day, “spread out like a molten mirror” (Job, xxvii. 18); their circular form to the perfection of which this figure is an emblem. If they had happened to be oval, he would still have been at no loss, for he explains the usually elliptical forms of the fictile vases as alluding to that deterioration of its nature which the soul undergoes when it enters into union with the body. As many articles of female ornament have been found in sepulchres—fibulae, hair-bodkins, collars, bracelets— it is an obvious conjecture, that the mirrors were a real part of the toilet of the deceased, consigned to the same grave with her; on the principle that what was most used and valued in life should be the companion in death. . Yet to this supposition it is an objection, that the slight convexity which some of them have is on the polished side, a circumstance which, as it would interfere with their use as real mirrors, suggests that they may have been emblematical of the sacerdotal of. fice borne by the female with whom they were interred.

Etrurian Language and Literature.

The literature of the Etrurians presents the singular phenonenon of an alphabet perfectly deciphered, along with a language completely unintelligible. Such a combination is so strange, that we find more than one writer alleging that the language is Greek, and appealing in proof to the alphabet, without suspecting the want of connexion between premises and conclusions. When the Eugubine tables were discovered in 1444, they were supposed to be in the Egyptian character; Reinesius suspected them to be Punic; and, though they gradually acquired the name of Etruscan, the real force of the letters was not discovered till 1732, when Bourguet ascertained it by comparing the two tables which are in the Latin character with one in the Etruscan, which he had happily divined to be nearly equivalent in sense. Gori, a few years later, published his alphabet, which, in all important points, has been confirmed by subsequent inquiries: the great improvement made in it by Lanzi was, that he detected a 2 in the letter M, which till then had been taken for an m. The principles of Greek paleography have been lately established, on a more solid basis than before, by Böckh ; and by the help of these and the labours of his predecessors, Muller has arrived at the conclusion, that the Etruscan alphabet has not been derived immediately from the Phoenicians, but from the Greeks. Very few forms occur in it which are not found in the early Greek inscriptions: while, on the other hand, it does not contain some of those which the Greeks retained a considerable time after they received them from the Phoenicians; and, again, the Etruscans have some letters which the Greeks added to their Phoenician alphabet. Other Etruscan letters have never yet been found in any Greek inscription, so that it is impossible to point out any specific age or form of the Greek alphabet which the Etruscans may be supposed to have adopted once for all. The Phry. gian inscription from the tomb of Midas (Walpole, vol. 2, p. 207) bears no closer resemblance to the Etruscan than other very old Greek inscriptions: in the Carian inscription (Ib, p. 530) there are many letters which differ from the Etruscan. The letters B, T, A do not appear to have had any corresponding sounds in the Etruscan language, and the first and last never occur. T is found in the form C, in which it appears on the coins of Magna Græcia. The digamma F occurs both in this form and in that of 5, which is found in Greek inscriptions and on coins; they had also for the same sound the character 8, for which a circular square with crossing lines is also used, as in the oldest Greek in

scriptions. It is remarkable that the Etruscan F, in proper names, always answers to the Latin V, as Fipi to Vibius, Felethri to Volaterra, Menarfe to Minerva; whence Müller (vol. 2, p. 300) takes occasion to dispute the opinion of Bishop Marsh, that the Latin F represented the digamma, observing that it is only before R that the digamma becomes F. The same character was also used for H and Th. So that there seems in fact to have been one letter for the labial, dental. and guttural aspirate. The vowel O appears to have been unknown to the Tuscan language; for Q they used chf and cf. Of the Greek forms { and Y, which both occur on early monuments, they have chiefly used the former, but not exclusively. For X they have the form which is frequent in Boeotian inscriptions, resembling an inverted anchor; for E a double cross; Y, Z, and the long vowels H and Q, are unknown to their alphabet. With very few exceptions, their writing is from right to left; and as this mode had been departed from by the Greeks in their earliest extant inscriptions, which may, perhaps, ascend to the fortieth Olympiad (620 B.C.), it seems reasonable to admit that the introduction of writing into Etruria was something earlier. Demaratus, who is said to have brought both painting and letters from Corinth, if really expelled | Cypselus, must have lived about the thirtieth Olympiad. A more recent character, which is commonly found in sepulchral inscriptions, seems to have been introduced about the end of the third century aster the building of Rome; at which time, according to Müller (vol. 2, p. 301), the Latin alphabet was also formed ; but from the Greek, not from the Etruscan. The Umbrians appear to have adopted the Etruscan alphabet, though their language was essentially different, and more resembling the Oscan than the Latin. The Oscan alphabet also appears to have been borrowed from the Etruscan, not immediately from the Greek. It is dilficult to say when the Etruscan character sell into entire disuse; the style of ornament on some of the urns on which it is found refers them to the times of the Roman empire. The language of Etruria never having been polished by the influence of literature (for its histories were probably mere chronicles, and its theological writings, liturgies and manuals of a gloomy superstition), remained harsh to the ear and uncouth to the eye. Such combinations of letters as aplc, srancrl, thunchulthl (Muller, vol. 2, p. 288), can scarcely have been pronounced at all without the intervention of a short vowel, after the manner of the Oriental languages. In regard to the interpretation of the language, it must be acknowledged, that all the labour which has hitherto been bestowed upon it, though valuable for its collateral results, has been nearly fruitless in respect to its direct object. When Lanzi, abandoning the former method of Oriental and Northern etymology, endeavoured to explain the Etruscan from the Pelasgic, it was natural to expect a more favourable issue: a close affinity, if not identity, of the two nations, was maintained by many of the ancients, and the alphabets were visibly the same. For many years after the appearance of his Saggio di Lingua Etrusca (3 vols. 8vo, 1789), his explanations were generally acquiesced in, and made the basis of other etymological speculations. But, when time had been given for examination, it could not but be perceived that his modes of proceeding were too arbitrary to warrant confidence; that he could produce no evidence of the actual existence of many of the words and forms which he supposed to be Greek, in order to identify them with the Etruscan; and that other monuments, discovered since his time, could not be in any way explained by his system. Niebuhr, in his Roman history, avers that, among all the Etruscan words of which explanations have been

retended, only two, avil rul (“pirit annos"), seem to . been really explained; and of these Müller assures us (vol. 1, p. 64), and apparently with goad rea

son, that apil (“aorum”) signifies, not virit, but attatis. Muller's observations on this subject are particularly deserving of attention at the present moment, when extravagant expectations appear to be entertained of the enlargement of our historical knowledge by the comparison of languages. “We might give much ampler information, is, after Lanzi's method, we sought in the monuments of the Etruscan language for single sounds resembling the Greek and Latin; and, persuaded that similar sounds must have a similar meaning, endeavoured to explain all that could not be brought to agree by an arbitrary prosthesis, epenthesis, paragoge, and similar cheap expedients. Without blaming the learned Italian, in whose time the most eminent literati had very confused ideas of the formation of language, we may maintain that his leading principle, that analogy is the character only of cultivated languages, and that the ruder any language is, the greater liberty might be taken in the use of it, is entirely false. This may justify us for having paid so little regard to etymologies, which, as they are arbitrary in themselves, suppose an arbitrary character in the language to which they are applied. If we use only genuine monuments, and require a certain evidence for every explanation of a root or a rammatical form, our apparent knowledge of the 2truscan language shrinks almost to nothing. It is not probable that the application of the still existing remains of the languages of the north and northwest of Europe should have those beneficial results for our knowledge of the Etruscan which some appear to anticipate. The Germans and Celts are originally divided from the nations on the Mediterranean by their locality in a very inarked manner; they onlv gradually approach these and come into collision with them; and, even though the languages of both nations may belong to that great family which, from time immemorial, has diffused itself through Europe and Asia, yet they have distinct peculiarities, which we have no reason to believe are found in those of Italy. The ‘undamental and indelible characteristic of the Celtic Anguages seems to be, that they mark grammatical forms by aspirations and other changes of the initial consonants; a thing not practised in any other EuroW. language, but found in all branches of the Celtic, Welsh, Cornish, Gaelic, Irish, and Bas Breton. This mutability of the consonants is a circumstance which must be perceptible, even in a small number of written remains, and which could not well have escaped us had the Etruscan been the Celtic. The Iberian family, once widely diffused on the shores of the Mediterranean, may have dwelt in close vicinity to the Etruscans; but the remains of its language in the Basque are completely different from those of the rest of Europe, and its grammar shows so little affinity with what we know of the Etruscan as to afford very slight support to the opinion of the affinity of the two nations. What may have been the relation of the Tuscan to the extinct Ligurian, or to the language of those Alpine tribes whose names alone are preserved in history, is a question respecting which we have not even a glimmering of knowledge.” (Muller, Etrusker, vol. 1, p. 64, seqq.–Edinburgh Review, vol. 50, p. 372–396.) Hub ERNiA. Vul. Ierne.

Hierarălis, I. a city of Syria near the Euphrates, south of Zeugma. It derived its Greek name (Holy City) from the circumstance of the Syrian goddess Atergatis being worshipped there. By the Syrians it was called Bambyce or Mabog. With the introduction of Christianity, its reputation and prosperity of course declined. Constantine, it is true, made it the capital of the newly-erected province of Euphratesia; but this proved of little avail. It suffered much during subsequent reigns from the inroads of the Persians. It is now Mamhedsch or Bambig, a deserted place, with many parts of the ancient wall standing.

(Mannert, Geogr., vol. 3, pt. 1, p. 510.)—II. A city in the southwestern angle of Phrygia, near the confines of Lydia, and northwest of Laodicea. This city was celebrated for its warm springs. (Strabo, 629.-Dio Cass., 68, 27.—Pliny, 5, 32.) The waters of Hierapolis were remarkable for their petrifying or stalactital properties, and Chandler affirms, that a cliff near the ancient town was one entire incrustation. (Trapels in Asia Minor, p. 287.) Besides this singular property, the waters of this town possessed, in a remarkable degree, that of serving for the purposes of the dyer. (Strabo, 630.) It is now called by the Turks Pambuk-Kalassi, or the Castle of Cotton, because the neighbouring rocks resemble that substance in their whiteness, a colour produced by the stalactital incrustations already alluded to. (Chandler, p. 290. —Cramer's Asia Minor, vol. 2, p. 37, seq.) Hierichus (gen. -untis; in Greek 'leptroit, gen. -oijvros.) Wid. Jericho. Hiero, I. succeeded his brother Gelon, as tyrant or ruler of Syracuse, B.C. 478. He committed many acts of violence, encouraged spies, and kept a mercenary guard around his person. He was ambitious of extending his dominion, and his attempts proved successful. After the death of Theron, prince of Agrigentum, Hiero defeated his son Thrasydaeus, who was soon after expelled by his countrymen. He took Naxus and Catana, and, having driven away the inhabitants from both towns, he replaced them by Syracusan and Peloponnesian colonists. He changed the name of Catana to AEtna, and he himself assumed the title of Ætnaus (Airvaios). Having joined his fleet to that of the people of Cumae, he succeeded in clearing the Tyrrhenian Sea of the Etruscan and other pirates who infested it. His chariots repeatedly won the prize at the Olympic games, and his success on those occasions formed the theme of some of the odes of Pindar, who was his guest and friend. Alschylus, Simonides, Bacchylides, and Epicharmus were also well received at the court of Hiero, who was fond of the society of learned men. Hiero died at Catana, B.C. 476, and was succeeded by his brother Thrasybulus, who had all his faults without any of his good qualities, and was at last driven away by the Syracusans, who restored the government to the commonwealth. (Diod. Suc., 11, 48, seqq.) 42|ian gives Hiero credit for a much better character than Diodorus; probably because the latter part of his reign, after he had firmly established his authority, was better than the commencement. (AElian, 9, 1.)—II. The second of the name, son of Hierocles, a wealty citizen of Syracuse, and a descendant of Gelon, distinguished himself in early life by his brilliant qualities, and served with distinction also under Pyrrhus in his Sicilian campaigns. After Pyrrhus had suddenly abandoned Sicily, the Syracusans found themselves threatened on one side by the Carthaginians, and on the other by the Mamertines, a band of Campanian mercenaries, who had treacherously taken possession of Messana. The Syracusan troops, being in want of a trusty leader, chose Hiero by acclamation, and the senaje and citizens, after some demur, ratified the choice, B.C. 275. After various successful operations against the Mamertines, Hiero returned to Syracuse, where, through the influence of Leptines, his father-inlaw, a leading man among the aristocratic party, he was proclaimed king, B.C. 270. Shortly after, the Mamertines at Messana quarrelled with the Carthaginians, who had managed to introduce a garrison into the citadel, and drove them out, upon which the Carthaginians invited Hiero to join his forces to theirs, in order to drive the Mamertines out of Sicily. Hiero having assented, encamped under the walls of Messana on one side, and the Carthaginians fixed their camp on the other, while their squadron guarded the strait. The Mamertines, meanwhile, had applied ..." Romans for assistance, claiming a common origin with them, as being descended from Mars, called Mamers or Mamertus in the Oscan language; and Rome eagerly seized this opportunity of obtaining a footing in Sicily. The consul Appius Claudius marched to Rhegium, and, having contrived to pass the strait in the night unobserved by the Carthaginian cruisers, he surprised Hiero's camp, routed the soldiers, and obliged the monarch himself to seek safety in flight. The consul next attacked the Carthaginian camp with the same success, and this was the beginning of the first Punic War, 265 B.C. In the following year the Romans took Tauromenium and Catana, and advanced to the walls of Syracuse, when Hiero sued for peace, which he obtained on condition of paying 100 talents of silver, and supplying the Roman army with provisions. He punctually fulfilled his engagements, remaining faithful to Rome during the whole of the war, and by his supplies was of great service to the Roman armies, especially during the long sieges of Agrigentum and Lilyboeum. Hiero was included in the peace between Rome and Carthage, by which his territories were secured to him, and he remained in friendship with both states. He even assisted Carthage at a very critical moment, by sending her supplies of provisions during the war which she had to sustain against her mercenaries. The period of peace which elapsed between the end of the first and the beginning of the second Punic wars, from 241 to 218 B.C., was most glorious for Hiero, and most prosperous for Syracuse. Commerce and agriculture flourished, and wealth and population increased to an extraordinary degree. Hiero paid particular attention to the administration of the finances, and made wise regulations for the collection of the tithe or tax on land, which remained in force throughout Sicily long after his time, and are mentioned with praise by Cicero as the Lex Hueronica. (Cic. in Verr., 2 et 3.) Hiero introduced the custom of letting the tax to farm every year by auction. He embellished and strengthened Syracuse, and built large ships, one of which, if we are to trust the account given of it by Athenaeus (5, p. 206), was of most extraordinary dimensions and magnificence. This ship he sent as a present to Ptolemy Philadelphus. Archimedes lived under Hiero's reign. When the second Punic war broke out, Hiero continued true to his Roman alliance, and, after the Trasymenian defeat, he sent a fleet to Ostia with provisions and other gifts, and a body of light troops to the assistance of Rome. He lived to see the battle of Cannae, after which his son Gelon embraced the part of the Carthaginians. Gelon, however, died, not without suspicion of violence, and Hiero himself, being past ninety years of age, ended his days soon after (B.C. 216), leaving the crown to his grandson Hieronymus. With Hiero the prosperity and independence of Syracuse may be said to have expired. (Lin, lib. 22 et 23–Polyb., lib. 7.—Encycl. Us. Knowl., vol. 12, p. 195.) HIERöcles, I. a rhetorician of Alabanda, in Caria, who lived in the beginning of the first century before the Christian era. He excelled in what Cicero termed the Asiatic style of eloquence. (Cic., de Orat., 2, 23.-Id., Brut., c. 95.)—II. A lawyer, who wrote a work on veterinary medicine, addressed to Cassianus Bassus, of which three chapters are preserved in the sixteenth book of the “Geoponica.” (Vid. Geoponica.)—III. Surnamed the grammarian, for distinction' sake from the philosopher of the same name, a Greek writer supposed to have been contemporary with Justinian, but of whom one thing at least is certain, that he was anterior to the tenth century. He composed, under the title of ovvéxönuoc (“Travelling Companion"), a description of the sixty-four provinces that formed the Byzantine empire, and of the nine hundred and thirty-five cities situate in them. The best edition is that of Wesseling, in the Itineraria Veterum

Rom., Amst., 1735, 4to.—IV. A new Platonist, who flourished at Alexandrea about the middle of the fifth century. He has left us a commontary “on the Golden Verses of Pythagoras,” and a treatise “on Providence, Destiny, and Free-will.” The end of Hierocles is to show the agreement which exists in respect of these doctrines between Plato and Aristotle; to refute the systems of Epicurus and the Stoics; to confound those who pretend to read the decrees of destiny in the nativities of men, or who believe that the determinations of Providence may be influenced by enchantments or mystic ceremonies; those, in fine, who have the misfortune to deny an existing Providence. We have only extracts from this latter work made by Photius, and an abridgement by an unknown hand. Stobacus has preserved for us some fragments of a work of Hierocles on the worship of the gods (IIor toic 6eois Xpmaréov), or, rather, a chapter belonging to some large work which treated of various points of ethics. The same Stoba’us has preserved fragments of other productions of Hierocles, “On Justice,” “On the Conduct due towards Parents,” “On Marrriage,” “On Fraternal Love,” &c. There exists alse, under the name of Hierocles, a collection of insipid Facetiae ('Aareia), containing an account of the ridiculous actions and sayings of book-learned men and pedants. In all likelihood, however, it was written by some other individual of the same name, and not by the philosopher—The best edition of the Commentary on the Golden Verses, and of the Fragments, &c., is that of Needham, Lond , 1709, 8vo. The editor, however, has made some rash einendations, which diminish the value of the work. The edition of Pearson, Lond, 1654, 8vo, is also a very good one. The best separate edition of the Commentary is that of Ashton and Warren, Lomd., 1742, 8vo, and of the Facetia, that of Schler, Lips., 1750–1768, 8vo.—W. A prefect of Bithynia, and afterward of Alexandrea, who is said by Lactantius to have been the principal adviser of the persecution of the Christians in the reign of Dioclesian. (Lactant., Inst. Div., 5. 2.-Id, de Morte Persec., c. 17.) He also wrote two works against Christianity, entitled Aóyot otzazote to Tpoo row: Xptariavoir (“Truth-loving words to the Christians”), in which, according to lactantius, he endeavoured to show that the Scriptures overthrow themselves by the contradictions with which they abound He also reviled Paul, and Peter, and the other disciples, as propagators of falsehood. He endeavoured to destroy the effect of our Saviour's miracles, though he did not deny the truth of them; and he aimed to show, that like things, or even greater, had been done by Apollonius of Tyana. (Lactant., Inst. Div., 5, 2, seq.) HIERo Nic A Lex. Vid. Hiero II. HieroNYMus, I grandson of Hiero II., monarch of Syracuse, succeeded him on the throne at the age of fifteen (B.C. 216). He was left by Hiero under the guardianship of several individuals, among whom was Andronorus, his aunt's husband, who, seconded by other courtiers, and with the view of monopolizing the confidence of the young king, indulged him in all his caprices and follies. The court of Syracuse, which, under Hiero, was orderly and respectable, soon became as profligate as it had been under the younger Dionysius. Andronorus persuaded Hieronymus, against the dying injunctions of his grandfather, to forsake the Roman alliance for that of Carthage, and messengers for that purpose were sent to Hannibal in Italy, and also to the senate of Carthage, which gladly agreed to an alliance with Syracuse, in order to effect a diversion against the Romans. War being at length declared by Rome, Hieronymus took the field with 15,000 men; but a conspiracy broke out among the soldiers, and he was murdered after a reign of about thirteen months. On the news of this, a popular nsurrection took place at Syracuse; the daughters and

« PoprzedniaDalej »