Obrazy na stronie
PDF

a protection against the incursions of an enemy; thirdly, to augment their population ; fourthly, to free the city of Rome from an excess of inhabitants; fifthly, to quiet seditions; and, sixthly, to reward their veteran soldiers. These reasons abundantly appear in all the best ancient authorities. In the later periods of the republic, a principal motive for establishing colonies was to have the means of disposing of soldiers, and rewarding them with donations of lands; and such colonies were, on this account, denominated military colonies. Now, for whichever of these causes a colony was to be established, it was necessary that some law respecting it should be passed either by the senate or people. This law in either case was called lex agraria, an agrarian law, which will now be explained.— An agrarian law contained various provisions; it described the land which was to be divided, and the classes of people among whom, and their numbers, and by whom, and in what manner, and by what bounds, the territory was to be parcelled out. The mode of dividing the lands, as far as we now understand it, was twofold; either a Roman population was distributed over the particular territory, without any formal erection of a colony, or general grants of land were made to such citizens as were willing to form a colony there. The lands which were thus distributed were of different descriptions, which we must keep in mind in order to have a just conception of the operation of the agrarian laws. They were either lands taken from an enemy, and not actually treated by the government as public property; or public lands which had been artfully and clandestinely taken possession of by rich and powerful individuals; or, lastly, lands which were bought with money from the public treasury, for the purpose of being distributed. Now all such agrarian laws as comprehended either lands of the enemy, or those which were treated and occupied as public property, or those which had been bought with the public money, were carried into effect without any public commotions; but those which operated to disturb the rich and powerful citizens in the possession of the lands which they unjustly occupied, and to place colonists (or settlers) on them, were never promulgated without creating great disturbances. The first law of this kind was proposed by Spurius Cassius; and the same measure was afterward attempted by the tribunes of the commons almost every year, but was as constantly defeated by various artifices of the nobles; it was, however, at length passed. It apars, both from Dionysius and Varro, that, at first, . allotted two jugera (about 14 acres) of the public lands to each man; then Numa divided the lands which Romulus had taken in war, and also a portion of the other public lands; afterward Tullus divided those lands which Romulus and Numa had appropriated to the private expenses of the regal government; then Servius distributed among those who had recently become citizens, certain lands which had been taken from the Veientes, the Caerites and Tarquinii; and, upon the expulsion of the kings, it appears that the lands of Tarquinius Superbus, with the exception of the Campus Martius, were, by a decree of the senate, granted to the people. After this period, as the republic, by means of its continual wars, received continual accessions of conquered lands, those lands were either occupied by colonists or remained public property, until the period when Spurius Cassius, twentyfour years after the expulsion of the kings, proposed a law (already mentioned) by which one part of the land taken from the Hernici was allotted to the Latins, and the other part to the Roman people; but as this law comprehended certain lands which he accused private persons of having taken from the public, and as the senate also opposed him, he could not accomplish the passage of it. This, according to Livy, was the first proposal of an agrarian law, of which, he adds, not one was ever proposed, down to the period of his re

membrance, without very great public commotions Dionysius informs us, farther, that this public land, by the negligence of the magistrates, had been suffered to fall into the possession of rich men; but that, notwithstanding this, a division of the lands would have taken place under this law, if Cassius had not included among the receivers of the bounty the Latins and the Hernici, whom he had but a little while before made citizens. After much debate in the senate on this subject, a decree was passed to the following effect: that commissioners, called decemvirs (ten in number), appointed from among the persons of consular rank, should mark out, by boundaries, the public lands, and should designate how much was to be let out, and how much was to be distributed among the common people; that, if any land had been acquired by joint services in war, it should be divided, according to treaty, with those allies who had been admitted to citizenship; and that the choice of the commissioners, the appointment of the lands, and all other things relating to this subject, should be committed to the care of the succeeding consuls. Seventeen years after this, there was a vehement contest about the division, which the tribunes proposed to make, of lands then unjustly occupied by the rich men; and, three years after that, a similar attempt on the part of the tribunes, would, according to Livy, have produced a serocious controversy, had it not been for Quintus Fabius. Some years after this, the tribunes proposed another law of the same kind, by which the estates of a great part of the nobles would have been seized to the public use; but it was stopped in its progress. Appian says, that the nobles and rich men, partly by getting possession of the public lands, partly by buying out the shares of indigent owners, had made themselves owners of all the lands in Italy, and had thus, by degrees, accomplished the removal of the common people from their possessions. This abuse stimulated Tiberius Gracchus to revive the Licinian law, which prohibited any individual from holding more than 500 jugera, or about 350 acres of land; and would, consequently, compel the owners to relinquish all the surplus to the use of the public; but Gracchus proposed that the owners should be paid the value of the lands relinquished. The law, however, did not operate to any great extent, and, after havin cost the 8. their lives, was by degrees rendere wholly inoperative. After this period, various other Agrarian laws were attempted, and with various success, according to the nature of their provisions and the temper of the times in which they were proposed. One of the most remarkable was that of Rullus, which gave occasion to the celebrated oration against him by Cicero, who prevailed upon the people to reject the law.—From a careful consideration of these laws, and the others of the same kind, on which we have not commented, it is apparent that the whole object of the Roman agrarian laws was, the lands belonging to the state, the public lands or national domains, which, as already observed, were acquired by conquest or treaty, and, we may add also, by confiscations or direct seizures of private estates by different factions, either for lawful or unlawful causes; of the last of which we have a well-known example in the time of Sylla's proscriptions. The lands thus claimed by the public became naturally a subject of extensive speculation with the wealthy capitalists, both among the nobles and other classes. In our own times, we have seen, during the revolution in France, the confiscation of the lands belonging to the clergy, the nobility, and emigrants, lead to similar results. The sales and purchases of lands by virtue of the agrarian laws of Rome, under the various complicated circumstances which must ever exist in such cases, and the attempts by the government to resume or regrant such as had been sold, whether by right or by wrong, especially after a

purchaser had been long in possession, under a title which he supposed the existing laws gave him, naturally occasioned great heat and agitation; the subject itself being intrinsically one of great difficulty, even when the passions and interests of the parties concerned would permit a calm and deliberate examination of their respective rights.--From the commotions which usually attended the proposal of agrarian laws, and from a want of exact attention to their true object, there has been a general impression, among readers of the Roman history, that those laws were always a direct and violent infringement of the rights of private property. Even such men, it has been observed, as Machiavelli, Montesquieu, and Adam Smith, have shared in this misconception of them. This erroneous opinion, however, has lately been exposed by the genius and learning of Niebuhr in his Roman history above mentioned, a work which may be said to make an era in that department of learning, and in which he has clearly shown that the original and prosessed object of the agrarian laws was the distribution of the public lands only, and not those of private citizens. Of the Licinian law, enacted about 376 B.C., on which all subsequent agrarian laws were modelled, Niebuhr enumerates the following as among the chief provisions: 1. The limits of the public land shall be accurately defined. Portions of it, which have been encroached on by individuals, shall be restored to the state. 2. Every estate in the public land, not greater than this law allows, which has not been acquired by violence or fraud, and which is not on lease, shall be good against any third person. 3. Every Roman citizen shall be competent to occupy a portion of newlyacquired public land, within the limits prescribed by this law, provided this land be not divided by law among the citizens, nor granted to a colony. 4. No one shall occupy of the public land more than five hundred jugera, nor pasture on the public commons more than a hundred head of large, nor more than five hundred head of small, stock. 5. Those who occupy the public land shall pay to the state the tithe of the produce of the field, the fifth of the produce of the fruit-tree and the vineyard, and for every head of large stock, and for every head of small stock yearly. 6. The public lands shall be farmed by the censors to those willing to take them on these terms. The funds hence arising are to be applied to pay the army—The foregoing were the most important permanent provisions of the Licinian law, and, for its immediate effect, it provided that all the public land occupied by indiWiduals, over five hundred jugera, should be divided by lot in portions of seven jugera to the plebeians.— But we must not hastily infer, as some readers of Nobuhr's works have done, that these agrarian laws * no in any manner violate private rights. This "ould be quite as far from the truth as the prevailing ‘pinion already mentioned, which is now exploded. *ides the argument we might derive from the very *ture of the case, we have the direct testimony of *ent writers to the injustice of such laws, and their violation of private rights. It will suffice to refer to o of Cicero alone, who says in his De Officiis (2,21), * men who wish to make themselves popular, * who, for that purpose, either attempt agrarian * in order to drive people from their possessions, *** maintain that creditors ought to forgive debt. **hat they owe, undermine the foundations of the *te; they destroy all concord, which cannot exist when money is taken from one man to be given to *; and they set aside justice, which is always * when every man is not suffered to retain ** his own;” which reflections would not have **alled forth, unless the laws in question had di*ly and plainly violated private rights. (Encyclo** Americans, vol. i. p. i00, sco) Agoulia, a festival celebrated at Athens in hon** Agraulos, the daughter of Cecrops, and priest.

ess of Minerva. The Cyprians also honoured her with an annual festival, in the month Aphrodisius, at which they offered human victims. (Robinson's Antiquities of Greece, 2d ed., p. 276.) Agraulos, I., the daughter of Actaeus, king of Attica, and the wife of Cecrops.—II. A daughter of Cecrops, and sister of Herse and Pandrosos. Mercury transformed her into a black stone, for endeavouring to prevent his entrance into the apartment of Herse. (Ovid, Met, 2, 702, seqq.) The true form of the name is the one here given, and not Aglauros. (Consult Siebelis, ad Pausan., 1, 2.) Larcher is wrong in maintaining, that by Agraulos is meant the daughter of Cecrops, and by Aglauros a daughter of Erectheus. (Larcher, ad Herod., 7, 53.)—III. An appellation often given to Minerva. (Meursii Lect. Attic., 2, 13.) AgriiNes, I, a small river of Thrace, running into the Hebrus. It is now the Ergene.—II. A Thracian tribe dwelling in the vicinity of the river Agrianes. (Herod., 5, 16.)—III. A people of Illyria, on the frontiers of lower Moesia. They were originally from Thrace, and very probably a branch of the Thracian Agrianes. AgriasPAE, a nation of Asia, mentioned by Quintus Curtius (7, 3). Some difference of opinion, however, exists with regard to the true reading in this passage. Most editors prefer Arimaspar, while others, and evidently with more correctness, consider Ariaspar the Fo lection. (Compare Schmieder, ad Quint. Curt., . c., and vid. Ariaspae.) AgricóLA, Cneius Julius, an eminent Roman commander, born A.D. 40, in the reign of Caligula, by whom his father Julius Graecinus was put to death for nobly refusing to plead against Marcus Silanus. His mother, to whom he owed his excellent education, was Julia Procilla, unhappily murdered on her estate in Liguria by a descent of freebooters from the piratical fleet of Otho. The first military service of Agricola was under Suetonius Paulinus in Britain; and, on his return to Rome, he married a lady of rank, and was made quaestor in Asia, where, in a rich province, peculiarly open to official exactions, he maintained the strictest integrity. He was chosen tribune of the people, and praetor, under Nero, and, unhappily, in the commotion which followed the accession of Galba, lost his mother as above mentioned. By Wespasian, whose cause he espoused, he was made a patrician, and governor of Aquitania, which post he held for three years. The dignity of consul followed, and in the same year he married his daughter to the historian Tacitus. He was soon afterward made governor of Britain, where he subjugated the Ordovices, in North Wales, and reduced the island of Mona, or Anglesea. He adopted the most wise and generous plans for civilizing the Britons, by inducing the nobles to assume the Roman habit, and have their children instructed in the Latin language. He also gradually adorned the country with magnificent temples, porticoes, baths, and public edifices, of a nature to excite the admiration and emulation of the rude people whom he governed. With these cares, however, he indulged the usual ambition of a Roman commander, to add to the limits of the Roman territory, by extending his arms northward; and in the succeeding three years he passed the river Tuesis, or Tweed, subdued the country as far as the Frith of Tay, and erected a chain of rotective fortresses from the Clota, or Clyde, to the oderia AEstuarium, or Frith of Forth. e also stationed troops on the coast of Scotland opposite to Ireland, on which island he entertained views of conquest; and, in an expedition to the eastern part of Scotland, beyond the Frith of Forth, was accompanied by his fleet, which explored the inlets and harbours, and hemmed in the natives on every side. His seventh summer was passed in the same parts of Scotland, and the Grampian Hills became the scene of a decisive eno with the Caledonians under their most able eader Galgacus. The latter made a noble stand, but was at last obliged to yield to Roman valour and discipline; and, having taken hostages, Agricola gradually withdrew his forces into the Roman limits. In the mean time, Domitian had succeeded to the empire, to whose mean and jealous nature the brilliant character and successes of Agricola gave secret uneasiness. Artfully spreading a rumour that he intended to make the latter governor of Syria, he recalled him, received him coldly, and allowed him to descend into private life. The jealousy of the tyrant still pursued him ; and as, after he had been induced to resign his pretension to the proconsulship of Asia or Africa, he was soon seized with an illness of which he died, Domitian, possibly without reason, has been suspected of a recourse to poison. Agricola died A.D. 93, in his fifty-fourth year, leaving a widow, and one daughter, the wife of Tacitus. It is this historian who has so admirably written his life, and preserved his high character for the respect of posterity. (Tac., Wit. Agric.)

Agrigentum, a celebrated city of Sicily, about three miles from the southern coast, in what is now called the valley of Mazara. The Greek form of the name was Acragas ("Akpayaç), derived from that of a small stream in the neighbourhood. The primitive name was Camicus, or, to speak more correctly, this was the appellation of an old city of the Sicani, situate on the summit of a mountain, which afterward was regarded merely as the citadel of Agrigentum. The sounding of Camicus is ascribed to Daedalus, who is said to have built it, after his flight from Crete, for the Sicanian prince, Cocalus. In the first year of the 56th Olympiad, 556 B.C., a colony was sent from Gela to this quarter, which founded Agrigentum, on a neighbouring height, to the southeast. Its situation was, indeed, peculiarly strong and imposing, standing as it did on a bare and precipitous rock, 1100 feet above the level of the sea. To this advantage the city added others of a commercial nature, being near to the sea, which af. forded the means of an easy intercourse with the ports of Africa and the south of Europe. The adjacent country, moreover, was very fertile. From the combined operation of all these causes, Agrigentum soon became a wealthy and powerful city, and was considered inserior to Syracuse alone. According to Diodorus Siculus (13, 81, seqq.), it drew on itself the enmity of the Carthaginians (406 B.C.), by refusing to embrace their alliance, or even to remain neutral. It was accordingly besieged by their generals Hannibal and Hamilcar.

he former, with many of his troops, died of a pestilential disorder, derived from the putrid effluvia of the tombs, which were opened and destroyed for the sake of the stone. But, from want of timely assistance and scarcity of provisions, the Agrigentines were obliged to abandon their city, and fly for protection to Gela, whence they were transferred to the city of the Leontines, which was allotted to them by the republic of Syracuse. The conqueror Hamilcar despoiled Agrigentum of all its riches, valuable pictures, and statues. Among the trophies sent to Carthage was the celebrated bull of Phalaris, which, two hundred and sixty years afterward, on the destruction of Carthage, was restored to the Agrigentines by Scipio. At a subsequent pe. riod, when a general peace had taken place Ol. 96, 1. (Diod. Sic., 14, 78), we find the Agrigentines returning to their native city; though, from a passage in Diodorus (13, 113), it would seem that the place had not been entirely destroyed by the foe, and that many of its previous inhabitants might have come back at an earlier date. (Ol. 93, 4.) Agrigentum soon recovered its importance, but the tyranny of Phintias having induced the inhabitants to call in the aid of Carthage, the city once more fell under that power. Not long after, it revolted to Pyrrhus (Diod. Sic, 22, ere., 14), but, on his departure from the island, was compelled to

return to its former masters. On the commencement of the Punic wars, Agrigentum was one of the most important strongholds which the Carthaginians possessed in the island. It suffered severely during these conflicts, being alternately in the hands of either party (Diod. Sic, 23, 7–Polyb., 1, 17, seqq.—Diod. Sc., 23, 9. —Id., 23, 14), but it eventually fell under the Roman power, and, notwithstanding its losses, continued for a long period a flourishing place, though it is supposed to have been confined, after it came permanently under the Romans, to the limits of the ancient Camicus, with which the moderm Girgenti nearly corresponds. Diodorus states the population, in its best days, to have been not less than 120,000 persons. (Mannert, 9, pt. 2, p. 353, seqq.—Hoare's Classical Tour, vol. 2, p. 90, seqq.) Agrionia, annual festivals in honour of Bacchus, generally celebrated in the night. They were instituted, as some suppose, because the god was attended with wild beasts. The appellation, however, should rather be viewed as referring back to an early period, when human sacrifices were offered to Bacchus. Hence the terms 'Qumarfic and 'Ayptávtoc applied to this deity. (Creuzer's Symbolik, vol. 3, p. 334.) Plutarch even speaks of a human sacrifice to this god as late as the days of Themistocles (Wit., 13), when three Persian prisoners were offered up by him to Bacchus, at the instigation of the diviner Eurantides. The same writer elsewhere (Wit. Ant., 24) uses both 'QumaTúc and 'Aypt&vtoo, in speaking of Bacchus; where Reiske, without any necessity, proposes 'Aypt&2 to: (from 6A2upu) as an emendation.—In celebrating this festival, the Grecian women, being assembled, sought eagerly for Bacchus, who, they pretended, had fled from them ; but, finding their labour ineffectual, they said that he had retired to the Muses and concealed himself among them. The ceremony being thus ended, they regaled themselves with an entertainment. (Plut., Sympos., 8, 1.) Has this a figurative reserence to the suspension of human sacrifices, and the consequent introduction of a milder form of worship ! Castellanus, however (Syntagm. de Festis Gracor, s. v. Agrionia), makes the festival in question to have been a general symbol of the progress of civilization and refinement. (Compare Rolle, Recherches sur le Culte de Bacchus, vol. 3, p. 251.) AGRIPPA, I. M. VIPsANius, a celebrated Roman commander, born B.C. 63. Though sprung from an obscure family, he raised himself by his civil and military talents, and by the virtue and integrity of his character, to the highest offices under the Emperor Augustus. He had embraced the party of the latter before his accession to imperial power, and rendered him the most signal services. It was Agrippa who ensured, by the skill and promptness of his manoeuvres, the success of the battles of Philippi, Mylae, and Actium, the last of which procured for Augustus the empire of the world. Nor did Augustus show himself ungrateful. He heaped the most ample favours on Agrippa, and admitted him to terms of the most familiar intimacy. It is said that he even consulted him and Macenas on the question, whether he should retain or abdicate imperial power. Agrippa advised him to re-establish the republic; but the monarch acquiesced in the opinion of Maecenas, who preferred a monarchical government. When Augustus was dangerously ill (B.C. 23), he intrusted his signet-ring to Agrippa, which, being considered as a preference of him for his successor, offended Marcellus, and rendered it necessary, on the recovery of Augustus, to remove Agrippa from court by an honourable exile to the rich government of Syria. Upon the death of Marcellus he was recalled to Rome, where he was married to Julia, the daughter of the emperor and Marcellus's widow. Augustus confided to him the administration of the empire during the two years which the former devoted to visiting the provinces of Greece

and Asia. Having been sent after this into Gaul and Germany, Agrippa performed there the most important services, and gained many victories, but declined, on his return, the honours of a triumph. He governed, after this, the provinces of the east for the space of four years, and on his return to Rome was reinvested with tribunitian power for five years longer. At length, on coming back from an expedition against the Pannonians, he was attacked by a sever, of which he soon died, in the 51st year of his age, B.C. 12. His death was the signal for universal mourning, so much had he endeared himself to all by his excellent qualities, and his body was placed in the tomb which Augustus had caused to be prepared for himself. He had been married three times: to Pompeia, daughter of Atticus; to Marcella, daughter of Octavia; and to Julia, by which last he had five children, Caius and Lucius Caesares, Posthumus Agrippa, Agrippina, and Julia. , Agrippa employed his noble fortune in the embellishment of Rome, where, among other magnificent edifices, he erected the famous #. the present Rotunda. (Suet., Wit. Aug.—Plut., Vit. Ant., 67, 88.)—II. Caius Caesar, son of Agrippa and Julia, was adopted, together with his two brothers Lucius and Posthumus, by the Emperor Augustus. He was still in his boyhood when the Roman people, by an excess of flattery, named him and his brother Lucius, Principes Juventutis, and bestowed upon them also the title of consuls elect. (Tac., Ann., 1, 3.—Consult Lips., ad loc.) From the language of Dio Cassius (55, 9), it would seem that in early life they were both somewhat dissolute and petulant. Having been sent at a subsequent period to the Armenian war, he was enticed to 'a conference by Addo, governor of Artagera, and treacherously wounded. He died of this wound, as he was on his return to Italy, in Limyra, a city of Lycia. (Zonaras, p. 539. —Well. Paterc., 2, 102.—Lips., ad Vell., l.c.)—III. Lucius Caesar, brother of the preceding, and son of Vipsanius Agrippa. He was adopted along with his two brothers by Augustus, and, like Caius, received in boyhood the title of Princeps Juventutis and consul elect. He died suddenly at Massilia, while proceeding to join the army in Spain. Tacitus appears to hint at his death's having probably been occasioned by the arts of the empress Livia, in order to clear the way to the throne for her son Tiberius. (Ann., 1, 3.)—IV. M. Posthumus, brother of the preceding two, and called Posthumus, because born after his father's death. He was adopted, together with his brothers, by Augustus; but was soon after exiled through the intrigues of Livia and Tiberius, having been falsely charged with speaking ill of the emperor. He was about to be recalled, after seven years' banishment, when Livia and Tiberius, fearing lest he might be nominated by Augustus as his successor, caused him to be assassinated, at the age of 26. Historians represent him as of a gloomy and ferocious spirit. (Tac., Ann., 1, 3, &c.) -V. Herödes, a son of Aristobulus, grandson of the Great Herod. He was brought up at Rome with Drusus the son of Tiberius; but, having reduced himself to penury by his profusion, he, upon the death of Drusus, retired to Judaea. After having lived here sor some time in great misery, he returned to Rome, and attached himself to the young prince Caligula; but, having of. fended Tiberius by some unguarded expressions, in which he had uttered the wish that the emperor might soon end his existence, he was thrown into prison, and loaded with chains. When Caligula ascended the throne, he was immediately released from priswn, and received a chain of gold as heavy as that which had lately confined him, together with the title of king, and two tetrarchies attached to it. He afterward ob. tained the tetrarchy and all the treasures of Herod An*P*, having accused him of taking part in the conspi*y of Sejanus, and caused him to be banished. He *afterward in imminent danger of incurring the an

ger of Caligula, for avoiding to obey that monarch's order, requiring his statue to be set up and adored in the very sanctuary of the temple of Jerusalem, when the assassination of Caligula saved him. Claudius favoured him, and not only confirmed all the gifts which Caligula had bestowed upon him, but even made his kingdom as extensive as it had been under Herod the Great. Having returned home, he offended his Jewish subjects by his Roman tastes and innovations, but soon after found means to please them by a persecution of the Christians. His end was a painful one. Being at Caesarea with his court, for the purpose of celebrating games in honour of Claudius, he was publicly addressed by some deputies from Tyre and Sidon, who came to sue for some favour. These deputies, and the other vile flatterers who were present, cried out that his voice was that of a god, not of a man; and almost at the same moment Herod was attacked by a disorder of the stomach (kot?ias (Aynua), which, af. ter five days of extreme suffering, put an end to his existence, in the 54th year of his age, and the seventh of his reign. (Josephus, Antiq. Jud., 18, 5, seqq.)— VI. A son of the preceding, named also Herod Agrippa. He was only 17 years of age when his father died, and, as he was deemed too young to reign, Judaea again became a Roman province. However, on the death of his uncle Herod, king of Chalcis, he obtained the superintendence of the temple, the privilege of naming the high-priest, and eventually the kingdom of Chalcis. At the commencement of the revolt, which proved so fatal to the Jewish nation, he was driven from Jerusalem, and was present with Titus at the siege and capture of that city. He afterward went to Rome with his sister Berenice, and died there at the age of about 70 years. He was the last of the race of Herod that bore the title of king. It was before this Agrippa and the Roman governor Festus that St. Paul made his memorable defence. (Josephus, Bell. Jud., 2, 12, seqq. —Tac., Hist., 2, 81.)—WII. Menenius. (Wid. Menenius Agrippa.) AgrippinA, I. daughter of M. Vipsanius Agrippa, by Julia, and grand-daughter of Augustus. She married Germanicus, and made him the father of nine children, among others of Caligula, and Agrippina the mother of Nero. Her attachment to her husband, and her high and inflexible spirit, soon excited against her the hatred of Livia and Tiberius; and the courage and energy which she displayed on several occasions, when with the forces of her husband in Pannonia and along the Rhine, could not but prove displeasing to both the mother and her son. Tiberius, in fact, then on the throne, suspected or pretended to suspect her of ambitious views, and the infamous Sejanus, his prime minister, did everything to make her odious to him. When Germanicus departed for the east, Agrippina accompanied him, and after he had died at Antioch, of poison, as was generally supposed, she brought home his ashes in an urn, amid universal sorrow, and, proceeding to the Capitol, demanded justice against Piso, his alleged murderer. Tiberius, jealous of the popular favour that continually attended her, treated her with constant and increasing harshness, and at last had her banished, by a pliant and corrupt senate, to the island of Pandataria, off the coast of Campania, where she remained four years, and died at last either by voluntary starvation, or having been refused all nourishment by the orders of Tiberius. (Tac., Ann., 1, 2, &c.— Suet., Vit. Tib., 52, &c.)—II. Daughter of Germanicus and Agrippina, born in the chief town of the Ubii (afterward Colonia Agrippina), on the banks of the Rhine. She was only 14 years of age when Tiberius gave her in marriage to Cn. Domitius Aenobarbus, by whom she became the mother of Nero. After the death of Domitius, Agrippina led a scandalous life, and was banished by Caligula, though not from any love of virtue on his part. When also was cut off, and Claudius, her uncle, had ascended the throne, Agrippina was recalled, and continued to exercise the most unbounded influence over the feeble emperor, until finally she was united to him in marriage with the consent of the senate. Her son Nero was now adopted by Claudius, and the accession of the former was soon facilitated by the poisoning of the latter. On the attainment of Nero to the empire, Agrippina gave loose to all her worst passions, and especially to the gratification of her vengeance against numerous individuals, who interfered more or less with her ambitious views, but was at length checked in her career by her own son Nero, after she had adopted the most infamous means for preserving her authority over him, and she was assassinated in her bed by his orders. Agrippina was ". to death A.D. 59. She is said to have left behind er memoirs of her own times, of which Tacitus availed himself in the composition of his Annals. (Tac., Ann., 4, 75.-Id. ib., 12, 7, &c.—Suet., Vit. Ner.)—III. Colonia, originally the chief town of the Ubii, on the banks of the Rhine. Here Agrippina, daughter of Vipsanius Agrippa, was born ; and when, in after life, she attained to power, a military colony was planted here by her orders, and what before this was called Ubiorum Oppidum, now became Colonia Agrippina. It answers to the modern Koln or Cologne. (Tac., Ann., 12, 27.) Agrius, I. son of Parthaon, drove his brother OEneus from the throne, in AEtolia. He was afterward expelled by Diomedes, the grandson of OEneus, on his return from the Trojan war, upon which he killed himself. (Hygin., fab., 175.)—II. The father of Thersites. (Ovid, ez Pont., 3, el. 9, 9.)—The old reading was Accius. (Consult Heinsius, ad loc.)— In the mythic history of the Greeks we find several Agrii, and in almost all, the allusion appears to be a symbolical one. Thus, for example, in the case of the one first mentioned, Agrius is the “Wild man,” the “Man of the fields,” while OEneus, on the other hand, is the “Wine-man,” the “cultivator of the vine.” (Compare Creuzer, Symbolik, vol. 4, p. 372–Apollod., 1, 8, 6.--Anton. Lib., fab., 37–Verheyk, ad Anton. Lib., fab., 21, p. 136.) In the case of the father of Thersites, the name Agrius may be intended as a figurative allusion to the rude and lawless manners of the son. AgróLAs, surrounded the citadel of Athens with walls, except that part which was afterward repaired by Cimon. (Pausan., 1, 28.) We have here one of the old traditions respecting the Pelasgic race. Agrolas was aided in the work by his brother Hyperbius, both of them Pelasgi. According to Pausanias (l.c.), they came originally from Sicily. It is more than probable, however, that the names in question are those of two leaders or two tribes, and that the work was executed under their orders. The wall erected on this occasion was styled Pelargicon, and the builders of it would seem to have erected also a town or small settlement for themselves, which afterward became part of the Acropolis. (Compare Siebelis, ad Pausan., 1, 28.-Müller, Gesch. Hellen. Stämme, &c., vol. 1, p. 440.) AgrotéRA, I. an annual festival, celebrated at Athens to Diana Agrotera ('Aprélude 'Ayporépa). It was instituted by Callimachus the polemarch, in consequence of a vow made by him before the battle of Marathon, that he would sacrifice to the goddess as many yearling she-goats (xtuatpac) as there might be enemies slain in the approaching conflict. (Schol, ad Aristoph., Equit., 657–Wen., Anab., 3, 2, 11.) The number of the Persians who fell was so great, that a sufficient amount of victims could not be obtained. Every year, therefore, 500 goats were slain, in order to make up the requisite number, until, at last, the whole thing grew into a regular custom. Ælian (V. H., 2, 25) makes the vow in question to have been

offered up by Miltiades, and the number of annual victims 300-II. The name Agrotera ('Ayporépa) is also sometimes applied to Diana herself. In this usage it is equivalent to kvvnyerukň, &mpevrukh, “the huntress.” Its primitive meaning, however, is the same as # 8peta, “she that frequents the mountains.” (Compare Heyne, ad Hom., Il., 21,471.) AGyirus, an appellation given to Apollo. The term is of Greek origin ('Ayvleåg), and, if the common derivation be correct, denotes “the guardian deity of streets” (from dyvtsi, “a street”), it being the custom at Athens to erect small conical cippi, in honour of Apollo, in the vestibules and before the doors of their houses. Here he was invoked as the Averter of evil (9eóc àrorpóratoc, “Deus averruncus"), and the worship here offered him consisted in burning perfumes before these pillars, in adorning them with myrtle garlands, hanging fillets upon them, &c. We must not suppose, however, that this custom originated in Athens. It appears to have been borrowed from the Dorians, and introduced into this city in obedience to an oracle. (Schol., in Aristoph Vesp., 870–Pausan., 8, 53.—Müller, Gesch. Hellen. Stämme, &c., vol. 2, p. 299, seqq.) As respects the pillars erected at Athens, the ancients seem to have been at a loss whether to regard them as altars, or as a species of statues. (Compare, on this point, the scholiast on Aristophanes, Vesp., 870, and Thesm., 496.—Harpocration, s. v.–Suidas, s. v.—Helladius, ap. Phot, cod, 279, vol. 2, p. 535, ed. Bekker.— Plautus, Merc., 4, 1, 9.—Zoega, de Obeliscis, p. 210.) Müller states, that this emblem of Apollo appears on coins of Apollonia in Epirus, Aptera in Crete, Megara, Byzantium, Oricum, Ambracia, &c. (Müller, Gesch. Hellen. Stämme, l.c.) AGYLLA. Vid. Caere. Agyrium, a city of Sicily, northeast of Enna, and in the vicinity of the river Symaethus. It would seem to have been one of the oldest settlements of the Siculi, and was remarkable for the worship of a hero, whom a later age confounded with the Grecian Hercules. (Diod. Sic., 4, 25.) The place is noted as having Fo birth to Diodorus Siculus. The modern town of San Filippo d'Argiro is supposed to correspond to the ancient city; the site of the latter, however, would appear to have been two miles farther east. (Mannert, vol. 9, pt. 2, p. 418.—Cellarius, Geog. Ant., vol. 1, p. 806, ed. Schwartz.) AHRLA, the surname of the Servilii at Rome. AHENob Arbus. Vid. AEnobarbus. Ajax (Alac), I. son of Telamon by Periboea, daughter of Alcathous, was, next to Achilles, the bravest of all the Greeks in the Trojan war, but, like him, of an imperious and ungovernable spirit. . In other peculiarities of their history, there was also a striking resemblance. At the birth of Ajax, Hercules is said to have wrapped him in the skin of the Nemean lion, and to have thus rendered him invulnerable in every part of his body, except that which was left exposed by the aperture in the skin, caused by the wound which the animal had received from Hercules. This vulnerable part was in his breast, or, as others, say, behind the neck. (Lycophr, 454.—Tzetz., ad loc.—Schol., ad Il., 23, 821.) To Ajax fell the lot of opposing Hector, when that hero, at the instigation of Apollo and Minerva, had challenged the bravest of the Greeks to single combat. The glory of the antagonists was equal in the engagement; and, at parting, they exchanged arms, the baldric of Ajax serving, most singularly, as the instrument by which Hector was, after his fall, attached to the car of Achilles. In the games celebrated by Achilles in honour of Patroclus, Ajax (as commentators have remarked) was unsuccessful, although he was a competitor on not less than three occasions: in hurling the quoit; in wrestling; and in single combat with arms. After the death of Achilles,

« PoprzedniaDalej »