I Have undertaken to arrange in chronological order, the diffuse and abundant notices which we have, widely scattered through classical authors, respecting Etruria and the Etruscan people, and which, as far as I know, have never yet been embodied in one history. This work I dedicate to my countrymen, hoping that it may fill a void in literature, and prove destitute neither of interest nor improvement; and most heartily do I wish, for their sakes, that it were more within the compass of my feeble powers to do full justice to so weighty a task.
Those who know what it is to write a history and what are the qualifications necessary for an historian, are aware that it requires a union of memory and knowledge, of judgment and acuteness, of reach of intellect and depth of thought, which are very rarely combined in one person, and to which I make no pretensions. But what lies within the compass of my power, I have done. I have spared neither study nor research to arrive at the knowledge of the truth; I have consulted ancient authors, as well as read modern ones, and I have nowhere intentionally misled or misrepresented, in order to support a favourite theory. I have found the field unoccupied, and mine has been the first plough to break the fallow ground. May more skilful hands cultivate it richly, and reap a golden harvest!
The authorities which have been consulted in the composition of this work, are Livy and Tacitus, Virgil, Varro, Pliny, Dionysius, Diodorus, Herodotus, Plutarch, and Strabo; the English Ancient History, in twenty volumes, to which I cannot sufficiently express my obligations; Dempster de Etruria Regali, Bochart’s valuable Treatise upon the Phoenicians, Micali’s two works upon Italy, Muller’s Etriisker, and Niebuhr’s Rome; besides a multitude of lesser authors, and the Annals of the Archaeological Institute of Rome. May my countrymen excuse the deficiencies of this work, and accept the information which it contains.
The Etruscans appear not to have been a native people in Italy, but to have arrived there in ships from some foreign country, about twelve hundred years before the Christian aera. Some authors call them indigenous, but this merely means that they were settled in Etruria from the earliest period of Italian history of which we have any knowledge, and that the first dawn of civilization and literature in that land may be traced to them. In the same manner, when they are called by Pliny, Diodorus, and Dionysius, the inventors of hand mills, trumpets, prows, and of many arts and sciences, it merely means that they were the first introducers of these things into the Peninsula.
Their history naturally divides itself into four parts, which we shall treat of in order.
1st. From the Settlement of the Etruscans in Italy to the Foundation of Rome.
2nd. From the Foundation of Rome to the Death of Tarquin the Second.
3rd. From the Death of Tarquin the Second to the Death of Sylla.
4th. From the Death of Sylla to the Extinction of the Etruscan Faith in the Fourth Century of the Christian 2Era.
To conclude with a short account of the manners and customs, arts and sciences, religion and commerce of the Etruscans.
Every nation in western Europe may take an interest in their history; for though unacknowledged, they were the prime originators of all our civilization, and many of their laws and customs exist amongst us at this day, and will continue to influence us unto the end of time.
Our first notices of the Etruscans are from Hesiod1 and Homer2, who call them the mighty Tyrseni, and say that they lived in the days of the Demigods; Eschylns, Euripides, and Herodotus, who call them Tyrseni, the only Italian 3 nation known to the early Greeks, celebrated for their dominion of the sea, their commerce, and their piracy. About a hundred years later than Herodotus, the Greeks knew that they were a different people from the Latins, and Aristotle 4 and Theophrastus 5 wrote largely upon their laws and government, but the works are lost. The later Greeks, describing the same people, call them Turrheni or Pelasgi, and the Latins call them Etruri, Etrusci, Tusci. It is singular that by none of these names did the people call themselves. Dionysius of Halicarnassus made a particular study of them and their institutions in the reign of Augustus, and wrote their history in twenty books; and though that history is lost, yet the circumstance of his having written it makes his authority of more weight in all those passages of his Roman history in which he treats of the Etruscan people; and he affirms that they called themselves Rasena, as he supposes, from some native hero. The word Rasn, Rasnes, is often found in their inscriptions, and though no Latin author has thus denominated them, it is, notwithstanding, their distinctive and appropriate appellation, even as Gael is that of the Scottish Highlanders, although no English historian has made mention of them by that term.
The name of an ancient nation is a thing of much consequence in tracing its origin, because it was never arbitrary, but had always a meaning attached to it, implying either some peculiarity in the people, such as ” tall, strong, red, fair” or that they were the descendants of a certain man, or that they came from a certain country or city. Of this, the example best known to every one is the Israelites, who took their name from Israel, and who were besides Hebrews, from Heber, and Jews, from Judah. They were also called ” the people of Moses,” and ” the seed of Abraham;” and they evidence to us the common practice of the East, which was to give many names to the same people, and frequently to the same person, but each name for its own peculiar reason. Hence the Rasena were Tyrseni, Turrheni, Etrusci, and Tusci, and each had its derivation. Niebuhr thinks that the real name is Ras, or Rus, and that Ena is a Latin termination. But as Pursn, or Pursenna, is unquestionably Etruscan, and the n or enna in this name, is not a Latin addition, there is no reason why it should be in Rasena, nor much probability that Dionysius, who, besides, gives us both the Latin and the Greek name, would have changed the native pronunciation, as it was taught to him. The name of Rasena, the radicals of which are R. S. N., (for in Etruscan the vowels seem always to be a matter of indifference,) is further confirmed by its being the only one adopted by all the early Greeks, who, like Dionysius, must have learned it from the people themselves; and they called them Tyrseni, or tyRSNi.6
No other appellation, according to Niebuhr, being found in any Greek author before the time of Plato. We shall, therefore, suppose the letters R S N to be proved as forming the radicals of the word by which the people called themselves ; and the stock from which they are descended, whether man, country, or city, is likely to have had that or a similar pronunciation.
The Greeks, in like manner, called their country TyRSeNa, and believed it to include the whole of Italy, from the Alps to Magna Grecia; because in the whole of that wide space from Spina to Cape Garganus, and from Luna to Cuma and Paestum, they knew and had commerce with no other people. The first colonies of the Greeks in South Italy bordered upon the country of the TyRSNi, and some towns, especially Parthenope Baia, Pozzuoli, and Nola, were composed of both people. The later Greeks, from the time the Romans became known in Magna Grecia, i.e. from about 350 B. C. down to the second century of our aera, called thepeople Tyrrheni and their country Tyrrhenia, and give as a reason, that they were great tower-builders, or as Dionysius says, the first tower-builders in Italy— Tvppot, whence Turrhenoi. The real reason, however, is probably derived from the Roman Etruri, or the name they themselves called their country, Etruria, Eturia, Ature, whence the Greek τυρροι,Turi, Turroi, Tyrrheni. This last appellation is the one by which they are best known in poetry and general history, and it is also a corruption, as Niebuhr and Miiller both prove, of the name Tarchun, or Tyrrhenus, the great hero, lawgiver, and leader of the Etruscan people.
It is scarcely necessary to quote authorities for these various names, as any one may satisfy himself of the correctness of the statement, by looking into any of the Latin or Greek writers whom we have mentioned.
Herodotus, about 450 B. C, is the oldest author who attempts any history of the TyRSNi, or, as they name themselves in their inscriptions to be seen in Italian museums, the “Rasne.” He gives a very curious story, and doubtless a very old tradition, current amongst themselves in that age. He says, (lib. i. 95,) “In the reign of Atys, son of Manes, king of Lydia, the country was afflicted with a grievous famine, which the people long bore with great patience, but finding that the evil did not cease, they sought a remedy, and each one imagined what pleased himself best. Upon this occasion they invented dice, ball, and all sorts of games, excepting πεσσοι, calculi, a sort of drafts, of which they were not the inventors; and they played at these new games one day and fasted, whilst they ate and, it is to be hoped, worked on the day following. In this manner they continued to live for eighteen years! But at last, the evil, instead of diminishing, increased, and the king Atys divided his people into two bands, and made them draw lots, the one to remain and the other to quit the country. Those who departed had for chief the king’s son Tyrsenus.
“The banished Lydians first went to Smyrna, where they constructed vessels, loaded them with furniture and useful implements, and embarked to go in search of food and habitation elsewhere. After coasting along several countries, they landed in Umbria, where they built cities, which,” says Herodotus, ” they inhabit now.”
It is, indeed, remarkable that this language is still so far true, that some of the descendants of Tyrrhenus’s colony, which settled in Italy more than three thousand years since, did very lately inhabit, and possibly may still dwell in the cities which Tyrrhenus colonised; witness the Cecina of Volterra and one or two more Tuscan families, whose names denote an Etrurian origin. Many will smile at this, but let them ask themselves, Do not we know the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, nay, even of Aaron, at this very hour ? Herodotus continues, “that the Lydians quitted their former name and took that Tyrseni, from Tyrsenus son of the king, who was chief of the colony.”7
It is scarcely necessary to criticise the absurdity of this story, which, nevertheless, Herodotus cannot be supposed to have invented. No land ever suffered famine for eighteen years. The longest famine ever known upon the earth was the seven years famine mentioned in the Genesis many years before the date of the Italian Rasne. The story is not Lydian, in our acceptation of the name Lydia, as is shown by Dionysius 8, confirmed by Miller and Niebuhr; for Xanthus, the historian of Lydia prior to Herodotus, never mentions it .The Lydians never were either,a maritime or a commercial people. They had no navy; they sent out no colonies. Smyrna, in that early age, did not exist; Tyrsenus is not a Lydian name: and when, in the reign of Tiberius, the Lydians claimed kindred with the Etruscans 9, Tacitus tells us that the senate rcjected their claim. This story, however, omitting the details of the famine, is repeated by Strabo, Velleius Paterculus, Virgil, Horace, and Plutarch, the one borrowing from the other, and all deriving their information from the father of Greek history. “The ancients,” says Wilkinson, speaking of his own experience in Egypt, ” tell us little of any land excepting Greece and Rome, and what they do tell us is generally wrong.”
Dionysius examined the grounds of this story, which was universally believed in Rome in his day; and he says that the Rasne had nothing in common with the Lydians, neither language nor religion, those two strongest of all evidences, nor manners, nor customs, nor laws, nor national peculiarities. The Rasne being from the beginning a trading and commercial nation, which the Lydians were not. Some, he says, called them “Turrheni-Pelasgi,” and of the two, they resembled the Pelasgi more than the Lydians, though most unlike to both.
It thus seems proved that the Etruscans were not Lydians, and yet that all the authors quoted agree in their having arrived in Italy by sea, from some other country, and under one great leader of royal rank, called by the Greeks Tyrsenus, by Greeks and Romans Tyrrhenus, by the Romans also Tarchon,10 and by the Rasne themselves Tarchun or Tarchu. Those who call the Etruscans indigenous, i. e. not tracing themselves beyond their settlement in Italy, equally agree as to their first great ruler Tarchun.
Dionys. lib. 1, after relating the whole of Herodotus’s story and confuting it, gives the version of Xanthus, that king Atys had two sons, Lydus and Torebo, both of whom remained in Asia, and both of whom are probably Eponyms, after the manner of the east, to signify that Lydians and Torebi were of the same stock. He then goes on to say, that he considers those authors who would make the Etruscans indigenous, scarcely less foolish than Herodotus and his legend ; because the people and their language were different from all the rest of Italy, though they influenced every state between the two seas. It is curious to see Dionysius lay so great stress upon language, which modern criticism has proved to be the real key to the extraction of a people. He thinks the Greeks called the Raseni Turseni from their Τυρσεις or fortresses, and Turrhenoi from their turreted habitations, or from some great prince. The Romans, he says, called the people Etruscus from their country Etruria, and Tuscus (which is a false idea) from thepre-eminent excellence of their frankinsence and sacrifices ,θυοσκοος being the Greek for a sacrificer, from θυος, a sacrifice; whence the Latin word for frankincense, Thus. The Turrheni and Pelasgi, Dionysius says, were long the only names connected with Italy which were known to the Greeks. Therefore, though the Pelasgi were conquered by the Turrheni, and all their cities taken, the two people came to be confounded by the Greeks and supposed to be the same. “In like manner, they included under the name Tyrseni the Latins, Umbrians, and Ausoni; the distance of the two countries rendering accurate information very difficult.”11
Nothing, surely, can more rationally and satisfactorily explain the confusion in ancient authors between the Turrheni and the Pelasgi, and how the acts of the one are continually attributed to the other. If it be true, as Dionysius affirms, that Agylla, Pisa, and many other cities be Pelasgic, can we wonder, when the Greeks found them inhabited and governed by Turrheni, that they should imagine the two people to be the same? The Greeks excelled in imagination,but were never famous, for exactness or truth. Hence Helanicus of Lesbos says that Tyrsenus, the leader of the Tyrseni,and Pelasgus were the same person. Hence other authors, according to Dionysius, make Tyrsenus the son of Hercules by Omphale, the Queen of Lydia. A poetical version of Herodotus”s story, that Tyrsenus or Tarchun was a royal person of great courage and talent from Lydia. Strabo follows this version, which yet we have proved to be false.
With respect to their antiquity, we have seen that Hesiod and Homer could not trace what had existed so long before themselves, and that Herodotus merely gives us the date of Atys, king of Lydia, a mythological person, whose ancestors sprung from the earth, and whose era is not known. Dionysius, lib. i. says, they expelled the Siculi, whom Niebuhr makes the Itali, the first inhabitants of Italia, three generations before the Trojan war; i. e. about 1260 B C. Strabo says that the Pelasgi expelled the Siculi at that time, meaning, very probably, by Pelasgi the Turrheni; but if otherwise, he must by implication place the settlement of the Tyrrheni still earlier, for Dionysius, i. says, that they, the Etruscans, taught the Pelasgi how to fight. Ptolemy and Aristides say that they were contemporary with the Argonauts and Theban Bacchus. Athenaeus 12 and several other authors say that they fought the Argonauts, which must have been 1266 B. C, according to Sir I. Newton. Appian says, they triumphed 1000 years before Rome and as the first Roman triumph is ascribed to Romulus, this fixes their date at 1700 B. C, and can only mean to express their great antiquity compared with the Romans.
Dionysius says, they conquered the Umbri 500 years before Rome, i. e. about 1253 before Christ.
Virgil makes their hero Tarchun contemporary with AEneas, 1177 B. C, when they were a settled and powerful nation, and Vellijus Paterculus confirms this date by placing Tarchun in the same age with Orestes, king of Argos.
It seems then established by Greeks, who were wholly unacquainted with Etruscan numbers, and by Latins, who were acquainted with them, that the Turrheni or Rasena arrived in Italy about 1250 B.c. Now, in confirmation of this,13 Varro tells us that the Tuscan annals were collected together and made into a written history in their 8th saeculum about the year 347 of Rome, which places the beginning of their aera between 400 and 500 years before Rome. Cicero gives the same statement, and Plutarch tells us that in the year of Rome 666, an Etruscan Aruspex proclaimed that the Etruscan day of 1100 years, during which Jove or Tina had given them dominion, was near an end,14 and this again brings us to the same reckoning.
From all these concurring testimonies, it seems quite clear that the Rasena, Tyrseni, Turrheni or Tuscans, arrived in Italy about the middle of the thirteenth century, B.c. and that they were a settled and powerful nation, both according to their own records and the early Greek authors, about 1180 B. c.
Before discussing the precise point of time from which the annals of the Tuscans date, we will inquire who was their leader? where they landed? what inhabitants they found in Italy at the time of their arrival? what arts and sciences, laws, religion and language they introduced? and lastly, upon this subject, whence they probably came?
Herodotus, lib. i., says that they sailed from their native land, and established themselves in Italy under Tursenus, and all the numerous Greek writers who follow him give the same story, changing the name, as they became personally acquainted with the people, to Turrhenus. Dionysius, who alone studied them, examined their annals and wrote their history from individual research, says that they did not name themselves Turrheni but Rasena, and that the name Turrheni was probably derived from some great prince, whom Miiller and Niebuhr prove to have been Tarchon, or as Micali has found it written in inscriptions preserved in Italy V I^ O A x Tarchu, and again, Tarkisa and Tarchina. We shall spell it Tarchun, because there was no O in the oldest Etruscan alphabet, and in the same manner and for the same reason, we shall substitute U for 0 in Etruscan names generally. Cato, Cicero, Festus, and Servius, call the Etruscan leader Tarchon; and as to him, the various authors quoted attribute the founding of all the Etruscan states, and especially of Tarquinia, which was called after his name, the promulgation of laws, the institutions of religion, and the formation of the army, we may consider it a settled truth, that Tarchun was the first leader and ruler of the Etruscans.
Our only testimony as to where they landed, is to be found in Herodotus, i. 94, and his followers, who call the country Umbria, and this is confirmed by Livy, v. 33, who says, that “They first settled in the country between the Appenines and the lower sea, and afterwards sent out colonies north and south.” Umbria, 1200 years before the christian aera, included, according to Pliny, all the country from the Po as far south as Mount Garganus. This account of their first landing is not disputed by any ancient writer, and the internal evidence of which such a matter is capable is all in its favour, such as names, dates, and the seat of government; and the certainty that all Etruria proper was once called Umbria, that the Umbrians were conquered by the Etruscans, and that several of the chief states, such as Perugia, Arezzo and Cortona, were long indifferently called Turrhenian and Umbrian.
Thus it would seem that this matter also is demonstrated and that we have gained the facts that the Rasena under Tarchun landed at some spot in Umbria, about 1250 before Christ; the period at which their own annals commence, being, according to the best scholars, 1187 before Christ. As the country was called Umbria, it must have been inhabited by the Umbrians; and as they conquered the Pelasgi, and as many of the Turrhenian cities were also called Pelasgic ; so it would seem that the inhabitants with whom they first met, were Umbri and Pelasgi, of whom more hereafter.
The arts and sciences which they brought with them, consisted, as implied by all the authors before quoted, of everything which in that age was known to the Lydians, or to the eastern nation which is designated by that name. As Tyrsenus is called the son of Hercules, his people must have been a brave, strong and warlike nation. As they built ships and fitted them out for long voyages, they must have understood navigation and as orientals, they must have loved music, dancing and feasting, pomp and ceremony, dress and show.
They were probably inclined to love of ease and luxurious living; they must have cherished a profound respect for age and rank, a reverence for parental authority, a religious veneration bordering upon superstition for all that related to divine worship, a love of order and an aversion to change. The story of the famine supposes that they had long patience and perseverance, that “they knew how to want, as well as how to abound,” that they were rich in expedients to remedy inevitable calamities, and that they introduced into Italy an unheard of number of games and diversions,the origin of which with them was not so much to consume time, as to divert sorrow. As the eighteen years scarcity implies that they supplied themselves with food, and did not depend upon their neighbours, we gather that they were an agricultural people and as Herodotus says that they carried with them furniture and useful implements, we presume that the forms afterwards in general and ancient use amongst them, as well as the peculiar inventions ascribed to them, were introduced into Italy first by them. It thus appears, that when they landed, they were an eastern colony of cultivated, refined and highly civilized men, well skilled in war, science and agriculture. Our knowledge of their dress and family names, some religious ceremonies and many domestic customs, is gathered from the arms and ornaments, the paintings, urns and sculpture found in their tombs.
Before detailing the Italian life of their great hero, it appears natural to inquire who they really were? or in other words, whence we must conclude them to have come?
Their laws and religion we gather from the Latin writers, Cato, Cicero, and Livy, confirmed by the whole Roman history; and of them and of their marked Syro-Egyptian character, even to the very name given to their laws, of “Tagetic institutions,” and of their lawgiver “Tages,” we shall treat in the sequel, when we come to the history of Tarchun and his times. Their language is only known from inscriptions found upon sarcophagi and bronzes in their tombs, upon statues and liturgical tables and marbles, which have from time to time, within the last two centuries, been dug up in Italy, and are now preserved in various museums. We have also a few Etruscan words in Varro, and in most of the Greek and Latin historians. And from these various sources, it has been proved that their alphabet is Assyrian; meaning by the term Assyria, that vast continent which lies between the Mediterranean and the Indus, the inhabitants of which originally had one common character, from which each separate nation has made its own varieties. The Etruscan language, in like manner, appears to be a branch of Phoenician or Assyrian, with some mixture of Egyptian, and in later times with derivations from the Greek, and the Oscan, or the native tongue of Italy.
The use of investigating a language and the reason of laying so much stress upon it, may be exemplified by the English. Supposing a learned eastern philosopher, who knew not our history, were to examine our language now, in order to trace through it, our origin and probable relations, he would find the basis of our tongue Saxon, our scientific terms all Latin and Greek, and the language of our upper classes, our fashion and refinement, largely mingled with French. He would hence conclude that the people were a German race, but that they had derived their literature and the greater part of their political institutions from the Greeks and Romans, and their ruling classes from the French. They appear, in short, to have been a race of Saxons, civilized by the Romans, and conquered by the French. Could written history tell our story better? It is thus that we shall reason with regard to the Etruscans.
Their numerals, as will hereafter appear, are a variety of oriental writing, and are remains of the Zend or arrow-headed character, which was used in the Assyrian part of Asia from the earliest times down to the days of Darius, but not later. Niebuhr calls them “the remains of a hieroglyphic of the west.” But he should rather have said the remains of a hieroglyphic, which proves the intercourse of the Etruscans with the eastern continent, if it does not demonstrate the very spot whence they emigrated.
Their astronomy and chronology, in like manner, Niebuhr terms western or Mexican. But as the Mexicans are very clearly traced in the annals of the American Archaeological Society, to have been colonists from Tartary and from Malacca, whose ancestors were settlers from lands to the west and north of themselves, our investigations pushed far enough, land us again in the centre of Asia, as the fountain spring whence the Rasena issued forth. Who and what then, do we suppose the Rasena to have been? We think it not doubtful, borne out at least by every collateral proof, that they were a colony from the great and ancient city of Resen, or RS N, as it is written in the Hebrew Bible, the capital of Aturia, in the land of Assyria.15 It is situated on the Tigris, a great navigable river, and the name is by some called the Chaldee and by others the Egyptian form of pronouncing Assyria, the Hebrew S (ש) being sounded in 16 Chaldee, t ת It is mentioned by Moses in the book of Genesis, x. 12, as one of the oldest and one of the greatest, if not the very greatest city, then in the world. He says, “Out of that land (the land of Shinaar) went forth Assur (or the Assyrians, i. e. the tribe of Assur) and builded Nineveh, and the city Rehoboth, and Calah, and ReSeN, between Nineveh and Calah; the same is a great city.” This was written by Moses the prince of Egypt, brought up in the court of Pharaoh, and acquainted with Zoan and Memphis, and the hundred-gated Thebes, and all the wealth, power and spend or of the first of kingdoms. Yet does he place R S N in its early glory above them all, using, as he does, an expression of wonder in mentioning it, which he neither uses respecting them, nor Salem, nor Tyre, nor Nineveh, nor Babylon. This was written at least 1460 years before Christ, two centuries before the appearance of the Rasena in Italy, and it refers to times which are many hundred years earlier.
It may be objected that if the radicals of the name Rasena are RSN, which are preserved in tyRSeNi and etRuScaN, how comes the N to be wanting in Etruria and Tusci, the Latin names for the Rasena; and does not this rather prove Niebuhr’s assertion that the radicals were RSn But this argument falls to the ground, if the great city of RS N itself, in course of time, or by Greek orthography, had its name so changed that the radical N was omitted. We find in Bochart’s profoundly learned work, that RSN was probably conquered by Cyrus, and that it is the city of Larissa, as described by Xenophon. It was then in ruins, but it had been a mighty and important town when in possession of the Medes. Bochart says, that when the Greeks asked its name, the Orientals would answer , L R S N, or in Greek euphony Larissa.17 Still more does Niebuhr’s argument fall, if tried by the Roman appellation of Etrusci or Tusci, for he thinks that the N was itself a Latin addition. Etrusci and Tusci are taken from the country Etruria or Tuscia, now Tuscany and the adjoining provinces.
We think, from the striking similarity in religion and habits between the Egyptians and the Rasena, that a large colony from the city of Resen dwelt for a long time in Egypt, and that about 1260 years before Christ, or it may be even somewhat later, they sailed from some part of Africa to seek new homes and new fortunes in Italy. And we think that had Herodotus written either ” Ludin” or “Lubia” instead of ” Ludia, ” and ” Syrtes ” instead of”Smyrna,” his account would have given the real tradition of the people. It is almost certain that Herodotus must have been told “Ludin,” for the country of the Rasena, which he wrote “Ludia;” because the name “Ludin” is found upon the Egyptian monuments, as the name of a series of nations triumphed over by the Pharaohs two or three times before the days of Moses.18 And as it is evident that the story of Herodotus is not Lydian in the sense of Lydia proper, so we must suppose him to have confused the Etruscan account with the Lydian, from similarity of names.
Concerning the events of a very remote period of ancient history, recorded by no authentic annals, and conjectured rather than traced through the mazes of the wanderings of a mysterious people, discretion forbids us to assume the tone of positive assertion. We trust, however, that in the foregoing as well as subsequent pages, hypothesis will be admitted to have assumed the garb of probability, and that we are neither deceiving ourselves, nor misleading our readers, when we believe that we can point out the true source of that wonderful race, to whom Europe owes so much and has acknowledged so little. We think that we can discern them, a stately band, issuing from beneath the lofty gateways of the high walled and proudly towered Resen, that great city, as ancient as Memphis and Zoan. Thence we follow them to the banks of the Nile, and behold them mingling in fellowship with the victorious Assyrians, and with the seed of Israel, in the fertile nomes of Lower Egypt. Until at length the avenging arm of the legitimate Pharaoh delivered his country from Asiatic oppression, and drove the men of Resen to seek for settlements elsewhere. After their second exile, we trace them to a welcome Italian home, whither they brought the arts, the arms, the luxuries, and the sciences which they had originally possessed in Ludin, and on which they had engrafted the learning of the wisest of nations.
Here they become dominant lords of the soil, and beneficent victors, conquering, civilizing, and blessing the ruder people of the west; until the mysterious times of their dominion being ended, and the sand of their promised ages of glory having run, they sunk into the subordinate state of a conquered nation, and were soon absorbed in the all-engrossing “Senatus Populusque Romanus.”
By Mrs Hamilton Gray 1839
from the foundation of tarqynia to the foundation of rome
PUBLISHED IN 1843 BY J.HATCHARD AND SON,LONDON ,PICCADILLY
1. Hesiod. Theog. 1015.
2. Herod, in lib. de vit. Horn
3. Dionysius of Halic. 1. 1, says, that Italia of the Latins was Tursenia of the Greeks.
4.Athen. Deip. xii.
5.Scholiast. Pind. in Pith.
6.The T here is merely a servile letter
7.Vel. Paterculus, lib. i., who repeats the story, and Strabo, both, from Herod., call Lydus and Tyrrhenus brothers.
8. Lib. 1.
9. Tacit. Annal, (lib. iv. § 24.) Eleven cities disputed the honour of raising temples to Tiberius; the Sardians recited the testimony of the Etruscans, that they came from Lydia under Tyrrhenus, but the senate rejected their claim. Dion, repeats the whole of the story.
10.vide Aeneid passim
11. Dionys. lib. 1.
13. Varro apud Censorinum, 17
14. Vide Niebuhr on Seculum.
15.Vide Strabo xvii.; Bochart, Pliny, v. 8.
16. Vide Bochart. Phal. 1. 2.
17.* Bochart, iv. 123.
18. Vide RoseUini, M. Storici, vol. iii.
source PRINCENTON UNIVERSITY LIBRARY – Class of 1889,Library of American history and politics
(TO BE CONTINUED)