Posts
Antiquarian research, partaking of the quickened energy of the nineteenth
century, has of late years thrown great light on the early ETRUSCAN history of Italy.
It has demonstrated, in confirmation of extant records, that ages BEFORE the straw hut of ROMOLO arose on the Palatine, there existed in Italy a nation far advanced in civilization and refinement — that ROMA, before her intercourse with Greece, was indebted to Etruria for whatever tended to elevate and humanise her, for her chief lessons in art and science, for many of her political, and most of her religious and social institutions, for the conveniences and enjoyments of peace, and the tactics and appliances of war — for almost everything in short that tended to exalt Rome as a nation, save her stern virtues, her thirst of conquest, and her indomitable courage, which were peculiarly her own.
For verily Rome's sons were mighty with little else but the sword — "stolidum genus bellipotentes sunt magis quam sapientipotentes".
It has demonstrated, in confirmation of extant records, that ages BEFORE the straw hut of ROMOLO arose on the Palatine, there existed in Italy a nation far advanced in civilization and refinement — that ROMA, before her intercourse with Greece, was indebted to Etruria for whatever tended to elevate and humanise her, for her chief lessons in art and science, for many of her political, and most of her religious and social institutions, for the conveniences and enjoyments of peace, and the tactics and appliances of war — for almost everything in short that tended to exalt Rome as a nation, save her stern virtues, her thirst of conquest, and her indomitable courage, which were peculiarly her own.
For verily Rome's sons were mighty with little else but the sword — "stolidum genus bellipotentes sunt magis quam sapientipotentes".
The history of the ancient ETRURIA, as there are no direct chronicles
extant, is to be gathered only from scattered notices, alas, by Roman
writers.
Their internal history, till of late years, was almost a blank.
But by the continual accumulation of fresh facts it is now daily acquiring form and substance, and promises, ere long, to be as distinct and palpable as that of Rome.
We already know the extent and peculiar nature of the Etruscan civilization — their social condition and modes of life — their extended commerce and intercourse with far distant countries — their religious creed, with its ceremonial observances in this life, and the joys and torments it set forth in a future state — their popular traditions — and a variety of customs, of all which, History, commonly so called, is either utterly silent, or makes but incidental mention, or gives notices imperfect and obscure.
We can now enter into inner life of the Etruscans, almost as fully as if they were living and moving before us, instead of having been extinct as a nation for more than two thousand years.
We can follow them from the cradle to the tomb.
We see the Etruscans in their national costume, varied according to age, sex, rank, and office.
We learn the Etruscan style of adorning their persons, their fashions, and the eccentricities of their toilet.
We even become acquainted with the peculiar Etruscan physiognomy, their individual names and family relationships.
We know what houses the Etruscans inhabited, what furniture they used.
We behold the Etruscans at their various avocations — the princes in the council-chamber — the augur, or priest, at the altar, or in solemn procession — the warrior in the battle-field, or returning home in triumph — the judge on the bench — the artisan at his handicraft — the husbandman at the plough — the slave at his daily toil.
We see the Etruscans in the bosom of their families, and at the festive board, reclining luxuriously amid the strains of music, and the time-beating feet of dancers — at their favourite games and sports, encountering the wild-boar, or looking on at the race, at the wrestling-match, or other palaestric exercises.
We behold the Etruscans stretched on the death-bed — the last rites performed by mourning relatives — the funeral procession — their bodies laid in the tomb — and the solemn festivals held in their honour.
Nor even here do we lose sight of the Etruscans, but follow their souls to the unseen world — perceive them in the hands of good or evil spirits — conducted to the judgment-seat, and in the enjoyment of bliss, or suffering the punishment of the damned.
Their internal history, till of late years, was almost a blank.
But by the continual accumulation of fresh facts it is now daily acquiring form and substance, and promises, ere long, to be as distinct and palpable as that of Rome.
We already know the extent and peculiar nature of the Etruscan civilization — their social condition and modes of life — their extended commerce and intercourse with far distant countries — their religious creed, with its ceremonial observances in this life, and the joys and torments it set forth in a future state — their popular traditions — and a variety of customs, of all which, History, commonly so called, is either utterly silent, or makes but incidental mention, or gives notices imperfect and obscure.
We can now enter into inner life of the Etruscans, almost as fully as if they were living and moving before us, instead of having been extinct as a nation for more than two thousand years.
We can follow them from the cradle to the tomb.
We see the Etruscans in their national costume, varied according to age, sex, rank, and office.
We learn the Etruscan style of adorning their persons, their fashions, and the eccentricities of their toilet.
We even become acquainted with the peculiar Etruscan physiognomy, their individual names and family relationships.
We know what houses the Etruscans inhabited, what furniture they used.
We behold the Etruscans at their various avocations — the princes in the council-chamber — the augur, or priest, at the altar, or in solemn procession — the warrior in the battle-field, or returning home in triumph — the judge on the bench — the artisan at his handicraft — the husbandman at the plough — the slave at his daily toil.
We see the Etruscans in the bosom of their families, and at the festive board, reclining luxuriously amid the strains of music, and the time-beating feet of dancers — at their favourite games and sports, encountering the wild-boar, or looking on at the race, at the wrestling-match, or other palaestric exercises.
We behold the Etruscans stretched on the death-bed — the last rites performed by mourning relatives — the funeral procession — their bodies laid in the tomb — and the solemn festivals held in their honour.
Nor even here do we lose sight of the Etruscans, but follow their souls to the unseen world — perceive them in the hands of good or evil spirits — conducted to the judgment-seat, and in the enjoyment of bliss, or suffering the punishment of the damned.
We are indebted for most of this knowledge, not to musty records drawn from
the oblivion of centuries, but to monumental remains — purer fonts of historical
truth — landmarks which, even when few and far between, are the surest guides
across the expanse of distant ages — to the monuments which are still extant on
the sites of Etruria, or have been drawn from their
Cemeteries, and are stored in the museums of Italy.
The internal history of Etruria is written on the mighty walls of her
cities, and on other architectural monuments, on her roads, her sewers, her
tunnels.
But above all the history of Etruria is written in her sepulchres.
The history of Etruria is to be read on graven rocks, and on the painted walls of tombs.
But its chief chronicles are inscribed on sarcophagi and cinerary urns, on vases and goblets, and mirrors and other articles in bronze, and a thousand et cetera of personal adornment, and of domestic and warlike furniture — all found within the tombs of a people long passed away, and whose existence was till of late remembered by few but the traveller or the student of classical lore.
It was the great reverence for the dead, which the Etruscans possessed in common with the other nations of antiquity, that prompted them — fortunately for us of the nineteenth century — to store their tombs with these rich and varied sepulchral treasures, which unveil to us the arcana of their inner life, almost as fully as though a second Pompeii had been disinterred in the heart of Etruria; going far to compensate us for the loss of the native annals of the country, of the chronicles of Theophrastus, and Verrius Flaccus,4 and twenty books of its history by the Emperor Claudius.
But above all the history of Etruria is written in her sepulchres.
The history of Etruria is to be read on graven rocks, and on the painted walls of tombs.
But its chief chronicles are inscribed on sarcophagi and cinerary urns, on vases and goblets, and mirrors and other articles in bronze, and a thousand et cetera of personal adornment, and of domestic and warlike furniture — all found within the tombs of a people long passed away, and whose existence was till of late remembered by few but the traveller or the student of classical lore.
It was the great reverence for the dead, which the Etruscans possessed in common with the other nations of antiquity, that prompted them — fortunately for us of the nineteenth century — to store their tombs with these rich and varied sepulchral treasures, which unveil to us the arcana of their inner life, almost as fully as though a second Pompeii had been disinterred in the heart of Etruria; going far to compensate us for the loss of the native annals of the country, of the chronicles of Theophrastus, and Verrius Flaccus,4 and twenty books of its history by the Emperor Claudius.
"Parlan le tombe ove la Storia è muta."
Etruria truly illustrates the remark, that "the history of a people must be
sought in its sepulchres."
The object of so-called "Etruscology" is NOT to collect the disjecta membra of Etruscan
history, and form them into a whole, though it were possible to breathe into it
fresh spirit and life from the eloquent monuments that recent researches have
brought to light.
The object of Etruscology is NOT to build up from these monuments any theory on the origin of this singular people, on the character of their language, or on the peculiar nature of their civilization.
The object of Etruscology is, simply, to set before the reader a mass of facts relative to Etruscan remains, and particularly to afford the traveller who would visit the cities and cemeteries of Etruria such information as may prove of service, by indicating precisely what is now to be found on each site, whether local monuments, or those portable relics which exist in public museums, or in the hands of private collectors.
The object of Etruscology is NOT to build up from these monuments any theory on the origin of this singular people, on the character of their language, or on the peculiar nature of their civilization.
The object of Etruscology is, simply, to set before the reader a mass of facts relative to Etruscan remains, and particularly to afford the traveller who would visit the cities and cemeteries of Etruria such information as may prove of service, by indicating precisely what is now to be found on each site, whether local monuments, or those portable relics which exist in public museums, or in the hands of private collectors.
Before entering, however, on the consideration of the particular
antiquities of Etruria, it is advisable to take a general view of her
geographical position and physical features, as well as to give a slight sketch
of her civilization.
It is difficult to define with precision the limits of a state, which
existed at so early a period as Etruria, ages before any extant chronicles were
written — of which such scanty records have come down to us, and whose
boundaries must have frequently varied during are continual struggles with her
warlike neighbours.
We are told that in very early times the dominion of ETRURIA embraced the
greater part of ITALIA, extending over the plains of LOMBARDIA to the Alps on the
one hand, and to Vesuvio and the Gulf of Salerno on the other; stretching
also across the peninsula from the TIRRENO to the Adriatic Sea, and comprising
the large islands off her western shores.
This wide territory of ETRURIA was divided into three grand districts — that in
the centre, which may be termed Etruria Proper; that to the north, or "Etruria
Circumpadana"; and that to the south, or "Etruria Campaniana".
And each of these regions was divided into twelve states, each represented by a city, as in Greece, where Athens, Sparta, Argos, Thebes — or in Italy of the middle ages, where Venezia, Genova, Pisa, Firenze — were representatives of so many independent, sovereign states, possessed of extensive territory.
And each of these regions was divided into twelve states, each represented by a city, as in Greece, where Athens, Sparta, Argos, Thebes — or in Italy of the middle ages, where Venezia, Genova, Pisa, Firenze — were representatives of so many independent, sovereign states, possessed of extensive territory.
Such seems to have been the extent of Etruria in the time of Tarquinio
Prisco, when she gave a dynasty to Roma, probably as to a conquered city.
But ere long the Gauls on the north and east, the Sabines, Samnites, and Greek colonists on the south, succeeded in compressing this wide-spread dominion into the comparatively narrow limits of the central region.
This may be called Etruria Proper, because it was the peculiar seat of the Etruscan power — the mother-country whence the adjoining districts were conquered or colonised — the source where the peculiar political and religious system of the nation took its rise — the region where the power of Etruria continued to flourish long after it had been extinguished in the rest of Italia, and where the name, religion, language and customs of the people were preserved for ages after they had lost their political independence, and had been absorbed in the colossal corporation of Roma.
But ere long the Gauls on the north and east, the Sabines, Samnites, and Greek colonists on the south, succeeded in compressing this wide-spread dominion into the comparatively narrow limits of the central region.
This may be called Etruria Proper, because it was the peculiar seat of the Etruscan power — the mother-country whence the adjoining districts were conquered or colonised — the source where the peculiar political and religious system of the nation took its rise — the region where the power of Etruria continued to flourish long after it had been extinguished in the rest of Italia, and where the name, religion, language and customs of the people were preserved for ages after they had lost their political independence, and had been absorbed in the colossal corporation of Roma.
It is Etruria Proper alone of which Etruscology should deal with.
Etruria was an extensive region of the Italian peninsula, comprehending
almost the whole of modern TOSCANA, the Duchy of Lucca, and the Transtiberine
portion of the Papal State; being bounded on the north by the Apennines and the
river Magra, on the east by the Tiber, on the west and south by several ranges
of mountains, lateral branches or offsets of the great spine-bone of the
peninsula — in the northern part in long chains stretching in various directions
— in the south, of much inferior altitude, lying in detached masses, and
separated, not by mere valleys, but by vast plains or table-lands.
The geology of the two districts differs as widely as their superficial features. In the northern, the higher mountains, like the great chain of the Apennines, are chiefly composed of secondary limestone, and attain a considerable altitude; the lower are formed of sandstone or marl.
The southern district on every hand shows traces of volcanic action — in the abundance of hot springs and sulphureous waters — in vast plains of tufo and other igneous deposits, of even later date than the tertiary formations — and in the mountains which are chiefly of the same material, with beds of lava, basalt, or scoriae, and which have been themselves volcanoes, their craters, extinct long before the days of history or even fable, being now the beds of beautiful lakes.
Hath, however, in this southern region, are heights of limestone.
Now, like Soracte, rearing their craggy peaks from the wide bosom of the plain; now, stretching in a continuous range along the coast.
On these physical differences depend many of the characteristic features of northern and southern Etruria.
The line of demarcation between these two great districts of Etruria is almost that of the modern frontier between the Tuscan and Roman States — i.e. from Cosa north-eastward to Acquapendente, and thence following the course of the Paglia till it mingles with the Tiber, near Orvieto.
The geology of the two districts differs as widely as their superficial features. In the northern, the higher mountains, like the great chain of the Apennines, are chiefly composed of secondary limestone, and attain a considerable altitude; the lower are formed of sandstone or marl.
The southern district on every hand shows traces of volcanic action — in the abundance of hot springs and sulphureous waters — in vast plains of tufo and other igneous deposits, of even later date than the tertiary formations — and in the mountains which are chiefly of the same material, with beds of lava, basalt, or scoriae, and which have been themselves volcanoes, their craters, extinct long before the days of history or even fable, being now the beds of beautiful lakes.
Hath, however, in this southern region, are heights of limestone.
Now, like Soracte, rearing their craggy peaks from the wide bosom of the plain; now, stretching in a continuous range along the coast.
On these physical differences depend many of the characteristic features of northern and southern Etruria.
The line of demarcation between these two great districts of Etruria is almost that of the modern frontier between the Tuscan and Roman States — i.e. from Cosa north-eastward to Acquapendente, and thence following the course of the Paglia till it mingles with the Tiber, near Orvieto.
Of the twelve cities or states of Etruria, no complete list is given
by the ancients, but it is not difficult to gather from their statements, which
were the chief in the land.
Foremost among them was
I) TARQVINII
where the national polity, civil and religious, took its rise.
This city was in the southern division of the land.
So also were
II) Veii
and
III) Falerii
long the antagonists, with
IV) Caere
the ally, of Rome.
And
V) Volsinii
one of the last to be subdued.
In the northern region were,
VI) Vetulonia and
VII) Rusellae on the coast,
VIII) Clusium and
IX) Arretium in the vale of the Clanis, and
X) Cortona and
XI) Perusia on the heights near the Thrasymene.
While
XII) Volaterrae stood by herself and ruled over a wide tract in the far north.
Beside these twelve cities, there were many other cities, renowned in history, or remarkable for their massive fortifications still extant, for their singular tombs, or for the wondrous treasures of their sepulchral furniture — all of which will be described in the course of this work.
Foremost among them was
I) TARQVINII
where the national polity, civil and religious, took its rise.
This city was in the southern division of the land.
So also were
II) Veii
and
III) Falerii
long the antagonists, with
IV) Caere
the ally, of Rome.
And
V) Volsinii
one of the last to be subdued.
In the northern region were,
VI) Vetulonia and
VII) Rusellae on the coast,
VIII) Clusium and
IX) Arretium in the vale of the Clanis, and
X) Cortona and
XI) Perusia on the heights near the Thrasymene.
While
XII) Volaterrae stood by herself and ruled over a wide tract in the far north.
Beside these twelve cities, there were many other cities, renowned in history, or remarkable for their massive fortifications still extant, for their singular tombs, or for the wondrous treasures of their sepulchral furniture — all of which will be described in the course of this work.
Etruria was of old densely populated, not only in those parts which are
still inhabited, but also, as is proved by remains of cities and cemeteries, in
tracts now desolated by malaria, and relapsed into the desert; and what is now
the fen or the jungle, the haunt of the wild-boar, the buffalo, the fox, and the
noxious reptile, where man often dreads to stay his steps, and hurries away as
from a plague-stricken land —
"rus vacuum, quod non habitet, nisi nocte coactà invitus"
of old yielded rich harvests of corn, wine, and oil, and contained
numerous cities, mighty, and opulent, into whose laps commerce poured the
treasures of the East, and the more precious produce of the Hellenic genius.
Most of these ancient sites are now without a habitat, furrowed yearly by the plough, or forsaken as unprofitable wildernesses; and such as are still occupied, are, with few exceptions, mere phantoms of their pristine greatness — mean villages in the place of populous cities.
On every hand are traces of by-gone civilization, inferior in quality, no doubt, to that which at present exists, but much wider in extent, and exerting far greater influence on the surrounding nations, and on the destinies of the world.
The glory has verily departed from Etruria.
Most of these ancient sites are now without a habitat, furrowed yearly by the plough, or forsaken as unprofitable wildernesses; and such as are still occupied, are, with few exceptions, mere phantoms of their pristine greatness — mean villages in the place of populous cities.
On every hand are traces of by-gone civilization, inferior in quality, no doubt, to that which at present exists, but much wider in extent, and exerting far greater influence on the surrounding nations, and on the destinies of the world.
The glory has verily departed from Etruria.
The sites of the cities varied according to the nature of the ground.
In the volcanic district, where they were most thickly set, they stood on the level of the plains, yet were not unprotected by nature, these plains or table-lands being everywhere intersected by ravines, the cleavings of the earth under volcanic action, which form natural fosses of great depth round the cliff-bound islands or promontories on which the towns are built.
Such was the situation of Veii, Caere, Falerii, Sutrium, and other cities of historical renown.
The favourite position was on a tongue of land at the junction of two of these ravines. In the northern district the cities stood in more commanding situations, on isolated hills.
But never on the summits of scarcely accessible mountains, like many a Cyclopean town in Central Italy, which, "like an eagle's nest, hangs on the crest of purple Apennine."
In the volcanic district, where they were most thickly set, they stood on the level of the plains, yet were not unprotected by nature, these plains or table-lands being everywhere intersected by ravines, the cleavings of the earth under volcanic action, which form natural fosses of great depth round the cliff-bound islands or promontories on which the towns are built.
Such was the situation of Veii, Caere, Falerii, Sutrium, and other cities of historical renown.
The favourite position was on a tongue of land at the junction of two of these ravines. In the northern district the cities stood in more commanding situations, on isolated hills.
But never on the summits of scarcely accessible mountains, like many a Cyclopean town in Central Italy, which, "like an eagle's nest, hangs on the crest of purple Apennine."
Low ground, without any natural strength of site, was always avoided,
though a few towns, as Luna, Pisae, Graviscae, Pyrgi, for maritime and
commercial purposes, stood on the very level of the coast.
The position of the cities of Etruria is in some measure a key to her
civilization and political condition.
Had they been on mountain-tops, we might have inferred a state of society little removed from barbarism, in which there was no security or confidence between the several communities.
Had they stood on the unbroken level of the plains, we should have seen in them an index to an amount of internal security, such as nowhere existed in those early times.
Yet is their medium position not inconsistent with a considerable degree of civilization, and a generally peaceable state of society.
They are not such sites as were selected in later times, even by the Romans.
But it should be borne in mind, that the political constitution of the people of early Italy, as of Greece, was entirely municipal — that cities were states, and citizens soldiers — and fortifications were therefore as indispensable to the cities of old, as standing armies and fleets are deemed to be to the states of modern Europe.
Had they been on mountain-tops, we might have inferred a state of society little removed from barbarism, in which there was no security or confidence between the several communities.
Had they stood on the unbroken level of the plains, we should have seen in them an index to an amount of internal security, such as nowhere existed in those early times.
Yet is their medium position not inconsistent with a considerable degree of civilization, and a generally peaceable state of society.
They are not such sites as were selected in later times, even by the Romans.
But it should be borne in mind, that the political constitution of the people of early Italy, as of Greece, was entirely municipal — that cities were states, and citizens soldiers — and fortifications were therefore as indispensable to the cities of old, as standing armies and fleets are deemed to be to the states of modern Europe.
Before same consider the institutions of Etruria, it may be well to say a
word on the origin of the people, and the source of their civilization.
It must be remarked, that the people known to the Romans as Etruscans were
not the original inhabitants of the land, but a mixed race, composed partly of
the earlier occupants, partly of a people of foreign origin, who became dominant
by right of conquest, and engrafted their peculiar civilization on that
previously existing in the land.
All history concurs in representing the earliest occupants to have been the Siculi, or the Umbri, two of the most ancient races of Italy, little removed, it is probable, from barbarism, though not nomade, but dwelling in towns.
Then a people of Greek race, the Pelasgi, entered Italy at the head of the Adriatic, and crossing the Apennines, and uniting themselves with the Aborigines, or mountaineers, took possession of Etruria, driving out the earlier inhabitants, raised towns and fortified them with mighty walls, and long ruled supreme, till they were in turn conquered by a third race, called by the Greeks Tyrrheni, or Tyrseni, by the Romans Etrusci, Tusci, or Thusci, and by themselves, Rasena, who are supposed to have established their power in the land about 290 years before the foundation of Rome, or 1044 before Christ.
All history concurs in representing the earliest occupants to have been the Siculi, or the Umbri, two of the most ancient races of Italy, little removed, it is probable, from barbarism, though not nomade, but dwelling in towns.
Then a people of Greek race, the Pelasgi, entered Italy at the head of the Adriatic, and crossing the Apennines, and uniting themselves with the Aborigines, or mountaineers, took possession of Etruria, driving out the earlier inhabitants, raised towns and fortified them with mighty walls, and long ruled supreme, till they were in turn conquered by a third race, called by the Greeks Tyrrheni, or Tyrseni, by the Romans Etrusci, Tusci, or Thusci, and by themselves, Rasena, who are supposed to have established their power in the land about 290 years before the foundation of Rome, or 1044 before Christ.
The threads of the history, however, of these races are so entangled, as to
defy every attempt at unravelment.
And the confusion is increased by the indiscriminate application of the word
"tyrrheni"
which was used by the ancients as a synonym sometimes of Pelasgi, sometimes of Etrusci.
And the confusion is increased by the indiscriminate application of the word
"tyrrheni"
which was used by the ancients as a synonym sometimes of Pelasgi, sometimes of Etrusci.
Amid this confusion, two facts stand out with prominence.
The first fact is that the land was inhabited before the Etruscans properly so called, took possession of it.
The second fact is that the Etruscans came from abroad.
From what country, however, is a problem as much disputed as any in the whole compass of classical inquiry.
The first fact is that the land was inhabited before the Etruscans properly so called, took possession of it.
The second fact is that the Etruscans came from abroad.
From what country, however, is a problem as much disputed as any in the whole compass of classical inquiry.
It is not compatible with the object of Etruscology to enter fully into this
when, yet it cannot be passed by in utter silence.
To guide us, we have data of two kinds —
(a) the records of the ancients, and
(b) the extant monuments of the Etruscans.
The native annals, which may be presumed to have spoken explicitly on this point, have not come down to us, and we have only the testimony of Roman writers.
The concurrent voice of these — historians and geographers, poets and philosophers — with a solitary exception, marks the Etruscans as a tribe of Lydians, who, leaving their native land on account of a protracted famine, settled in this part of Italy.
The dissentient voice, however, is of great importance — that of Dionisio of Halicarnassus — one of the most accurate and diligent antiquaries of his times, and an authority considered by many as sufficient to outweigh the vast body of opposing evidence.
His objections are two-fold.
First — that Xanthus, an early native historian of Lydia, "particularly well versed in ancient history," makes no mention of such an emigration.
Secondly — that neither in language, religion, laws, nor customs, was there any similarity between the Lydians and Etruscans — i.e. as they existed in his day.
He consequently broached a view entirely different from that recorded by other ancient writers, viz., that they were unlike every other race in language, manners, and customs.
This view has been adopted by a modern Tuscan writer of celebrity, who, however, may be suspected of national prejudice, when he attempts to prove that the early civilization of Italy was indigenous.
To guide us, we have data of two kinds —
(a) the records of the ancients, and
(b) the extant monuments of the Etruscans.
The native annals, which may be presumed to have spoken explicitly on this point, have not come down to us, and we have only the testimony of Roman writers.
The concurrent voice of these — historians and geographers, poets and philosophers — with a solitary exception, marks the Etruscans as a tribe of Lydians, who, leaving their native land on account of a protracted famine, settled in this part of Italy.
The dissentient voice, however, is of great importance — that of Dionisio of Halicarnassus — one of the most accurate and diligent antiquaries of his times, and an authority considered by many as sufficient to outweigh the vast body of opposing evidence.
His objections are two-fold.
First — that Xanthus, an early native historian of Lydia, "particularly well versed in ancient history," makes no mention of such an emigration.
Secondly — that neither in language, religion, laws, nor customs, was there any similarity between the Lydians and Etruscans — i.e. as they existed in his day.
He consequently broached a view entirely different from that recorded by other ancient writers, viz., that they were unlike every other race in language, manners, and customs.
This view has been adopted by a modern Tuscan writer of celebrity, who, however, may be suspected of national prejudice, when he attempts to prove that the early civilization of Italy was indigenous.
A different opinion was held by the great Niebuhr — that the Etruscans were
a tribe from the Rhaetian Alps, who conquered the Tyrrhene-Pelasgi, the earlier
possessors of the land.
This opinion is worthy of all respect, as coming from such a man, but seems to most Etruscologists to derive little support from ancient writers.
Nor does the well-known fact that ancient monuments like the Etruscan, and inscriptions in a character very similar, have been found among the Rhaetian and Noric Alps, come to the aid of this theory.
For though we are told that the Etruscans occupied Rhaetia, it was only when they had been driven by the Gauls from their settlements in the plains of the Po.
All history concurs in marking the emigration to have been from the south northwards, instead of the contrary.
The subjoined specimen of Rhaeto-Etruscan art confirms Livy's testimony as to the degeneracy and semi-barbarism of these Etruscan emigrants.
This opinion is worthy of all respect, as coming from such a man, but seems to most Etruscologists to derive little support from ancient writers.
Nor does the well-known fact that ancient monuments like the Etruscan, and inscriptions in a character very similar, have been found among the Rhaetian and Noric Alps, come to the aid of this theory.
For though we are told that the Etruscans occupied Rhaetia, it was only when they had been driven by the Gauls from their settlements in the plains of the Po.
All history concurs in marking the emigration to have been from the south northwards, instead of the contrary.
The subjoined specimen of Rhaeto-Etruscan art confirms Livy's testimony as to the degeneracy and semi-barbarism of these Etruscan emigrants.
A modification of Niebuhr's view was held by Otfried Mueller — that
the later element in the Etruscan nation was from Lydia, yet composed not of
natives, but of Tyrrhene-Pelasgi who had settled on the coasts of Asia Minor;
and that the earlier lords of the land were the Rasena, from the mountains
of Rhaetia, who driving back the Umbrians, and uniting with the Tyrrheni on the
Tarquinian coast, formed the Etruscan race.
The recent opinion, also of great weight, is that of Lepsius, — that there was no occupation of the land by any foreign race after its conquest by the Pelasgi, but that the Umbrians, whom they had subdued, in time recovering strength, rebelled with success, and that this reaction of the early inhabitants against their conquerors produced what is known as the Etruscan people.
The recent opinion, also of great weight, is that of Lepsius, — that there was no occupation of the land by any foreign race after its conquest by the Pelasgi, but that the Umbrians, whom they had subdued, in time recovering strength, rebelled with success, and that this reaction of the early inhabitants against their conquerors produced what is known as the Etruscan people.
It would take too long to record all the opinions and shades of opinion
held on this intricate subject.
Suffice it to say that the origin of the Etruscans has been assigned to the Greeks — to the Egyptians — the Phoenicians — the Canaanites — the Libyans — the Cantabrians or Basques — the Celts, an old and favourite theory revived in our own days by Sir William Betham, who fraternises them with his pets, the Irish — and lastly, to the Hyksos, or Shepherd-Kings of Egypt.
We know not if they have been taken for the lost Ten Tribes of Israel, but, certes, a very pretty theory might be set up to that effect, and support by arguments which would appear all-cogent to every one who swears by Coningsby.
The reader, when he perceives how many-sided is this question, will
surely thank us for not leading him deeply into it, yet may hardly like to be
left among this chaos of opinions without a guiding hand. Suffice it to say that the origin of the Etruscans has been assigned to the Greeks — to the Egyptians — the Phoenicians — the Canaanites — the Libyans — the Cantabrians or Basques — the Celts, an old and favourite theory revived in our own days by Sir William Betham, who fraternises them with his pets, the Irish — and lastly, to the Hyksos, or Shepherd-Kings of Egypt.
We know not if they have been taken for the lost Ten Tribes of Israel, but, certes, a very pretty theory might be set up to that effect, and support by arguments which would appear all-cogent to every one who swears by Coningsby.
Amid the clash and conflict of such a host of combatants, who shall attempt to establish harmony? — and where there are "giants in the land," who shall hope to prevail against them?
We confess that we do not perceive that the crowd of authorities who maintain the
Lydian origin of the Etruscans have been put hors de combat by the dictum of
Dionysius.
There seems to be life in them yet.
They clearly represent the popular traditions, not of the Romans only, but of the Etruscans also, for what was current on such a matter among the former, could not have been opposed to the traditions of the latter.
Nay, we have it on record that the Etruscans claimed for themselves a Lydian origin.
TACITO tells us that in the time of TIBERIO, deputies from Sardis recited before the Roman senate a decree of the Etruscans, declaring their consanguinity, on the ground of the early colonization of Etruria by the Lydians.
This popular tradition might not of itself be decisive of the question, but when it is confirmed by a comparison of the recorded customs and the extant monuments of the two people, as will presently be shown, it comes with a force to my mind, that will not admit of rejection.
There seems to be life in them yet.
They clearly represent the popular traditions, not of the Romans only, but of the Etruscans also, for what was current on such a matter among the former, could not have been opposed to the traditions of the latter.
Nay, we have it on record that the Etruscans claimed for themselves a Lydian origin.
TACITO tells us that in the time of TIBERIO, deputies from Sardis recited before the Roman senate a decree of the Etruscans, declaring their consanguinity, on the ground of the early colonization of Etruria by the Lydians.
This popular tradition might not of itself be decisive of the question, but when it is confirmed by a comparison of the recorded customs and the extant monuments of the two people, as will presently be shown, it comes with a force to my mind, that will not admit of rejection.
When a tribe like the Gypsies, without house or home, without literature or
history, without fixed religious creed, but willing to adopt that of any country
where their lot may be cast, with no moral peculiarity beyond their nomade life
and roguish habits — when such a people assert that they come from Egypt or
elsewhere, we believe them in proportion as we find their physiognomy,
language, and peculiar customs, are in accordance with those of the land whence
they claim their origin.
Their tradition is credible only when confirmed from other sources.
But when a people, not a mere tribe, but spread over a large extent of territory, not a nomade, semibarbarous, unlettered race, but a nation settled for ages in one country, possessing a literature and national annals, a systematic form of government and ecclesiastical polity, and a degree of civilization second to that of no contemporary people, save Greece, — a nation in constant intercourse with the most polite and civilized of its fellows, and probably with the very race from which it claimed its descent, — when such a people lays claim traditionally to a definite origin, which nothing in its manners, customs, or creed appears to belie, but many things confirm — how can we set the tradition at nought? — why hesitate to give it credence?
It was not so much a doubtful fiction of poetry, assumed for a peculiar purpose, like the Trojan origin of Rome, as a record preserved in the religious books of the nation, like the Chronicles of the Jews.
Their tradition is credible only when confirmed from other sources.
But when a people, not a mere tribe, but spread over a large extent of territory, not a nomade, semibarbarous, unlettered race, but a nation settled for ages in one country, possessing a literature and national annals, a systematic form of government and ecclesiastical polity, and a degree of civilization second to that of no contemporary people, save Greece, — a nation in constant intercourse with the most polite and civilized of its fellows, and probably with the very race from which it claimed its descent, — when such a people lays claim traditionally to a definite origin, which nothing in its manners, customs, or creed appears to belie, but many things confirm — how can we set the tradition at nought? — why hesitate to give it credence?
It was not so much a doubtful fiction of poetry, assumed for a peculiar purpose, like the Trojan origin of Rome, as a record preserved in the religious books of the nation, like the Chronicles of the Jews.
If this tradition of the Lydian origin of the Etruscans be borne out by
their recorded manners, and by monumental evidence, it must entirely outweigh
the conflicting and unsupported testimony of Dionysius.
Nay, granting him to have spoken advisedly in asserting that there was no resemblance between the two people in language, religion, or customs, it were well explained by the lapse of more than a thousand years from the traditional emigration to his day, — a period much more than sufficient to efface all superficial analogies between people so widely severed, and subjected to such different external influences, and a period during which the Lydians were purposely degraded by Cyrus, till they had "lost all their pristine virtue," while the Etruscans, though also subjected to a foreign yoke, continued to advance in the arts of civilized life.
Nay, granting him to have spoken advisedly in asserting that there was no resemblance between the two people in language, religion, or customs, it were well explained by the lapse of more than a thousand years from the traditional emigration to his day, — a period much more than sufficient to efface all superficial analogies between people so widely severed, and subjected to such different external influences, and a period during which the Lydians were purposely degraded by Cyrus, till they had "lost all their pristine virtue," while the Etruscans, though also subjected to a foreign yoke, continued to advance in the arts of civilized life.
No fact can be more clearly established than the oriental character
of the civic and religious polity, the social and domestic manners, and many of
the arts of the Etruscans; and traces of this affinity are abundant in their
monuments.
The Etruscans were
subject to an all-dominant hierarchy, which assumed to be a theocracy, and
maintained its sway by its arrogant, extensive claims of intimate acquaintance
with the will of Heaven and the decrees of fate.
But here this ecclesiastical authority was further strengthened by the civil government, for the priests and augurs of Etruria were also her princes and military chiefs; so that with this triple sceptre of civil, religious, and military power, they ruled the people "as the soul governs the body."
This state of things was purely oriental.
It never existed among the Greeks or other European races; unless it find some analogy in the Druidical system.
The divination and augury for which the Etruscans were renowned, and which gave them so peculiar a character among the nations of the west, were of oriental origin.
Besides the abundant proofs given in Holy Writ of the early prevalence of soothsaying in the East, we have the authority of Homer and other pagan writers; and the origin of augury is particularly referred to Caria, an adjoining and cognate country to Lydia.
CICERONE, indeed, classes the Etruscans with the Chaldees for their powers of divination, though they affected to read the will of heaven, not in the stars, or in dreams, so much as in the entrails of victims, the flight of birds, and the effects of lightning.
But here this ecclesiastical authority was further strengthened by the civil government, for the priests and augurs of Etruria were also her princes and military chiefs; so that with this triple sceptre of civil, religious, and military power, they ruled the people "as the soul governs the body."
This state of things was purely oriental.
It never existed among the Greeks or other European races; unless it find some analogy in the Druidical system.
The divination and augury for which the Etruscans were renowned, and which gave them so peculiar a character among the nations of the west, were of oriental origin.
Besides the abundant proofs given in Holy Writ of the early prevalence of soothsaying in the East, we have the authority of Homer and other pagan writers; and the origin of augury is particularly referred to Caria, an adjoining and cognate country to Lydia.
CICERONE, indeed, classes the Etruscans with the Chaldees for their powers of divination, though they affected to read the will of heaven, not in the stars, or in dreams, so much as in the entrails of victims, the flight of birds, and the effects of lightning.
The evidence of extant monuments seems to point to a close analogy
between the Etruscan religious creed and those of oriental nations, but whether
this is substantial or merely superficial we have no means of determining.
Micali has written a work with the express purpose of establishing this analogy from the consideration of Etruscan monuments.
Micali contends that the antagonism of good and evil in the government of the universe, which entered so largely into the religious systems of the East, was held by the Etruscans also, and is set forth by the same external means of expression — either by the victories of deities over wild beasts or monsters, or by combats of animals of different natures.
Such representations are seen in the colossal reliefs of Persepolis — on the monuments of Babylon and Nineveh — in the Osiris and Typhon of Egypt — and such abound on works of Etruscan art, particularly on those of most ancient character and date.
But how far these representations on Etruscan monuments are symbolical, and how far they are parts a conventional, decorative system derived from the East, it is not easy to pronounce. Such subjects are found also on works of primitive Hellenic art, and especially on those from lands of Greek colonization in Asia Minor.
The same may be said of monsters of two-fold life — sphinxes, griffons, chimaeras — and even of the four-winged demons of the Assyrian and Babylonian mythology, which abound also on Etruscan monuments, and are likewise found on Greek vases.
Yet the doctrine of good and evil spirits attendant on the soul — obviously held by the Etruscans — favours the supposition that they held the dualistic principle of oriental creeds.
Micali has written a work with the express purpose of establishing this analogy from the consideration of Etruscan monuments.
Micali contends that the antagonism of good and evil in the government of the universe, which entered so largely into the religious systems of the East, was held by the Etruscans also, and is set forth by the same external means of expression — either by the victories of deities over wild beasts or monsters, or by combats of animals of different natures.
Such representations are seen in the colossal reliefs of Persepolis — on the monuments of Babylon and Nineveh — in the Osiris and Typhon of Egypt — and such abound on works of Etruscan art, particularly on those of most ancient character and date.
But how far these representations on Etruscan monuments are symbolical, and how far they are parts a conventional, decorative system derived from the East, it is not easy to pronounce. Such subjects are found also on works of primitive Hellenic art, and especially on those from lands of Greek colonization in Asia Minor.
The same may be said of monsters of two-fold life — sphinxes, griffons, chimaeras — and even of the four-winged demons of the Assyrian and Babylonian mythology, which abound also on Etruscan monuments, and are likewise found on Greek vases.
Yet the doctrine of good and evil spirits attendant on the soul — obviously held by the Etruscans — favours the supposition that they held the dualistic principle of oriental creeds.
The analogy of the Etruscan customs to those of the East did not escape the
notice of ancient writers.
And here let me xliremark that the Mysians, Lydians, Carians, Lycians, and Phrygians being cognate races, inhabiting adjoining lands, what is recorded of one is generally applicable to all.
"The ascendancy of the Lydian dynasty in Asia Minor, with its empire (real or fabulous) of the sea during its flourishing ages, would naturally impart to any such tradition a Lydian form.
In any attempt, therefore, to illustrate the Etruscan origin or manners from Asiatic sources, our appeals may safely be extended to the neighbouring, whether kindred, or merely connected, races."
The sports, games, and dances of the Etruscans, adopted by the Romans, are traditionally of Lydian origin.
The musical instruments on which they excelled were introduced from Asia Minor, — the double-pipes from Phrygia, the trumpet from Lydia.
Their luxurious habits were so strictly oriental, that almost the same language is used in describing them and those of the Lydians.
Dionisio himself, after having stated that there was no resemblance whatever between the customs of the Etruscans and Lydians, points out that the purple robes worn in Etruria as insignia of authority, were similar to those of the Lydian and Persian monarchs, differing only in form.
Even the common national robe, the toga, was of Lydian origin.
The eagle, which Rome bore as her standard, and which she derived from Etruria, was also the military ensign of Persia.
The young women of Etruria are said, like those of Lydia, to have obtained their dowries by prostitution.
The singular custom of the Lycians, of tracing their descent by the maternal line, obtained also among the Etruscans, alone among the nations of antiquity.
And another custom which essentially distinguished the Etruscans from the Greeks, and assimilated them to the people of Asia Minor, was that they shared the festive couch with their wives.
Their language and the character in which it was written have very marked oriental analogies.
But in their tombs and sepulchral usages the affinity of Etruria to Lydia and other countries of the East is most strongly marked; and it is to be learned not only from extant monuments, but from historical records.
And here let me xliremark that the Mysians, Lydians, Carians, Lycians, and Phrygians being cognate races, inhabiting adjoining lands, what is recorded of one is generally applicable to all.
"The ascendancy of the Lydian dynasty in Asia Minor, with its empire (real or fabulous) of the sea during its flourishing ages, would naturally impart to any such tradition a Lydian form.
In any attempt, therefore, to illustrate the Etruscan origin or manners from Asiatic sources, our appeals may safely be extended to the neighbouring, whether kindred, or merely connected, races."
The sports, games, and dances of the Etruscans, adopted by the Romans, are traditionally of Lydian origin.
The musical instruments on which they excelled were introduced from Asia Minor, — the double-pipes from Phrygia, the trumpet from Lydia.
Their luxurious habits were so strictly oriental, that almost the same language is used in describing them and those of the Lydians.
Dionisio himself, after having stated that there was no resemblance whatever between the customs of the Etruscans and Lydians, points out that the purple robes worn in Etruria as insignia of authority, were similar to those of the Lydian and Persian monarchs, differing only in form.
Even the common national robe, the toga, was of Lydian origin.
The eagle, which Rome bore as her standard, and which she derived from Etruria, was also the military ensign of Persia.
The young women of Etruria are said, like those of Lydia, to have obtained their dowries by prostitution.
The singular custom of the Lycians, of tracing their descent by the maternal line, obtained also among the Etruscans, alone among the nations of antiquity.
And another custom which essentially distinguished the Etruscans from the Greeks, and assimilated them to the people of Asia Minor, was that they shared the festive couch with their wives.
Their language and the character in which it was written have very marked oriental analogies.
But in their tombs and sepulchral usages the affinity of Etruria to Lydia and other countries of the East is most strongly marked; and it is to be learned not only from extant monuments, but from historical records.
The relation and connection of Etruria with the East is an established
fact, admitted on all hands but variously accounted for.
To me it seems to be such as cannot be explained by commercial intercourse, however extensive, for it is apparent not merely on the surface of Etruscan life, but deep within it, influencing all its springs of action, and imparting a tone and character, that neither Greek example and preceptorship, nor Roman domination could ever entirely efface.
So intimate a connection could only have been formed by conquest or colonization from the East.
That such was possible all will admit, — that it was not improbable, the common practice of antiquity of colonizing distant lands is evidence enough; sublime memorials of which we still behold on the shores of Italy and Sicily, in those shrines of a long-perished creed, now sacred to the divinity of Hellenic genius.
Had we been told that Mysia, Caria, Phrygia, or Lycia, was the mother-country of Etruria, we might have accepted the tradition, but as Lydia is definitely indicated, why refuse to credit it?
To what country of the East we may be inclined to ascribe this colonization, is of little moment. We must at least admit, with Seneca, that "Asia claims the Etruscans as her own" -- "Tuscos Asia sibi vindicat."
To me it seems to be such as cannot be explained by commercial intercourse, however extensive, for it is apparent not merely on the surface of Etruscan life, but deep within it, influencing all its springs of action, and imparting a tone and character, that neither Greek example and preceptorship, nor Roman domination could ever entirely efface.
So intimate a connection could only have been formed by conquest or colonization from the East.
That such was possible all will admit, — that it was not improbable, the common practice of antiquity of colonizing distant lands is evidence enough; sublime memorials of which we still behold on the shores of Italy and Sicily, in those shrines of a long-perished creed, now sacred to the divinity of Hellenic genius.
Had we been told that Mysia, Caria, Phrygia, or Lycia, was the mother-country of Etruria, we might have accepted the tradition, but as Lydia is definitely indicated, why refuse to credit it?
To what country of the East we may be inclined to ascribe this colonization, is of little moment. We must at least admit, with Seneca, that "Asia claims the Etruscans as her own" -- "Tuscos Asia sibi vindicat."
That which in an investigation of this kind would prove of most service is
here unfortunately of no avail.
The land of Etruria, even in an age which has unveiled the Egyptian hieroglyphics and the arrow-headed character of Babylon, still remains a mystery.
This "geological literature," as it has been aptly termed, has baffled the learning and research of scholars of every nation for ages past; and though fresh treasures are daily stored up, the key to unlock them is still wanting.
We know the characters in which it is written, which much resemble the Pelasgic or early Greek,— we can learn even somewhat of the genius of the language and its inflections; xlivbut beyond this, and the proper names and the numerals on sepulchral monuments, and a few words recorded by the ancients, the wisest must admit their ignorance, and confess that all they know of the Etruscan tongue, is that it is unique — like the Basque, an utter alien to every known fm of languages. To the other early tongues of Italy, which made use of the same or nearly the same character, we find some key in the Latin, especially to the Oscan, which bears to it a parental relation. But the Etruscan has been tested again and again by Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and every other ancient language, and beyond occasional affinities which may be mere coincidences, such as occur in almost every case, no clue has yet been found to its interpretation, — and only some monument like the Rosetta-stone should come to light, and some Young or Champollion should arise to decipher it, the Etruscan must ever remain a xlvdead, as it has always emphatically been, a sepulchral, language.
Till then, to every fanciful theorist, who fondly hugs himself into the belief that to him it has been reserved to unravel the mystery, or who possesses the Sabine faculty of dreaming what he wishes, we must reply in the words of the prophet — "It is an ancient nation, a nation whose language thou knowest not."
The land of Etruria, even in an age which has unveiled the Egyptian hieroglyphics and the arrow-headed character of Babylon, still remains a mystery.
This "geological literature," as it has been aptly termed, has baffled the learning and research of scholars of every nation for ages past; and though fresh treasures are daily stored up, the key to unlock them is still wanting.
We know the characters in which it is written, which much resemble the Pelasgic or early Greek,— we can learn even somewhat of the genius of the language and its inflections; xlivbut beyond this, and the proper names and the numerals on sepulchral monuments, and a few words recorded by the ancients, the wisest must admit their ignorance, and confess that all they know of the Etruscan tongue, is that it is unique — like the Basque, an utter alien to every known fm of languages. To the other early tongues of Italy, which made use of the same or nearly the same character, we find some key in the Latin, especially to the Oscan, which bears to it a parental relation. But the Etruscan has been tested again and again by Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and every other ancient language, and beyond occasional affinities which may be mere coincidences, such as occur in almost every case, no clue has yet been found to its interpretation, — and only some monument like the Rosetta-stone should come to light, and some Young or Champollion should arise to decipher it, the Etruscan must ever remain a xlvdead, as it has always emphatically been, a sepulchral, language.
Till then, to every fanciful theorist, who fondly hugs himself into the belief that to him it has been reserved to unravel the mystery, or who possesses the Sabine faculty of dreaming what he wishes, we must reply in the words of the prophet — "It is an ancient nation, a nation whose language thou knowest not."
Were it not for this mystery of the language, the oriental analogies on the
one hand, and the Greek features on the other, which are obvious in the recorded
customs of Etruria and the monuments of her art, might be reconciled by the
theory of a Pelasgic colony from Asia Minor.
But the language in its utter loneliness compels us to look further for the origin of the Etruscan people.
But the language in its utter loneliness compels us to look further for the origin of the Etruscan people.
For the benefit of travellers, who would spell their way through
epitaphs, I subjoin the Etruscan alphabet, confronting the characters with the
Greek.
Α Ε Ζ Θ Ι Κ Λ
Μ Ν Π Ρ Σ Τ Υ
Φ Χ
Aspirate
Digamma
Aspirate
Digamma
The Etruscan alphabet, it will be seen, wants the
Β, Γ, Δ, ξ, Υ, the Η, and both the Ο and Ω.
In the custom of writing from right to left, and of frequently dropping the short vowels, the Etruscan bears a close oriental analogy.
Indeed it is clear that, like the Pelasgic, the Greek, and other kindred alphabets, this had its origin from Phoenicia.
Β, Γ, Δ, ξ, Υ, the Η, and both the Ο and Ω.
In the custom of writing from right to left, and of frequently dropping the short vowels, the Etruscan bears a close oriental analogy.
Indeed it is clear that, like the Pelasgic, the Greek, and other kindred alphabets, this had its origin from Phoenicia.
The numerals known to us by the name of Roman, are in reality Etruscan.
And were originally not only read from right to left, but were inverted.
And were originally not only read from right to left, but were inverted.
The government of Etruria in external form bore some resemblance to a
federal republic, each of its Twelve States or Cities having a distinct internal
sovereignty, yet combining in a league of amity and mutual assistance — such a
confederation, in fact, as existed in early times among the states of
Greece.
Yet the internal government of each state was an aristocracy, for the kings we read of occasionally in Roman history were either the chief rulers of each state, or one chosen out of this body to preside over all, like the Doges of Venice or the Popes of Rome.
Indeed, the analogy in the latter case is strengthened by the double functions, political and ecclesiastical, of the Etruscan Lucumones.
For these princes were all augurs, skilled in divination and the mysteries of "the Etruscan Discipline;" and when they met in solemn conclave at the shrine of the great goddess Voltumna, to deliberate on the affairs of the Confederation, one was chosen from among them as high-priest or pontiff.
In Etruria, as in the modern Papal State, the same will decreed civil laws, and prescribed religious observances and ceremonies, all on the assumption of an unerring interpretation of the will of heaven.
Yet the internal government of each state was an aristocracy, for the kings we read of occasionally in Roman history were either the chief rulers of each state, or one chosen out of this body to preside over all, like the Doges of Venice or the Popes of Rome.
Indeed, the analogy in the latter case is strengthened by the double functions, political and ecclesiastical, of the Etruscan Lucumones.
For these princes were all augurs, skilled in divination and the mysteries of "the Etruscan Discipline;" and when they met in solemn conclave at the shrine of the great goddess Voltumna, to deliberate on the affairs of the Confederation, one was chosen from among them as high-priest or pontiff.
In Etruria, as in the modern Papal State, the same will decreed civil laws, and prescribed religious observances and ceremonies, all on the assumption of an unerring interpretation of the will of heaven.
Political freedom was a plant which flourished not in Etruria.
The power was wholly in the hands of the priestly nobles.
The people had no voice in the government, not even the power of making themselves heard and respected, as at Rome.
Whatever may have been the precise relation between the ruling class and their dependents, it is clear that it was akin to the feudal system, and that the mass of the community was enthralled.
The state of society was not precisely that of the middle ages, for there was more union and community of interest and feeling than among the feudal lords of Germany, France, or England.
The commons must have been a conquered people, the descendants of the early inhabitants of the land, and must have stood in a somewhat similar relation to their rulers, to that which the Perioeci of Laconia held to their Dorian lords, or the subjugated Saxons of England bore to their Norman conquerors.
That they were serfs rather than slaves seems evident, from the fact that they formed the class of which the Etruscan armies were composed.
The Etruscans possessed slaves, like the other nations of antiquity — nay, their bondage was proverbially rigorous,— but these were captives taken in war, or in piratical expeditions.
Niebuhr shows that "the want of a free and respectable communalty — which the Etruscans, obstinately retaining and extending their old feudal system, never allowed to grow up — was the occasion of the singular weakness displayed by the great Etruscan cities in their wars with the Romans, where the victory was decided by the number and strength of the infantry."
It was also the cause of the inferiority of the Etruscan to the Greek civilization — of its comparatively stationary and conventional character.
Yet had there been no slaves, and had the entire population been of one race, the lower classes could hardly have escaped enthralment, for it is difficult to conceive of a system of government more calculated to enslave both mind and body than that of the aristocratical augurs and aruspices of Etruria.
The power was wholly in the hands of the priestly nobles.
The people had no voice in the government, not even the power of making themselves heard and respected, as at Rome.
Whatever may have been the precise relation between the ruling class and their dependents, it is clear that it was akin to the feudal system, and that the mass of the community was enthralled.
The state of society was not precisely that of the middle ages, for there was more union and community of interest and feeling than among the feudal lords of Germany, France, or England.
The commons must have been a conquered people, the descendants of the early inhabitants of the land, and must have stood in a somewhat similar relation to their rulers, to that which the Perioeci of Laconia held to their Dorian lords, or the subjugated Saxons of England bore to their Norman conquerors.
That they were serfs rather than slaves seems evident, from the fact that they formed the class of which the Etruscan armies were composed.
The Etruscans possessed slaves, like the other nations of antiquity — nay, their bondage was proverbially rigorous,— but these were captives taken in war, or in piratical expeditions.
Niebuhr shows that "the want of a free and respectable communalty — which the Etruscans, obstinately retaining and extending their old feudal system, never allowed to grow up — was the occasion of the singular weakness displayed by the great Etruscan cities in their wars with the Romans, where the victory was decided by the number and strength of the infantry."
It was also the cause of the inferiority of the Etruscan to the Greek civilization — of its comparatively stationary and conventional character.
Yet had there been no slaves, and had the entire population been of one race, the lower classes could hardly have escaped enthralment, for it is difficult to conceive of a system of government more calculated to enslave both mind and body than that of the aristocratical augurs and aruspices of Etruria.
The religion of Etruria in her earliest ages bore some resemblance to that
of Egypt, but more to the other theological systems of the East.
It had the same gloomy, unbending, imperious character, the same impenetrable shroud of mysticism xlixand symbolism; widely unlike the lively, plastic, phantasy-full creed of the Greeks, whose joyous spirit found utterance in song.
The one was a religion of a caste, imposed for its exclusive benefit on the masses, and therefore not an exponent of national character, though influencing it; the other was the creed of an entire people, voluntarily embraced from its adaptation to their wants — nay, called into being by them — and necessarily stamped with the peculiar impress of their thoughts and feelings.
In consequence of increased intercourse with other lands, in subsequent times, the mythology of Etruria assimilated, in great measure, to that of Greece.
Yet there was always this difference, that she held her creed, not as something apart from all political systems, not as a set of dogmas which deep-probing philosophy and shallow superstition could hold in common, and each invest with its peculiar meaning.
No; it was with her an all-pervading principle — the very atmosphere of her existence — a leaven operating on the entire mass of society — a constant presence ever felt in one form or other — a power admitting no rival, all-ruling, all-regulating, all-requiring. Such was its sway, that it moulded the national character, and gave the Etruscans a pre-eminently religious reputation among the people of antiquity.59 Like the Roman Catholic in after times, it was renowned as the religion of mysteries, of marvels, of ceremonial pomp and observances. Its dominance was not without one beneficial effect. It bound its votaries in fetters, if not of entire harmony, at least of peace.
Those civil contests which were the disgrace of Greece, which retarded her civilization, and ultimately proved her destruction, seem to have been unknown in Etruria. Yet the power of her religion was but negative; it proved ineffectual as a national bond, as an incitement to make common cause against a common foe.
The several States were often at variance, and pursued independent courses of action, and thus laid themselves open to be conquered in detail.60 But as far as we can learn from history, lthey were never arrayed in arms against each other; and this must have been the effect of their religion. Yet it was her system of spiritual tyranny that rendered Etruria inferior to Greece. She had the same arts — an equal amount of scientific knowledge — a more extended commerce. In every field had the Etruscan mind liberty to expand, save in that wherein lies man's highest delight and glory.
Before the gate of that paradise where the intellect revels unfettered among speculations on its own nature, existence, and final destiny, on its relation to the First Cause, to other minds, and to society in general — stood the sacerdotal Lucumo, brandishing in one hand the double-edged sword of secular and ecclesiastical authority, and holding forth in the other the books of Tages, exclaiming, to his awe-struck subjects, "Believe and obey!" Liberty of thought and action was as incompatible with the assumption of infallibility in the governing power in the days of Tarchon or Porsena, as in those of Gregory XVI.
It had the same gloomy, unbending, imperious character, the same impenetrable shroud of mysticism xlixand symbolism; widely unlike the lively, plastic, phantasy-full creed of the Greeks, whose joyous spirit found utterance in song.
The one was a religion of a caste, imposed for its exclusive benefit on the masses, and therefore not an exponent of national character, though influencing it; the other was the creed of an entire people, voluntarily embraced from its adaptation to their wants — nay, called into being by them — and necessarily stamped with the peculiar impress of their thoughts and feelings.
In consequence of increased intercourse with other lands, in subsequent times, the mythology of Etruria assimilated, in great measure, to that of Greece.
Yet there was always this difference, that she held her creed, not as something apart from all political systems, not as a set of dogmas which deep-probing philosophy and shallow superstition could hold in common, and each invest with its peculiar meaning.
No; it was with her an all-pervading principle — the very atmosphere of her existence — a leaven operating on the entire mass of society — a constant presence ever felt in one form or other — a power admitting no rival, all-ruling, all-regulating, all-requiring. Such was its sway, that it moulded the national character, and gave the Etruscans a pre-eminently religious reputation among the people of antiquity.59 Like the Roman Catholic in after times, it was renowned as the religion of mysteries, of marvels, of ceremonial pomp and observances. Its dominance was not without one beneficial effect. It bound its votaries in fetters, if not of entire harmony, at least of peace.
Those civil contests which were the disgrace of Greece, which retarded her civilization, and ultimately proved her destruction, seem to have been unknown in Etruria. Yet the power of her religion was but negative; it proved ineffectual as a national bond, as an incitement to make common cause against a common foe.
The several States were often at variance, and pursued independent courses of action, and thus laid themselves open to be conquered in detail.60 But as far as we can learn from history, lthey were never arrayed in arms against each other; and this must have been the effect of their religion. Yet it was her system of spiritual tyranny that rendered Etruria inferior to Greece. She had the same arts — an equal amount of scientific knowledge — a more extended commerce. In every field had the Etruscan mind liberty to expand, save in that wherein lies man's highest delight and glory.
Before the gate of that paradise where the intellect revels unfettered among speculations on its own nature, existence, and final destiny, on its relation to the First Cause, to other minds, and to society in general — stood the sacerdotal Lucumo, brandishing in one hand the double-edged sword of secular and ecclesiastical authority, and holding forth in the other the books of Tages, exclaiming, to his awe-struck subjects, "Believe and obey!" Liberty of thought and action was as incompatible with the assumption of infallibility in the governing power in the days of Tarchon or Porsena, as in those of Gregory XVI.
The mythological system of Etruria is learned partly from ancient writers,
partly from national monuments, particularly figured mirrors.
It was in some measure allied to that of Greece, though rather to the early Pelasgic system than to that of the Hellenes; but still more nearly to that of Rome, who in fact derived certain of her divinities and their names from this source.
It was in some measure allied to that of Greece, though rather to the early Pelasgic system than to that of the Hellenes; but still more nearly to that of Rome, who in fact derived certain of her divinities and their names from this source.
The three great deities, who had temples in every Etruscan city, were:
I) Tina or Tinia —
II) Cupra — and
III) Mnerva or Menerva.
*******************I) Tina or Tinia —
II) Cupra — and
III) Mnerva or Menerva.
Tinia was the supreme deity of the Etruscans, analogous to the Jupiter of the Romans — "the centre of the Etruscan
god-world, the power who speaks in the thunder and descends in the lightning."
TINIA is always represented on Etruscan monuments with the thunder-bolt in his hand
TINIA is always represented on Etruscan monuments with the thunder-bolt in his hand
Cupra was the Etruscan Hera or Juno, and her principal shrines seem to have
been at Veii, Falerii, and Perusia.
Like her counterpart among the Romans, CUPRA appears to have been worshipped under other forms, according to her various attributes — as Feronia, Thalna or Thana, Ilithiyaº-Leucothea.63
Like her counterpart among the Romans, CUPRA appears to have been worshipped under other forms, according to her various attributes — as Feronia, Thalna or Thana, Ilithiyaº-Leucothea.63
Menrva, as she is called on Etruscan monuments, answers to the MINERVA of the Romans.
It is probable that the name by which the Romans knew her was of purely Etruscan origin.
She seems to have been allied to Nortia, the Fortuna of Etruscans.
Like her counterpart in Roman mythology, MENRVA is represented armed, and with the aegis on her breast, but in addition has sometimes wings.
It is probable that the name by which the Romans knew her was of purely Etruscan origin.
She seems to have been allied to Nortia, the Fortuna of Etruscans.
Like her counterpart in Roman mythology, MENRVA is represented armed, and with the aegis on her breast, but in addition has sometimes wings.
***********************************
There were twelve great gods, six of each sex, called "Dii Consentes" or "Dii
Complices".
They comprised the council of Tinia, and are called "the senators of the gods" — "the Penates of the Thunderer himself."
They were fierce and pitiless deities, dwelling in the inmost recesses of heaven, whose names it was liiforbidden to utter.
Yet they were not deemed eternal, but supposed to rise and fall together.
They comprised the council of Tinia, and are called "the senators of the gods" — "the Penates of the Thunderer himself."
They were fierce and pitiless deities, dwelling in the inmost recesses of heaven, whose names it was liiforbidden to utter.
Yet they were not deemed eternal, but supposed to rise and fall together.
Still more awful and potent were "the shrouded Gods,"— "Dii Involuti" — whose
appellation is suggestive of their mysterious character.
The Dii Involuti ruled both gods and men, and to their decisions even Tinia himself was obedient.
The Dii Involuti ruled both gods and men, and to their decisions even Tinia himself was obedient.
The Etruscans believed in
Nine
Great Gods, who had the power of hurling thunderbolts.
They were called "Novensiles" by the Romans.
Of thunderbolts there were eleven sorts, by which Tinia, as the supreme thunder-god, wielded three.
Cupra, or Juno, as one of the nine, also hurled her bolts.
Menerva, the third, hurled hers at the time of the vernal equinox.
Summanus hurled his bolts by night as GIOVE did by day, and received even more honour from the old Romans as a thunder-wielding god, than GIOVE himself.
Vejovis, or Vedius, though with a Latin name, was an Etruscan deity, whose bolts had the singular effect of making those they struck so deaf, "that they could not hear the thunder, or even louder noises."
VOLCANO, or as the Etruscans called him Sethlans, was another bolt-hurling god.
MARTE was also one of the nine.
The last two are not mentioned, but it seems probable that one was Saturn, or it may be their great infernal deity Mantus.
The ninth was probably ERCOLE — Ercle, or ERCLE — a favourite god of the Etruscans.
Nine
Great Gods, who had the power of hurling thunderbolts.
They were called "Novensiles" by the Romans.
Of thunderbolts there were eleven sorts, by which Tinia, as the supreme thunder-god, wielded three.
Cupra, or Juno, as one of the nine, also hurled her bolts.
Menerva, the third, hurled hers at the time of the vernal equinox.
Summanus hurled his bolts by night as GIOVE did by day, and received even more honour from the old Romans as a thunder-wielding god, than GIOVE himself.
Vejovis, or Vedius, though with a Latin name, was an Etruscan deity, whose bolts had the singular effect of making those they struck so deaf, "that they could not hear the thunder, or even louder noises."
VOLCANO, or as the Etruscans called him Sethlans, was another bolt-hurling god.
MARTE was also one of the nine.
The last two are not mentioned, but it seems probable that one was Saturn, or it may be their great infernal deity Mantus.
The ninth was probably ERCOLE — Ercle, or ERCLE — a favourite god of the Etruscans.
Besides these, were other great deities, as Vertumnus, or "the changeable,"
the god of wine and gardens, the Etruscan Bacco.
Though that god is sometimes also called Phuphluns.
Allied to him, probably in more than name, was Voltumna, the great goddess at whose shrine the confederate princes of Etruria held their councils.
With her also may be analogous, Horta, whose name, perhaps, indicates a goddess of gardens, and from whom a town of Etruria derived its name.
"Aplu", or Apollo, often appears on Etruscan monuments, as god of the sun, being sometimes called Usil.
And so also Turms, or Mercury.
And Turan, or Venus; and more rarely Thesan, the goddess of the dawn, Eos-Aurora.
And Losna, or Lala — the Etruscan Luna, or Diana. Nethuns, or Nettuno, also appears on monuments, and Janus and Silvanus are mentioned as Etruscan gods, but they may have been of foreign introduction.
Then there were four gods called "Dii Penates" —
(i) Ceres
(ii) Pales
(iii) Fortuna, and
(iv) the Genius Jovialis.
And the two Penates of the Lazio, — the Dioscuri, — Castur and Pultuke — were much worshipped in Etruria, as we learn from monuments.
The worship of the mysterious Cabiri testified to the Pelasgic origin of a portion of the Etruscan population.
Though that god is sometimes also called Phuphluns.
Allied to him, probably in more than name, was Voltumna, the great goddess at whose shrine the confederate princes of Etruria held their councils.
With her also may be analogous, Horta, whose name, perhaps, indicates a goddess of gardens, and from whom a town of Etruria derived its name.
"Aplu", or Apollo, often appears on Etruscan monuments, as god of the sun, being sometimes called Usil.
And so also Turms, or Mercury.
And Turan, or Venus; and more rarely Thesan, the goddess of the dawn, Eos-Aurora.
And Losna, or Lala — the Etruscan Luna, or Diana. Nethuns, or Nettuno, also appears on monuments, and Janus and Silvanus are mentioned as Etruscan gods, but they may have been of foreign introduction.
Then there were four gods called "Dii Penates" —
(i) Ceres
(ii) Pales
(iii) Fortuna, and
(iv) the Genius Jovialis.
And the two Penates of the Lazio, — the Dioscuri, — Castur and Pultuke — were much worshipped in Etruria, as we learn from monuments.
The worship of the mysterious Cabiri testified to the Pelasgic origin of a portion of the Etruscan population.
All these deities are more or less akin to those of other ancient
mythological systems, and what were of native origin and what of foreign
introduction, it is not always easy to determine.
But there were others more peculiarly Etruscan.
At least if their counterparts are to be found in the Roman Pantheon, they had a wider influence in Etruria, and occupied a more prominent place in the Etruscan mythology.
Such is the goddess of Fate, who is generally represented with wings, sometimes with a hammer and nail, as if fixing unalterably her decrees — an idea borrowed by the Romans; but more frequently with a bottle in one hand and a stylus in the other, with which to inscribe her decisions. She is found with various names attached; but the most common are Lasa, and Mean.93
A kindred goddess is frequently introduced in the reliefs on the sepulchral urns, as present at the death of some individual, and is generally armed with a hammer, a sword, or torch, though sometimes brandishing snakes like a Fury.
But there were others more peculiarly Etruscan.
At least if their counterparts are to be found in the Roman Pantheon, they had a wider influence in Etruria, and occupied a more prominent place in the Etruscan mythology.
Such is the goddess of Fate, who is generally represented with wings, sometimes with a hammer and nail, as if fixing unalterably her decrees — an idea borrowed by the Romans; but more frequently with a bottle in one hand and a stylus in the other, with which to inscribe her decisions. She is found with various names attached; but the most common are Lasa, and Mean.93
A kindred goddess is frequently introduced in the reliefs on the sepulchral urns, as present at the death of some individual, and is generally armed with a hammer, a sword, or torch, though sometimes brandishing snakes like a Fury.
What gives most peculiarity to the Etruscan mythology is the doctrine of
Genii.
The entire system of national divination, called "the Etruscan Discipline," was supposed to have been revealed by a Genius, called Tages — a wondrous boy with a hoary head and the wisdom of age, who sprung from the fresh-ploughed furrows of Tarquinii.
But the system of Lares and Penates, the household deities who watched over the personal and pecuniary interests of individuals and families, was the most prominent feature in the Etruscan mythology, whence it was borrowed by the Romans.
Thence it was also, in all probability, that the Romans obtained their doctrine of an attendant genius watching over every individual from his birth — Genius natale comes qui temperat astrum -- who was of the same sex as the individual, and was called Genius when male, and Juno when female. Yet we find no positive proof of this doctrine among the Etruscans.96
The entire system of national divination, called "the Etruscan Discipline," was supposed to have been revealed by a Genius, called Tages — a wondrous boy with a hoary head and the wisdom of age, who sprung from the fresh-ploughed furrows of Tarquinii.
But the system of Lares and Penates, the household deities who watched over the personal and pecuniary interests of individuals and families, was the most prominent feature in the Etruscan mythology, whence it was borrowed by the Romans.
Thence it was also, in all probability, that the Romans obtained their doctrine of an attendant genius watching over every individual from his birth — Genius natale comes qui temperat astrum -- who was of the same sex as the individual, and was called Genius when male, and Juno when female. Yet we find no positive proof of this doctrine among the Etruscans.96
Last, but brought most prominently before the eye in Etruscan sepulchral
monuments, are the dread powers of the lower world.
Here rule Mantus and Mania, the Pluto and Proserpine of the Etruscan creed, never mentioned, though sometimes figured in the native monuments.
Mantus is represented as an old man, wearing a crown, with wings at his shoulders, and a torch, or it may be large nails in his hands, to show the inevitable character of his decrees.
Of Mania we have no decided representation, but she is probably figured in some of the female demons who were supposed to be present at scenes of death and slaughter.
She was a fearful deity, who was propitiated by human sacrifices.98 Intimately connected with these divinities was Charun, the great conductor of souls, the infernal Mercury of the Etruscans, the chief minster of Mantus, whose dread image, hideous as the imagination could conceive, is often introduced on sepulchre monuments; and who, with his numerous attendant demons and Furies, well illustrates the dark and gloomy character of the Etruscan superstition.
Here rule Mantus and Mania, the Pluto and Proserpine of the Etruscan creed, never mentioned, though sometimes figured in the native monuments.
Mantus is represented as an old man, wearing a crown, with wings at his shoulders, and a torch, or it may be large nails in his hands, to show the inevitable character of his decrees.
Of Mania we have no decided representation, but she is probably figured in some of the female demons who were supposed to be present at scenes of death and slaughter.
She was a fearful deity, who was propitiated by human sacrifices.98 Intimately connected with these divinities was Charun, the great conductor of souls, the infernal Mercury of the Etruscans, the chief minster of Mantus, whose dread image, hideous as the imagination could conceive, is often introduced on sepulchre monuments; and who, with his numerous attendant demons and Furies, well illustrates the dark and gloomy character of the Etruscan superstition.
The government and religion of a country being ascertained, lviimuch may be
inferred of the character of its civilization. With such shackles as were
imposed on it, it was impossible for the Etruscan mind, individually or
collectively, to reach the highest degree of cultivation to which society, even
in those early ages, attained. The intellect of Etruria, when removed from the
sciences and arts, and purely practical applications, was too much absorbed in
the mysteries of divination and the juggleries of priestcraft. Even art was
fettered by conventionalities, imposed, it seems, by her religious system. Yet
there is recorded evidence that she possessed a national literature —
histories,100 tragedies,101 poems;102 besides religious and ritual books;103 and
the Romans used to send their sons into the land of their hereditary foes to
study its literature and language,104 just as in later times the "old
Christians" of Spain sent their youth to receive a knightly education at the
Moslem courts of Cordoba and Granada.
History, moreover, attests the eminence of the Etruscans in navigation and
military tactics,105 agriculture, medicine, and other lviiipractical
sciences; above all in astronomy, which was brought by them to such
perfection, that they seem to have arrived at a very close approximation to the
true division of time, and to have fixed the tropical year at precisely 365
days, 5 hours, 40 minutes.
If we measure Etruria by the standard of her own day, we must ascribe to
her a high degree of civilization.
It differed indeed, as the civilization of a country under despotic rule will always differ from that of a lixfree people. It resided in the mass rather than in the individual; it was the result of a set system, not of personal energy and excellence; its tendency was stationary rather than progressive; its object was to improve the physical condition of the people, and to minister to luxury, rather than to advanced and elevate the nobler faculties of human nature. In all this it assimilated to the civilization of the East, or of the Aztecs and Peruvians.
It had not the earnest gem of development, the intense vitality which existed in Greece; it could never have produced a Plato, a Demosthenes, a Thucydides, or a Phidias.
Yet while inferior to her illustrious contemporary in intellectual vigour and eminence, Etruria was in advance of her in her social condition and in certain respects in physical civilization, or that state in which the arts and sciences were made to minister to comfort and luxury.
The health and cleanliness of her towns were insured by a system of sewerage, vestiges of which may be seen on many Etruscan sites; and the Cloaca Maxima will be a memorial to all time of the attention paid by the Etruscans to drainage. Yet this is said to have been neglected by the Greeks.108 In her internal communication Etruria also shows her advance in physical civilization. Few extant remains of paved ways, it is true, can be pronounced Etruscan, but in the neighbourhood of most of her cities are traces of roads cut in the rocks, sometimes flanked with tombs, or even marked with inscriptions, determining their antiquity; and generally having water-channels or gutters to keep them dry and clean.109
The Etruscans were also skilled in controlling lxthe injurious processes of nature. They drained lakes by cutting tunnels through the heart of mountains, and they diverted the course of rivers, to reclaim low and marshy ground, just as the Val di Chiana has been rescued in our own times.110 And these grand works are not only still extant, but some are even efficient as ever, after the lapse of so many centuries.
It differed indeed, as the civilization of a country under despotic rule will always differ from that of a lixfree people. It resided in the mass rather than in the individual; it was the result of a set system, not of personal energy and excellence; its tendency was stationary rather than progressive; its object was to improve the physical condition of the people, and to minister to luxury, rather than to advanced and elevate the nobler faculties of human nature. In all this it assimilated to the civilization of the East, or of the Aztecs and Peruvians.
It had not the earnest gem of development, the intense vitality which existed in Greece; it could never have produced a Plato, a Demosthenes, a Thucydides, or a Phidias.
Yet while inferior to her illustrious contemporary in intellectual vigour and eminence, Etruria was in advance of her in her social condition and in certain respects in physical civilization, or that state in which the arts and sciences were made to minister to comfort and luxury.
The health and cleanliness of her towns were insured by a system of sewerage, vestiges of which may be seen on many Etruscan sites; and the Cloaca Maxima will be a memorial to all time of the attention paid by the Etruscans to drainage. Yet this is said to have been neglected by the Greeks.108 In her internal communication Etruria also shows her advance in physical civilization. Few extant remains of paved ways, it is true, can be pronounced Etruscan, but in the neighbourhood of most of her cities are traces of roads cut in the rocks, sometimes flanked with tombs, or even marked with inscriptions, determining their antiquity; and generally having water-channels or gutters to keep them dry and clean.109
The Etruscans were also skilled in controlling lxthe injurious processes of nature. They drained lakes by cutting tunnels through the heart of mountains, and they diverted the course of rivers, to reclaim low and marshy ground, just as the Val di Chiana has been rescued in our own times.110 And these grand works are not only still extant, but some are even efficient as ever, after the lapse of so many centuries.
That the Etruscans were eminently skilled in tunnelling, excavating, and
giving form and beauty to shapeless rocks, and for useful purposes, is a fact
impressed on the mind of every one who visits the land.
Their tombs were all subterranean, and, with few exceptions, hewn in the rock, after the manner of the Egyptians and other people of the East. In truth, in no point is the oriental character of the Etruscans more obviously marked than in their sepulchres; and modern researches are daily bringing to light fresh analogies to the tombs of Lycia, Phrygia, Lydia, or Egypt.
Their tombs were all subterranean, and, with few exceptions, hewn in the rock, after the manner of the Egyptians and other people of the East. In truth, in no point is the oriental character of the Etruscans more obviously marked than in their sepulchres; and modern researches are daily bringing to light fresh analogies to the tombs of Lycia, Phrygia, Lydia, or Egypt.
In physical comfort and luxury the Etruscans cannot have been surpassed by
any contemporary nation.
Whoever visits the Etruscan Museum of the Vatican, or that of the Cavaliere Campana at Rome, will have abundant proofs of this.
Much of it is doubtless owing to their extensive commerce, which was their pride for ages. In their social condition they were in advance of the Greeks, particularly in one point, which is an important test of civilization.
In Athens, woman was always degraded; she trod not by the side of man as his companion and helpmate, but followed as his slave; the treatment of the lxisex, even in the days of Pericles, was what would now be called oriental.
But in Etruria, woman was honoured and respected; she took her place at the board by her husband's side, which she was never permitted to do in Athens;111 she was educated and accomplished, and sometimes even instructed in the mysteries of divination;112 her children assumed her name as well as their father's;113 and her grave was honoured with even more splendour than that of her lord. It is not easy to say to what Etruria owed this superiority. But whatever its cause, it was a fact which tended greatly to humanise her, and, through her, to civilise Italy — a fact of which Rome especially reaped the benefit by imitating her example.
Whoever visits the Etruscan Museum of the Vatican, or that of the Cavaliere Campana at Rome, will have abundant proofs of this.
Much of it is doubtless owing to their extensive commerce, which was their pride for ages. In their social condition they were in advance of the Greeks, particularly in one point, which is an important test of civilization.
In Athens, woman was always degraded; she trod not by the side of man as his companion and helpmate, but followed as his slave; the treatment of the lxisex, even in the days of Pericles, was what would now be called oriental.
But in Etruria, woman was honoured and respected; she took her place at the board by her husband's side, which she was never permitted to do in Athens;111 she was educated and accomplished, and sometimes even instructed in the mysteries of divination;112 her children assumed her name as well as their father's;113 and her grave was honoured with even more splendour than that of her lord. It is not easy to say to what Etruria owed this superiority. But whatever its cause, it was a fact which tended greatly to humanise her, and, through her, to civilise Italy — a fact of which Rome especially reaped the benefit by imitating her example.
No comments:
Post a Comment