ITALIA. At a ferent race and origin from those by which they were 87 surrounded. This strongly marked distinctness from and there seems no doubt that they were established were a distinct race from the Gauls (Strab. ii. p. 128), the other Italian races appears to have been recog-in Northern Italy long before the Gallic invasion. nised both by Roman and Greek writers. Dionysius Nor were they by any means confined to the part of even affirms that the Etruscans did not resemble, Italy which ultimately retained their name. either in language or manners, any other people very early period we learn that they occupied the whatsoever (Dionys. i. 30); and, however we may whole coast of the Mediterranean, from the foot of question the generality of this assertion, the fact in the Pyrenees to the frontiers of Etruria, and the regard to their language seems to be borne out by Greek writers uniformly speak of the people who the still existing remains of it. The various theories occupied the neighbourhood of Massilia, or the modern that have been proposed concerning their origin, and Provence, as Ligurians, and not Gauls. (Strab. iv. the views of modern philologers in regard to their p. 203.) At the same period, it is probable that language, are more fully discussed under the article they were more widely spread also in the basin of ETRURIA. It may suffice here to state that two the Po than we find them when they appear in points may be considered as fairly established: 1. That a considerable part of the population of foot of the Cottian Alps, were the most northern of Roman history. At that time the Taurini, at the Etruria, and especially of the more southern portions the Ligurian tribes; while S. of the Padus they exof that country, was (as already mentioned) of Pe- tended probably as far as the Trebia. Along the lasgic extraction, and continued to speak a dialect shores of the Mediterranean they possessed in the closely akin to the Greek. 2. That, besides this, time of Polybius the whole country as far as Pisae there existed in Etruria a people (probably a con- and the mouths of the Arnus, while they held the quering race) of wholly different origin, who were fastnesses of the Apennines as far to the E. as the the proper Etruscans or Tuscans, but who called frontiers of the Arretine territory. (Pol. ii. 16.) themselves Rasena; and that this race was wholly It was not till a later period that the Macra became distinct from the other nations of Central Italy. the established boundary between the Roman proAs to the ethnical affinities of this pure Etruscan vince of Liguria and that of Etruria. race, we are almost as much in the dark as was Dionysius; but recent philological inquiries appear to have established the fact that it may be referred to the same great family of the Indo-Teutonic nations, though widely separated from all the other branches of that family which we find settled in Italy. There are not wanting, indeed, evidences of many points of contact and similarity, with the Umbrians on the one hand and the Pelasgians on the other; but it is probable that these are no more than would naturally result from their close juxtaposition, and that mixture of the different races which had certainly taken place to a large extent before the period from which all our extant monu-bably a Celtic race [CARNI]. ments are derived. It may, indeed, reasonably be assumed, that the Umbrians, who appear to have been at one time in possession of the greater part, if not the whole, of Etruria, would never be altogether expelled, and that there must always have remained, especially in the N. and E., a subject population of Umbrian race, as there was in the more southern districts of Pelasgian. The statement of Livy, which represents the Rhaetians as of the same race with the Etruscans (v. 33), even if its accuracy be admitted, throws but little light on the national affinities of the latter; for we know, in fact, nothing of the Rhaetians, either as to their language or origin. It only remains to advert briefly to the several branches of the population of Northern Italy. Of these, by far the most numerous and important were the Gauls, who gave to the whole basin of the Po the name of Gallia Cisalpina. They were universally admitted to be of the same race with the Gauls who inhabited the countries beyond the Alps, and their migration and settlement in Italy were referred by the Roman historians to a comparatively recent period. The history of these is fully given under GALLIA CISALPINA. Adjoining the Gauls on the SW., both slopes of the Apennines, as well as of the Maritime Alps and a part of the plain of the Po, were occupied by the LIGURIANS, a people as to whose national affinities we are almost wholly in the dark. [LIGURIA.] It is certain, however, from the positive testimony of ancient writers, that they from them by the river Athesis (Adige), were the Bordering on the Gauls on the E., and separated VENETI, a people of whom we are distinctly told that their language was different from that of the Gauls (Pol. ii. 17), but of whom, as of the Ligurians, we know rather what they were not, than what they were. were an Illyrian race (Zeuss, Die Deutschen, p. 251), The most probable hypothesis is, that they and there is good reason for referring their neighbours the ISTRIANS to the same stock. On the other hand, the CARNI, a mountain tribe in the extreme NE. of Italy, who immediately bordered both on the Venetians and Istrians, were more pro of Italy is that of the EUGANEI, a people who had Another name which we meet with in this part dwindled into insignificance in historical times, but whom Livy describes as once great and powerful, and occupying the whole tracts from the Alps to the sea. (Liv. i. 1.) Of their national affinities we know nothing. It is possible that where Livy as being of common origin with the Etruscans (v. speaks of other Alpine races besides the Rhaetians, 33), that he had the Euganeans in view; but this is mere conjecture. He certainly seems to have regarded them as distinct both from the Venetians and Gauls, and as a more ancient people in Italy than either of those races. V. HISTORY. inseparably connected with that of Rome, and cannot The history of ancient Italy is for the most part be considered apart from it. It is impossible here to attempt to give even an outline of that history; but it may be useful to the student to present at one view a brief sketch of the progress of the Roman arms, and the period at which the several nations of Italy successively fell under their yoke, as well as the measures by which they were gradually consolidated into one homogeneous whole, in the form that Italy assumed under the rule of Augustus. The few facts known to us concerning the history of the several nations, before their conquest by the Romans, will be found in their respective articles; that of the Greek colonies in Southern Italy, and their relations with the surrounding tribes, are given under the head of MAGNA GRAECIA. 1. Conquest of Italy by the Romans, B. C. 509264.-The earliest wars of the Romans with their immediate neighbours scarcely come here under our consideration. Placed on the very frontier of three powerful nations, the infant city was from the very first engaged in perpetual hostilities with the Latins, the Sabines, and the Etruscans. And, however little dependence can be placed upon the details of these wars, as related to us, there seems no doubt that, even under the kings, Rome had risen to a superiority over most of her neighbours, and had extended her actual dominion over a considerable part of Latium. The earliest period of the Republic, on the other hand (from the expulsion of the Tarquins to the Gaulish invasion, B. C. 509-390), when stripped of the romantic garb in which it has been clothed by Roman writers, presents the spectacle of a difficult and often dubious struggle, with the Etruscans on the one hand, and the Volscians on the other. The capture of Veii, in B. C. 396, and the permanent annexation of its territory to that of Rome, was the first decisive advantage acquired by the rising republic, and may be looked upon as the first step to the domination of Italy. Even the great calamity sustained by the Romans, when their city was taken and in part destroyed by the Gauls, B. c. 390, was so far from permanently checking their progress, that it would rather seem to have been the means of opening out to them a career of conquest. It is probable that that event, or rather the series of predatory invasions by the Gauls of which it formed a part, gave a serious shock to the nations of Central Italy, and produced among them much disorganisation and consequent weakness. The attention of the Etruscans was naturally drawn off towards the N., and the Romans were able to establish colonies at Sutrium and Nepete; while the power of the Volscians appears to have been greatly enfeebled, and the series of triumphs over them recorded in the Fasti now marks real progress. That of M. Valerius Corvus, after the destruction of Satricum in B. c. 346 (Liv. vii. 27; Fast. Capit.), seems to indicate the total subjugation of the Volscian people, who never again appear in history as an independent power. Shortly after this, in B.C. 343, the Romans for the first time came into collision with the Samnites. That people were then undoubtedly at the height of their power: they and their kindred Sabellian tribes had recently extended their conquests over almost the whole southern portion of the peninsula (see above, p. 86); and it cannot be doubted, that when the Romans and Samnites first found themselves opposed in arms, the contest between them was one for the supremacy of Italy. Meanwhile, a still more formidable danger, though of much briefer duration, threatened the rising power of Rome. The revolt of the Latins, who had hitherto been among the main instruments and supports of that power, threatened to shake it to its foundation; and the victory of the Romans at the foot of Mt. Vesuvius, under T. Manlius and P. Decius (B. C. 340), was perhaps the most important in their whole history. Three campaigns sufficed to terminate this formidable war (B. C. 340-338). The Latins were now reduced from the condition of dependent allies to that of subjects, whether under the name of Roman citizens or on less favourable terms [LATIUM]; and the greater part of Campania was placed in the same condition. | At this time, therefore, only seventy years before the First Punic War, the Roman dominion still cornprised only Latium, in the more limited sense of the name (for the Aequi and Hernici were still independent), together with the southern part of Etruria, the territory of the Volscians, and a part of Campania. During the next fifty years, which was the period of the great extension of the Roman arms and influence, the contest between Rome and Samnium was the main point of interest; but almost all the surrounding nations of Italy were gradually drawn in to take part in the struggle. Thus, in the Second Samnite War (B. c. 326-304), the names of the Lucanians and Apulians nations with which (as Livy observes, viii. 25) the Roman people had, up to that period, had nothing to do-appear as taking an active part in the contest. In another part of Italy, the Marsi, Vestini, and Peligni, all of them, as we have seen, probably kindred races with the Samnites, took up arms at one time or another in support of that people, and were thus for the first time brought into collision with Rome. It was not till B. C. 311 that the Etruscans on their side joined in the contest: but the Etruscan War at once assumed a character and dimensions scarcely less formidable than that with the Samnites. It was now that the Romans for the first time carried their arms beyond the Ciminian Hills; and the northern cities of Etruria, Perusia, Cortona, and Arretium, now first appear as taking part in the war. [ETRURIA.] Before the close of the contest, the Umbrians also took up arms for the first time against the Romans. The peace which put an end to the Second Samnite War (B. c. 304) added nothing to the territorial extent of the Roman power; but nearly contemporary with it, was the revolt of the Hernicans, which ended in the complete subjugation of that people (B.C. 306); and a few years later the Aequians, who followed their example, shared the same fate, B. c. 302. About the same time (B. c. 304) a treaty was concluded with the Marsi, Marrucini, Peligni, and Frentani, by which those nations appear to have passed into the condition of dependent allies of Rome, in which we always subsequently find them. A similar treaty was granted to the Vestini in B. c. 301. In B. c. 298, the contest between Rome and Samnium was renewed, but in this Third Samnite War the people of that name was only one member of a powerful confederacy, consisting of the Samnites, Etruscans, Umbrians, and Gauls; nevertheless, their united forces were defeated by the Romans, who, after several successful campaigns, compelled both Etruscans and Samnites to sue for peace (B. C. 290). The same year in which this was concluded witnessed also the subjugation of the Sabines, who had been so long the faithful allies of Rome, and now appear, for the first time after a long interval, in arins: they were admitted to the Roman franchise. (Liv. Epit. xi.; Vell. Pat. i. 14.) The short interval which elapsed before hostilities were generally renewed, afforded an opportunity for the subjugation of the Galli Senones, whose territory was wasted with fire and sword by the consul Dolabella, in 283; and the Roman colony of Sena (Sena Gallica) established there, to secure their permanent submission. Already in B. C. 282, the war was renewed both with the Etruscans and the Samnites; but this Fourth Samnite War, as it is often called, was soon merged in one of a more extensive character. The Samnites were at first assisted by the Lucanians and Bruttians, the latter of whom now occur for the first time in Roman history (Liv. Epit. xii.); but circumstances soon arose which led the Romans to declare war against the Tarentines; and these called in the assistance of Pyrrhus, king of Epirus. The war with that monarch (the first in which the Romans were engaged with any non-Italian enemy) was at the same time decisive of the fate of the Italian peninsula. It was, indeed, the last struggle of the nations of Southern Italy against the power of Rome: on the side of Pyrrhus were ranged, besides the Tarentines and their mercenaries, the Samnites, Lucanians, and Bruttians; while the Latins, Campanians, Sabines, Umbrians, Volscians, Marrucini, Peligni, and Frentani, are enumerated among the troops which swelled the ranks of the Romans. (Dionys. xx. Fr. Didot.) Hence, the final defeat of Pyrrhus near Beneventum (B. c. 275) was speedily followed by the complete subjugation of Italy. Tarentum fell into the hands of the Romans in B. C. 272, and, in the same year, the consuls Sp. Carvilius and Papirius Cursor celebrated the last of the many Roman triumphs over the Samnites, as well as the Lucanians and Bruttians. Few particulars have been transmitted to us of the petty wars which followed, and served to complete the conquest of the peninsula. The Picentes, who were throughout the Samnite wars on friendly terms with Rome, now appear for the first time as enemies; but they were defeated and reduced to submission in B. c. 268. The subjection of the Sallentines followed, B. C. 266, and the same year records the conquest of the Sarsinates, probably including the other mountain tribes of the Umbrians. A revolt of the Volsinians, in the following year (B. C. 265), apparently arising out of civil dissensions, gave occasion to the last of these petty wars, and earned for that people the credit of being the last of the Italians that submitted to the Roman power. (Florus, i. 21.) 89 East, they were still constantly engaged in an ingloITALIA. rious, but arduous, struggle with the Ligurians, on their own immediate frontiers. Strabo observes, that it cost them eighty years of war to secure the coastline of Liguria for the space of 12 stadia in width (iv. p. 203); a statement nearly correct, for the first triumph over the Ligurians was celebrated in B. C. 236, and the last in B. C. 158. Even after this last period it appears to have been a long time before the people were finally reduced to a state of tranquillity, and lapsed into the condition of ordinary Roman subjects. great mistake to suppose that the several nations 2. Italy under the Romans. It would be a of Italy, from the periods at which they successively yielded to the Roman arms and acknowledged the supremacy of the Republic, became her subjects, in the strict sense of the word, or were reduced under any uniform system of administration. The relawith the supreme head, were regulated by special tions of every people, and often even of every city, agreements or decrees, arising out of the circumstances of their conquest or submission. How various and different these relations were, is sufficiently seen by the instances of the Latins, the Campanians, and the Hernicans, as given in detail by Livy (viii. 11 -14, ix. 43). From the loss of the second decade of that author, we are unfortunately deprived of all Italy; and hence our information as to the relations similar details in regard to the other nations of established between them and Rome in the third century B. C., and which continued, with little alteration, till the outbreak of the Social War, B. C. 90, is unfortunately very imperfect. We may, however, clearly distinguish two principal classes into which the Italians were then divided; those who possessed the rights of Roman citizens, and were thus incorporated into the Roman state, and those It was not till long after that the nations of as dependent allies, rather than subjects properly so who still retained their separate national existence Northern Italy shared the same fate. Cisalpine called. The first class comprised all those comGaul and Liguria were still regarded as foreign munities which had received, whether as nations or provinces; and, with the exception of the Senones, separate cities, the gift of the Roman franchise; a whose territory had been already reduced, none of right sometimes conferred as a boon, but often also the Gaulish nations had been assailed in their own imposed as a penalty, with a view to break up more abodes. In B. C. 232 the distribution of the "Gal- effectually the national spirit and organisation, and licus ager" (the territory of the Senones) became bring the people into closer dependence upon the the occasion of a great and formidable war, which, supreme authority. In these cases the citizenship however, ultimately ended in the victory of the was conferred without the right of suffrage; but in Romans, who immediately proceeded to plant the most, and perhaps in all such instances, the latter two colonies of Placentia and Cremona in the ter- privilege was ultimately conceded. Thus we find ritory of the Gauls, B. c. 218. The history of the Sabines, who in B. c. 290 obtained only the this war, as well as of those which followed, is "civitas sine suffragio," admitted in B. c. 268 to fully related under GALLIA CISALPINA. here suffice to mention, that the final conquest of 14): the same was the case also, though at a much It may the full enjoyment of the franchise (Vell. Pat. i. the Boii, in B. c. 191, completed the subjection of longer interval, with Formiae, Fundi, and Arpinum, Gaul, south of the Padus; and that of the Trans- which did not receive the right of suffrage till B. C. padane Gauls appears to have been accomplished 188 (Liv. viii. 41, x. 1, xxxviii. 36), though they soon after, though there is some uncertainty as to had borne the title of Roman citizens for more than the exact period. The Venetians had generally a century. To the same class belonged those of the been the allies of the Romans during these contests Roman colonies which were called "coloniae civium with the Gauls, and appear to have passed gradually Romanorum," and which, though less numerous and and quietly from the condition of independent allies powerful than the Latin colonies, were scattered to that of dependents, and ultimately of subjects. through all parts of Italy, and included some wealthy The Istrians, on the contrary, were reduced by force and important towns. (A list of them is given by of arms, and submitted in B. C. 177. The last Madvig, de Coloniis, pp. 295-303, and by Marquardt, people of Italy that fell under the yoke of Rome Handb. der Römischen Alterthümer, vol. iii. pt. i. were the Ligurians. This hardy race of mountaineers was not subdued till after a long series of p. 18.) campaigns; and, while the Roman arms were overthrowing the Macedonian and Syrian empires in the To the second class, the "Socii" or "Civitates people, belonged all those nations that had submitted to Rome upon any other terms than those of citizenship; and the treaties (foedera), which determined their relations to the central power, included almost every variety, from a condition of nominal equality and independence (aequum foedus), to one of the most complete subjection. Thus we find Heraclea in Lucania, Neapolis in Campania, and the Camertes in Umbria, noticed as possessing particularly favourable treaties (Cic. pro Balb. 8, 20, 22); and even some of the cities of Latium itself, which had not received the Roman civitas, continued to maintain this nominal independence long after they had become virtually subject to the power of Rome. Thus, even in the days of Polybius, a Roman citizen might retire into exile at Tibur or Praeneste (Pol. vi. 14; Liv. xliii. 2), and the poor and decayed town of Laurentum went through the form of annually renewing its treaty with Rome down to the close of the Republic. (Liv. viii. 11.) Nor was this independence merely nominal: though politically dependent upon Rome, and compelled to follow her lead in their external relations, and to furnish their contingent of troops for the wars, of which the dominant republic alone reaped the benefit, many of the cities of Italy continued to enjoy the absolute control of their own affairs and internal regulations; the troops which they were bound by their treaty to furnish were not enrolled with the legions, but fought under their own standards as auxiliaries; they retained their own laws as well as courts of judicature, and, even when the Lex Julia conferred upon all the Italian allies the privileges of the Roman civitas, it was necessary that each city should adopt it by an act of its own. (Cic. pro Balb. 8.) Nearly in the same position with the dependent allies, however different in their origin, were the so-called "Coloniae Latinae;" that is, Roman colonies which did not enjoy the rights of Roman citizenship, but stood in the same relation to the Roman state that the cities of the Latin League had formerly done. The name was, doubtless, derived from a period when these colonies were actually sent out in common by the Romans and Latins; but settlements on similar terms continued to be founded by the Romans alone, long after the extinction of the Latin League; and, before the Social War, the Latin colonies included many of the most flourishing and important towns of Italy. (For a list of them, with the dates of their foundation, see Madvig, de Coloniis, l. c. ; Mommsen, Römische Münz-Wesen, pp. 230-234; and Marquardt, l. c. p. 33.) These colonies are justly regarded by Livy as one of the main supports of the Republic during the Second Punic War (Liv. xxvii. 9, 10), and, doubtless, proved one of the most effectual means of consolidating the Roman dominion in Italy. After the dissolution of the Latin League, B. C. 338, these Latin colonies (with the few cities of Latium that, like Tibur and Praeneste, still retained their separate organisation) formed the "nomen Latinum," or body of the Latins. The close connection of these with the allies explains the frequent recurrence of the phrase "socii et nomen Latinum" throughout the later books of Livy, and in other authors in reference to the same period. those who had so long been her bravest defenders they would have been still more alarming had the whole Italian people taken part in it. But the allies who then rose in arms against Rome were almost exclusively the Sabellians and their kindred races. The Etruscans and Umbrians stood aloof, while the Sabines, Latins, Volscians, and other tribes who had already received the Roman franchise, supported the Republic, and furnished the materials of her armies. But the senate hastened to secure those who were wavering, as well as to disarm a portion at least of the openly disaffected, by the gift of the Roman franchise, including the full privileges of citizens: and this was subsequently extended to every one of the allies in succession as they submitted. There is some uncertainty as to the precise steps by which this was effected, but the Lex Julia, passed in the year 90 B. C., appears to have conferred the franchise upon the Latins (the "nomen Latinum," as above defined) and all the allies who were willing to accept the boon. The Lex Plautia Papiria, passed the following year, B. C. 89, completed the arrangement thus begun. (Cic. pro Balb. 8, pro Arch. 4; A. Gell. iv. 4; Appian, B. C. i. 49; Vell. Pat. ii. 16.) By the change thus effected the distinction between the Latins and the allies, as well as between those two classes and the Roman citizens, was entirely done away with; and the Latin colonies lapsed into the condition of ordinary municipia. At the same time that all the free inhabitants of Italy, as the term was then understood (i. e. Italy S. of the Macra and Rubicon), thus received the full rights of Roman citizens, the same boon was granted to the inhabitants of Gallia Cispadana, while the Transpadani appear to have been at the same time raised to the condition and privileges of Latins, that is to say, were placed on the same footing as if all their towns had been Latin colonies. (Ascon. in Pison. p. 3, ed. Orell.; Savigny, Vermischte Schriften, vol. iii. pp. 290-308; Marquardt, Handb. vol. iii. pt. i. p. 48.) This peculiar arrangement, by which the Jus Latii was revived at the very time that it became naturally extinct in the rest of Italy, is more fully explained under GALLIA CISALPINA. In B. C. 49, after the outbreak of the Civil War, Caesar bestowed the full franchise upon the Transpadani also (Dion Cass. xli. 36); and from this time all the free inhabitants of Italy became united under one common class as citizens of Rome. The Italians thus admitted to the franchise were all ultimately enrolled in the thirty-five Roman tribes. The principle on which this was done we know not; but we learn that each municipium, and sometimes even a larger district, was assigned to a particular tribe: so that every citizen of Arpinum, for instance, would belong to the Cornelian tribe, of Beneventum to the Stellatine, of Brixia to the Fabian, of Ticinum to the Papian, and so on.* But in so doing, all regard to that geographical distribution of the tribes which was undoubtedly kept in view in their first institution was necessarily lost; and we have not sufficient materials for attempting to determine how the distribution was made. A know. ledge of it must, however, have been of essential importance so long as the Republic continued; and *This did not, however, interfere with the per A great and general change in the relations previously subsisting between the Italian states and Rome was introduced by the Social War (B. C. 90-sonal right, where this previously existed, so that a 89), and the settlement which took place in consequence of it. Great as were the dangers with which Rome was threatened by the formidable coalition of Roman citizen already belonging to another tribe, who settled himself in any municipium, retained his own tribe. ITALIA. 91 -8 the opulent watering-place of Baiae always remained, in a municipal sense, a mere dependency of Cumae which had been of great importance under the RoThe distinction between coloniae and municipia, man republic, lost its real significance, when the citizens of both alike possessed the Roman franchise. towns which had received fresh colonies towards the But the title of colonia was still retained by those close of the Republic under Caesar or the Triunhave been regarded as an honorary distinction, and virate, as well as under the Empire. It appears to as giving a special claim upon the favour and protection of the founder and his descendants; though it conferred no real political superiority. (Gell. xvi. 13.) On the other hand, the Praefecturaewere distinguished from the colonies and municipia name also derived from the early republican periodby the circumstance that the juridical functions were there exercised by a Praefectus, an officer sent direct from Rome, instead of by the Duumviri or Quatuorviri (whose legal title was IIviri or IIIIviri Juri dicundo) elected by the municipality. But as these distinctions were comparatively unimportant, in a generic sense, so as to include all towns which the name of "municipia" is not unfrequently applied had a local self-government. employed with the same meaning. Pliny, however, generally uses "oppida" as equivalent to "muniOppida" is sometimes cipia," but exclusive of colonies: thus, in describing Brixillum, Mutina, etc. the eighth region, he says, "Coloniae Bononia, Claterna, Forum Clodi, etc." (iii. 15. s. 20, et passim). It is important to observe that, in all Oppida Caesena, such passages, the list of "oppida" is certainly meant to include only municipal towns; and the lists and carelessness, were probably in the first instance thus given by Pliny, though disfigured by corruption derived from official sources. agreement which may be traced between them and Hence the marked the lists given in the Liber Coloniarum, which, notwithstanding the corruptions it has suffered, is unquestionably based upon good materials. (Concerning the municipal institutions of Italy, see Savigny, Vermischte Schriften, vol. iii. pp. 279-412, and Gesch. des Röm. Rechts, vol. i.; Marquardt, Handb. d. Röm. Alterthümer, vol. iii. pt i. pp. 44-55; Hoeck, Röm. Geschichte, book 5, chap. 3; and the article GALLIA CISALPINA.) 66 in this sense we find Cicero alluding to " Italia tributim descripta" as a matter of interest to the candidates for public offices. (Q. Cic. de Petit. Cons. 8.) 3. Italy under the Roman Empire.-No material change was introduced into the political condition of Italy by the establishment of the imperial authority at Rome; the constitution and regulations that existed before the end of the Republic continued, with only a few modifications, in full force. The most important of these was the system of municipal organisation, which pervaded every part of the country, and which was directly derived from the days of Italian freedom, when every town had really possessed an independent government. Italy, as it existed under the Romans, may be still regarded as an aggregate of individual communities, though these had lost all pretensions to national independence, and retained only their separate municipal existence. Every municipium had its own internal organisation, presenting very nearly a miniature copy of that of the Roman republic. It had its senate or council, the members of which were called Decuriones, and the council itself Ordo Decurionum, or often simply Ordo; its popular assemblies, which, however, soon fell into disuse under the Empire; and its local magistrates, of whom the principal were the Duumviri, or sometimes Quatuorviri, answering to the Roman consuls and praetors: the Quinquennales, with functions analogous to those of the censors; the Aediles and Quaestors, whose duties nearly corresponded with those of the same magistrates at Rome. These different magistrates were annually elected, at first by the popular assembly, subsequently by the Senate or Decurions: the members of the latter body held their offices for life. Nor was this municipal government confined to the town in which it was resident: every such Municipium possessed a territory or Ager, of which it was as it were the capital, and over which it exercised the same municipal jurisdiction as within its own walls. This district of course varied much in extent, but in many instances comprised a very considerable territory, including many smaller towns and villages, all which were dependent, for municipal purposes, upon the central and chief town. Thus we are told by Pliny, that many of the tribes that inhabited the Alpine valleys bordering on the plains of Gallia Cisalpina, were by the Lex Pompeia assigned to certain neighbouring municipia (Lege Pompeia attributi municipiis, Plin. iii. 20. s. 24), that is to say, they ritorial distribution connected with it, lasted throughThe municipal organisation of Italy, and the terwere included in their territory, and subjected to their jurisdiction. Again, we know that the terri- strong tendency on the part of the central authority out the Roman empire, though there was always a tories of Cremona and Mantua adjoined one another, and its officers to encroach upon the municipal though the cities were at a considerable distance. powers: and in one important point, that of their In like manner, the territory of Beneventum com- legal jurisdiction, those powers were materially cirprised a large part of the land of the Hirpini. It is cumscribed. But the municipal constitution itself this point which gives a great importance to the naturally acquired increased importance as the cendistinction between municipal towns and those which tral power became feeble and disorganised: it surwere not so; that the former were not only them-vived the fall of the Western Empire, and continued selves more important places, but were, in fact, the capitals of districts, into which the whole country was divided. The villages and minor towns included within these districts were distinguished by the terms "fora, conciliabula, vici, castella," and were dependent upon the chief town, though sometimes possessing a subordinate and imperfect local organisation of their own. In some cases it even happened that, from local circumstances, one of these subordiLate places would rise to a condition of wealth and prosperity far surpassing those of the municipium, on which it nevertheless continued dependent. Thus, to subsist under the Gothic and Lombard conquerors, the establishment of Christianity in the Roman em- |