rising colony of Thurii at an early period of its existence (Polyaen. ii. 10); but it was not till after 400 B. C. that their power assumed a formidable aspect towards the Greeks in general. The territory of Thurii was the first object of their hostilities, but the other cities were not insensible to their danger; and hence the general league of the Italian Greeks in B. C. 393, as already mentioned, was directed as much against the Lucanians as against Dionysius. Unfortunately, their arms met with equal ill success in both quarters and in B. C. 390 the confederate forces were defeated by the Lucanians with great slaughter near Laüs. (Diod. xiv. 101, 102; Strab. vi. p. 253.) That city had already fallen into the hands of the invaders, who now pressed on towards the south, and seem to have spread themselves with great rapidity throughout the whole of the Bruttian peninsula. Here they became so formidable that the younger Dionysius was compelled to abandon the policy of his father (who had courted the alliance of the Lucanians, and even rendered them active assistance), and turn his arins against them, though with little effect. A period of great confusion and disorder appears to have ensued, and the rise of the Bruttian people, which took place at this period (B. c. 356), though it in some measure broke the power of the Lucanians, was so far from giving any relief to the Greek cities that they soon found the Bruttians still more formidable neighbours. The flourishing cities of Terina and Hipponium were conquered by the barbarians (Diod. xvi. 15; Strab. vi. p. 256): Rhegium and Locri, though they maintained their nationality, suffered almost as severely from the oppressions and exactions of the younger Dionysius; while Crotona, long the most powerful city in this part of Italy, seems never to have recovered from the blow inflicted on it by the elder despot of that name [CROTONA], and was with difficulty able to defend itself from the repeated attacks of the Bruttians. (Diod. xix. 3, 10.)

Meanwhile, the Lucanians had turned their arms against the more northerly cities on the Tarentine gulf. Here the Thurians seem, as before, to have borne the brunt of the attack; but at length Tarentum itself, which had hitherto stood aloof, and had apparently not even joined in the league of B.C. 393, was compelled to take up arms in its own defence. The Tarentines could have suffered comparatively but little from the causes which had so severely impaired the prosperity of the other cities of Magna Graecia; and Tarentum was undoubtedly at this time the most opulent and powerful of the Greek cities in Italy. But its citizens were already enervated by indolence and luxury; and when they found themselves threatened by the forces of the Lucanians, combined with their old enemies the Messapians, they mistrusted their own resources, and applied to their parent city of Sparta for assistance. Archidamus, king of Sparta, accepted the invitation, and proceeded to Italy with a considerable force, where he appears to have carried on the war for some years, but was finally defeated and slain in a battle near Manduria, B. c. 338. (Diod. xvi. 63, 88.) Only a few years afterwards, B. C. 332, Alexander king of Epirus was invited over to Italy for the same purpose. The history of his expedition is, unfortunately, very imper.ectly known to us; though it is clear that his military operations were attended with much success, and must have exercised considerable influence upon the fortunes of

the Greek cities. Though invited, in the first instance, by the Tarentines, he subsequently quarrelled with that people, and even turned his arms against them, and took Heraclea, their colony and dependency. At the same time he defeated the combined forces of the Lucanians and Bruttians in several successive battles, retook Terina, Consentia, and several other towns, and penetrated into the heart of Bruttium, where he was slain by a Lucanian exile, who was serving in his own army, B. c. 326. (Liv. viii. 17, 24; Justin, xii. 2.)

After his death, the wars between the Tarentines and Lucanians appear to have continued with little intermission; though we have no further account of them till the year 303 B. C., when the former people again sued to Sparta for assistance, and Cleonymus, the uncle of the Spartan king, repaired to Tarentum with a large mercenary force. So formidable did this armament appear that both the Messapians and Lucanians were speedily induced to sue for peace; while Metapontum, which, for some reason or other, had opposed the views of Cleonymus, was reduced by force of arins. (Diod. xx. 104.) The Spartan prince, however, soon alienated all his allies by his luxury and rapacity, and quitted Italy the object of universal contempt.

We have very little information as to the wars of Agathocles in Bruttium; though we learn that he made himself master of Hipponium and Crotona, and occupied the latter city with a garrison. It is evident, therefore, that his designs were directed as much against the Greek cities as their barbarian neighbours; and the alliance which he concluded at the same time with the Iapygians and Peucetians could only have been with a view to the humiliation of Tarentum. (Diod. xxi. 2, 8.) His ambitious designs in this quarter were interrupted by his death, B. C. 289.

Only a few years later than this took place the celebrated expedition of Pyrrhus to Italy (B. c. 281 -274), which marks a conspicuous era in the history of Magna Graecia. Shortly before that event, the Thurians, finding themselves hard pressed and their city itself besieged by the Lucanians, had concluded an alliance with the Romans, who raised the siege and defeated the assailants, B. c. 282. (Appian, Samn. 7; Val. Max. i. 8. § 6.) This was the first occasion that brought the Roman power down to the shores of the Tarentine gulf; and here they almost immediately after came into collision with the Tarentines themselves. [TARENTUM.] That people, conscious of their inability to resist the power of these new enemies, now invoked the assistance of Pyrrhus, king of Epirus, at the same time that they concluded a league with the Lucanians and Samnites, so long the inveterate enemies of Rome. Hence, when Pyrrhus landed in Italy, he found himself supported at the same time by all the remaining Greek cities in that country, as well as by the barbarian nations with whom they had been so long at war. It is unnecessary to enter into a detailed account of his campaigns: notwithstanding his first successes, his alliance proved of no real advantage to the Greeks, while his visit to Sicily in B. C. 278, and his final departure in B.C. 274, left them at the mercy of the victorious Romans. Tarentum itself was taken by the consuls in B. C. 272. Crotona and Locri had previously fallen into the hands of the Romans; while Rhegium, which was held by a revolted body of Campanian troops, originally placed there as a garrison, was finally reduced to subjection in B. c. 271

But the final blow to the prosperity of Magna Graecia was inflicted by the Second Punic War. It is probable that the Greek cities were viewed with unfavourable eyes by the Roman government, and were naturally desirous to recover their lost independence. Hence they eagerly seized the opportunity afforded by the victories of Hannibal, and after the battle of Cannae we are told that almost all the Greek cities on the S. coast of Italy (Graecorum omnis ferme ora, Liv. xxii. 61) declared in favour of the Carthaginian cause. Some of these were, however, overawed by Roman garrisons, which restrained them from open defection. Tarentum itself (still apparently the most powerful city in this part of Italy) was among the number; and though the city itself was betrayed into the hands of the Carthaginian commander, the citadel was still retained by a Roman garrison, which maintained its footing until the city was recovered by Fabius, B. c. 209. (Liv. xxv. 8—11, xxvii. 15, 16.) Tarentum was on this occasion treated like a captured city, and plundered without mercy, while the citizens were either put to the sword or sold as slaves. Metapontum was only saved from a similar fate by the removal of its inhabitants and their property, when Hannibal was compelled to abandon the town; and at a later period of the war Terina was utterly destroyed by the Carthaginian general. (Liv. xxvii. 51; Strab. vi. 256.) Locri and Crotona were taken and retaken: Rhegium alone, which maintained its fidelity to Rome inviolate, though several times attempted by a Carthaginian force, seems to have in great measure escaped the ravages of the war.

It is certain that the cities of Magna Graecia never recovered from this long series of calamities. We have very little information as to their condition under the government of the Roman Republic, or the particular regulations to which they were subjected. But it is probable that, until after the complete subjugation of Greece and Macedonia, they were looked upon with a jealous eye as the natural allies of their kinsmen beyond the seas (Liv. xxxi. 7); and even the colonies, whether of Roman or Latin citizens, which were settled on the coasts of Southern Italy, were probably designed rather to keep down the previous inhabitants than to recruit the exhausted population. One of these colonies, that to Posidonia, now known as Paestum, had been established at a period as early as B. C. 273 (Liv.

was also settled before the Second Punic War, B. C. 244. (Vell. Pat. l. c.; Liv. Epit. xix.) But, with these exceptions, all the Roman colonies to the coasts of Lucania, Bruttium, and Calabria, date from the period subsequent to that war. Of these, Buxentum in Lucania and Tempsa in Bruttium were settled as early as B. C. 194; and in the same year a body of Roman colonists was established in the once mighty Crotona. (Liv. xxxiv. 47.) Shortly afterwards two other colonies were settled, one at Thurii in Lucania, in B. c. 193, and the other at Hipponium or Vibo, in Bruttium, B. C. 192. (Liv. xxxiv. 53, xxxv. 9, 40.) The last of these, which under the name of Vibo Valentia became a flourishing and important town, was the only one of these colonies which appears to have risen to any considerable prosperity. At a much later period (B. C. 123), the two colonies sent to Scylacium and Tarentum, under the names of Colonia Minervia and Neptunia (Vell. Pat. i. 15), were probably designed as an attempt to recruit the sinking population of those places.

But all attempts to check the rapid decline of this part of Italy were obviously unsuccessful. It is probable, or indeed almost certain, that malaria began to make itself severely felt as soon as the population diminished. This is noticed by Strabo in the case of Posidonia (v. p. 251); and the same thing must have occurred along the shores of the Tarentine gulf. Indeed, Strabo himself tells us, that, of the cities of Magna Graecia which had been so famous in ancient times, the only ones that retained any traces of their Greek civilisation in his day were Rhegium, Tarentum, and Neapolis (vi. p. 253); while the great Achaean cities on the Tarentine gulf had almost entirely disappeared. (lb. p. 262.) The expressions of Cicero are not less forcible, that Magna Graecia, which had been so flourishing in the days of Pythagoras, and abounded in great and opulent cities, was in his time sunk into utter ruin (nunc quidem deleta est, Cic. de Amic. 4, Tusc. iv. 1). Several of the towns which still existed in the days of Cicero, as Metapontum, Heraclea, and Locri, gradually fell into utter insignificance, and totally disappeared, while Tarentum, Crotona, and a few others maintained a sickly and feeble existence through the middle ages down to the present time.

It has been already observed, that the name of Magna Graecia was never a territorial designation; nor did the cities which composed it ever constitute a political unity. In the earliest times, indeed, the difference of their origin and race must have effectually prevented the formation of any such union among them as a whole. But even the Achaean cities appear to have formed no political league or union among themselves, until after the troubles growing out of the expulsion of the Pythagoreans, on which occasion they are said to have applied to the Achaeans in Greece for their arbitration, and to have founded by their advice a temple of Zeus Homorius, where they were to hold councils to deliberate upon their common affairs and interests. (Pol. ii. 39.)

A more comprehensive league was formed in B. C. 393, for mutual protection against the attacks of Dionysius on one side, and the Lucanians on the other (Diod. xiv. 91); and the cities which composed it must have had some kind of general council or place of meeting. It is probable that it was on this occasion that the general meetings of the Italian Greeks, alluded to by Strabo (vi. p. 280),

that the Tarentine colony of Heraclea was selected in the first instance for the place of assembly, as the Tarentines seem at first to have kept aloof from the contest, and it is very doubtful whether they were included in the league at all. But it was natural that, when the Tarentines assumed the leading position among the allied cities, the councils should be transferred to their colony of Heraclea, just as Alexander of Epirus afterwards sought to transfer them from thence to the river Acalandrus in the Thurian territory, as a mark of enmity towards the Tarentines. (Strab. I. c.) [E. H. B.]

COIN OF MAGNESIA AD MAEANDRUM.

2. A town of Lydia, usually with the addition pòs or und Zinúλ (ad Sipylum), to distinguish it from Magnesia on the Maeander in Ionia, situated on the north-western slope of Mount Sipylus, on the southern bank of the river Hermus. We are not informed when or by whom the town was founded, but it may have been a settlement of the Magnesians in the east of Thessaly. Magnesia is most celebrated in history for the victory gained under its walls by the two Scipios in B. C. 190, over Antiochus the Great, whereby the king was for ever driven from Western Asia. (Strab. xiii. p. 622; Plin. ii. 93; Ptol. v. 2. § 16, viii. 17. § 16; Scylax, p. 37. Liv. xxxvii. 37, foll.; Tac. Ann. ii. 47.) The town, after the victory of the Scipios, surrendered to the Romans. (Appian, Syr. 35.) During the war against Mithridates the Magnesians defended themselves bravely against the king. (Paus. i. 20. § 3.) In the reign of Tiberius, the town was nearly destroyed by an earthquake, in which several other Asiatic cities perished; and the emperor on that occasion granted liberal sums from the treasury to repair the loss sustained by the inhabitants (Strab. xii. p. 579; xiii. p. 622; Tac. l. c.) From coins and other sources, we learn that Magnesia continued to flourish down to the fifth century (Hierocl. p. 660); and it is often mentioned by the Byzantine writers. During the Turkish rule, it once was the residence of the Sultan; but at present it is much reduced, though it preserves its ancient name in the corrupt form of Manissa. The ruins of ancient buildings are not very considerable. (Chandler, Travels in Asia, ii. p. 332; Keppel, Travels, ii. p. 295.) The accompanying coin is remarkable by having on its obverse the head of Cicero, though the reason why it appears here, is unknown. The legend, which is incorrectly figured, should be, MAPKO TTAAIO KIKEPON. [L.S.]

MAGNATA. [NAGNATAE.] MAGNE'SIA, MAGNETES. [THESSALIA.] MAGNESIA (Μαγνησία: Eth. Μάγνης.) 1. A city in Ionia, generally with the addition pоs οι ἐπὶ Μαιάνδρῳ (ad Maeandrum), to distinguish it from the Lydian Magnesia, was a considerable city, situated on the slope of mount Thorax, on the banks of the small river Lethaeus, a tributary of the Maeander. Its distance from Miletus was 120 stadia or 15 miles. (Strab. xiv. pp. 636, 647; Plin. v. 31.) It was an Aeolian city, said to have been founded by Magnesians from Europe, in the east of Thessaly, who were joined by some Cretans. It soon attained great power and prosperity, so as to be able to cope even with Ephesus (Callinus, ap. Strab. xiv. p. 647.) At a later time, however, the city was taken and destroyed by the Cimmerians; perhaps about B. c. 726. In the year following the deserted site was occupied, and the place rebuilt by the Milesians,or, according to Athenaeus (xii. p. 525), by the Ephesians. Themistocles during his exile took up his residence at Magnesia, the town having been assigned to him by Artaxerxes to supply him with bread. (Nepos, Themist. 10; Diod. xi. 57.) The Persian satraps of Lydia also occasionally resided in the place. (Herod. i. 161, iii. 122.) The territory of Magnesia was extremely fertile, and produced excellent wine, figs, and cucumbers (Athen. i. p. 29, ii. p. 59, iii. p. 78.) The town contained a temple of Dindymene, the mother of the gods; and the wife of Themistocles, or, according to others, his daughter, was priestess of that divinity; but, says Strabo (p. 647), the temple no longer exists, the town having been transferred to another place. The new town which the geographer saw, was most remarkable for its temple of Artemis Leucophryene, which in size and in the number of its treasures was indeed surpassed by the temple of Ephesus, but in beauty and the harmony of its parts was superior to all the temples in Asia Minor. The change in the site of the town alluded to by Strabo, is not noticed by any other author. The temple, as we learn from Vitruvius (vii. Praefat.), was built by the architect Hermogenes, in the Ionic style. In the time of the Romans, Magnesia was added to the kingdom of Pergamus, after Antiochus had been driven eastward beyond Mount Taurus. (Liv. xxxvii. 45, xxxviii. 13.) After this time the town seems to have decayed, and is rarely mentioned, though it is still noticed by Pliny (v. 31) and Tacitus (Ann. iv. 55). Hierocles (p. 659) ranks it among the bishoprics of Asia, and later documents seem to imply that at one time it bore the name of Maeandropolis. (Concil. Constantin. iii. p. 666.) The existence of the town in the time of the emperors Aurelius and Gallienus is attested by coins.

Formerly the site of Magnesia was identified with the modern Guzel-hissar; but it is now generally admitted, that Inek-bazar, where ruins of the temple

decay at an early period, as it is not mentioned by any late writer. Appian (Mithrid. 78, 115) speaks of it under both names, Eupatoria and Magnopolis, and Strabo in one passage (xii. p. 560) speaks of it under the name of Megalopolis. Ruins of the place are said to exist some miles to the west of Sonnisa, at a place called Boghaz Hissan Kaleh. (Hamilton, Researches, i. p. 340.) [L. S.] MAGNUM PROMONTORIUM (rd μéyа ȧкрwThptov, Ptol. vii. 2. § 7; Marcian, Peripl. p. 28), a promontory which forms the southern termination of the Chersonesus Aurea, in India extra Gangem, on the western side of the Sinus Magnus. Its modern name is C. Romania. Some have supposed that the Prom. Magn. represents another cape, either considerably to the NW., now called C. Patani. Ptolemy's account of these far Eastern places is so doubtful, that it is impossible to feel sure of the evidence for or against the position of any place in the Aurea Chersonesus. [V.]

MAGNUM PROMONTORIUM, a promontory on the west coast of Lusitania (Mela, iii. 1. § 6), probably the same which Strabo (iii. p. 151) and Ptolemy ii. 5. § 1) call rd Варbáρiov áкрov, near the mouth of the Tagus. The passage in Strabo is corrupt; but according to the correction of Coray, approved of by Groskurd, the promontory was 210 stadia from the mouth of the Tagus, which makes it correspond with C. Espichel. Pliny also calls it Magnum or Olisiponense, from the town in its vicinity; but he strangely confounds it with the Prom. Artabrum, on the NW. of the peninsula (iv. 21. s. 35).

MAGNUM PROM. MAURETANIAE. [MAURETANIA]

MAGNUS PORTUS. 1. (Пóρтоs μáyvos, Ptol. ii. 4. §7; comp. Marcian. p. 41), a port-town of Hispania Baetica, between the town Abdara and the Prom. Charidemi.

2. (Méyas λμhy, Ptol. ii. 6. § 4), a bay on the coast of the Gallaeci Lucenses, which is evidently the same as the Artabrorum Sinus. [Vol. I. p. 226, b.] 3. (Méyas λiphy, Ptol. ii. 3. §§ 4, 33), a harbour in Britain, opposite the island of Vectis, corresponds to Portsmouth.

4. (Пóρтos Máуvos, Ptol. iv. 2. § 2; Mela, i. 5; Plin. v. 2; It. Anton. p. 13), a port-town of Mauretania Caesariensis, on the road between Gilva and Quiza, described by Pliny as "civium Romanorum oppidum." It is identified by Forbiger with Oran, of which the harbour is still called Mars-el-Kibir, i. e., the great Harbour.

5. (Meyós λuhy, Ptol. iv. 6. § 6), a port on the west coast of Libya Interior, between the mouth of the river Daradus and the promontory Ryssadium.

MAGNUS SINUS (¿ μéyas kóλños, Ptol. vii. 2. §§ 3, 5; Agathem. i. p. 53), the great gulf which runs up to the middle of the present kingdom of Ava, and is known by the name of the Gulf of Siam. The ancient geographers correctly placed China on the east of this gulf, though they had no very accurate notions relative to its latitude or longitude. On the west side was the Aurea Chersonesus. [V.]

MAGO. [BALEARES, p. 374, a.] MAGON (8 Mayŵv, Arrian, Ind. c. 4), a river mentioned by Arrian as flowing into the Ganges on its left bank. It has been conjectured that it is the same as the present Ramguna. [V.]

MAGONTIACUM. [MOGANTIACUM.] MAGORAS, a river of Syria, under mount Li

tween Sidon and Berytus, and probably identical with the Tamyras of Strabo (xvi. p. 756), now Nahr-ed-Damur; though Dr. Robinson suggests the Nahr-Beirût. (Bib. Res. vol. iii. pp. 433, 439.) [TAMYRAS.] [G. W.]

MAGORUM SINUS (Mayŵv кóλжOs), a bay on the Arabian coast of the Persian Gulf, in the country of the Themi, who joined the Gerraei on the north. (Ptol. vi. 7. § 54.) It is still marked by the modern town of Magas, and the ancient name is accounted for by Mr. Forster by the fact that "the ancient Themi are the Magian tribe of Beni-Temin, in all ages of Arabian history inhabitants of the gulf and city of Magas,—a deep bay, with its chief town of the same name, immediately above the bay of Katiff." (Geogr. of Arabia, vol. ii. p. 215.) He maintains that the Magi of S. Matthew (ii. 1) were of this tribe, and from this country (vol. i. pp. 304-307). [THEMI.] [G. W.]

MAGRADA, a small river on the N. coast of Hispania Tarraconensis, now Uresmea. (Mela, iii. 1. § 10.)

MAGYDUS (Máyudos: Eth. Mayudeus; called Máondos by Scylax, p. 39), a town of Pamphylia, on the coast between Attaleia and Perge, and subsequently of episcopal rank, is probably the MYGDALE (Mʊydáλn), of the Stadiasmus. There are numerous imperial coins of Magydus, bearing the epigraph MATTAENN. Leake identities it with Laara. (Ptol. v. 5. § 2; Hierocl. p. 679; Stadiasm. §§ 201, 202; Leake, Asia Minor, p. 194 ; Cramer, Asia Minor, vol. ii. p. 278.)

MAHANAIM (Mavatu, LXX.), a place, and afterwards a town, on the east side of the Jordan, so named from the incident related in Genesis (xxxii. 2), where the word is translated, both by the LXX. and Josephus, Пapeμsoλaí, and also by the latter Oεоû σтраτÓжEdov (Ant. i. 20. §1). The following notices of its position occur in the Old Testament: It was north of the brook Jabbok (Gen. l. c., comp. v. 22), in the borders of Bashan (Josh. xiii. 30), afterwards in the tribe of Gad (xxi. 38), but on the confines of the half-tribe of Manasseh (xiii. 29) assigned to the Levites. (1 Chron. vi. 80.) It was the seat of Ishbosheth's kingdom, during the time that David reigned in Hebron (2 Sam. ii.), and there he was assassinated (iv.). When David fled from Absalom, he was maintained at Mahanaim by Barzillai, the aged sheikh of that district (2 Sam. xvii. 27, xix. 32); and it was apparently in the vicinity of this city that the decisive battle was fought in the wood of Ephraim between the royal troops and the rebels (xviii). A ruined site is mentioned in the Jebel 'Ajlun, under the name of Mahneh, which probably marks the position of Mahanaim. (Robinson, Bib. Res. vol. iii. Appendix, p. 166.) [G.W.]

MAIS, a station in Britain, so called upon an engraved bronze cup found at Rudge, in Wiltshire. From this name occurring with those of four other stations, all on the line of the Great Wall, it is supposed to be identical with Magna, or Magnis. [C. R. S.]

MAIS (Mats), a river of India intra Gangem, flowing into the Sinus Barygazenus, now the Mahi. (Nearch. p. 24; Arrian, Periplus Maris Erythraei.)

MAKKEDAH (Maкndά, LXX., Euseb.; Maxxidá, Joseph.), a city of the Canaanites in the south part of the tribe of Judah (Josh. xv. 41), governed by a sheikh. It was the first city taken by Joshua after the battle in Gibeon; and there it was that the five