« السابقةمتابعة »
"Tenuisque censu civitas Polygiuin est, Turn Mansa vicus oppidumque Naustalo." There is nothing to say about a place for whose site there is no sufficient evidence. Menard supposed it to be Bouriguet on the Etang it Tau. The name seems to be Greek, and the place may be one of the Massaliot settlements ou this coast [nau8TAU>]. [G. L.]
POLYME'DIUM (UoKvfdfiior, Strab. xiii. pp. 606, 616; Polymedia, Plin. 7. 30. s. 32), a small place iu Mysia, between the promontory Lectum and Assus, and at the distance of 40 stadia from the former.
POLYRRHE'NIA(n0Ai#5)i<(a,Ptol.ui. 17.§ 10; TloKtffnir, no\vpnv, Steph. B. ». v., corrected by Meineke into nokvffyrprta; HoWipfava, Scylax, p. 18, corrected by Gail; noAu^noK, Zenob. Prov. v. 50; Polyrrhenium, Plin. iv. 12. s. 20: Eth. Uo\u^vias, Polyb. iv. 53, 55; Strab. x. p. 479), a town in the NW. of Crete, whose territory occupied the whole western extremity of the island, extending from N. to S. (Scylax, p. 18.) Strabo describes it as lying W. of Cydonia, at the distance of 30 stadia from the sea, and 60 from Phalasarna, and as containing a temple of Dictynna. He adds that the Polyrrhenians formerly dwelt in villages, and that they were collected into one place by the Achaeans and Lacedaemonians, who built a strong city looking towards the south. (Strab. x. p. 479.) In the civil wars in Crete in the time of the Achaean League, B.C. 219, the Polyrrhenians, who had been subject allies of Cnossus, deserted the latter, and assisted tlie Lyctians against that city. They also sent auxiliary troops to the assistance of the Achaeans, because the Gnossians had supported the Aetolians. (Polyb. iv. 53, 55.) The ruins of Polyrrhcnia, called Palaeokattro, near KUamo-Kattili, exhibit the remains of the ancient walls, from 10 to 18 feet high. (Pashley, Crete, vol. ii. p. 46, seq.)
POLYTIME'TUS. [oxia Palus.]
POME'TIA. [sukssa Pombtia.]
POMPE'II (noiunfla, Strab.; Ilo/iinjioi, Dion Cass.: Eth. Houirntavos, Pompeianus: Pompeii), an ancient city of Campania, situated on the coast of the beautiful gulf called the Crater or Bay of Naplet, at the mouth of the river Sarnua (Aarno), and immediately at the foot of Mount Vesuvius. It was intermediate between Herculaueum and Stabiae. (Strab. v. p. 247; Pliny, iii. 5. s. 9; Mela, ii. 4. § 9.) All accounts agree in representing it as a very ancient city: a tradition recorded by Solinns (2. § 5) ascribed its-foundation to Hercules; but Dionysius, who expressly notices him as the founder of Herculaneum, says nothing of Pompeii (Dionys. i. 44). Strabo says it was first occupied by the Oscans, subsequently by the Tyrrhenians (Etruscans) and Pelasgians, and afterwards by the Samnites (Strab. I. c). It continued in the liands of these last, that is, of the branch of the nation who had assumed the name of Campanians [campasia], till it passed under the government of Kome. It is probable that it became from an early period a flourishing town, owing to its advantageous situation at the mouth of the Saruns, which rendered it the port of Nola, Nuceria, and all the rich plain watered by that river. (Strab. I. c.) But we meet with no mention of its name in history previous to the Roman conquest of Campania. In B.O.810 it is mentioned for the firnt time, when a Roman fleet under P. Cornelius touched there, and the troops on board proceeded from thence to ravage the territory of Nuceria. (Liv. ix. 38.) No sub
sequent notice of it occurs till the outbreak of the Social War (b. c. 91), in which it appears to have taken a prominent part, as the Pompeiani are mentioned by Appian apart from the other Campanians, in enumerating the nations that joined in the insurrection. (Appian, B. C. i. 39.) In the second year of the war (b. C. 89) Pompeii was still in the hands of the insurgents, and it was not till after repeated engagements that L. Sulla, having defeated the Samnite forces under L. Cluentins, and forced them to take refuge within the walls of Nola, was able to form the Biege of Pompeii. (Appian, ib. 50; Oros. v. 18; Veil. Pat. ii. 16.) The result of this is nowhere mentioned. It is certain that the town ultimately fell into tho bauds of Sulla; but whether by force or a capitulation we are not informed ; the latter is, however, the most probable, as it escaped the fate of Stabiae, and its inhabitants were admitted to the Roman franchise, though they lost a part of their territory, in which a military colony was established by the dictator, under the guidance and patronage of his relation, P. Sulla. (Cic. pro Sull. 21; Zumpt, de Colon, pp. 254,468.) Before the close of the Republic, Pompeii became, in common with so many other maritime towns of Campania, a favourite resort of the Roman nobles, many of whom had villas in its immediate neighbourhood. Among others, Cicero had a villa there, which he frequently mentions under the name of "Pompeianum," and which appears to have been a considerable establishment, and one of his favourite residences. (Cic Acad. ii. 3, ad AtU i. 20, ad Fam. vii. 3, xii. 20.) Under the Empire it continued to be resorted to for the same purposes. Seneca praises the pleasantness of its situation, and we learn both from him and Tacitus that it was a populous and flourishing town ("celebre oppidum," Tac. Ann. xv. 22; Sen. Nat. Qu. vi. 1). In addition to the colony which it received (as already mentioned) under Sulla, and which is alluded to in an inscription as " Colonist Veneria Cornelia" (Mommsen, Inter. Jt. N. 2201), it seems to have received a colony at some later period, probably under Augustus (though it is nut termed a colony by Pliny), as it bears that title in several inscriptions (Mommsen, I. c. 2230—2234).
In the reign of Nero (a. D. 59) a tumult took place in the amphitheatre of Pompeii, arising out of a dispute between the citizens and the newly-settled colonists of Nuceria, which ended in a conflict in which many persons were killed and wounded. The Pompeians were punished for this outbreak by the prohibition of all gladiatorial and theatrical exhibitions for ten years. (Tac. Ann. xiv. 17.) Only four years after, the city suffered severely from an earthquake, which took place on the 5th of February, A. D. 63. The expressions both of Seneca and Tacitus would lead us to suppose that it was in great part utterly destroyed; and we learn from existing evidence that the damage done was unquestionably very great, the public buildings especially having suffered most severely. (Sen. Nat. Qu. vi. 1; Tac. Ann. xv. 22.) The city had hardly recovered from this calamity, when it met with one far greater; being totally overwhelmed by the famous eruption of Vesuvius in A. D. 79, which buried Pompeii, as well as Herculaneum, under a dense bed of ashes and cinders. The loss of life in the former city was the greater, because the inhabitants were assembled in the theatre at the time when the catastrophe took place. (Dion Cass. lxvi. 23.) The younger Pliny, in his celebrated letters describing the eruption (JSp. vi. 16,2 J), does not even notice the destruction of Pompeii or Her. culaneum; bat his Attention is directed principally to the circumstances of his uncle's death and the phenomena which he had himself witnessed.
From this time the name of Pompeii disappears from history. It is not noticed by Ptolemy; and it is certain that the city was never rebuilt. But the name is again found in the Tabula; and it thus appears that a small place must have again arisen on the she, or, more probably, in the neighbourhood, of the buried city.. But all trace of Pompeii was subsequently lost; and in the middle ages its very site was entirely forgotten, so that even the learned and diligent Cluverius was unable to fix it with certainty, and was led to place it at Scafuti on the Sarno, about 2 miles £. of its true position. This difficulty arose, in great measure, from the great physical changes produced by the catastrophe of A. D. 79, which diverted the course of the Sarno, so that it now flows at some distance from Pompeii,—and at the same time pushed forward the line of the coast, Bo that the city is now above a mile distant from the sea, which in ancient times undoubtedly bathed its walls.
There is no reason to suppose that Pompeii in ancient times ever rose above the rank of a secondrate provincial town; but the re-discovery of its buried remains in the last century has given a celebrity to its name exceeding that of the greatest cities. The circumstances of its destruction were peculiarly favourable to the preservation of its remains. It was not overthrown by a torrent of lava, but simply buried by a vast accumulation of volcanic sand, ashes, and cinders (called by the Italians lapilU), which forms a mass of a very light, dry, and porous character. At the same time, it is almost certain that the present accumulation of this volcanic deposit (which is in most places 15 feet in depth) did not take place at once, but was formed by successive eruptions; and there is little doubt that the ruins a searched and the most valuable objects removed
soon after the catastrophe took place. This seems to be proved by the small number of objects of intrinsic value (such as gold and silver plate) that have been discovered, as well as by the fact that comparatively few skeletons have been found, though it appears certain, from the expressions of Dion Cassius, that great numbers of the inhabitants perished; nor have any of these been found in the theatre, where it is probable that the greatest loss of life occurred.
It was not till 1748 that an accidental discovery drew attention to the remains of Pompeii; and in 1755 regular excavations on the site were first commenced by the Neapolitan government, which have been carried on ever since, though with frequent intervals and interruptions. It is impossible for us here even to attempt to give any account of the results of these excavations and the endless variety ol interesting remains that have been brought to light We shall confine ourselves to those points which bear more immediately on the topography and character of the town of Pompeii, rather than on the general habits, life, and manners of ancient times. More detailed accounts of the remains, and the numerous objects which have been discovered in the course of the ex ■ cavations, especially the works of art, will be found in the great work of Mazois (La Ruines de Pompeii, continued by Gau, 4 vols, fol., Paris, 1812—1838), and in the two works of Sir W. Gell (Pompeiana, 1st series, 2 vols. 8vo. Lond. 1824; 2nd series, 2 vols. 8vo. 1830); also in the little work published by the Society of Useful Knowledge (Pompeii, 2 vols. 12mo. 1831). A recent French publication by Breton (Pompeia, 8vo. Paris, 1855), also gives a good account of the whole progress and results of the discoveries (including the most recent excavations) in a moderate compass and inexpensive form. The still more recent work of Overbeck (8vo. Leipzic, 1856), of which the first part only has yet appeared, contains an excellent compendium of the whole sub
ject, with especial attention to the works of art discovered.
The area occupied by the ancient city was an irregular oval, about 2 miles in circumference. It was surrounded by a wall, which is still preserved round the whole of the city, except on the side towards the sea, where no traces of it have been found, and it seems certain that it had been pulled down in ancient times to allow for the extension of houses and other buildings down to the water's edge. The wall itself is in many places much ruined, as well as the towers that flank it, and though this may be in part owing to the earthquake of 63, as well as the eruption of 79, it ia probable that the defences of the town had before that time
been allowed to fall into decay, and perhaps even intentionally dismantled after the Social War. There were seven gates, the most considerable and ornamental of which was that which formed the entrance to the city by the high road from Herculaneum: the others have been called respectively the gate of Vesuvius, the gate of Capua, the gate ot Nola, the gate of tbe Sarnus, the gate of Stabiae, and the gate of the Theatres. The entrances to the town from the side of the sea had ceased to be gates, there being no longer any walls on that side. All these names are of course modem, but are convenient in assisting us to describe the city. The walls were strengthened with an Agger or rampart, faced with masonry, and having a parapet or outer
trail on its extornal front: they were further fortified at intervals with square towers, which in some parts occur regularly at about 100 yards from each other, in other parts are added much more sparingly. These towers seem to have been subsequent additions to the original walls, being of a different and less solid style of construction. The walls themselves are very solidly built of large blocks cf travertine, in horizontal courses, but presenting considerable irregularities of construction: the upper part is more regularly finished, and consists of pt~ perino. But both walls and towers are in many places patched with coarser masonry and reticulated work; thus showing that they had been frequently repaired, and at distant intervals of time.
The general plan of the city is very regular, and the greater part of the streets run in straight lines: but the principal line of street, which runs from the gate of Herculaneum to the Forum, is an exception, being irregular and crooked as well as very narrow. Though it must undoubtedly have been one of the chief thoroughfares of the city, and the line followed by the high road from Capua, Neapolis, and Borne itself, it does not exceed 12 or 14 feet in width, including the raised trottoirs or footpaths on each side, so that the carriageway could only have admitted the passage of one vehicle at a time. Some of the other streets are broader; but few of them exceed 20 feet in width, and the widest yet found is only about 30. They are uniformly paved with large polygonal blocks of bard lava or basalt, in the same manner as were the streets of ancient Rome, and the Via Appia, and other great highways in this part of Italy. The principal street, already noticed, was crossed, a little before it reached the Forum, by a long straight line of street which, passing by the temple of Fortune, led direct to the gate of Kola. In the angle formed by the two stood the public baths or Thermae, and between these and the temple of Fortune a short broad street led direct to the Forum, of which it seems to have formed the principal entrance. From the Forum two other parallel streets struck off in an easterly direction, which have been followed till they cross another main line of street that leads from the gate of Vesuvius directly across the city to the gate adjoining the theatres. This last line crosses the street already noticed, leading from the gate of Nola westward, and the two divide the whole city into four quarters, though of irregular size. Great part of the city (especially the SE. quarter) has not yet been explored, but recent excavations, by following the line of these main streets, have clearly shown its general plan, and the regularity with which the minor streets branched off at intervals in parallel lines. There is also little doubt that the part of the city already excavated is the most important, as it includes the Forum, with the public buildings adjoining to it, the theatres, amphitheatre, &c
The Forum was situated in the SW. quarter of the city, and was distant about 400 yards from the gate of Herculaneum. As was commonly the case in ancient times, it was surrounded by the principal public buildings, and was evidently the centre of the life and movement of the city. The extent of it was not, however, great; the actual open space (exclusive of the porticoes which surrounded it) did not exceed 160 yards in length by 35 in breadth, and a part of this space was occupied by the temple of Jupiter. It was surrounded on three sides by a Grecian-Doric portico or colonnade, which appears
to have been surmounted by a gallery or upper story, though no part of this is now preserved. It would seem that this portico had replaced an older arcade on the eastern side of the Forum, a portion of which still remains, so that this alteration was not yet completed when the catastrophe took place. At the north end of the Forum, and projecting out into the open area, are the remains of an edifice which must have been much the most magnificent of any in the city. It is commonly known, with at least a plausible foundation, as the temple of Jupiter; others dispute its being a temple at all, and have called it the Senaculum, or place of meeting of the local senate. It was raised on & podium or base of considerable elevation, and had a portico of six Corinthian columns in front, which, according to Sir W. Gell, are nearly as large as those in the portico of St. Paul's. From the state in which it was found it seems certain that this edifice (in common with most of the public buildings at Pompeii) had been overthrown by the earthquake of 63, or, at least, so much damaged that it was necessary to restore, and in great part rebuild it, and that this process was still incomplete at the time of its final destruction. At the NE. angle of the Forum, adjoining the temple of Jupiter, stood an arch which appears to have been of a triumphal character, though now deprived of all its ornaments: it was the principal entrance to the Forum, and the only one by which it was accessible to carriages of any description. On the E. side of the Forum were four edifices, all unquestionably of a public character, though we are much in doubt as to their objects and destination. The first (towards the N.) is generally known as the Pantheon, from its having contained an altar in the centre, with twelve pedestals placed in a circle round it, which are supposed to have supported statues of the twelve chief gods. But no traces have been found of these, and the general plan and arrangement of the building are wholly unlike those of an ordinary temple. A more plausible conjecture is, that it was consecrated to Augustus, and contained a small temple or aedicula in honour of that emperor, while the court and surrounding edifices were appropriated to the service of his priests, the Augustales, who are mentioned in many inscriptions as existing at Pompeii. Next to this building is one which is commonly regarded as the Curia or Senaculum; it had a portico of fluted columns of white marble, which ranged with those of the general portico that surrounded the Forum. South of this again is a building which was certainly a temple, though it is impossible now to say to what divinity it was consecrated; it is commonly called the Temple of Mercury, and is of small size and very irregular form. Between this and the street known as the Street of the Silversmiths, which issued from the Forum near its SE. angle, was a large building which, as we learn from an inscription still existing, was erected by a female priestess named Eumachia. It consists of a large and spacious area (about 130 feet by 63) surrounded by a colonnade, and having a raised platform at the end with a semicircular recess similar to that usually found in a Basilica. But though in this case the founder of the edifice is known, its purpose is still completely obscure. It is commonly called the Chalcidicum, but it is probable that that term (which is found in the inscription above noticed) designates only a part of the edifice, not the whole building.