throughout Italy, has, with the usual boldness of a mere theorist, discovered little but their rites among the Sabellians. The inquiries of Niebuhr are confined to the investigation of the geographical limits of these tribes, and the chronology of their progress, so that from him we can hope for no assistance. He speaks, indeed, of "the strictness of their morals, and their cheerful contentedness," and of the long preservation of their ancient virtues. He alludes to the practice among them of divination from the flight of birds, and to their ability to charm serpents, for which the Marsians are noted to the present day, and which might be supposed to have been derived from the East, if it were not to be noticed in other countries.† So far Niebuhr goes, but no further. We are obliged to have recourse to Michelet. We would omit the examination of this topic altogether, were it not that it throws much light upon the peculiarities and manners of the Roman people. While the Hindoos introduced into their mythology the monstrous conception of divinities uniting in themselves the characteristics, the functions and the attributes of both sexes; and the Greeks, by making their gods and goddesses wholly distinct from each other, rendered their Olympus a celestial lupanar, the early races of Italy avoided both errors,-the unnatural grossness of the former, and that impurity of the latter, which excited the indignation of Plato,-by worshipping their deities under a two-fold, but united form. They appear usually in pairs: Saturnus-Ops, Djanns-Djana, Annus-Anna, and, perhaps, Mavors-Menerva and Fors-Fortuna. In process of time, and particularly after the prevalence of an Hellenic influence, one of the two was dropped, or they were separated in imitation of the Greek theology, as in the instance of the Roman Janus, and Diana, of which the one remained peculiarly an Italian god, and the other received the attributes of the Hellenic Artemis. This may account for the fact, that several of these divinities appear under only one name, the other may have been forgotten as soon as the distinction took place. The history of religions, shows that none can be properly termed indigenous in any particular country,-unless we characterize by that term those which have been established by express revelation, as the Mosaic and Christian dispensa* Mrs. Hamilton Gray's Hist. Etruria, vol. 1, c. 16, pp. 369–70. + Niebuhr, Hist. Rome, vol. 1, p. 71. tions, or those which are acknowledged heresies and schisms from these, as in the remarkable instance of Mahometanism. The tendency towards superstition is undoubtedly one of the essential characteristics of human nature; this feeling was directed into the due channel of religious belief, by the direct influence of God upon Adam, and probably Noah: and as we follow back the stream of the various pagan creeds, they all obviously converge towards this common origin. We may therefore assent to Muller's theory, that certain of these divinities were introduced from Etruria; and with Mrs. Hamilton Gray,* refer to the same origin Saturn and Janus, without in the slightest degree conceding that the civilization of the Oscan tribes was derived from the Etruscans. There is, however, but small necessity for the supposition, that the general theology of the earliest races must be referred to that source,-the deification of the powers of nature, and the personification of the seasons and changes of the year, being found every where in ancient paganism, and being capable of being introduced from a hundred other countries besides. To return to our more immediate subject. The Sabellians gave to their heavenly rulers a name, but neither local habitation nor form. The same thing was true of the other tribes of Oscan descent. As late as A. U. C. 170, no statues had been erected to the divinities at Rome. The attributes personified in Saturn belong entirely to the Hellenic era, when he was supposed to be identical with the Greek Cronus. The simple minds of those early inhabitants of Italy were content to worship them as unseen powers. The chief adoration was paid to the one or the other of them, according to the occupations and habits of each tribe respectively. The Sabellians paid especial reverence to Mavors, the god of war, though they also worshipped sedulously Sabus, Saucus, Songus, or Fidius, who was identified at a later period with the Greek Hercules. Saturnus-Ops was the chief deity of the agricultural tribes, whom we may call Opicans for the * History of Etruria, vol. 1, c. 13, pp. 304, 306. But it may be shown from the classics that Janus was Quirinus, and Servius explicitly declares Quirinus to have been Mars,-ad. Virg. Æn. vi., 860. Servius terms Saturn advena,-ad Virg. Æn. xi., 253, but the name is pure Oscan. Mrs. Gray's inference is unwarranted by her references to Tertullian and Diodorus Siculus, who, besides, would have been no authority in these mat ters. sake of distinction. Under these names was honoured the vivifying power of the earth, and its receptive and productive energies, or, in the language which Michelet has borrowed from Spinoza, the natura naturans, and the natura naturata.t Those to whom nature was thus sanctified, naturally regarded with veneration those changes of the seasons, Annus-Anna, which obviously determined the measure and the quality of the earth's productions. To what cause we should refer the worship of Fortune, is uncertain. We would hardly venture to trace her to the Nortia of the Etruscans, as some have done,--for we think it exceedingly doubtful whether we can legitimately connect, in this way, deities in whose names there is neither similarity nor analogy. From whatever source derived, Fortune was sedulously honoured by the Oscans, and may be considered pre-eminently the deity of Rome, whose whole career was mainly attributable to that good Fortune, on whom she constantly and confidently relied. Rome was the child of Fortune. It is worthy of note that Chance, whose influence must seem omnipotent to those not enlightened by revelation, was never fully introduced into the Greek mythology.‡ But the important fact to be noticed, is, that the primitive religion of the Oscans was founded, or, at any rate, cherished and matured, by the pastoral and agricultural habits. And when we find all the tendencies arising from an agricultural life, fully displayed in the best times of Rome, in literature, religion, law, politics and social life, we know to what source to refer them, for the Oscans we hold to be the basis, the true bone and sinew, of the Roman people. The three great elements of which they were composed, were the Oscans, the Pelasgians, the Etruscans. The Pelasgian race appears throughout all the faint traditions we have of them, as an unwarlike and easily subjected race; and the Etruscans certainly were neither, by their habits nor institutions, calculated to be the conquering nation of the earth. We may then safely refer to the Oscan, and more particularly to the Sa * Niebuhr, Hist. Rome, vol. 1, p. 62. + Michelet, Hist Rép. Rom. Introd. c. 4. + Hesiod mentions Tux, but the earliest allusion is in the hymn, ad Cer. of the Homeridæ, if that composition preceded the poems of Hesiod.. as we think. The other allusions in the Greek classics, are rather to fortune as an incident of human life, than to Fortune as a goddess. For the full evidence of their agricultural tastes, habits, and tendencies for we cannot dwell upon them, see Michelet, Hist. Rép. Rom. Int. c. 4. VOL. VII.-NO. 14. 20 bellian leaven in Rome. The federal government and feudal aristocracy of the Etrurians, were ill adapted for conquest; but the secret of their early impotence in war may, perhaps, be found in the single epithet, "obesus Etruscus." * But, before we enter upon the consideration of the Pelasgian and Etruscan races, we must spare a little space for some passing remarks upon the Umbri and Siceli, the Latins, the Ligurians, Liburnians and Venetians. With the population of Magna Græcia we have no concern at present; for whatever be its antiquity, it did not come in contact with Rome until a late period, and any notice of it belongs peculiarly to Greek history. The origin of the Umbrians is hidden in impenetrable obscurity, we can trace no descent for them from any of the other races of Italy. They are represented as the earliest race of Italy, but their primary seat, Reate, is stated to have been previously occupied by the Aborigines. By some authors, ancient and modern, they are supposed to have been Gauls; other modern writers contend that they were Celts. "It is certain, however, that the Umbrians were a great nation, before the time of the Etruscans, in the age of the Sicelians, and that they have a right to the name of a most ancient and genuine people of Italy. Their city, Ameria, was built, according to Cato, 964 years before the war with Perseus, or 381 before Rome." But, "for us, the Umbrians are only the name of a great forgotten people." Their language was different from the Etruscan, though the two nations became intimately connected, though not so closely as Mrs. Gray supposes, for "their indissoluble alliance with the Tuscans, during the whole of their historical existence," of which she speaks, is singularly at variance with their neutrality while Etruria was engaged in her dying struggle with Rome. In their earlier age, before subjected into a servile * Catull. Carm. 39, v. 11-"pinguis Tyrrhenus," i. e., Etruscus, Virgil's Georg. ii., 193. + Mrs. Gray accuses Niebuhr of saying that "the Umbrians are the oldest people in Italy," Hist. Etruria, c. 4, p. 75. We have not seen the passage. She charges him with inconsistency, because they drove out the Siceli, but he says that this took place when they "spread as conquerors." Hist. Rome, vol. 1, pp. 88, 102. Niebuhr, Hist. Rome, vol. 1, p. 88. Note 430, is a direct contradiction of Mrs. Gray's accusation, refuted in the preceding note, for in it he says that the Umbri were called antiquissima gens Italia, merely in contrast with other races, as being of unmixed blood themselves. § Anthon's Class. Dict. Tit. "Umbria." See Mrs. Gray, Hist. Etruria, vol. 1, pp. 79, 76. alliance with the Etruscans, they were a numerous and conquering people.* Before this event, they are said to have possessed three hundred towns,t of which Silius Italicus enumerates Silium, Were, Arna, Mævania, Hispallum, Narnia, Iguvium, Fulginia, Ameria, Camers, Sassina and Tuder. But Silius is an unsafe antiquarian,-the same reliance cannot be placed upon him in this respect as upon Virgil, though he is one of Mrs. Hamilton Gray's principal authorities, her chief one, indeed, after modern authors. "The Umbrian nation consisted," says Niebuhr, "of several races, some of which dwelt in towns, others in rural cantons." We may mention, that Mrs. Hamilton Gray "believes the Umbri to have been of the same origin as the Sikeli," but on what she founds her belief, is not made apparent,-there is neither authority cited nor reason alleged,—it is purely a wild conjecture. The Sicelians, or Siculians, may be found in almost every region and corner of Italy,--the other nations of Italy called all their enemies by this name; and, perhaps, this may account for its universal prevalence, and no doubt frequently for its unjust application. Thus, many races, not of Sicelian blood, may have been spoken of under this name. Niebuhr thinks them to have been Pelasgians. We will not express either assent or dissent, for we have not room to set forth our reasons, and the race is too unimportant in itself to justify such an occupation of our pages at present. They were rude and wholly uncultivated, living apparently a wild and savage life, and they have left behind them only uncertain traditions, numerous though they be. We are disposed to agree for once with Mrs. Gray, and call the Sicelians Oscans, or Aborigines, though this does not alter our position with respect to Niebuhr, for he considers the Pelasgians to have been Aborigines too. It is, perhaps, hopeless to wind our way through the confusion of these tribes. In our despair, we must content ourselves with the conviction, that "no man can mount up to the fountain head of those * Niebuhr, Hist. Rome, vol. 1, p. 88. Mrs. Hamilton Gray, Hist. Etruria, vol. 1, c. 4, p. 76. + Mrs. Hamilton Gray, Hist. Etruria, vol. 1, c. 4, p. 76. + Punic, lib. viii., 448-60. § Hist. Etruria, vol. 1, c. 4, p. 78. They were totally distinct in character and in customs, though there is some analogy between several Umbrian and Latin words. |