PREFACE.

pearance of an English sentence, and destroys, in some degree, its continuity. Th is remedied in the American edition by throwing all the authorities into foot-notes at the bottom of the page, an arrangement so natural, and, withal, so convenient, that it is surprising it should not have been adopted by the English editor.

Another blemish in the English edition is the plan of appending to each article the initials of the writer's name, which, to say the least of it, gives a very awkward and clumsy appearance to the page. In the American edition a different arrangement is adopted. A full reference is given at the end of the volume to the different articles furnished by the different contributors, and these are so classified that it can be ascertained at a glance what portions have been supplied by each. This, indeed, gives the American a decided advantage over the English edition.

We have remarked above, that the present work is intended to supersede the compilations of Potter and Adams. In order to facilitate this most desirable change, an Index Raisonné has been appended to the volume, in which the whole subject of Greek and Roman Antiquities is classified under appropriate heads, so that, by means of this index, the present work, though having the form of a Dictionary, may be made, with the utmost ease, to answer all the purposes of a College text-book. No conscientious and honest instructer, therefore, can hesitate for an instant between the work which is here presented to him and the ordinary text-books of the day. In the preparation of the indexes, and, indeed, in the arrangement of the entire work, the editor has to acknowledge the valuable aid of his friend, Mr. Henry Drisler, sub-rector of the Grammar-school of Columbia College, to whose accuracy and faithful care the previous volumes of the Classical Series are so largely indebted.

Before concluding the present preface, it may be proper to remark, that in a review of Mure's Tour in Greece, which appeared in the London Quarterly for June, 1842, mention is made of an ancient bridge, discovered by that traveller in Laconia, which the reviewer thinks disproves an assertion made in the present work relative to the arch, namely, that the Romans were undoubtedly the first people who applied the arch to the construction of bridges. The bridge discovered by Mr. Mure, over a tributary of the Eurotas, was regarded by him as a work of the remotest antiquity, probably of the heroic age itself; and he even goes so far as to suppose that either Homer himself or Telemachus may have crossed this bridge in travelling into Laconia! The visionary nature of such speculations must present itself to every mind; and we have preferred, therefore, waiting for farther information on this subject, and allowing the article in the Dictionary to remain unaltered. Mr. Mure's Homeric bridge may be found at last to be as modern a structure as Fourmont's temple of the goddess Oga or Onga, near Amyclæ, supposed to have been built about 1500 B.C., but which Lord Aberdeen proved to be a modern Greek chapel!

Columbia College, February 13, 1843.

PREFACE

TO THE LONDON EDITION.

THE study of Greek and Roman Antiquities has, in common with all other pho ogical studies, made great progress in Europe within the last fifty years. The earlier writers on the subject, whose works are contained in the collections of Gro novius and Grævius, display little historical criticism, and give no comprehensive view or living idea of the public and private life of the ancients. They were contented, for the most part, with merely collecting facts, and arranging them in some systematic form, and seemed not to have felt the want of anything more: they wrote about antiquity as if the people had never existed: they did not attempt to realize to their own minds, or to represent to those of others, the living spirit of Greek and Roman civilization. But, by the labours of modern scholars, life has been breathed into the study: men are no longer satisfied with isolated facts on separate departments of the subject, but endeavour to form some conception of antiquity as an organic whole, and to trace the relation of one part to another.

There is scarcely a single subject included under the general name of Greek and Roman Antiquities which has not received elucidation from the writings of the modern scholars of Germany. The history and political relations of the nations of antiquity have been placed in an entirely different light since the publication of Niebuhr's Roman History, which gave a new impulse to the study, and has been succeeded by the works of Böckh, K. O. Müller, Wachsmuth, K. F. Hermann, and other distinguished scholars. The study of the Roman law, which has been unaccountably neglected in this country, has been prosecuted with extraordinary success by the great jurists of Germany, among whom Savigny stands pre-eminent, and claims our profoundest admiration. The subject of Attic law, though in a scientific point of view one of much less interest and importance than the Roman law, but without a competent knowledge of which it is impossible to understand the Greek orators, has also received much elucidation from the writings of Meier, Schömann, Bunsen, Platner, Hudtwalcker, and others. Nor has the private life of the ancients been neglected. The discovery of Herculaneum and Pompeii has supplied us with important information on the subject, which has also been discussed with ability by several modern writers, among whom W. A. Becker, of Leipzig, deserves to be particularly mentioned. The study of ancient art likewise, to which our scholars have paid little attention, has been diligently cultivated in Germany from the time of Winckelmanr. and Lessing, who founded the modern school of criticism in art, to which we are indebted for so many valuable works.

While, however, so much has been done in every department of the subject, no attempt has hitherto been made, either in Germany or in this country, to make the results of modern researches available for the purposes of instruction, by giving them in a single work, adapted for the use of students. At present, correct information on many matters of antiquity can only be obtained by consulting a large number of costly works, which few students can have access to. It was therefore thought that a work on Greek and Koman Antiquities, which should be founded or a careful examination of the original sources, with such aids as could be derived from the best modern writers, and which should bring up the subject, so to speak, to the present state of philological learning, would form a useful acquisition to all persons engaged in the study of antiquity.

It was supposed that this work might fall into the hands of two different classes of readers, and it was therefore considered proper to provide for the probable wants of each, as far as was possible. It has been intended not only for schools, but also for the use of students at universities, and of other persons, who may wish to obtain more extensive information on the subject than an elementary work can supply Accordingly, numerous references have been given, not only to the classical authors but also to the best modern writers, which will point out the sources of information on each subject, and enable the reader to extend his inquiries farther if he wishes

At the same time, it must be observed, that it has been impossible to give at the of each article the whole of the literature which belongs to it. Such a list of w as a full account of the literature would require would have swelled the work mu beyond the limits of a single volume, and it has therefore only been possible to rel to the principal modern authorities. This has been more particularly the case w such articles as treat of the Roman constitution and law, on which the modern w ters are almost innumerable..

3

A work like the present might have been arranged either in a systematic or an alphabetical form. Each plan has its advantages and disadvantages, but many reasons induced the editor to adopt the latter. Besides the obvious advantage of an alphabetical arrangement in a work of reference like the present, it enabled the editor to avail himself of the assistance of several scholars who had made certain departments of antiquity their particular study. It is quite impossible that a work which comprehends all the subjects included under Greek and Roman Antiquities can be written satisfactorily by any one individual. As it was therefore absolutely necessary to divide the labour, no other arrangement offered so many facilities for the purpose as that which has been adopted; in addition to which, the form of a Dictionary has the additional advantage of enabling the writer to give a complete account of a subject under one head, which cannot so well be done in a systematic work. An example will illustrate what is meant. A history of the patrician and plebeian orders at Rome can only be gained from a systematic work by putting together the statements contained in many different parts of the work, while in a Dictionary a connected view of their history is given, from the earliest to the latest times, under the respective words. The same remark will apply to numerous other subjects.

The initials of each writer's name are given at the end of the articles he has writ ten, and a list of the names of the contributors is prefixed to the work. It may l be proper to state, that the editor is not answerable for every opinion or statement contained in the work he has endeavoured to obtain the best assistance that he could; but he has not thought it proper or necessary to exercise more than a gêneral superintendence, as each writer has attached his name to the articles he has written, and is therefore responsible for them. It may also not be unnecessary to remark, in order to guard against any misconception, that each writer is only responsible for his own articles, and for no other parts of the work.

Some subjects have been included in the present work which have not usually been treated of in works on Greek and Roman Antiquities. These subjects have been inserted on account of the important influence which they exercised upon the public and private life of the ancients. Thus, considerable space has been given to the articles on Painting and Statuary, and also to those on the different departments of the Drama. There may seem to be some inconsistency and apparent capriciousness in the admission and rejection of subjects, but it is very difficult to determine at what point to stop in a work of this kind. A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, if understood in its most extensive signification, would comprehend an account of everything relating to antiquity. In its narrower sense, however, the term is confined to an account of the public and private life of the Greeks and Romans, and it is convenient to adhere to this signification of the word, however arbi trary it may be. For this reason, several articles have been inserted in the work which some persons may regard as out of place, and others have been omitted which have sometimes been improperly included in writings on Greek and Roman Antiquities. Neither the names of persons and divinities, nor those of places, have been inserted in the present work, as the former will be treated of in the "Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology," and the latter in the "Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography."

The subjects of the woodcuts have been chosen by the writers of the articles which they illustrate, and the drawings have been made under their superintendence. Many of these have been taken from originals in the British Museum, and others from the different works which contain representations of works of ancient art, as the Museo Borbonico, Museo Capitolino, Millin's Peintures de Vases Antiques, Tischbein's and D'Hancarville's engravings from Sir William Hamilton's Vases, and other similar works. Hitherto little use has been made in this country of existing Works of art for the purpose of illustrating antiquity. In many cases, however, the representation of an object gives a far better idea of the purposes for which it was intended, and

PREFACE.

way in which it was used, than any explanation in words only can convey. Be es which, some acquaintance with the remains of ancient art is almost essential a proper perception of the spirit of antiquity, and would tend to refine and elevate ne taste, and lead to a just appreciation of works of art in general.

Considerable care has been taken in drawing up the list of articles, but it is feared hat there may still be a few omissions. Some subjects, however, which do not occur in the alphabetical list, are treated of in other articles; and it will be found, by reference to the Index, that many subjects are not omitted which appear to be so. The reader will occasionally find some words referred for explanation to other arti cles, which are not treated, of under the articles to which the references are made. Such instances, however, occur but rarely, and are rectified by the index, where the proper references are given. They have only arisen from the circumstance of its having been found advisable, in the course of the work, to treat of them under different heads from those which were originally intended. Some inconsistency may also be observed in the use of Greek, Latin, and English words for the names of the articles. The Latin language has generally been adopted for the purpose, and the subjects connected with Greek antiquity have been inserted under their Greek names, where no corresponding words existed in Latin. In some cases, however, it has, for various reasons, been found more convenient to insert subjects under their English names, but this has only been done to a limited extent. Any little difficulty which may arise from this circumstance is also remedied by the index, where the subjects are given under their Greek, Latin, and English titles, together with the page where they are treated of. The words have been arranged according to the order of the letters in the Latin alphabet.

Mr. George Long, who has contributed to this work the articles relating to Roman Law, has sent the editor the following remarks, which he wishes to make respecting the articles he has written, and which are accordingly subjoined in his own words: "The writer of the articles marked with the letters G. L. considers some apology necessary in respect of what he has contributed to this work. He has never had the advantage of attending a course of lectures on Roman Law, and he has written these articles in the midst of numerous engagements, which left little time for other labour. The want of proper materials, also, was often felt, and it would have been sufficient to prevent the writer from venturing on such an undertaking, if he had not been able to avail himself of the library of his friend, Mr. William Wright, of Lincoln's Inn. These circumstances will, perhaps, be some excuse for the errors and imperfections which will be apparent enough to those who are competent judges. It is only those who have formed an adequate conception of the extent and variety of the matter of law in general, and of the Roman Law in particular, who can estimate the difficulty of writing on such a subject in England, and they will allow to him who has attempted it a just measure of indulgence. The writer claims such indulgence from those living writers of whose labours he has availed himself, if any of these articles should ever fall in their way. It will be apparent that these articles have been written mainly with the view of illustrating the classical writers; and that a consideration of the persons for whose use they are intended, and the present state of knowledge of the Roman Law in this country, have been sufficient reasons for the omission of many important matters which would have been useless to most readers, and sometimes unintelligible.

แ Though few modern writers have been used, compared with the whole number who might have been used, they are not absolutely few, and many of them, to Englishmen, are new. Many of them, also, are the best, and among the best of the kind. The difficulty of writing these articles was increased by the want of books in the English language; for, though we have many writers on various departments of the Roman Law, of whom two or three have been referred to, they have been seldom used, and with very little profit."

It would be improper to close these remarks without stating the obligations this work is under to Mr. Long It was chiefly through his advice and encouragement that the editor was induced to undertake it, and during its progress he has always been ready to give his counsel whenever it was needed. It is, therefore, as much a matter of duty as it is of pleasure to make this public acknowledgment to him. WILLIAM SMITH.