supposed knowledge subsides within a very small compass. One conclusion indeed is confirmed by the Etruscan monuments, which we also derive from the old writers, namely, that the Etruscan language was much more strongly distinguished from the Hellenic and the Latin than was either the Oscan or Umbrian. The Romans often term the Tuscans "barbari," an epithet bestowed on people whose language was entirely foreign to their own, and which is never found to have been ascribed to the Sabines or Oscans, or the kindred nations to the southward of the Tiber. The Tuscan language was apparently much more remote in its general character from the idiom of Latium than was that of the Umbrians or of the Opici. It is well known that while in Latin the consonants consist chiefly of the middle class of mutes and of tenues, or of hard and soft but not aspirated letters, the Etruscan alphabet had no middle or soft consonants, and abounded in aspirates. This cannot be supposed to have arisen merely from the want of orthographical signs. The Etruscans might have borrowed soft mutes as well as the others from the Greeks or Phoenicians. They likewise wanted the vowel o, and expressed 'Añоwν by Apulu. Unlike the Latin and Greek, this language accumulated consonants, and produced words such as a Roman mouth could scarcely articulate. The omission of short vowels seems to have arisen from the attempt to throw the accent powerfully on the initial syllables and to shorten words in pronunciation, as in Elchsentre, which in the Etruscan represents 'Aλɛžavòpos, in Menle for Menelaus, and Hercle for Heracles. For Minerva they wrote either Minerfe or, the vowel of the second syllable being neglected, Menrfa. For Metellus, first contracted to Meteli, we find Methlnal, and for Marcanius, Marcani, Marcnial. On comparing the Perusian monument, which is the greatest specimen of genuine Tuscan writing extant, with the Eugubian tables, an entire difference in the whole system of orthography and pronunciation becomes strikingly manifest.*

*This inscription was discovered in the year 1822, and published by Vermiglioli in his "Saggio di congetture sulla grande Inscrizione Etrusca, Perugia 1824.” The broad side of the stone pillar contains twelve lines, which are read by the editor as follows:-" Eulat tanna larexul | amefachr lautn felthinas e | st la aphunas slel eth caru | texan phusleri terns teis | rasnes ipa ama hen napr | xij fel

This habit of abbreviating rendered the Etruscan pronunciation hostile, as Müller observes, to grammatical flexions, and seems to have made great havoc among the varieties of ending and other modifications of Greek and Latin words. The Greek names Peleus and Tydeus became contracted to Pele and Tute. Scarcely a trace is to be found of the Latin and Greek termination of masculine nouns in os or us. The native Tuscan names end in vowels, as Lecne, Cfelne, Felche, Canxna, Thurmna, Marcani, Pherini, Rapli, Petru, Precu, Rexu; or with consonants, as in the prænames Larth, Aonth. Here indeed it may be argued, from a passage in the grammarian Agretius, that the Etruscan had originally an s, but gradually elided it in pronunciation, as we know that the Romans sometimes put u for us. Feminine nouns, however, end in a, as it appears from the names of the goddesses Thalna, Menerfa, Lasa on the pateræ, and from the female prænames Thana, Larthia, Phastia, Feilia in lists of the dead, a circumstance however that indicates no near relation to the Greek and Latin, since in Gothic and Frankish, and even Hebrew, feminine names often have the same ending. Forms such as Larthia and Phastia are indeed not so frequent as the abbreviated Larthe and Phasti. The Tuscans had, however, a genitive formed like the Greek. Marcha and Lentia made Marchas and Lentias, and words ending in a consonant added us in the genitive: thus Arnthial and Tanchfil made Arnthialus and Tanchfilus. Even a dative in si may be made out with probable evidence. That m marked the accusative and c the ablative, is merely a conjecture. The mi found at the beginning of inscriptions may be shown with probability to stand for μ, marking an affinity with the Greek conjugations in μ, which, however, cannot be traced further. The initial syllables which denoted family relations, al indicating descent, and sa the relation of marriage, are scarcely explicable from the thina thuras aras pe | ras cemulmlescul xuci en | esci epi tularu | aulesi felthinas arxnal cl | ensi thii thils cuna cenu | plc phelic larthals aphunes | clen thunchulthe phalas chiem phusle felthina ¦ hintha cape municlet masu | naper sranxl thii phlasti f | elthina hut naper penexs | masa acnina clel aphuna fel | thinam lerxinia intimamer cnl felthina xias atene | tesne eca felthina thuras th | aura helu tesne rasne cei tesus teis rasnes chimths pel thutas cuna aphunam ena j hen naper ciclnl harcutuse." (Müller's Etrusker, Einl. lib. xvi. s. 61.)

classical languages. Of particular Etruscan words which correspond in their derivation with Greek and Latin words there are very few, as "aifil," for "ævum," air; "lusna," luna, σɛλývŋ; itus, connected with the root in dividere. On the other hand, the short and strongly-sounding word ril, representing year, as inscriptions clearly prove, arse verse, according to Festus, "averte ignem," falandum for "cœlum," mantisa for "additamentum," subulo for "tibicen," appoi, according to Strabo, meaning ape, indicate a totally foreign derivation.*

A much wider field for the comparison of the Etruscan language with the Greek and Latin would be obtained if we were at liberty to follow the example of Lanzi and other Italians, and to take for granted that every Tuscan word or syllable that can be detected similar in form to words either in Greek or Latin, had a parallel signification; but apart from all that is merely conjectural, there is nothing more evident than that data are wanting for coming to any satisfactory conclusion as to the relations of the Tuscan and the other languages of Italy and of Southern Europe. The grammatical flexions which are known may be considered as indicating a remote affinity to the Greek; but all that can be inferred as tolerably well-established respecting the Etruscan dialect is, that it belonged to the class of Indo-European languages.+

The Etruscans were always termed by the Greeks Tyrrheni or Tyrseni. This same name, as it is well known, belonged also to a people celebrated for their wandering and predatory habits on the shores of the Hellespont and the Ægean sea, who appear to have been a branch of the great Pelasgian nation. They are called Pelasgi Tyrseni, or simply Tyrseni. It appears improbable that the same name should have properly belonged to two different races, and yet the ancient historical traditions do not identify the Etruscans, called by the Greeks Tyrseni, with the Pelasgi of Greece. We find an almost uniform statement that Pelasgic colonies from Greece settled in Umbria and built many towns, from which they were afterwards expelled by a people of different race. The latter are

* O. Müller's Etrusker, Finl. s. 64.

† Such is the conclusion of one of the most accurate and profound philologers of the age, Dr. Lepsius.

said to have come from Lydia, and are often called Lydi, as well as Tyrseni. Thus Pliny, speaking of Umbria, says: "Umbros inde exegêre antiquitus Pelasgi; hos Lydi." It has been a general opinion among modern writers that the latter people, the so-termed Lydian or Etruscan Tyrseni, from whatever quarter they originated, were a distinct race from the Pelasgi who had preceded them, and who had previously made conquests in Umbria, of which they were afterwards dispossessed by the true Etruscans or Tyrseni.

The Romans always term the Etruscan Tyrseni, "Etrusci" or "Tusci." This seems to be an abbreviation of Tursci or Turski. In three of the Eugubian tables the Tusci appear to be mentioned, and in two parallel passages the word Turske occurs, for which in a third stands Tusce. Turski is not remote from Tyrseni, and it is very probable, as Niebuhr has observed, that both ki and eni are mere terminations, the one Italian, the other Greek. If the fact be so, Tyrseni and Turski are only modifications of the same name, both being appropriated to a nation who had no real affinity, or but a very distant one, to the Tyrseni of the Hellespont or of Thrace. Now if it be inquired how the same appellation came to be ascribed to two races so distinct, the following appears to be the most probable answer. The Umbrians gave, as we find from the Eugubian tables, the name of Tyrski, or perhaps Tyrsi, to the invading Tuscan race, who dispossessed them of a part of their country. The Greeks obtaining their ancient accounts of this people from the Umbrians, modified the pronunciation of their name, and assimilated it to one with which they were already familiar, and made of it Tyrseni, while the Romans dropped the r and pronounced it Tusci.* Neither appellation was, however, recognised by the people themselves; they termed themselves, as we learn from Dionysius, Rasena or Rasenna.

If the Pelasgi were really, as it is asserted, the predecessors of the Etruscans, they were probably overcome by the latter at an early period, since we find no account of any independent

They retained ther in the other Latin name of the same people. Etrusci, namely, Truski is nearer to Turski. It is evident that Tyrs-ki, Tyrs-eni, E-trus-ki, and Tuski, are all but slight modifications of one name, which is Tyrs. From this Tарk-vvia is not very remote.

Pelasgic cities at the era of the subjugation of Etruria by the Romans. The cities said to be founded by the Pelasgi were mostly near the coast, but some of them in the interior; and the story that these towns were built by a different people from the Etruscans who afterwards possessed them, derives some confirmation from the fact, of which we are assured by Dionysius, that they bore afterwards double names. The conquests of the Etruscans were, however, chiefly made upon the Umbrians.

The Etruscans possessed twelve confederated cities in Tuscany on the Lower or Tyrrhene sea, and as many in the Northern or Circumpadane territory, termed by Servius Nova Etruria.* There was also a third Etruria, according to Strabo, containing twelve cities, among which were Capua and Nola. So powerful were the Etruscans at the period when their nation was most extensively spread, that all Italy, from the Alps to the Sicilian straits, has been said to have been subject to their government.

Paragraph 1.-Extent of the three Etrurias.

I. Lower Etruria.

Niebuhr has found some difficulty in determining precisely which were the twelve Etrurian cities in Tuscany or Lower Etruria. He observes that Livy has mentioned but eight in a place where a full enumeration would have been expected; these are Cære, which from the Pelasgi had the name of Agylla, Tarquinii, Populonia, Volaterræ, Aretium, Perusia, Clusium, Rusellæ, Veii, and Volsinii, which must have been included among the towns that had been destroyed. The two still wanting cannot be fixed upon with certainty: Capena, Cosa, and Fæsulæ may appear to have a claim.

The Tiber seems to have been in general the boundary of the Lower Etruria towards the south; but this limit was passed in some notable instances, and it appears that the Tuscan confederacy at different periods held a predominant sway over

* Servius ad Georgic. ii. v. 533. "Constat Tuscos usque ad mare Siculum omnia possedisse."— Notizia," says Lanzi, "che attinse da Catone." (Lanzi, Saggio, iii. 582.)