ship-building. The latter especially was under the Romans an important source of revenue to the state. (Dionys. xx. Fr. Mai, 5, 6.)
All ancient authors agree in stating that neither the name nor the origin of the Bruttians could claim a very remote antiquity. The country occupied by them was inhabited, in the earliest times of which we have any knowledge, by the Oenotrians — a tribe of Pelasgian origin, of which the Chones and Morgetes appear to have been merely subordinate divisions. [See the respective articles.] It was while the Oenotrians were still roasters of the land that the first Greek settlers arrived; and the beauty of the climate and country, as well as the rapid prosperity attained by these first settlements, proved so attractive that within a few years the shores of Bruttium were completely encircled by a belt of Greek colonies. These were (beginning from the Crathis, and proceeding southwards): 1.Crotona, an Achaean colony, founded in B. C. 710, probably the most ancient, and at one time the most powerful of all: 2.Scyllacium or Scylletium, according to Strabo, an Athenian colony, but of uncertain date: 3.Caulonia, a colony of Crotona: 4.Locri, founded by the people of the same name in Greece: 5.Rhegium, a Chalcidic colony, founded shortly before the first Messenian war: 6.Medma, a colony, and probably a dependency, of Locri: 7.Hipponium, also a colony from Locri: 8.Terina, a colony of Crotona. We have scarcely any knowledge of the exact relations between these Greek cities and the native Oenotrian tribes; but there appears little doubt that the latter were reduced to a state of dependence, and at one time at least of complete subjection. We know that the territories of the Greek cities comprised the whole line of coast, so that those of Crotona and Thurii met at the river Hylias, and those of Locri and Rhegium were separated only by the Halex (Thuc. iii. 99, vii. 35); and when we find both Crotona and Locri founding colonies on the opposite side of the peninsula, there can be little doubt that the intermediate districts also were at least nominally subject to
them.
Such appears to have been the state of things at the time of the Peloponnesian war; but in the course of the following century a great change took place. The Sabellian tribe of the Lucanians, who had been gradually extending their conquests towards the south, and had already made themselves roasters of the northern parts of Oenotria, now pressed forwards into the Bruttian peninsula, and established their dominion over the interior of that country, reducing its previous inhabitants to a state of vassalage or serfdom. This probably took place after their great victory over the Thurians, near Laos, in B.C. 390; and little more than 30 years elapsed between this event and the rise of the people, properly called Bruttians. These are represented by ancient authors as merely a congregation of revolted slaves and other fugitives, who had taken refuge in the wild mountain regions of the peninsula: it seems probable that a considerable portion of them were the native Oenotrian or Pelasgic inhabitants, who gladly embraced the opportunity to throw off the foreign yoke. (Niebuhr, vol. i. p. 98.) But Justin distinctly describes them as headed by youths of Lucanian race; and there appears sufficient evidence of their dose connexion with the Lucanians to warrant the assumption that these formed an important ingredient in their national composition. The name
BRUTTII.
of Bruttii (Βρεττιοι) was given them, it seems, not by the Greeks, but by the Lucanians, and signified in their language fugitive slaves or rebels (δραπέται, άποστάται). But though used at first as a term of reproach, it was subsequently adopted by the Bruttians themselves, who, when they had risen to the rank of a powerful nation, pretended to derive it from a hero named Bruttus (Βρεττος), the son of Hercules and Valentia. (Diod. xvi. 15; Strab. vi. p. 255; Justin xxiii. 1; Steph. Byz. s. v.Βρεττος.) Justin, on the other hand, represents them as deriving their name from a woman of the name of Bruttia, who figured in their first revolt, and who, in later versions of the legend, assumes the dignity of a queen. (Justin. l. c.; Jornand. de Reb. Get. 30; P. Diac. Hist. ii. 17.)
The rise of the Bruttian people from this fortuitous aggregation of rebels and fugitives is assigned by Diodorus to the year 356, B.C.; and this accords with the statement of Strabo that they arose at the period of the expedition of Dion against the younger Dionysius. The wars of the latter, as well as of his father, with the Greek cities in southern Italy, and the state of confusion and weakness to which these were reduced in consequence, probably contributed in a great degree to pave the way for the rise of the Bruttian power. The name must indeed have been much more ancient if we could trust to the accuracy of Diodorus, who, in another passage (xii. 22), speaks of the Bruttians as having expelled the remainder of the Sybarites, who had settled on the river Traens after the destruction of their own city. But it is probable that this is a mere inaccuracy of expression, and that he only means to designate the inhabitants of the country, who were afterwards called Bruttians.* The progress of the latter, after their first appearance in history, was rapid. Composed originally, as we are told, of mere troops of outlaws and banditti, they soon became numerous and powerful enough to defy the arms of the Lucanians, and not only maintained their independence in the mountain districts of the interior, but attacked and made themselves masters of the Greek cities of Hipponium, Terina, and Thurii. (Diod, xvi. 15; Strab. vi. p. 255.) Their independence seems to have been readily acknowledged by the Lucanians; and less than 30
years after their first revolt, we find the two nations uniting their arms as allies against their Greek neighbours. The latter applied for assistance to Alexander, king of Epirus, who crossed over into Italy with an army, and carried on the war for several successive campaigns, during which he reduced
Heraclea, Consentia, and Terina; but finally perished in a battle against the combined forces of the Lucanians and Bruttians, near Pandosia, B.C. 326. (Liv. viii. 24; Justin, xii. 2, xxiii. 1; Strab. v. p. 256.) They next had to contend against the arms of Agathocles, who ravaged their coasts with his fleets, took the city of Hipponium, which he converted into a strong fortress and naval station, and
Stephanus of Byzantium, indeed, cites Antiochns of Syracuse, as using the name of Brettia for this part of Italy, but this seems to be clearly a mistake. (Comp. Dionys. i. 12.) It is more remarkable that, according to the same authority, the name of Brettian as an adjective (μελαίνη γλώσσα Βρεττία) was used by Aristophanes, at least 30 years before the date assigned for the rise of the nation.
