1 892 FALEBn. agree in descriUng the Falerii ben^^ by Camilliis, as well as the city taken hj the Romans in b. a 241, as a place of great natund strength, a character wholly inapplicable to the site of Faileri, the walls of which are on one side easily exposed to attack, just as the site of the neio dty is described by Zo* naras (evc^iofios, Zonar. /. c). On the other hand, this d^cripticm applies perfectly to Cimta Ccutd- kmaf and there can be little or no doubt that the opinion first put forward by Cluver, and since adopted by many antiquarians, correctly regards that place as the representative of the Etruscan or original Fa- lerii. No other ancient remains are visible there, except a few fragments of the walls; but these are of a more ancient style of constmction than those of Fallerij and thus confirm the view that they are vestiges of the Etruscan city. (For a full discussion of this point, see Nibby, Dmtomi di Roma^ vol. ii. pp. 15---dO; and Dennis, Etrwria, vol. i. pp. 114 — -147.) G«ll and Miiller, the two chief authorities who were misled into placing the Etruscan city at Falleri, were thus led to regard Cwita Caatellaaa as the site of Fescennium, a town of &r inferior im- portance; though the former himself admits that that place would correspond better with the descrip- tions of Falerii. (Gell, Top, of Rome^ pp. 235-— 240; Miiller, £<nwj;0r, vol. i. p. 110.) The site of Civxia CagUllana, indeed, is not only one of gr«at strength, from the rast and deep ra- vines which surround it on almost all sides, but afibrds space for a city of considerabla extent ; and the population and power of the ancient Falerii are attested by the fact that, in its last hopeless struggle against the Soman power, it is said to have lost 15,000 men in the field. (Oros. iv. 11 ; Eutrop. ii. 28.) The existing walls u£ Roman Falerii enclose a much smaller space, being only about 2300 yards in circuit, and could therefore never have belonged to a city of the first chun. (Gell, p. 241.) They are, however, of interest, from their excellent pre- servation, and present one of the best specimens ex- tant of Roman fortification : they are fianked at short intervals by projecting square towers, which are most numerous on the two sides whore they stand completely in the plain, and much fewer on the S. side of the city, where the wall borders on a small ravine, and is protected by the nature of the ground. The gateways, of which several remain in good preservation, are regularly arched, and the masonry of the walls themselves has throughout a character of regularity wholly different firom any of those of ancient Etruscan origin. The territory of Falerii appears to have been in ancient times extensive and fertUe. Ovid, whose wife was a native of the place, speaks of the ** pomi- feri FaUsci,'* and of the rich pastures in which its cattle were fed. (Ovid, Amor. iii. 13. 1.) It was celebrated also for its sausages, which were known as '* ventres Falisci," and were considered to rival those of Lucania. (Varr. L.L,y, 111; Martial, iv. 46. 8.) There is no doubt that Faliscus was only the ethnic form derived from Falerii, and the Falisci usually mean the inhabitants of that city. Those writers, indeed, who speak of the Falisci as a sepa> rate people, ascribe to them the possession of two cities, Falerii and Fescennium (Dion. Hal. i. 21); but the latter appears to have been a place of inferior im* portance, and was probably a mere dependency of Falerii in the days of its power. There is, however, much difficulty in a passage of Strabo (v. p. 226) in FALERNUS. which he speaks of ** Falerii and Falxscnm ** as twa separate towns; and both Solinns and Stephanua ei Byzantium seem to acknowledge the sanne distinctjaa. Little dependence can, indeed, be placed npon the accuracy of these two last authorities; and the F»- liscum of Straho (if it be not roerdy a mSsijikr fiir Fescennium) may probably be the same place whicii he again alludes to shortly after as *^ Asqman Fa^ liscnm** (Alicov/u^oXiiricoy), and describee as a- tuated (HI the Fliuninian Way between Rome and OcricnlL No other author mentions a toum of tibia name, but the ** Aequi Falisci " are mmtianed boUi by Virgil and Silius Italicns. (Virg. Aeu. viL 695 ; Sil. Ital. viii. 491.) Andent oommentatorB i^^pear to have understood the epithet of Aequi as « ntocal one, signifying *'just" (Serv. ocf Jai. Lc); wbila Niebulur supposes it to indicate a national oonnectiaa with the Aequians (voL i. p. 72): but there can be little doubt tiiat in reality it rrferred to the phyacal position of the people, and was equivalent naerely to
- ' Faliscans of the Pliun." It seems, however, im-
possible to understand this, as Miiller baa dooe {Etnuker, vol. i. pr 100), as referring to the site of the new city of Falerii. It is far uore probable tiat the plain on the banks of the Tiber was meant; and this would agree with the statement of Strabo, who places his ** Aequum Faliscum " on the Flaminian Way, where it is natural enough that a large village or borgo may have grown up, during the flofuishiBg ages o£ Rome, within the Faliscan territory, but db- tinct both finom the more ancient and later Falerii, neither of which was situated on the line of that high road. Unfortunately the passage of Stnfao is obviously corrupt, and none of the onendationa pn>- posed are altogether satisfactoiy. (See Kramer, od loc,) The coins ascribed by earlier numismatista to Fa- lerii belong in fact to Ells, the inscription on them, being FAAEIAN, the ancient Doric form with the digamma prefixed. [Elxs.] [£. H. B.3 FALERNUS AGER, a district or territoiy in the northern part of Campania, extending from the Mas- sican hills to the N. bank of the Vultumus. It was celebrated for its fertility, and particnlariy for the excellence of its wine, which b extolled by the Roman writers, especially by Horace, as snrpassing all othen then in repute. (Hon Carm. i. 20. 10, u. 3. 8, ≷ Yirg. G. ii. 94; Sil. Ital. viL 162—165; PiY>pert. iv. 6. 73; Plin. xiv. 6. s. 8; Sbab. v. pp. 234. 243; Athen. i. pp. 26, 27.) It is probable that the distiict in question derived its name originally from a town of the name of Faleria, but no mention of sudi oocxua in history: and it was a part of the domain of Capua until its conquest by the Romans, who, after the great battle at the foot of Mount Vesuvius in b. c. 340, annexed the whole district N. of the Vultumus to the Roman domains, and shwtly after divided the lands thus acquired among the plebeians. (Liv. viii. 11, 12.) In B.C. 295 a colony was founded at Sinuessa, immediatdy adjdning the Falemian district (Liv. X. 21), but it does not appear that the latter was annexed to it: nor do we know to which of the neighbouring dtiee this favoured tract belonged lor municipal purposes. In b. o. 217 the whole district was laid waste by the Carthaginian cavalry under Mafaarbal. (Liv. xxiL 13.) On this oocasi(m Livy distinctly teQs us that the " Falemus ager " which was tlius ravaged extended as far as the Aquae Sinuessanae, and almost up to the gates of Sinuessa itself: shortly afterwards (/6. 15) he speaks of the Falemus ager as separated
