Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-lvwk9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-17T09:40:52.909Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Corythus: the Return of Aeneas in Virgil and His Sources

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2012

Nicholas Horsfall
Nicholas Horsfall
Affiliation:
University College, London
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Italian town of Corythus, which Virgil makes the home of Dardanus and the cradle of the Trojan people (Aen. iii, 170; vii, 209; ix, 10), has long been identified with Cortona, between Arezzo and Chiusi. It is the purpose of this paper to suggest that this identification is false; in reviving an alternative suggestion, which has not been current since the Renaissance, I hope to show too that the vexed question of whether or not the story is a Virgilian innovation admits of a decisive answer. The Aeneid itself provides our earliest evidence; it is remarkable that Virgil's own topographical indications, oblique, but not obscure, should have been so completely ignored by earlier writers on the topic.

From his ancestral throne, King Latinus addresses the Trojan embassy (vii, 195 f.): ‘dicite Dardanidae (neque enim nescimus et urbem et genus, auditique advertitis aequore cursum’. He speaks of Dardanus, ancestor of Aeneas, as ‘his ortus ut agris’ (206): the old story relates that, ‘Corythi Tyrrhena ab sede profectus’ (209), Dardanus made for Samothrace, and then Troy (207 f.). The location of Latinus’ city is indeed left uncertain, but we are clearly to envisage it as standing somewhere between the Tiber mouth and Ardea. That is about 120 miles from Cortona—enough to impose a great strain on his (206). It would be far more satisfactory if we could discover a Tyrrhenian location for Corythus that was easily reconcilable with ‘his … agris’. The fama which Latinus relates is obscurior on account of anni (205) and not because the story has percolated with difficulty through the length of Etruria.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Roman Studies , Volume 63 , November 1973 , pp. 68 - 79
Copyright
Copyright ©Nicholas Horsfall 1973. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 cf. Cluverius, P., Italia Antiqua i (Leyden, 1624), 590 ff.Google Scholar

2 There is some inconsistency between these words and vii, 167 f., ‘nuntius ingentis ignota in veste reportat advenisse viros’ cf. Buchheit, V., Vergil über die Sendung Roms (Gymn. Beiheft iii, 1963), 160Google Scholar, n. 41.

3 cf. Rehm, B., Das geographische Bild des alten Italien in Vergils Aeneis (Phil. Supplbd. xxiv, 2, 1932), 52 ff.Google Scholar

4 It is not significant that Evander omits to hail the return of the native; he is himself an Arcadian and a wanderer, so a mention of Aeneas' Italian ancestry would hardly be appropriate in his mouth. In place of the Aurunci … senes (vii, 206), the authority quoted for Aeneas' strictly orthodox genealogy is ut Grai perhibent (viii, 135); cf. Binder, G., Aeneas und Augustus (Beitr. z. klass. Phil. xxxviii, 1971), p. 58.Google Scholar

5 Though the Tiber was familiar as ‘the Etruscan river’ (cf. n. 8 below; its Etruscan name was Thebris—Varr., L.L. v, 29), the river-god is here given an unmistakably local appearance: Tiberinus was his name in cult at Rome (Liv. ii, 10, 11; Serv. ad Aen. viii, 72; cf. A. Momigliano, Terzo Contributo 615 f., 632 f.; Carcopino, J., Virgile et les Origines d'Ostie 2566 ff.Google Scholar).

6 Dardanus must be the subject of repetit; hinc and huc cannot be separated by a strong mark of punctuation. Serv.'s suggestion that Dardanus is here used for Aeneas is not persuasive; cf. Heyne-Wagner's note here.

7 Aeneas' landing and the annalistic tradition: cf. Fabius Maximus fr. 1 P; Liv. i, 1, 4; D. Hal. i, 53, 3; Buchheit (n. 2) 179; H. Boas, Aeneas' Arrival in Latium (Allard-Pierson Stichting, Arch.-Hist. Bijdr.), 53 ff. Tiber and Virgil: Buchheit, 173 ff.

8 R. G. M. Nisbet and M. E. Hubbard on Hor., Od. i, 20, 4; 26, 1; Lyc., Alex. 805; Ritter, R., De Timaei topographiam veteris urbis Romae pertinentes ii, 27 ff.Google Scholar

9 Extremas must mean not ‘quae plurimum Corytho urbe distant’ but ‘quae plurimum luco Pilumni distant’ (cf. ix, 3 f.); the former interpretation is both linguistically awkward, and, on any identification of Cortona, geographically intolerable.

10 Rut. Nam. i, 60 ‘per Corythi populos’ is not worth much for the interpretation of Virgil. References to the importance of Cortona (Steph. Byz., s.v. Κρότων as a Τυρρηνίας μητρόπολις, cf. D. Hal. i, 20; Liv. ix, 37, 12—Cortona, Perusia, and Arretium as the capita Etruriae in 310 B.C.) are not, on my argument, relevant to the discussion of Cory thus.

11 x, 719 f. ‘venerat antiquis Corythi de finibus Acro Graius homo’ is a lone exception. Acron fits easily in with an identification of Corythus with the Pelasgian city of Cortona, home of Odysseus (D. Hal. i, 20, 4; 26, 1; Lyc., Alex. 805; Ritter, R., De Timaei fabulis per Varronem Vergilio traditis (Diss. Halle 1901), 16 ff.Google Scholar; H. H. Scullard, The Etruscan Cities and Rome 156 ff.). But the name points elsewhere: Acron is familiar as the king of the Caeninenses killed by Romulus (Liv. i, 9, 8, etc.); so like Arruns and Herminius he is a name borrowed by Virgil from Roman legend (cf. Saunders, C., TAPA lxxi (1940), 544Google Scholar). Propertius (iv, 10, 9) calls Acron Herculeus, so clearly the king of the Caeninenses had some Greek associations, and I would suggest that Virgil's Acron draws his Greekness from his name, rather than from his place of origin, cf. Hill, H.JRS li (1961), 90 f.Google Scholar for the abundance of Greeks in Virgil's Italy.

12 In view of the frequency of the appositional genitive (urbs Romae) in the Aeneid (cf. i, 247 with Austin's note; iii, 293 with Williams' note), I rather doubt whether the genitives Corythi Tyrrhena ab sede (vii, 209), extremas Corythi … urbes (ix, 11), and antiquis Corythi de finibus (x, 719) would naturally refer to an ancient king rather than to a place. This interpretation is reinforced by the difficulty involved in making Corythum at iii, 170 refer to a person, not a place; to interpret C. as a place in iii and as a person in vii, ix, and x is to introduce needless complications. It is easy to take the plur. urbes as referring to a single town (cf. vii, 207 f. and 364 of Troy and the use of arces at iii, 553 et saep.), and a single town is clearly envisaged at vii, 209, Sil. iv, 719 f. and v, 123. Even if there had been an ancient king Corythus, his city would probably have borne his name (cf. vii, 1 ff.; 670; xi, 246)! ix, 11 should not be pressed for any precise information on the relations between Corythus and Caere; cf. p. 76 ff.

13 A royal decree of 10 Sept., 1872, imposed the hybrid appellation Corneto Tarquinia.

14 Dennis, G., Cities and Cemeteries of Etruria i 2, 303 f.Google Scholar; Dasti, L., Notizie storiche archeologiche di Tarquinia e Corneto (1878), 73 ff.Google Scholar; Scullard (n. 11), 86 f.

15 Etymologically, Corneto is usually connected with ‘cornel-tree’ (Dasti, l.c.); whether there is much significance in the similarity between Corythus and Corneto is very doubtful; cf. n. 19.

16 i, 290, 28 ff. Romano; cf. C. G. Hardie, JRS. liv (1964), 250; Hortis, A., Studj sulle opere Latine di Boccacio (Trieste 1879), 494 ff.Google Scholar

17 Uhrlichs, L., Bull. Inst. xi (1839), 68.Google Scholar Few scholars have considered the Tarquinia identification seriously: L. Holstenius ap. Dasti (n. 14), 75; Christ, W., S. bay. Ak., phil.-hist. Kl., 1905, 42Google Scholar; Hardie, l.c. (n. 16).

18 At least since Dausqueius' ed. of Sil. It., Paris 1615; cf. Dennis (n. 14) ii, p. 396, n. 1.

19 cf. Rosenberg, A., Rh.M. lxix (1914), 622Google Scholar, who says that the identification is ‘nur wegen des aüsseren Anklanges von Korythus an Cortona’. Even though we might also compare other names of Cortona, notably D. Hal. i, 26 Κορθωνία, the common element of Cor + t/th is hardly adequate evidence to demonstrate identity.

20 D. H. i, 20, 26; inhabited by Umbrians, Pelasgi, Romans. See too Scullard (n. 11) 157 f.

21 From NW. to SE. the geographical sequence is: Cortona (?), Graviscae (? = Porto Clementino), Caere (= Cerveteri), Alsium (= Palo), Fregenae (= Fregene).

22 Strab. v, p. 219, Steph. Byz. s.v. Ταρκυνἰα, Ταρχώνιον, p. 76 ff. infra.

23 Liv. i, 34, etc.; Ogilvie, R. M.A Commentary on Livy i–v, 1965, 141Google Scholar; p. 14 f. infra.

24 Rehm (n. 3), 97 ff. The identity of this source is once again a matter for dispute. Rehm (104) settled for Varro res hum. xi; Reeker (Die Landschaft in der Aeneis, Spudasmata xxvii, 1971, 121 ff.) rejects Rehm's conclusions only in respect of the coastal parts of Virgil's Catalogues, where he argues for a use of Varro's de ora maritima. But Sallmann's meticulous discussion (Die Geographie des älteren Plinius in ihrem Verhältnis zu Varro, Berlin 1971, 224 f., 267, etc.) suggests strongly that the de ora maritima did not contain suitable material for Virgil and Silius.

25 Serv., ad Aen. i, 380; iii, 104; vii, 209; ix, 10; cf. Serv. and Serv. Dan. ad Aen. iii, 170.

26 Which TLL Onom. 655, 52 and most modern writers identify with Cortona-by-Trasimene without a qualm.

27 Plin., HN. iii, 63; Sol. ii, 7; Mart. Cap. vi, 642; Coras—Serv., ad Aen. vii, 672.

28 Aen. vii, 672, ‘Sextius’ ap. Sol. ii, 7; identified with Sueius by Ritter, R., Diss. Hal. xiv. (1901), 330.Google Scholar

29 Aen. vi, 775, O.G.R. 17, 6.

30 Sallmann (n. 24), 149, n. 69.

31 Though Coras is said by Virgil to be of Argive stock, the name may be intended to recall by association Cora and its neighbourhood, passed by in the rest of the Catalogue; cf. Holland, L. A., AJP lvi (1935), 202 ff.Google Scholar

32 Pace Nardi, B., Mantuanitas Vergiliana (1963), 2f.Google Scholar

33 Diod. iv, 33, 11; cf. Apollod., Bibl. iii, 9, 1 and ii, 7, 4 with Frazer's notes; Paus. i, 4, 6 with Frazer's note; viii, 48, 7; 54, 6; Hyg., Fab. xcix; Tz. ad Lyc. 206. See too Schrader, H., JDAI iii (1888), 61 f.Google Scholar

34 Soph. fr. 89 mentions the hind; cf. A.C. Pearson, Fragments of Sophocles i, 46 ff. The exposure story is of a very common type: cf. Binder, G., Die Aussetzung des Königskindes Kyros u. Romulus (1964), 130 ff.Google Scholar

35 Gruppe, O., Gr. Mythologie i (1906), 203.Google Scholar

36 Paus. viii, 45, 4; cf. Dugas, C., etc., Le Sanctuaire d'Aléa Athéna (1924), 77 ff.Google Scholar

37 Brit. Mus. Cat. Gk. Coins, Peloponnesus 202 f.

38 Gruppe (n. 35), 203 ff.; subjected to a minute but often obscure critique by Bayet, J., MEFR xxxviii (1920), 63 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; cf. too, Perret, J., Les Origines de la légende troyenne de Rome (1942), 38 ff.Google Scholar

39 P-W iv, 2168, 55 ff.; FGH 4 F 23, with Jacoby's note.

40 cf. Pallottino, M., L'origine degli Etruschi (1947), 17Google Scholar; Schachermeyr, F., W.St. xlvii (1929), 154 ff.Google Scholar; Etr. Frühgeschichte, (1929), 205 f.

41 cf. Hdt. i, 94; Xanthus Lydus ap. D. Hal. i, 28, 2 = FGH 765 F 16. Scullard, H. H. in Ancient Society and Institutions. Studies presented to Victor Ehrenberg (1966), 225 ff.Google Scholar; Bayet (n. 38) 76 traces the process of Hellenization in detail.

42 Contrast Lyc., Alex. 1351 ff., with von Holzinger, introd. p. 70. Timaeus (FGH 566 F 62 = Tert., Spect. 5) accepted the Herodotean account of Etruscan origins; it would not be easy (pace Geffcken, J., Timaios' Geogr. d. Westens, Phil. Unters. xiii, 1892, 44Google Scholar, n. 1) to trace the Telephusstory back to him; cf. Jacoby n. 324 on FGH 566 F 62; Perret (n. 38), 356 ff.

43 A hind is also associated with the foundation of the city by Capys, Sil. xiii, 115 ff.; cf. Hubaux, J., Rome et Veies (1958), 264 ff.Google Scholar; Alföldi, A., Early Rome and the Latins, (1965), 280Google Scholar; Binder (n. 34), 155 f.; Heurgon, J., Capoue préromaine (1942), 224 f.Google Scholar

44 J. Schmidt in Roscher v, 296, 10 ff., passim; Beazley, J., Etr. Vase-Painting (1947), 54Google Scholar, n. 1; 66.

45 For the evidence, cf. n. 22. In the writers on res Etruscae, A. Caecina and Verrius Flaccus, (T)archon was also connected with the northern dodecapolis of the Etruscans; cf. Schol. Ver. on Aen. x, 200; Ogilvie on Liv. v, 33, 9.

46 Wikén, E., Die Kunde der Hellenen von dem Lande und den Völkern der Appeninenhalbinsel bis 300 v. Chr. (1937), 132.Google Scholar

47 So Schachermeyr op. cit. (n. 40), 207.

48 Scullard (n. 11), 84 ff.; Schachermeyr 208 f.

49 Dardanus is not easily fitted into the pattern of primitive occupations of Cortona (cf. n. 11). Tarquinii, on the other hand, has no long prehistory; cf. Cato, Orig. fr. 43P ‘Cato Originum, qui Pisas tenuerint ante adventum Etruscorum, negat sibi compertum …’.

50 ‘Others’ ap. D. Hal. i, 28, 1; cf. Plut., Rom. 2, 1.

51 Serv. makes Corythus the father of Dardanus, by various genealogical arrangements; cf. E. Thraemer, P-W iv. 2176, 18 ff.; cf. n. 12.

52 In Herodotus, in the mid-thirteenth century B.C.; cf. ii, 145; Rawlinson i.p. 354 ff.; Scullard (n. 41), 226 ff.; Vell. i, 1, 3, at the time of Orestes—i.e. just after the Trojan war. In Lyc., presumably just in time for them to settle and meet Aeneas.

53 In Virg., Lyc.; cf. ‘others’ ap. D. Hal. i, 28, 1.

54 viii, 480; xi, 581; cf. Gagé, J., MEFR, xlvi (1929), 120Google Scholar; Nardi (n. 32), 1.

55 Does this imply that Virgil thought the Etruscans autochthonous (cf. Nardi 4 ff.)? I very much doubt it. Virgil refers to Caere as Pelasgian (viii, 597 f.) and implies that Agylla was a yet earlier foundation on the same site (viii, 478 f.). The usual version in antiquity made Agylla the Pelasgian name and Caere the Tyrrhenian (D. Hal. i, 20, 5, Plin. HN iii, 51, etc.), but Varro, after Hellanicus, etc., regarded Caere as the Pelasgian name, and Pelasgians and Tyrrhenians as identical (Schol. Ver. ad Aen. vii, 652; Serv., ad Aen. x, 183; Serv. Dan., ad Aen. viii, 600; cf. Pallottino (n. 40), 28 ff.; Scullard (n. 41), 229 ff.); and it would appear that Virgil did so too.

56 At xi, 612, a mere name.

57 The change in Horace's attitude to Troy (Od. iii, 3 to iv, 6, 15), is noteworthy (Buchheit, ibid. p. 171, n. 92), but it is an argument for the influence of the Aeneid as a whole, and not for the impact of one story.

58 cf. Binder (n. 4), 18; Montenegro Duque, A., La Onomastica de Virgilio y la Antigüedad preitálica, Salamanca 1949, 271 ff.Google Scholar

59 It is clearly wrong to divide the two halves of 380 by a mark of punctuation (Mynors, Williams). To the convincing arguments of Wagner and Austin, I would add that for Virgil, Aeneas' descent from Jupiter in the male line runs through Dardanus and his Italian ancestry: there is an unbreakable link of sense between genus and ‘Italy, my fatherland’ cf. iii, 129 Cretam proavosque petamus. It asks much of a reader to supply both a pause in sense and construction before et, as well as an est with what follows, when excellent sense can be obtained without either pause or understood copula. Cf. Harrison, E., CR xxii (1972), 303 f.Google Scholar

60 Auruncos is probably used in a vague sense, as an Urvolk of Central Italy; cf. vii, 795; xi, 318; Plin. HN iii, 56; Rehm (n. 3), 64 f.

61 cf. Norden on Aen. vi, 14; Nisbet, R. G. M. and Hubbard, M. E. on Hor., Od. i, 7, 23Google Scholar, with further bibliography.

62 cf. Isyll. 3 f. ὧδε γὰρ φάτις ἐνέπουσ' ἤλυθ' ἐς ἀκοὰς προγόνων ἀμετέρων– of a new and startling Epidauruscentred account of Asclepius' birth: cf. E. J., and Edelstein, L., Asclepius ii (1945), 69 f.Google Scholar On the other hand, cf. Pind., Ol. vii, 54 f.: φαντὶ δ' ἀνθρώπων παλαιαὶ ῥήσιες, where the schol. says πρὸ Πινδάρου δὲ τοῦτο οὐχ ἱστόρητο but rather was preserved in local tradition.

63 cf. Rehm (n. 3), 84 ff.

64 cf. Alföldi (n. 43), 279; Nardi (n. 32), 1 ff.; Gagé (n. 54), 115 ff.; Enking, R., MDAI(R) lxvi (1959), 65 ff.Google Scholar

65 cf. K. Büchner, P-W viii, A 1, 1037, 53 ff.; Westendorp Boerma on Catal. 5, 3 f.

66 The belief that it is is inherited from Serv. (ad Aen. x, 228, etc.), and Macr. (Sat. iii, 9, 16, etc.); the ancient commentators are tireless excavators of Virgilian Religionswissenschaft (cf. Thomas, E., Essai sur Servius (Paris, 1880), 267 ff.Google Scholar), and their uncritical enthusiasm has infected many modern writers (notably H. J. Rose, Aeneas Pontifex. 1948).

67 R. G. M. Nisbet and M. E. Hubbard on Hor. Od. i, 1, 1; Enking (n. 64), 94 ff.; Heurgon, J., La Vie quotidienne des Etrusques (1961), 317 ff.Google Scholar

68 vii, 653; viii, 478 ff.; cf. P. T. Eden, Proc. Verg. Soc. iv (1964–5), 31 ff.; and p. 69 f., supra.

69 But cf. Knauer, G. N., Die Aeneis und Homer, Hypomnemata 7, 1964, 297.Google Scholar

70 viii, 505 f.; x, 153 ff.; Gagé (n. 54), 130 ff.

71 cf. Cato, Orig. frr. 9, 10, with Schroeder's notes (Porcius Cato, M., Das erste Buch der Origines, Beitr. Z. kl. Phil. xli, 1971)Google Scholar, Varr. ap. Plin. HN xiv, 88; Serv. Dan. ad Aen. i, 259, etc. D. Hal.'s position is slightly unusual; he does not connect Mezentius with Caere, but calls him simply ‘king of Tyrrhenia’ (i, 64, 4; 65, 2); cf. Musti, D., Tendenze nella storiografia romana e greca su Roma arcaica, Quaderni Urbinati x, 1970, 31.Google Scholar

72 1239 παλιμπλανήτην δέξεται Τυρσηνία. It would be imprudent to build much on a sense of ‘returning’ for π.; cf. von Holzinger ad loc., Epigr. Gr. 491, 5.

73 S. Josifović, P-W Suppl. xi, 922, 20 ff.; K. Ziegler, P-W xiii, 2350, 13 ff. is perhaps too sceptical about Virgil.

74 Also FGH 560 F 4 (Alcimus): Romulus son of Aeneas and Tyrrhenia; cf. further p. 78 infra, Gagé (n. 54), 115 ff.; Sordi, M., I Rapporti Romano-Ceriti (1960), 10 ff.Google Scholar; Josifović (n. 73), 900, 18 ff. (on Lyc.); Malten, L., ARW xxix (1931), 49Google Scholar; Buchheit (n. 2), 166; Perret (n. 38), 468 f.; Musti (n. 71), 30 f.

75 Gagé (n. 54), 129; Geffcken (n. 42), 44, n. 1; Saunders, C., Vergil's Primitive Italy (1930), 74.Google Scholar

76 According to Hoffmann, it reflects Greek impressions of mid-fourth-century hostility between Rome and Caere, though I doubt whether contacts were quite so sensitive (Rom u. die gr. Welt im 4. Jahrhundert, Phil. Supplbd. xxvii, 1 (1934), 124 ff.).

77 Few will have known that, historically, the family of the Tarquinii was probably connected more closely with Caere than with Tarquinii; cf. Ogilvie (n. 23), 141; Gagé (n. 54), 128 f. A close connection of Tarchon and Caere would have suited and convinced no one!

78 Nardi (n. 32), 9; Buchheit 166.

79 viii, 512; x, 156. As he is also an externus for purposes of marriage with Lavinia (vii, 68, etc.); Amata's claim that Turnus is a foreigner (vii, 367 ff.), on the other hand, is not expected to convince; cf. Buchheit 113.

80 130 ff.; he compares viii, 505 ff. and D. Hal. iii, 59 ff. (the subjection of Etruria by Tarquinius Priscus).

81 Perhaps because it is not a coastal city (Plin., HN iii, 51), perhaps because of the name's hostile associations at Rome; Gagé (n. 54), 122 ff.; Saunders (n. 64), 74 f.

82 Alföldi 279; Bayet (n. 38), 75 ff.; Wikén (n. 46), 180; Perret (n. 38), 468 ff.; Schur, W., Klio xvii (1921), 141Google Scholar; Phillips, E. D., JHS lxxiii (1953), 61Google Scholar; A. Rosenberg, P-W 1 A 1082, 8 ff.; F. Schachermeyr (n. 40), 154 ff.; EF 205 ff.; etc.

83 cf. D. Hal. i, 28, 1, others say that Tyrrhenus son of Telephus came to Italy after the Trojan war; Steph. Byz. s.v. Ταρχώνιον, Tarchon son of Telephus as eponym of Tarquinii.

84 Indeed her action in burning Aeneas' ships betrays definite hostility towards the Trojan settlements in the West; cf. Mommsen, Th., Herm. xvi (1881), 3Google Scholar = Ges. Schr. (Berlin, 1906) iv, 3; Jacoby on FGH 564 F 5 (Callias ap. D. Hal. i, 72, 5); Hoffmann (n. 76), 109 ff.; A. Rosenberg, P-W 1 A, 1077, 56 ff.; Classen, C. J., Hist. xii (1963) 449 ff.Google Scholar; Alföldi, A., Die Trojanischen Urahnen der Römer (1957), 9 ff.Google Scholar

85 F. Jacoby, P-W viii, 144, 1 ff.; Bickermann, E., CPh xlvii (1952), 66 f.Google Scholar: ‘one could write on the subject in an original manner, disentangling the difficulties in most satisfactory fashion, yet without coming into conflict with accepted mythology.’

86 Jacoby, ad loc.; Hoffmann (n. 76), 114; Wikén (n. 46), 180; Classen (n. 84), 447 ff.

87 cf. D. Hal. i, 25, 5 Τυρρηνίας μὲν γὰρ δὴ ὄνομα τὸν χρόνον ἐκεῖνον (i.e. fifth century) ἀνὰ τὴν Ἑλλάδα ἦν, καὶ πάσα ἡ προσεσπέριος Ίταλία τὰς κατὰ τὸ ἔθνος ὀνομασίας ἀφαιπεθεῖσα[καὶ] τὴν ἐπίκλησιν ἐκεἱνην ἐλάμβανεν. This passage tells against West's 500 B.C. as a terminus ante quem for (Hes.) Theog. 1011 ff.; I do not find it easy to credit that Greek writers could have distinguished between Latins and Etruscans by that date. It is pretty clear that the Carthaginians were unable to do so, reckoning Rome in 509 to be yet another prosperous Etruscan trading city; cf. Plb. iii, 22, 6 with Walbank's note.

88 Theog. 1016; cf. Momigliano, A., JRS lvii (1967), 212Google Scholar = Quarto Contributo 490 f., who refers these words to the period of Rome's expansion under the Tarquins and Servius Tullius.

89 cf. Jacoby's commentary on Alcimus fr. 4 (FGH 560). Galinsky, G. K. (Aeneas, Sicily, and Rome, 1969, 105)Google Scholar implies optimistically that Hellanicus was aware of Aeneas' status among the Etruscans.

90 Ogilvie (n. 23), 141; Scullard (n. 12) 86, 100; A. Rosenberg, P-W 1 A, 1082, 28 ff. Von Christ (n. 17) compares Corythus and Corinthus—a name well known at Tarquinii in connection with Demaratus! It will appear from my argument that I do not at all accept Schachermeyr's account of Rome's Telephid origins as coming from an Etruscan source, constituting a claim to primacy and mastery over an enemy city. Rather, I hope to show that the origin of these genealogies is distinctively and datably Greek. Cf. too Jacoby's remark (n. 27 on FGH 569 F 4): es ist schwer vorstellbar wo und wie ‘Tyrsener oder tyrsenerfreundliche Hellenen für die Vorrechte der Etrusker eingetreten' (Wikén (n. 46), 180) sein sollen.’ This being so, it is hard to see how Schachermeyr's ‘old Etruscan story’ could have been transmitted.

91 P. 72 f., the foundation of Cora (though the source of Plin. HN iii, 63 is not necessarily Varro, (n. 30); p. 71 f., the source of Sil.'s Italian Catalogue, more probably Varro (n. 24).

92 Res hum. ii ap. Serv., ad Aen. iii, 148 ‘sane hos deos Dardanum ex Samothracia in Phrygiam, Aeneam vero in Italiam ex Phrygia transtulisse idem Varro testatur' (similarly. Varr, ap. Serv. Dan., ad Aen. i, 378). On iii, 167, Serv. Dan. (supra) adds that Dardanus came originally from Pheneus in Arcadia. cf. Wissowa, G., Herm. xxii (1887), 40 ff.Google Scholar = Ges. Abh. (1904), 107 ff.; S. Weinstock, P-W xix, 453, 37 ff.

93 cf. the startling range of Varronian etymologies of Palatium: LL v, 53; Serv., ad Aen. viii, 51; Lugli, G., Fontes ad topogr. vet. urbis Romae pertin. viii (1962), 9 ff.Google Scholar There must have been another list in res hum. viii, de urbe Roma; cf. Mirsch, P.Leipz. Stud. v (1882), 100 ff.Google Scholar; H. Dahlmann, P-W Suppl. vi, 1231, 39 ff.

94 Poucet, J. in Etudes étrusco-italiques (1963), 173 ff.Google Scholar

95 P-W iv, 2176, 41 ff.

96 cf. Serv. ad Aen. iii, 15 ‘cum omni hereditate maiorum diviserunt etiam deos Penates Dardanus et Iasion fratres, quorum alter Thraciam, alter Phrygiam incoluit occupatam’.

97 Wissowa, Ges. Abh. (n. 92), 113, n. 3.

98 S. Josifović, P-W Suppl. xi, 900, 18 ff.; cf. p. 13.

99 Weinstock, S., PBSR xviii (1950), 44 ff.Google Scholar; Harris, W. V., Rome in Etruria and Umbria (1971), 4 ff.Google Scholar; Heurgon (n. 67), 288 ff.; Enking (n. 64), 94.

I am indebted to Mr. T. J. Cornell, Mr. C. G. Hardie, and Dr. R. M. Ogilvie for much stimulating criticism.