LATIUM. Home which led to the abolition of the kingly power, or from some other cause, we know not. The Latin cities became wholly independent of Kome ; and though the war which was marked by the great battle at the lake Eegillus has been dressed up in the legendary history with so much of fiction as to render it difficult to attach any historical value to the traditions connected with it, there is no reason to doubt the fact that the Latins had at this time shaken off the supremacy of Rome, and that a war between the two powers was the result. Not long after this, in B. c. 493, a treaty was concluded with them by Sp. Cassius, which determined their relations with Home for a long period of time. (Liv. ji. 33; Dio- nys. vi. 96; Cic. pro Balb. 23.) By the treaty thus concluded the Romans and Latins entered into an alliance as equal and inde- ])endent states, both for offence and defence: all booty or conquered territory was to be shared be- tween them; and there is much reason to believe that the supreme command of the allied armies was to be held in alternate years by the Koman and Latin generals. (Dionys. I. c; Nieb. vol. ii. p. 40.) The Latin cities, which at this time composed the league or confederacy, were thirty in number : a list of them is given by Dionysius in another passage (v. 61), but which, in all probability, was derived from the treaty in question (Niebuhr, vol. ii. p. 23). They were : — Ardea, Aricia, Bovillae, Bubentum, Corniculum, CaiTentum, Circeii, Corioli, Corbio, Cora, Fortinei (?), Gabii, Laurentum, Lavinium, Lanuvium, Labicum, Nomentum, Norba, Praeneste, Pedum, Querquetulum, Satricum, Scaptia, Setia, Tellenae, Tibur, Tusculum, Toleria, Tricrinum (?), Velitrae. The number thirty appears to have been a recognised and established one, not dependent upon accidental changes and fluctuations: the cities which composed the old league under the supremacy of Alba are also represented as thirty in number (Dionys. iii. 34), and the " populi Albenses," which formed the smaller and closer union under the same head, were, according to Pliny's list, just thirty. It is therefore quite in accordance with the usages of ancient nations that the league when formed anew should consist as before of thirty cities, though these could not have been the same as previously composed it. The object of this alliance between Rome and Latium was no doubt to oppose a barrier to the rapidly advancing power of the Aequians and Vol- scians. With the same view the Hemicans were soon after admitted to participate in it (b. c. 486); and from this time for more than a century the Latins continued to be the faithful allies- of Kome, and shared alike in her victories and reverses during her long and arduous struggle with their warlike neighbours. (Liv. vi. 2.) A shock was given to these friendly relations by the Gaulish War and the capture of Rome in B.C. 390: the calamity which then befel the city appears to have incited some of her nearest neighboui's and most faithful allies to take up arms against her. (Varr. L.L.y'i. 18; Liv. vi. 2.) The Latins and Hernicans are repre- sented as not only refusing their contingent to the Roman armies, but supporting and assisting the Volscians against them; and though they still avoided as long as possible an open breach with Rome, it seems evident that the former close alliance between them was virtually at an end. (Liv. vi. 6, 7, 10, 11, 17.) But it would appear that the bond of union of the Latin League itself was, by this time, LATIURL 139 very much weakened. The more powerful cities are found acting with a degree of independence to which there is no parallel in earlier times: thus, iu B. c. 383, the Lanuvians formed an alliance with the Volscians, and Praeneste declared itself hostile to Rome, while Tusculum, Gabii, and Labicum con- tinued on friendly terms with the republic. {Id. vi. 21.) In B. c. 380 the Romans were at open war with the Praenestines, and in b. c. 360 with the Tiburtines, but in neither instance do the other cities of Latium appear to have joined in the war. (^Id. vi. 27— 29, vii. 10—12, 18, 19.) The repeated invasions of the Gauls, whose armies traversed the Latin territory year after year, tended to increase the confusion and disorder: nevertheless the Latin League, though much disorganised, was never broken up; and the cities composing it still con- tinued to hold their meetings at the Lucus P'eren- tinae, to deliberate on their common interests and policy, (/d vii. 25.) In b. c. 358 the league with Rome appears to have been renewed upon the same terms as before; and in that year the Latins, for the first time after a long intei-val, sent their contingent to the Roman armies. (Liv. vii. 12.) At length, in b. c. 340, the Latins, who had adhered faithfully to their alliance during the First Samnite War, appear to have been roused to a sense of the increasing power of Rome, and became conscious that, under the shadow of an equal alliance, they were gradually passing into a state of depen- dence and servitude. {Id. viii. 4.) Hence, after a vain appeal to Rome for the establishment of a more equitable arrangement, the Latins, as well as the Volscians, took part with the Campanians in the war of that year, and shared in theii* menwrable defeat at the foot of Mount Vesuvius. Even on this occasion, however, the councils of the Latins were divided: the Laurentes at least, and pi-obably the Lavinians also, remained faithful to the Koman cause, while Signia, Setia, Circeii, and Veliti-ae, though regarded as Roman colonies, were among the most prominent in the war. {Id. viii. 3 — 11.) The contest was renewed the next year with various suc- cess; but in B.C. 338 Furius Camillus defeated the forces of the Latins in a great battle at Pedum, while the other consul, C. JIaenius, obtained a not less decisive victory on the river Astura. The struggle was now at an end ; the Latin cities sub- mitted one after the other, and the Roman senate pronounced separately on the fate of each. The first great object of the arrangements now made was to deprive the Latins of all bonds of national or social unity: for this purpose not only were they prohibited from holding general councils or assem- blies, but the several cities were deprived of the mutual rights of " connubium" and " commercium," so as to isolate each little community from its neigh- bours. Tibur and Praeneste, the two most powerful cities of the confederacy, and which had taken a prominent part in the war, were deprived of a large portion of their territory, but continued to exist as nominally independent communities, retaining their own laws, and the old treaties with them were re- newed, so that as late as the time of Polybius a Roman citizen might choose Tibur or Praeneste as a place of exile. (Liv. xhii. 2 ; Pol. vi. 14.) Tus- culum, on the contrary, received the Roman fran- chise ; as did Lanuvium, Aricia, Pedum, and Ko- mentum, though these last appear to have, in the first instance, received only the imperfect citizen- ship without the right of suffrage. Velitrae was
