30 IGLETES. Etruria, directly opposite to the Mons Argentarius jiud the port of Cosa. It is, next to Ilva, the most considerable of the islands near the coast of Etruria, being 6 miles long by about 3 iu breadth, and con- sists of a group of mountains of considerable eleva- tion. Hence Kutilius speaks of its " silvosa cacu- inina." {Idn. i. 325.) From that author we learn that, when Kome was taken by Alaric (a. d. 410), a number of fugitives from the city took refuge in Igilium, the insular position of which atibrded them complete security. Caesar also mentions it, during the Civil War, in conjunction with the neighbotmng port of Cosa, as furnishing a few vessels to Domi- tius, with which that general sailed for l^Iassilia. (Cues. B. C. i. 34 ; Plin. iii. 6. s. 12 ; Mela, ii. 7. § 19.) It is evident, therefore, that it was inhabited iu ancient as well as modern times. [E. H. B.] IGLE'TES, IGNE'TES, [Hispania.] IGULLIO'XES, in European Sarmatia, mentioned by Ptolemy as lying between the Stavani and^Cois- toboci, and to the east of the Venedi (iii. 5. § 21). Now the Stavani lay south of the Galindae and Sudini, populations of which the locality is known to be that of the Galinditae and Sudovitae of the middle ages, i. e. the parts about the Spirdinff-see in East Prussia. This would place the IgulUunes in the southern part of Lithuania, or in parts of Grodno, Fodulia, and Volhijnia, in the country of the Jaztvingi of the thirteenth century, — there or thereabouts. Zeuss has allowed himself to consider some such form as 'Irvyyiaifes as the truer reading; and, so doing, identifies the names, as well as the localities, of the two populations {'iTvyy lau, Jacivinrj), — the varieties of form being very numerous. The Jacwings were Lithuanians^— lAXm..imA-as, as opposed to Slavonians ; and in this lies their ethnological importance, inas- much as the southward extension of that branch of the Sarmatian stock is undetermined. (See Zeuss, s. V. Jazwinyi.) [K. G. L.J IGU'VIUM("l7oui'oy: iJ^/t. Iguvinus : Gubbio), an ancient and important town of Umbria, situated on the W. slope of the Apennines, but not far from their central ridge, and on the left of the Via Fla- minia. Its existence as an ancient Umbrian city is sufficiently attested by its coins, as well as by a re- markable monument presently to be noticed ; but we find no mention of it in history previous to the period of its subjection to Kome, and we only learn inci- dentally trom Cicero that it enjoyed the privileged condition of a " foederata civitas," and that the terms of its treaty were of a highly favourable character. (Cic. pro Balh. 20, where the reading of the older editions, " FiUginatium,"' is certainly erroneous: see Orelli ad he.) The tiist mention of its name oc- curs in Livy (slv. 43, where there is no doubt we should read Iguvium for " Igiturvium ") as the place selected by the Roman senate for the confinement of the Illyrian king Gentius and his sons, when the people of Spoletium refused to receive them. Its natural strength of position, which was eddently the cause of its selection on this occasion, led also to its bearing a conspicuous part in the beginning of the civil war between Caesar and Pompey, when it was occupied by the praetor Minucius Thermus with five cohorts; but on the approach of Curio with three cohorts, Thermns, who was apprehensive of a re- volt of the citizens, abandoned the town without resistance. (Caes. B.C.'i. 12 ; Cic. ad Att. vii. 13, b.) Under the Koman dominion Iguvium seems to bave lapsed into the condition of an ordinary mu- nicipal town : we find it noticed in an inscription as IGUVIUJI. one of the '• xv. pnpuli Umbriae " (Orell. Inscr. 98), as well as by Pliny and Ptolemy (Plin. iii. 14. s. 19; Ptol. iii. 1. § 53), and it is probable that in Strabo also we should read 'lyoiiov for the corrupt name "iTOvpov of the MS.S. and eardcr editions. (Strab. v. p. 227; Cluver. /to?, p. 626.) But its secluded position in the mountains, and at a distance of some miles from the line of the Via Flaminia, was pro- bably unfavourable to its prosperity, and it does not seem to have been a place of much impoilance. Silius Italicus spealcs of it as very subject to fogs (viii. 459). It early became the see of a bishop, and retained its episcopal rank throughout the middle ages, when it rose to be a place of considerably more importance than it had enjoyed under the Eoman empire. The modern city of Gvbbio contains no ruins of ancient date; but about 8 miles to the E. of it, at a place now called La Schieggia, on the line of the ancient Flaminian Way, and just at the highest point of the pass by which it crosses the mam ridge of the Apennines, some vestiges of an ancient temple are still visible, which are supposed with good reason to be those of the temple of Jupiter Apenninus. This is represented in the Tabula Peutingeriana as existing at the highest point of the pass, and is noticed also by Claudian in describing the progress of Honorius along the Flaminian Way. (Claudian, de VI. Cons. Uon. 504; Tub. Pent.) The oracle consulted by the emperor Claudius " in Apennino (Treb. Poll. Claud. 10) may perhaps have reference to the same spot. Many bronze idols and other small objects of antiquity have been found near the ruins in question ; but a far more important dis- covery, made on the same site in 1444, was that of the celebrated tables of bronze, commonly known us the Tabulae Eugubinae, which are still preserved in the city of Gubbio. These tables, which are seven in number, contain long inscriptions, four of which are in Etruscan characters, two in Latin, and one partially in Etruscan and partially in Latin cha- racters; but the language is in all cases apparently the same, and is wholly distinct from that of the genuine Etruscan monuments on the one band, as well as from L.atin on the other, though exhibiting strong traces of affinity with the older Latin forms, as well as with the existing remains of the Oscau dialects. There can be no doubt that the language which we here find is that of the Umbrians them- selves, who are represented by all ancient writers as nationally distinct both from the Etruscans and the Sabellian races. The ethnological and linguistic inferences from these important monuments will be more fully considered under the article Umbria. It is only of late years that they have been investigated with care; early antiquaries having formed the most extravagant theories as to their meaning : Lanzi had the merit of first pointing out that they evidently related only to certain sacrificial and other religious rites to be celebrated at the temple of Jupiter by the Iguvians themselves and some neighbouring com- munities. The interpretation has since been carried out, as far as our imperfect knowledge will pemiit, by Lepsius, Grotefend, and still more recently in the elaborate work of Aufrecht and KirchholF. (Lanzi, Saggio di Lingua Etrusca, vol. iii. pp. 657 — 768 ; Lepsius, de Tabulis Evguhinis, 1833 ; Inscriptlones Uinbricae et Oscae, Lips. 1841; Grotefend, liudi- menta Linguae Umhricae, Hannov. 1835 — 1839; Aufrecht u. Kirchhoff, Die Umbrischen Sprach. DenkmUkr, 4to. Berlin, 1849.) In the stUl im-
