%^ Physical Notices of the Bay of Naples. 



formerly been built. This remarkable coincidence of observed 

 facts with history is too strong to be overlooked. 



It cannot, however, be concealed that the silence of his- 

 torians on the subject is very remarkable ; since, except in 

 Dion, we have no other direct testimony of the fall of these 

 cities ; but the declaration of Martial, in one of his epigrams, 

 certainly, as far as it goes, is perfectly satisfactory : — 



" Haec Veneris sedes, Lacedemone gratior illi ; 

 Hie locus Herculeo nomine clarus erat : 

 Cuncta jacent fiaminis, et tristi mersa favilla.*** 



It has been alleged that Florus, who lived so late as the 

 reigns of Trajan and Adrian, has represented Herculaneum 

 and Pompeii as still existing, which certainly cannot be reason- 

 ably inferred from the passage in his history. He is engaged 

 in pointing out the causes of the war against the Samnites, 

 and takes the opportunity of launching out a little into the 

 praises of Campania, as if to give the reader, as is not unfre- 

 quent, a picture of the regions where the transactions of the 

 time were carried on (337 before Christ) in a sort of poe- 

 tical and impersonal style, without using any verb which shall 

 express either present time or past. He says, " Hie illi nobilis 

 portus, Caieta, Misenus, &c. Hie amicti vitibus montes Gau- 

 rus, &c. Urbes ad mare, Formiae, Cumae, Puteoli, Neapolis, 

 Herculaneum, Pompeii^ et ipsa caput urbium Capua, quondam 

 inter tres maximas, Roman, Carthaginemque numerata.""* 

 This mention of Capua, obviously referring to it in its pris- 

 tine state, and the remarkable want of any verb in the sen- 

 tence, inclines me to believe that I am not wrong in suppos- 

 ing that he refers to Herculaneum and Pompeii with ]<espect 

 to the time which his history describes ; when, in fact, they 

 were in their highest state of independence, not having been 

 subjected to the Roman yoke. Suetonius, in his History of 

 Titusj-f briefly mentions the eruption of Vesuvius in 79 ; but 

 describes the loss of life as so great as to make us believe that 

 some peculiar catastrophe, such as the destruction of a city, 

 must have occurred, though not particularly noticed in the 



• Mart. Epig- iv. 44. 



■f Florus, 1 16., and Chronol. in edit. var. Elz. 1674. t Cap. viii. 



