DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.42497#0219
SECT. III.] Historical Notices of the Walls.
119
Eutropius, writing a.d. 361, mentions the walls as follows :—
“ He (Aurelian) surrounded the city with stronger wallss.”
Cassiodorus also, writing a.d. 562, in his Chronicle, uses the ex-
pression —
“He surrounds Rome with stronger walls1.”
In the foregoing passages it is to be remarked, that while all agree
as to the fact that Aurelian built walls round the city, Zosimus
implies that there were no walls before, while Vopiscus implies that
he enlarged the circuit of the existing walls, and he gives the length
of the circuit to which the walls were extended. It would seem at
first sight that it was impossible to reconcile these statements with
those of other writers, as interpreted by the existing remains. The
probability is that the explanation is to be found in the special use
made of the word muri, i.e. ‘ walls, • properly so called".’ It will
be noticed that this word is used by all the later writers, while
before we have had the word moenia, which signifies rather high em-
bankments, chiefly of earth, often supported, it is true, by a wall, but
not having the same advantages for resisting an attack as the later
mode of fortification.
A change appears to have taken place at this time in the mode of
attacking fortified places, and higher walls were necessary for the
defence. In the history of the siege of Rome by the Goths not
long afterwards, that is, in the fifth century, written by Procopius
(an eye witness), we read frequently of Balistse, and Aries and
Turres, and other machines of war, exactly similar to those con-
tinued in the Middle Ages. These are not mentioned as anything
new, but as the ordinary machines of war for a siege, and had there-
fore probably been in use for a century or so before. The besieging
towers were high and of wood, covered with hides to prevent their
being set on fire, and were intended to be moved on wheels up to
the walls which they could overtop.
The walls and towers, therefore, of the time of Aurelian were very
much higher than they had been before, and they had probably
wooden hourds at the top for the use and protection • of the de-
fenders, of which we have several traces in the corbels, and put-log
holes, which are still visible in many parts of the walls, especially
‘ “ Urbem Romam muris firmioribus
cinxit,” &c. (Eutropii Hist. Rom. Bre-
viar., lib. ix. c. 15.)
1 ‘ ‘ Romam firmioribus muris val-
lat.” (Cassiodori Chronicon, Aurelia-
nus xxix.)
u Varro says distinctly that the bank
of earth thrown out of a trench on the
inner side was called murus, but in the
course of time the word had changed
its signification, and murus came to sig-
nify a lofty wall of stone or brick only,
as distinct from low earthworks.
119
Eutropius, writing a.d. 361, mentions the walls as follows :—
“ He (Aurelian) surrounded the city with stronger wallss.”
Cassiodorus also, writing a.d. 562, in his Chronicle, uses the ex-
pression —
“He surrounds Rome with stronger walls1.”
In the foregoing passages it is to be remarked, that while all agree
as to the fact that Aurelian built walls round the city, Zosimus
implies that there were no walls before, while Vopiscus implies that
he enlarged the circuit of the existing walls, and he gives the length
of the circuit to which the walls were extended. It would seem at
first sight that it was impossible to reconcile these statements with
those of other writers, as interpreted by the existing remains. The
probability is that the explanation is to be found in the special use
made of the word muri, i.e. ‘ walls, • properly so called".’ It will
be noticed that this word is used by all the later writers, while
before we have had the word moenia, which signifies rather high em-
bankments, chiefly of earth, often supported, it is true, by a wall, but
not having the same advantages for resisting an attack as the later
mode of fortification.
A change appears to have taken place at this time in the mode of
attacking fortified places, and higher walls were necessary for the
defence. In the history of the siege of Rome by the Goths not
long afterwards, that is, in the fifth century, written by Procopius
(an eye witness), we read frequently of Balistse, and Aries and
Turres, and other machines of war, exactly similar to those con-
tinued in the Middle Ages. These are not mentioned as anything
new, but as the ordinary machines of war for a siege, and had there-
fore probably been in use for a century or so before. The besieging
towers were high and of wood, covered with hides to prevent their
being set on fire, and were intended to be moved on wheels up to
the walls which they could overtop.
The walls and towers, therefore, of the time of Aurelian were very
much higher than they had been before, and they had probably
wooden hourds at the top for the use and protection • of the de-
fenders, of which we have several traces in the corbels, and put-log
holes, which are still visible in many parts of the walls, especially
‘ “ Urbem Romam muris firmioribus
cinxit,” &c. (Eutropii Hist. Rom. Bre-
viar., lib. ix. c. 15.)
1 ‘ ‘ Romam firmioribus muris val-
lat.” (Cassiodori Chronicon, Aurelia-
nus xxix.)
u Varro says distinctly that the bank
of earth thrown out of a trench on the
inner side was called murus, but in the
course of time the word had changed
its signification, and murus came to sig-
nify a lofty wall of stone or brick only,
as distinct from low earthworks.