¹ Begun in 54 B.C. (Cic. ad QF 2.12.1, 3.5.1, ad Att. 4.16.2) and published in 51 B.C. (ad Fam. 8.1.5, ad Att. 5.12.2)

² The principal passages are: Apis, Hdt. 3.27, Diodorus 1.21.10; Persian attitude to statues of gods, Hdt. 1.131; human sacrifice, Hdt. 4.103 (Tauri), Plut.Mor.315B, Apollod. Bibliotbeca 2.5.11 (Busiris, though the story is rejected by others cf. Hdt. 2.45, Diod. 1.67), Caesar, BG 6.16 (Gauls), Diodorus 20.14, Justin 18.6 (Carthaginians); Cretan and Aetolian brigandage, Thuc. 1.5, Polyb. 4.16.4, Athenaeus 6.253f (cf. Ormerod, H. A., Piracy in the Ancient World (London, 1924), passim); the Spartan claim (ascribed variously to Agesilaus, Antalcidas, or Archidamus Ill), Plut.Mor. 210 E, 217 E, 218 F; The Athenian claim (part of the Ephebic oath)Google Scholar, Plut, . Alcibiades 15; the Gauls, Polyb. 2.19.4, Diodorus 5.32.Google Scholar

³ Mommsen, , Römische Geschichte iv, ch.5.Google Scholar

⁴ Polyb. 33.10 f., Livy, , Per. 47.Google ScholarOn their location, Pliny, , NH 3.47.Google Scholar

⁵ The identification of all three is un certain (MRR i. 451)Google Scholar

⁶ Frank, Tenney, Roman Imperialism (New York, 1921), pp. 280, 294Google Scholar, cf. ESAR i. 172 f.Google Scholar

⁷ Badian, E., Roman Imperialism in the late Republic (Oxford, 1978), p.20.Google Scholar

⁸ Rostovtzeff, M.SEHRE ² pp. 22, 548 n.17 (but he goes far beyond the evidence in talking of ‘a prohibition on vine and olive culture in the Western provinces’)Google Scholar, Wilson, A. J. N., Emigration from Italy in the Republican Age of Rome (Manchester, 1966), pp. 67 ff.Google Scholar, Aymard, A., ‘L'interdiction des plantations de vignes en Gaule Transalpine’, Mélanges Faucher, pp. 27 ff.Google Scholar (reprinted in Aymard, , Études d‘histoire ancienne, pp.585 ff.)Google Scholar, Bellini, L., ‘La viticoltura nella politica economica di Roma reppublicana’, Memorie dell’ Accademia dei Lincei Ser. 8, 1 (1948) 387 ff.Google Scholar

⁹ Clavel, M., Béziers et son territoire dans l'antiquité (Paris, 1970), pp. 311 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁰ As Wilson, op. cit., sensibly realizes.

¹¹ Cf. Badian, E., ‘Cicero and the com mission of 146 B.C.’, Hommages á M. Renard (Collection Latomus Vol.101, 1969), i. 54 ff.Google Scholar

¹² For the Gauls’ proverbial love of wine: Livy, 5.33.2Google Scholar, Polyb, . 2.19.4Google Scholar, Diodorus, 5.26.4Google Scholar, Ammianus, 15.12.4Google Scholar, Cic, . Pro Fonteio 8.Google Scholar For the late development of Gallic viticulture and oleiculture, which Reinach, M. (Revue archèologique 1901, 350 ff.) claims was the result of a Roman banGoogle Scholar: Macrobius, Comm. in Somnium Scipionis 2.10.8.Google Scholar

¹³ Justin, 43.4.1Google Scholar, Strabo, 4.1.5Google Scholar, Plut, . Marius 21.3.Google Scholar These stray references are reinforced by the distribution of amphorae of a probable Massiliot origin, cf. Benoit, F. (Rivista di studi liguri 21 (1955), 32 ff.)Google Scholar and Benoit, F., Recherches sur l'hellénisation du midi de la Gaule (Aix en Provence, 1965), pp. 182 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Strabo, 4.1.2Google Scholar, Pomp, . Mela 2.5Google Scholar, cf. Pliny, , NH 14.14, 68Google Scholar, Columella, 3.2.25.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Cic, . Pro Fonteio 19.Google Scholar One of the charges emphasized by the prosecution (‘invidiosissimum et maximum’) against Fonteius was that he had imposed portoria on Italian wine transported through Gaul. As Cicero is forced to admit that these levies would have raised a large sum, the volume of trade is likely to have been considerable.

¹⁶ Strabo, 4.1.2 (if this is based on Poseidonius then the passage may be evidence against a ban on viticulture in the area in the second centuryGoogle Scholar; see Brunt, P., ‘The Equites in the Late Republic’, in Seager, R. (ed.), The Crisis of the Roman Republic (Cambridge, 1969), p.127 n.4)Google Scholar; Varro, RR 1.7.8.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Pliny provides good evidence for the developments in his own day: NH 14.18: ‘Iam invents vitis per se in vino picem resipiens… non pridem haec inlustrata atque Vergilii vatis aetate incognita’, cf. NH 14.26, 57Google Scholar; 23.47 (for correct reading ‘Ellinco’ see André, J. and Levadoux, L., Journal des savants 1964, 169 ff.)Google Scholar; Celsus, 4.12Google Scholar; Columella, 3.2.16.Google ScholarPliny, , NH 14.43: ‘septem his annis in Narbonensis provinciae Alba Helvia inventa est vitis uno die deflorescens, ob id tutissimum.’ For beyond the Cevennes: the BiturigiacaGoogle Scholar (Pliny, , NH 14.27 –Google Scholar whether of the Bituriges Cubi or Bituriges Vivisci - cf. Columella, 3.2.19, 3.9.3).Google ScholarPliny, , NH 17.47 is a general reference to the usefulness of chalk and cannot be used as evidence of viticulture among the Aedui and PictonesGoogle Scholar (see Andre, J.(ed.), Pliny, NH 14 (Paris, 1958), 84). The earliest reference to the vine in Bourgogne belongs to the fourth century A.D. (although it implies the existence of vineyards at an earlier date), Pan. Lat. 5.6.4. In general seeGoogle Scholar: Andre, J., ‘La vigne et le vin en Provence dans l’antiquité, Melanges Benevent (Aix en Provence, 1954)Google Scholar, Billiard, R., La Vigne dans l'antiquité (Lyons, 1913), pp. 77 ff.Google Scholar, Dion, R., Histoire de la vigne et du vin en France (Paris, 1959), pp. 117 ff.Google Scholar, Lantier, R., ‘Le yin et l'huile en Bourgogne aux temps Galloromaine’, Rev Arch 1952, 103 ff.Google Scholar, Thevenot, E. ‘Les origines du vignoble bourguinon d'aprés les documents archeologiques’, Annales de Bourgogne 1951, 253 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Theophrast, . HP 6.2.4 claims that the olive will not grow more than three hundred stades from the sea.Google Scholar On the limit of the olive representing the northern limit of the Mediterranean world see Braudel, F., The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean world in the age of Philip II (London, 1972), pp. 232 f.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Strabo, 4.1.2Google Scholar, Diodor, . 5.26.2 (based on Poseidonius – Ath. Deipn. 4.15 C probably gives a fragment).Google Scholar The Sasernas (Comumella, 1.1.5) suggested that milder winters allowed the vine to grow further north.Google Scholar

²⁰ e.g. Isid, . Et. 17.5.22, ‘Biturica (uva) a regione nomen sortita est, turbines et pluvias et calores fortissime sustinens, nec in macra terra deficiens’Google Scholar, cf. Imberciadori, I., Vite e vigna nell‘ alto Medioevo’, Agricoltura e mondo rurale in occidente nell’ alto medioevo (Settimane di Spoleto 13 (1966)), 310 ff.Google Scholar

²¹ Caesar, , BG 2.15.3, 4.2.6, cf. 6.24.Google Scholar

²² Badian, (Roman Imperialism in the Late Republic, pp. 16 ff.) has demonstrated that the senate in the Republic had no general desire to influence or regulate economic activity in the Roman world. There is no point in trying to link this passage with Domitian's ill-fated attempt to limit viticulture. In any case Domitian was not attempting to protect the price of Italian wine, but was trying to divert investment from viticulture into the production of corn, the ever-present concern of all emperors.Google Scholar

²³ Livy, 39.22.6, 45.6.Google Scholar

²⁴ Livy, 39.54.5.Google Scholar Later in the Roman senate they protested ‘se superante in Gallia multitudine inopia coactos agri et egestate ad quaerendam sedem Alpes transgressos.

²⁵ On all matters concerning these Gauls see Sartori, F., ‘Galli Transalpini transgressi in Venetiam’, Aquileia Nostra 1960, 1 ff.Google Scholar The question of the identity of these people is dealt with by Marchetti, G., ‘Le origine di Aquileia nella narrazione di Tito Livio’ Memorie storiche Foroguiliesi 43 (1958-9), 1 ff.Google Scholar The territory round Aquileia was first known as the land of the Veneti (Livy, 1.1.3Google Scholar, Strabo, 5.1.4Google Scholar, Polyb, . 2.17.5)Google Scholar, but later as the land of the Carni (Strabo, 4.6.9, 7.1.5Google Scholar, Pliny, , NH 3.126).Google Scholar So RE iii col.1598 identifies Livy's ‘Galli Transalpini’ as Carni. But the Carni are clearly an earlier and larger-scale settlement. Sartori ingeniously identifies Livy's invaders as Taurisci. Polyb, . 24.10.1Google Scholar and Strabo, 4.6.9Google Scholar mention Norici and Taurisci near Aquileia; the Norici are definitely located later beyond the Julian Alps. Pliny, , NH 3.131 records among towns in the area which had disappeared by his own day ‘Tauriscis Noreia‘. But it is very unlikely that the ’Galli Transalpini’ in their brief stay would have had any effect on the nomenclature of the area.Google Scholar

²⁶ Livy, 39.45.Google Scholar

²⁷ Livy, 39.54.Google Scholarcf. Zon, Dio. 9.21.Google Scholar

^{28 12},000 armed men (Livy, 39.54).Google Scholar

²⁹ Piso, L. fr.35 (Peter).Google Scholar

³⁰ L. Furius Purpurio, as praetor in Cisalpine Gaul in 200 B.C., had defeated a serious rising of Gauls and Ligurians for which he may have got a triumph (Livy, 31.10, 21 f.).Google Scholar As consul in 196 B.C. he again fought in the area (Livy, 33.37).Google ScholarRufus, Q. Minucius, as consul in 197 B.C.Google Scholar, fought against the same tribes (Livy, 32.28 f., 33.22 ff.).Google Scholar L. Manlius Acidinus (Fulvianus), later to be consul 179 B.C., was one of the Illviri in charge of the foundation of Aquileia (Livy, 39.55).Google Scholar These men were chosen for their interest and experience in North Italy. Those who consider it useful and significant to assign senators to family groups should consult Scullard, H. H., Roman Politics, and Briscoe, J., A Commentary on Livy XXXI XXXIII (Oxford, 1973), pp. 64 f., 158.Google Scholar

³¹ Sanctis, De, Storia iii. 1.291 ff., particularly 319 f.Google Scholar, Calderini, A., Aquileia Romano (Udine, 1930), pp. 4 ff.Google Scholar

³² Klingner, F., Römiscbe Geisteswelt (Munich, 1956), pp. 13 ff.Google Scholar

³³ Livy, 39.54.10, ‘nullius Romani magistratus, qui ei provinciae praeesset, permissu…’Google Scholar

³⁴ Piso, L. fr. 35Google Scholar (Peter), ‘et ab Aquileia ad XII lapidem deletum oppidum etiam invito senatu a M. Claudio Marcello.’ Sanctis, De, Storia iv.1.Google Scholar 428 claims that ‘invito senatu’ is a misunderstanding. But it is clearly supported by Livy's narrative. It was Marcellus‘ brutality that shocked senators. The senate's opposition may have continued when Marcellus asked to march against the Istri (Livy, 39.55,4, reading ’id senatui non placuit’).Google Scholar

³⁵ Toynbee, A., Hannibal's Legacy (Oxford, 1965), ii. 608 ff.Google Scholar

³⁶ Livy, 38.42 ff.Google Scholar

³⁷ I hesitate to identify the speaker as Cato, , although Cic. Brutus 52 ff. implies that few, if any, speeches other than Cato's were published in this period. The sort of anecdote which I am suggesting would be remembered and could just as easily be transmitted by an annalist.Google Scholar

³⁸ Justin 43.4.1, talking of the effect Massilia had on the Gauls: ‘ab his Galli et usum vitae cultioris deposita ac mansuefacta barbaria et agrorum cultus et urbes moenibus cingere didicerunt. Tunc et legibus non armis vivere, tune et vitem putare, tunc olivam serere consuerunt.’

³⁹ Amphorae supply the evidence, although the beginnings of the trade are as yet unclear. Pliny, , NH 15.1.3 implies that Italy first exported oil in 52 B.C. But there is no reason to believe him. It is very difficult to know what Pliny had in mind – perhaps an official gift by the Roman senate?Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Livy, 39.55.Google Scholar

⁴¹ One argument against our interpretation might be the use of the present tense, ‘sinimus‘, in 129 B.C. for an episode in 183 B.C. But that incident was not an isolated one. On at least one further occasion, in 179 B.C., Gauls tried to settle in north Italy and were thrown out (Livy, 40.53). The present tense may imply that the policy was a continuing and still valid one.Google Scholar