^{page 75 note 1} Considerations of space have made it impossible to publish the description of the Via Valeria (from Tibur to Cerfennia) in the present volume; but it will appear in Vol. X. The description of the Roman highway running eastward from Rome to the mouth of the Aternus will thus be completed, the first portion of the road, from Rome to Tibur, having been already dealt with by Dr.Ashby, in P.B.S.R. iii. IseqGoogle Scholar.

The present article was written in the winter of 1913–14. To Dr. Ashby are due my thanks for his kindness in recently looking over the manuscript and in supplying additions and suggestions.

The map (Plate XI.) has been drawn to scale from the sheets of the Italian Staff Map, and with an exception mentioned in the Postcript, every ancient and modern name in the text has been inserted.

^{page 75 note 2} Strabo, V. 3. II:

^{page 76 note 1} Their history is summarised by Mommsen, , C.I.L. ix. p. 282Google Scholar (Marrucini), p. 290 (Paeligni) and by Nissen, , Ital. Land, ii. p. 446Google Scholar (Paeligni), p. 443 (Marrucini). Cf. also Besnier, , De regione Paelignorum; Paris (1902), pp. 59–106Google Scholar.

^{page 76 note 2} C.I.L. vi. 3824. The relations of the Via Salaria and the Via Caecilia are considered more in detail in an article upon the Nova, Via Claudia, Journal of Roman Studies, vol. iii. pp. 204Google Scholarseq.

^{page 76 note 3} Strabo, vi. 3. 7; Horace, , too, (Satires, i. 5Google Scholar), from Herdoniae onwards in all probability, followed this road to Brundisium, although, between Barium and Gnathia, he kept to the coast instead of travelling by the inland road. For the Traiana, Via see C.I.L. ix. p. 592Google Scholarseq. and Ashby, T. and Gardner, R. in the Papers of the British School at Rome, vol. viii. p. 104Google Scholarseq.

^{page 77 note 1} Suetonius, Caesar, 44: Iam de ornanda instituendaque urbe item de tuendo ampliandoque imperio, plura ac maiora in dies destinabat…. emittere Fucinum lacum, viam munire a mari supero per Apennini dorsum ad Tiberim usque. The identification of this proposed road with the Via Claudia Valeria is not, for obvious reasons, a matter of certainty.

^{page 77 note 2} It is curious that no traces of any ancient bridge are to be seen along the course of the Via Claudia Valeria. Possibly it was due to bad workmanship and indeed the known monuments of Claudius outside Rome are not famous for their permanency. The Emissarium of the Fucine Lake was not a success and had to be restored by Trajan and Hadrian. On the other hand the bridges which are mentioned in the inscription C.I.L. ix. 6005 as constructed by Trajan along the Via Traiana (VIAM ET. PONTES a BENEVENTO BRVNDISIVM PECVNIA SVA fecit) are finely preserved specimens of Roman workmanship of the period of Trajan.

^{page 77 note 3} The ‘Claudian archaisms’ are interesting, namely, the spelling of ‘CAISAR’ and the use of for V. A well known instance of the spelling ‘CAISAR’ is to be seen above the Porta Maggiore at Rome(C.I.L. vi. 1256), a monument which testifies also to the lack of permanence in Claudius' constructions. For this peculiarity see E. Albertini, L'inscription de Claude sur la Porte Majeure et deux passages de Frontin,' Mélanges de l'Ècole Française, (1906), pp. 305–318.

^{page 78 note 1} Notizie degli Scavi, 1903, p. 515.

^{page 78 note 2} A milestone of Magnentius was discovered on the course of the Via Claudia Nova at Pile near Aquila. Cf. Persichetti, Viaggio archeologico sulla Via Salaria, 1893, p. 136, and my article on Nova, Via Claudia in J.R.S. vol. iii. p. 204Google Scholarsqq.

^{page 78 note 3} Notizie degli Scavi, 1890, pp. 160–164. The last of the four milestones of the Via Valeria, the discovery of which is there described, is probably to be referred to a restoration by Magnentius or Julian.

^{page 78 note 4} Notizie degli Scavi, 1878, p. 319; 1886, p. 432; 1889, p. 344; 1904, p. 299.

^{page 78 note 5} In the inscription C.I.L. ix. 5973 (Claudius' 43rd milestone) the mileage was reckoned from Cerfennia, whereas in the time of Magnentius (see milestone quoted above) it was clearly reckoned from Rome.

^{page 79 note 1} The descriptions of the Via Claudia Valeria as given by the Itinerarium Antoninianum and the Tabula Peutingerana are examined and criticised by E. Albertini, Mélanges de l'École Française, 1907, pp. 463–471.

^{page 81 note 1} See the inscription PAGI CEIANI mentioned in the Postscript, p. 105.

^{page 81 note 2} The Tabula Peutingerana is full of these loci desperati. Cf. Fernique (de regione Marsorum, p. 36) who says that the Tabula Peutingerana must be used with care and that readers must not hesitate to correct its figures, whenever they differ from those of modern topographers.

^{page 81 note 3} It is owing to an inadvertence on Mommsen's, part that in C.I.L. ix. p. 204Google Scholar he quotes the distance (from the inscription C.I.L. ix. 5973 discovered near Teate) between Cerfennia and Ostia Aterni as m.p. xliii. The same mistake is repeated in C.I.L. ix. p. 348. He says that the distance between Collarmele and Pescara corresponds with the m.p. xlv (?) which are stated by C.I.L. ix. 5973 to separate Cerfennia from Ostia Aterni. The milestone in question simply stood at the 43rd mile of the Via Claudia Valeria. As it is difficult to say whether the stone was discovered in its original position, it is deprived of much topographical importance. But according to the estimated distance Teate would stand at the 43rd milestone.

^{page 82 note 1} From various inscriptions mentioning curatores of these roads it appears that even at the beginning of the second century A.D. the Via Tiburtina, the Via Valeria and the Via Claudia Valeria, were administered as one road and occasionally by one and the same curator.

^{page 82 note 2} Caesar, , B.C. i. 18Google Scholar: oppidum (Sulmonensium) a Corfinio vii. milium intervallo abest. The Tabula Peutingerana (ab Appia ad Valeriam) reads Sulmone—VII.—CORFINIO.

^{page 83 note 1} Hunter, L. W., ‘Cicero's Journey to his Province in 51 B.C.’ J.R.S. vol. iii. pt. 1. p. 73–97Google Scholar. The errors, however, there cited are those of time rather than distance.

The exactitude of the distance given in Horace's, well known line (Sat. i. 5Google Scholar) ‘quattuor hinc rapimur viginti et milia raedis’ is much disputed. (cp. Papers, viii. 110).

^{page 83 note 2} All our knowledge of Cerfennia is summarised by Mommsen, , C.I.L. ix. p. 348Google Scholar, Hülsen, , Pauly-Wissowa, , R.E. iii. 1980Google Scholar and Nissen, , op. cit. ii. p. 456Google Scholar. Unfortunately there are no inscriptions extant which bear upon its topography.

^{page 83 note 3} Ughelli, , Ital. Sacr. ed. 2. vol. i. p. 893Google Scholar.

^{page 83 note 4} Holste, Ad Cluv. p. 153, says that the remains were in his time very conspicuous (clarissima). The aqueduct was subterranean.

^{page 84 note 1} Notizie degli Scavi, 1903, p. 347, describes excavations near the Madonna delle Grazie.

^{page 84 note 2} Nibby, , Analisi, iii. 644Google Scholar, says that the course of the Via Valeria is clearly indicated beyond the Fucine Lake by the site of Cerfennia at Collarmele and, especially beyond Cerfennia by the imposing pass known as the Forca Carúso, whence the road descends to the valley of the Aterno.

^{page 84 note 3} Abbate (Guida degli Abruzzi, p. 139) mentions cuttings on the ascent to Forca Caruso. I did not observe any cutting which could be described as ancient, but probably a closer and longer examination would reveal more definite traces.

^{page 84 note 4} It has been supposed by topographers that an arch was erected at the summit of the pass in honour of the Empress Livia, (C.I.L. ix. 3304Google Scholar, Liviae Drusi f. Augustae Matri Ti. Caesaris et Drusi Germanici Superaequani public(e), on the authority of a letter of Phoebonius, the author of the Historia Marsorum, to Holste. Phoebonius says clearly enough that the site of an ancient building could be distinguished there and that the arch of Augusta was placed there, because the place was called ‘all' Arco,’ and the land so registered in the surveys. But it seems equally clear that the inscription was found near Castelvecchio Subequo (‘vicino a Castelvecchio di Subreco nel piano è una tesa di muraglia lunga con ruine assai d'edifizii…. questo luogo gli abitanti lo chiamono Macrano…. nelle ruine si è trovata l' inscrittione del Publico Superequo.’). It would seem that the two localities are not identical from the beginning of the description of the arch ‘mi porta questa occasione la chiarezza di un' altra curiosita,’ but in his Historia Marsorum (p. 277) he further describes the arch of Augusta as mentioned in the life of S. Rufinus (in the letter it is S. Caesidius his son) as being at the 75th mile from Rome, and connects with it the inscription, which he copied in the house of the Macrini family at Castelvecchio, where it supported a marble female head. He also notes that the Piano di S. Nicola took its name from a well built church and a ruined monastery of the Celestines. Frothingham, (A.J.A. xix. (1915), p. 157Google Scholar) describes the arch as marking the boundary between the Paeligni and the Marsi, and as the only territorial arch in Italy, except just outside Rome on the Via Flaminia, though there are, he says, many in the provinces. Frothingham makes it a brick arch, on what authority I do not know. His reference to the ‘monograph’ by De Nino, R. Ac. Lincei, Sept. 1897, is taken at secondhand from Abbate and refers to Not. Scavi, 1897, P.427. (T.A.)

^{page 85 note 1} The distance from Collarmele is approximately 4 Roman miles, which is one mile less than that recorded by the Tabula Peutingerana. The Geographer of Ravenna gives the corrupt form Musumeos. Phoebonius, Historia Marsorum, p. 269, mentions both Cerfennia and Mons Imeus as being stations on the Via Claudia Valeria, although he calls it simply the Via Valeria. ‘Mons Iseus’ and ‘Monte Ineo’ he gives as other forms of Mons Imeus.

^{page 85 note 2} Strabo, V. 238:

Mommsen, , C.I.L. ix. p. 318Google Scholar, note 2, says that on the authority of Holste (adnot. ad Cluver. p. 155) the Cuculum mentioned by Strabo is generally placed at Cocullo between Pescina and Sulmona, but that at no time have any remains of the Roman period been found there. Moreover, that since Strabo was enumerating in this passage Latin towns, Cuculum must not be looked for outside the boundaries of Latium in his time. Mommsen's statement that no remains of the Roman period have been found on the site of Cocullo, was, of course, made previous to the discovery of miscellaneous remains at II Casale di Cocullo (see below).

^{page 85 note 3} Mommsen, loc. cit.

^{page 86 note 1} Nissen, , op. cit. ii. p. 462Google Scholar; Hülsen, , P.W. R.E. i. 598Google Scholar (Aequiculi).

^{page 86 note 2} Not. Scavi. 1899, p. 239, 240.

^{page 86 note 3} Not. Scav. 1889, p. 344. Between La Forchetta and Goriano Sicoli, where the old track passes along the lower slopes of the Colle S. Donato traces of a rock cutting and wheel marks are mentioned as existing.

^{page 87 note 1} Not. Scav. 1878, p. 319.

^{page 87 note 2} Not. Scav. 1886, p. 432.

^{page 87 note 3} Not. Scav. 1890, p. 344.

^{page 87 note 4} Not. Scav. 1903, p. 515.

^{page 87 note 5} Not. Scav. 1904, p. 299.

^{page 87 note 6} Not. Scav. 1878, p. 320.

^{page 88 note 1} Castelvecchio Subequo is on the site of Superaequum, one of the towns of the Paeligni, cf. Mommsen, , C.I.L. ix. p. 311Google Scholar. Important excavations were carried out there in 1898, which throw light upon the site of the old town and its necropolis, which was probably in the locality called Macrano, S. of the modern village (see p. 84, note 4). Not. Scav. 1898, pp. 71–77. For further discoveries in the district see also Not. Scav. 1892, p. 170 (traces of an ancient road leading from Superaequum towards the valley of the Aternus, through which it may have gone on towards Aveia, cf. J.R.S. iii. 232.)

^{page 88 note 2} Mommsen, , C.I.L. ix. p. 296Google Scholar. Lavernae is mentioned in Plutarch, Sulla, 6, who speaks of a great earthquake which took place there during the Social War. It possessed a temple of the Bona Dea and also a theatre. Not. Scav. 1897, p. 203. Monte S. Cosimo (E. of Prezza) shews traces of occupation in primitive times, while a few insignificant remains of the Roman period have come to light to the south of the hill. Cf. also Not. Scav. 1878, p. 299; 1887, p. 296; 1888, p. 293; 1889, p. 253; 1890, p. 129; 1894, p. 290 (Roman and prehistoric tombs); 1899, p. 239.

^{page 88 note 3} Not. Scav. 1878, 319; 1880, 252; 1882, 118; 1891, 295; 1884, 109; 188, 293; 1890, 193; 1894, 195—256; 1898, 77; 1900, 242.

Traces of an ancient road (Not. Scav. 1880, 253) have been found north of Raiano in the defile along which the Aterno passes into the plain. It was probably a deverticulumconnecting Superaequum (Castelvecchio Subequo) with Corfinium. To the S.W. of Raiano polygonal walls and inhumation tombs have been discovered on the hills known as Varranije and Raiano Vecchio.

^{page 89 note 1} Not. Scav. 1883, 176; 1892, 123; 1894, 317; 1899, 299; 1902, 124; 1904, 18; Tombs of the Republican period have been discovered there. There are also traces of polygonal walls on the hillside above the modern village.

^{page 89 note 2} Chaupy, , Maison d'Horace, vol. iii. p. 237Google Scholar, observes' Le lieu précis où elle fut situèe, s'annonce par un grand morceau de la voie Valérienne, qui y conserve un grand nombre de ses anciens tombeaux…. La barbarie qui emploia à la fabrique de l'église de S. Pelino, toutes les pierces de l'ancien Corfinium qu'elle trouva, en a conservé par ce moyen quelques inscriptions.’ The pavement mentioned is no longer visible.

^{page 90 note 1} Nissen, , op. cit. ii. p. 448Google Scholar.

^{page 90 note 2} As one comes from Raiano the first core met with is merely a shapeless lump of concrete. 20 metres further on is a second tomb measuring 3 X 4 metres at the base. The third, 50 metres nearer S. Pelino, measured 5 × 4 metres and would have been about 7 metres high. 50 metres further on is a smaller core, measuring 2 × 1·5 metres at the base, while after another 75 metres is seen another imposing ruin some 9 metres high. Of the remaining two, on the other side of the road, the larger measured 5 × 6 × 10 metres, the smaller being 4·5 × 3·5 × 7 metres.

^{page 91 note 1} Lear, Illust. Excursions in Italy, 1846, p. 32. ‘Of that great city (Corfinium) how little remains: foundations of solid brickwork; walls of opus reticulatum peeping above the soil: some traces of aqueducts; and two or three high masses of ruin supposed to be a temple.’ Perhaps the earthquakes in the last century may have completed the work of desolation; since Alberti in 1596 writes ‘si veggono molte rovine di grand' edifici.’ Plate II. (Lear) gives a view of S. Pelino and the tombs round it.

^{page 91 note 2} Not. Scav, since 1877 passim under ‘Pentima.’

^{page 92 note 1} For Italic inscriptions from Corfinium see way, Con, The Italic Dialects, vol. i. p. 241Google Scholarseq.

^{page 92 note 2} For the Itineraries see Mommsen, , C.I.L. ix. p. 201Google Scholar. I went along this road in May 1914. Of the road itself nothing is left, but the remains of the cities in the Samnite country through which it passed were of great interest.

^{page 93 note 1} Caesar, , B.C. i. 16Google Scholar: recepto Asculo…. Caesar Corfinium contendit; eo cum venisset, cohortes quinque praemissae a Domitio ex oppido pontem fluminis interrumpebant, qui erat ab oppido m.p. circiter iii.

^{page 93 note 2} Strabo, V. 4. 2, p. 241:

^{page 93 note 3} Acta of SS. Valentinus and Damianus, quoted by Mommsen, , C.I.L. ix. p. 286Google Scholar, note I: Venientes itaque (a Corfinio) inter fluvium Piscariam (Pescara or Aterno) in loco ubi dicitur Pons marmoreus (intellegitur Pons Aterni tertio a Corfinio lapide) invenerunt ibi quendam iuvenem iacentem paralyticum. De Petra, G. (‘Interpromium e Ceii’ in the Atti dll' Accademia di Napoli, xxi. (1900–1901), p. 170Google Scholar) identifies the Pons Marmoreus with the Pons Regalis close to S. Clemente a Casauria from various passages in the chronicle of Casauria. (See Postscript).

^{page 93 note 4} See Postscript, where this statement is qualified.

^{page 93 note 5} Nissen, , op. cit. ii. p. 447Google Scholar. But the Via Valeria, in republican times, did not go beyond Corfinium, although there must have been an unpaved track leading thence down the valley of the Aternus. I do not know what authority he had for saying that the road proceeded from near Popoli to Interpromium on the left bank of the river.

^{page 94 note 1} ‘Ad confluentes Aternum et Tirinum’ was the meeting place of the Via Claudia Nova and the Via Claudia Valeria; see J.R.S., vol. iii. p. 204, ‘The Via Claudia Nova.’ The course of the Via Claudia Nova from Peltuinum (Ansidonia) to its termination is quite uncertain. Perhaps for Caesar, in the absence of any paved highway, the route down the valley of the Aternus was easier and more natural than that down the Tirinus.

^{page 94 note 2} Italie regio IV. C.I.L. ix. Tab. iii.

^{page 94 note 3} Besnier, op. cit. p. 110. It is just possible on the score of distance that the road did cross the Sagittario before its confluence with the Aterno and that the bridge was three miles from Corfinium. But the bridge was across the Aternus, not the river now called the Sagittario, although in ancient times the word ‘Aternus’ might have covered both.

^{page 95 note 1} Not. Scav. 1879, p. 42.

^{page 96 note 1} Not. Scav. 1887, p. 420. Several large dolia were found in situ.

^{page 96 note 2} Not. Scav. 1892, p. 123.

^{page 96 note 3} The Via Claudia Nova was constructed in 47 A.D., the Via Claudia Valeria in 48–49 A.D. The dates probably refer to the completion of the roads. Cf. ‘The Via Claudia Nova’ in J.R.S. vol. iii., p. 204. Since writing that article I have discovered that Cuntz, (Jahreshefte des Oest. Arch. Inst. vii. 1904Google Scholar), deals with the Claudia Nova and especially with Pitinum (which he puts at Coppito) p. 65 sqq. and (p. 70) proposes to put Prifernum at Aquila.

^{page 96 note 4} Not. Scav. 1877, pp. 90, 91.

^{page 97 note 1} Not. Scav. 1877, pp. 126, 127.

^{page 97 note 2} Not. Scav. 1877, p. 127. A. de Nino here proposed to put Interpromium at Ara di Colle, but afterwards (Not. Scav. 1895, pp. 442–446) he changes his opinion.

^{page 97 note 3} Calore, in Arch. Stor. dell Art?, iv. (1891), 9Google Scholarseq.; Craven, Keppel, Excursions in the Abruzzi, vol. i. p. 281Google Scholarseq.

^{page 97 note 4} According to scale measurements the estimated distances are; from Corfinium to Interpromium m.p. 12, from Interpromium to Teate m.p. 16. The Itinerarium Antoninianum gives, in one passage (p. 308), Corfinio—XL—Interpromium—XVII.—Teate Marrucino. Elsewhere (p. 101) the distance from Sulmo to Interpromium is given as m.p. 25; thus, since (Caesar, , B.C. i. 18Google Scholar) Sulmo was m.p. 7 distant from Corfinium, the distance separating Corfinium and Interpromium is shewn to be m.p. 18. According to another passage Ostia Aterni is m.p. 25 distant from Interpromium and, as the distance from Ostia Aterni to Teate is according to measurements m.p. 8, that between Teate and Interpromium is m.p. 17. In any case the Itinerary points to a site between the villages of S. Valentino and Tocca Casauria. Cf. Mommsen, , C.I.L. ix. p. 286Google Scholar.

^{page 98 note 1} It reads C.C. SVLMONII · PRIMUS · ET · FORTVNATVS / PONDERARIVM PAGI · INTERPROMINI / vi TERRAEMOTVS DILAPSAM · A · SOLO / SVA PECVNIA · RESTITVERVNT: Mommsen ad. loc. says that this discovery is decisive proof of the existence of Interpromium in the neighbourhood of S. Clemente Casauria. Mancini (Topografia del pago Interpromio ne' Vestini, p. 32) wrongly puts Interpromium at Popoli.

^{page 98 note 2} Not. Scav. 1895, 442–446. The conclusions drawn by the writer (A. de Nino) are that Fara Vecchia and S. Clemente are on a site inhabited in Roman times, most probably that of Interpromium. He renounces his opinion (Not. Scav. 1877, 364, 443) that Interpromium was situated at Ara di Colle, just outside the Gola di Popoli.

^{page 98 note 3} Not. Scav. 1901, 263–285.

^{page 99 note 1} Not. Scav. 1885, 204, 205.

^{page 99 note 2} Not. Scav. 1890, 20, 21.

^{page 99 note 3} Not. Scav. 1894, 386, 387.

^{page 99 note 4} Mommsen, , C.I.L. ix. p. 286Google Scholar, note 1. Cf. Eph. Epigr. viii. p. 32.

^{page 100 note 1} C.I.L. ix. p. 286. He says that the mention of two Sulmonii, probably freedmen of Sulmo, mentioned in the inscription C.I.L. ix. 3046 (quoted p. 98, n. 1), inclines him to believe that it was in the territory of the Paeligni. Two other inscriptions (C.I.L. ix. 3072 from Manoppello, ; C.I.L. ix. 3049Google Scholar from Torre de' Passeri) mention respectively the Tribus Arnensis (Marrucini) and the Tribus Sergia (Paeligni).

^{page 100 note 2} op. cit. ii. p. 444.

^{page 100 note 3} Not. Scav. 1887, 159; Eph. Epigr. viii. p. 27, no. 120. The inscription reads SEPTIMIO · L · F/ARN · CALVO/AED · IIII VIR · I · D · PRAEF/EX · S · C / QVINQVENNALICIA/ POTESTATE / SEPTIMIVS · CALWS/ ANVS · FECIT

^{page 101 note 1} Mommsen, , C.I.L. ix. p. 282Google Scholar.

^{page 101 note 2} Not. Scav. 1880, 170–178.

^{page 102 note 1} Not. Scav. 1881, 294–297, where an inventory of all the funeral objects is given. Additional finds were made in 1882, 1883 and 1886. Not. Scav. 1882, 375; 1884, 87; 1886, 459. Eph. Epigr. viii. p. 27, nos. 119–128:

^{page 102 note 2} Not. Scav. 1886, 169; 1887, 158.

^{page 102 note 3} Not. Scav. 1888, 745. The reliefs have been described in detail by Ghislanzoni, E. in Mon. Lincei, vol. xix. p. 541–614Google Scholar, with plates.

^{page 103 note 1} ‘Zecca. Chieti sotterranea,’ para. 10 (published in the appendix to the local periodical L'Aterno, 1870, nos. 104–110 and 1871, nos. 2–9) and Not. Scav. 1880, 170 sqq. In Gli scavi della Via Ulpia in Chieti (Teramo, 1897Google Scholar) he summarises his previous writings and assigns the following course to the deverticulum in the neighbourhood of Chieti—Contrada S. Maria Callona—Civitella—Villa Adami—largo Trinità—Corso—largo Mercatello—strada del Popolo, Ulpia, Arniense, Toppi, Porta Pescara—and thence down towards Tricalle and the plain. Further remains of antiquity at Teate are mentioned by Abbate, op. cit. p. 300. He enumerates a theatre and a reservoir—the former near the Porta Reale, in the locality called Civitella, now mostly occupied by private houses. The latter is a building to the S. near the former convent of the Paolotti and consists of seven large chambers; in the vault of each, which is of brickwork, are two large openings.

^{page 103 note 2} Cf. Persichetti, ‘Alia ricerca della Via Caecilia,’ Röm. Mitt. 1902, 301.

^{page 104 note 1} Strabo, V. 4. 2. p. 241: Pliny, (N.H. iii. 106Google Scholar) and Mela (ii. 65) say that the territory of the Frentani extended right up to the Aternus, . Cf. C.I.L. ix. p. 316Google Scholar.

^{page 104 note 2} Not. Scav. 1896, 206–208.

^{page 104 note 3} Craven, Keppel, op. cit. vol. i. pp. 291–292Google Scholar. ‘In the days of the Roman republic this estuary was illustrated by the existence of a considerable town, which, from it, has been named Aternum, and entirely covered the site of the modern Pescara; with this difference, that it likewise extended to the opposite bank of the river, to which it was united by a bridge…. Several tombs and vestiges of ancient buildings have been found in the immediate vicinity, and attest the identity of Aternum; which has likewise been proved by inscriptions, many of which are preserved and copied.’