Julius Nepos

And now you all get to see the origin of my username. The Old Kingdom The founding of the Hittite Kingdom is attributed to either Labarna I or Hattusili I (the latter might also have had Labarna as a personal name),[21] who conquered the area south and north of Hattusa. Hattusili I campaigned as far as the Amorite kingdom of Yamkhad in Syria, where he attacked, but did not capture, its capital of Aleppo. His heir, Mursili I, conquered that city in a campaign conducted in 1595 BC.[22] Also in 1595 BC, Mursili I (or Murshilish I) conducted a great raid down the Euphrates River and captured Mari and Babylon, ejecting the Amorite founders of the Babylonian state in the process.[22] However, the Hittite campaigns caused internal dissension which forced a withdrawal of troops to the Hittite homelands. Throughout the remainder of the sixteenth century BC, the Hittite kings were held to their homelands by dynastic quarrels and warfare with the Hurrians—their neighbours to the east.[22] Also the campaigns into Syria and Mesopotamia may be responsible for the reintroduction of cuneiform writing into Anatolia, since the Hittite script is quite different from the script of the preceding Assyrian Colony period. Mursili continued the conquests of Hattusili I. Mursili's conquests reached southern Mesopotamia and even ransacked Babylon itself in 1531 BC.[23] Rather than incorporate Babylonia into Hittite domains, Mursili seems to have instead turned control of Babylonia over to his Kassite allies, who were to rule it for the next four centuries. This lengthy campaign, however, strained the resources of Hatti, and left the capital in a state of near-anarchy. Mursili was assassinated shortly after his return home, and the Hittite Kingdom was plunged into chaos. The Hurrians (under the control of an Indo-European Mitanni ruling class), a people living in the mountainous region along the upper Tigris and Euphrates rivers took advantage of the situation to seize Aleppo and the surrounding areas for themselves, as well as the coastal region of Adaniya, renaming it Kizzuwatna (later Cilicia). Following this, the Hittites entered a weak phase of obscure records, insignificant rulers, and reduced area of control. This pattern of expansion under strong kings followed by contraction under weaker ones, was to be repeated over and over again throughout the Hittite Kingdom's 500-year history, making events during the waning periods difficult to reconstruct with much precision. The political instability of these years of the Old Hittite Kingdom, can be explained in part by the nature of the Hittite kingship at that time. During the Old Hittite Kingdom period prior to 1400 BC, the king of the Hittites was not viewed by the Hittite citizenry as a "living god", like the Pharaohs of Egypt, but rather as a first among equals.[24] Only in the later period of the Hittite Empire, from 1400 BC until 1200 BC, did the kingship of the Hittites become more centralized and powerful. Also in earlier years the succession was not legally fixed, enabling the "war of the Roses" rivalries between northern and southern branches. The next monarch of any note following Mursili I was Telepinu (ca. 1500 BC), who won a few victories to the southwest, apparently by allying himself with one Hurrian state (Kizzuwatna) against another (Mitanni). Telepinu also attempted to secure the lines of succession.[25] The Middle Kingdom The last monarch of the Old kingdom, Telepinu, reigned until about 1500 BC. Telepinu's reign marked the end of the "Old Kingdom" and the beginning of the lengthy weak phase known as the "Middle Kingdom".[26] The period of the 15th century BC is largely unknown with very sparse surviving records.[27] Part of the reason for both the weakness and the obscurity is that the Hittites were under constant attack, mainly from the Kaska, a non Indo-European people settled along the shores of the Black Sea. The capital once again went on the move, first to Sapinuwa and then to Samuha. There is an archive in Sapinuwa but it has not been adequately translated to date. It segues into the "Hittite Empire period" proper, which dates from the reign of Tudhaliya I from ca. 1430 BC. One innovation that can be credited to these early Hittite rulers is the practice of conducting treaties and alliances with neighboring states; the Hittites were thus among the earliest known pioneers in the art of international politics and diplomacy. This is also when the Hittite religion adopted several gods and rituals from the Hurrians. The New Kingdom Tudhaliya IV (relief in Hattusa) With the reign of Tudhaliya I (who may actually not have been the first of that name; see also Tudhaliya), the Hittite Kingdom re-emerges from the fog of obscurity. Hittite civilization entered the period of time called the "Hittite Empire period". Many changes were afoot during this time, not the least of which was a strengthening of the kingship. Settlement of the Hittites progressed in the Empire period.[24] However, the Hittite people tended to settle in the older lands of south Anatolia rather than the lands of the Aegean. As this settlement progressed, treaties were signed with neighboring peoples.[24] During the Hittite Empire period the kingship became hereditary and the king took on a "superhuman aura" and began to be referred to by the Hittite citizens as "My Sun". The kings of the Empire period began acting as a high priest for the whole kingdom—making an annual tour of the Hittite holy cities, conducting festivals and supervising the upkeep of the sanctuaries.[24] During his reign (c. 1400 BC), King Tudhaliya I, again allied with Kizzuwatna, then vanquished the Hurrian states of Aleppo and Mitanni, and expanded to the west at the expense of Arzawa (a Luwian state). Another weak phase followed Tudhaliya I, and the Hittites' enemies from all directions were able to advance even to Hattusa and raze it. However, the Kingdom recovered its former glory under Suppiluliuma I (c. 1350 BC), who again conquered Aleppo, reduced Mitanni to tribute under his son-in-law, and defeated Carchemish, another Syrian city-state. With his own sons placed over all of these new conquests, Babylonia still in the hands of the Kassites, this left Suppiluliuma the supreme power broker in the known world, alongside Assyria and Egypt, and it was not long before Egypt was seeking an alliance by marriage of another of his sons with the widow of Tutankhamen. Unfortunately, that son was evidently murdered before reaching his destination, and this alliance was never consummated. However, Assyria began to grow in power also, with the ascension of Ashur-uballit I in 1365 BC. Ashur-uballit I attacked and defeated Mattiwaza the Mitanni king despite attempts by the Hittite king Suppiluliumas I, now fearful of growing Assyrian power, attempting to preserve his throne with military support. The lands of the Mitanni and Hurrians were duly appropriated by Assyria, enabling it to encroach on Hittite territory in Asia Minor, and Adad-nirari I annexed Carchemish from the control of the Hittites.[28] After Suppiluliumas I, and a very brief reign by his eldest son, another son, Mursili II became king (c. 1330). Having inherited a position of strength in the east, Mursili was able to turn his attention to the west, where he attacked Arzawa and a city known as Millawanda in the coastal land of Ahhiyawa. Many recent scholars have surmised that Millawanda in Ahhiyawa is likely a reference to Miletus and Achaea known to Greek history, though there is a small number who has disputed this connection. Battle of Kadesh Egyptian pharaoh Ramesses II storming the Hittite fortress of Dapur. Main article: Battle of Kadesh Hittite prosperity was mostly dependent on control of the trade routes and metal sources. Because of the importance of Northern Syria to the vital routes linking the Cilician gates with Mesopotamia, defense of this area was crucial, and was soon put to the test by Egyptian expansion under Pharaoh Ramesses II. The outcome of the battle is uncertain, though it seems that the timely arrival of Egyptian reinforcements prevented total Hittite victory.[29] The Egyptians forced the Hittites to take refuge in the fortress of Kadesh, but their own losses prevented them from sustaining a siege. This battle took place in the 5th year of Rameses (c.1274 BC by the most commonly used chronology). Downfall and Demise of the Kingdom Egypto-Hittite Peace Treaty (c. 1258 BC) between Hattusili III and Ramesses II is the best known early written peace treaty. Istanbul Archaeology Museum After this date, the power of both the Hittites and Egyptians began to decline yet again because of the rising power of the Assyrians.[30] The Assyrian king Shalmaneser I had seized the opportunity to vanquish Hurria and Mitanni, occupy their lands, and expand up to the head of the Euphrates in Anatolia and into Babylonia, Iran, Aram (Syria), while Muwatalli was preoccupied with the Egyptians. The Hittites had vainly tried to preserve the Mitanni kingdom with military support.[28] Assyria now posed just as great a threat to Hittite trade routes as Egypt ever had. Muwatalli's son, Urhi-Teshub, took the throne and ruled as king for 7 years as Mursili III before being ousted by his uncle, Hattusili III after a brief civil war. In response to increasing Assyrian encroachments into Hittite territory, he concluded a peace and alliance with Rameses II, presenting his daughter's hand in marriage to the Pharaoh.[30] The "Treaty of Kadesh", one of the oldest completely surviving treaties in history, fixed their mutual boundaries in Canaan, and was signed in the 21st year of Rameses (c. 1258 BC). Terms of this treaty included the marriage of one of the Hittite princesses to the Pharaoh Rameses.[30][31] Hattusili's son, Tudhaliya IV, was the last strong Hittite king able to keep the Assyrians out of the Hittite heartland to some degree, though he lost territory to them, and was heavily defeated by Tukulti-Ninurta I of Assyria in the Battle of Nihiriya. He even temporarily annexed the island of Cyprus, before that too fell to Assyria. The very last king, Suppiluliuma II also managed to win some victories, including a naval battle against Alashiya[32] off the coast of Cyprus. But it was too little and too late. The Assyrians, under Ashur-resh-ishi I had by this time annexed much Hittite territory in Asia Minor and Syria, driving out the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar I in the process, who also had eyes on Hittite lands. The Sea Peoples had already begun their push down the Mediterranean coastline, starting from the Aegean, and continuing all the way to Philistia—taking Cilicia and Cyprus away from the Hittites en route and cutting off their coveted trade routes. This left the Hittite homelands vulnerable to attack from all directions, and Hattusa was burnt to the ground sometime around 1180 BC following a combined onslaught from new waves of invaders, the Kaskas, Phrygians and Bryges. The Hittite Kingdom thus vanished from historical records.[33] The end of the kingdom was part of the larger Bronze Age Collapse. The Syro-Hittite Kingdoms By 1160 BC, the political situation in Asia Minor looked vastly different from that of only 25 years earlier. In that year, the Assyrian king Tiglath-Pileser I was defeating the Mushku (Phrygians) who had been attempting to press into Assyrian colonies in southern Anatolia from the Anatolian highlands, and the Gasga people, the Hittites' old enemies from the northern hill-country between Hatti and the Black Sea, seem to have joined them soon after. The Phrygians had apparently overrun Cappadocia from the West, with recently discovered epigraphic evidence confirming their origins as the Balkan "Bryges" tribe, forced out by the Macedonians. Although the Hittite kingdom disappeared from Anatolia at this point, there emerged a number of so-called Neo-Hittite kingdoms in Anatolia and northern Syria. They were the successors of the Hittite Kingdom. The most notable Syrian Neo-Hittite kingdoms were those at Carchemish and Milid (near the later Melitene). These Neo-Hittite Kingdoms gradually fell under the control of the Neo Assyrian Empire (911–608 BC). Carchemish and Milid were made vassals of Assyria under Shalmaneser III (858–823 BC), and fully incorporated into Assyria during the reign of Sargon II (722–705 BC). A large and powerful state known as Tabal occupied much of southern Anatolia. Known as Gk. Τιβαρηνοί Tibarenoi, Lat. Tibareni, Thobeles in Josephus, their language may have been Luwian,[34] testified to by monuments written using Luwian hieroglyphics.[35] This state too was conquered and incorporated into the vast Assyrian Empire. Ultimately, both Luwian hieroglyphs and cuneiform were rendered obsolete by an innovation, the alphabet, which seems to have entered Anatolia simultaneously from the Aegean (with the Bryges, who changed their name to Phrygians), and from the Phoenicians and neighboring peoples in Syria.

I got the same thing too. My original intention was to post the entire first book of Dionysius of Halicarnassus's Roman Antiquities, but that woud have been too long of a post.

This city, mistress of the whole earth and sea, which the Romans now inhabit, is said to have had as its earliest occupants the barbarian Sicels, a native race. As to the condition of the place before their time, whether it was occupied by others or uninhabited, none can certainly say. But some time later the Aborigines gained possession of it, having taken it from the occupants after a long war. 2 These people had previously lived on the mountains in unwalled villages and scattered groups; but when the Pelasgians,23 with whom some other Greeks had united, assisted them in the war against their neighbours, they drove the Sicels out of this place, walled in many towns, and contrived to subjugate all the country that lies between the two rivers, the Liris and the Tiber. These rivers spring from the foot of the Apennine mountains, the range by which all Italy is divided into two parts throughout its length, and at points about eight hundred stades from one another discharge themselves into the Tyrrhenian Sea, the Tiber to the north, near the city of Ostia, and the Liris to the south, as it flows by Minturnae, both these cities being Roman colonies. 3 And these people remained in this same place of abode, both never afterwards driven out by any others; but, although they continued to be one and the same people, their name was twice changed. Till the time of the Trojan war they preserved their ancient name p31of Aborigines; but under Latinus, their king, who reigned at the time of that war, they began to be called Latins, 4 and when Romulus founded the city named after himself sixteen generations after the taking of Troy, they took the name which they now bear. And in the course of time they contrived to raise themselves from the smallest nation to the greatest and from the most obscure to the most illustrious, not only by their humane reception of those who sought a home among them, but also by sharing the rights of citizenship with all who had been conquered by them in war after a brave resistance, by permitting all the slaves, too, who were manumitted among them to become citizens, and by disdaining no condition of men from whom the commonwealth might reap an advantage, but above everything else by their form of government, which they fashioned out of their many experiences, always extracting something useful from every occasion. 10 1 There are some who affirm that the Aborigines, from whom the Romans are originally descended, were natives of Italy, a stock which came into being spontaneously24 (I call Italy all that peninsula which is bounded by the Ionian Gulf25 and the Tyrrhenian Sea and, thirdly, by the Alps on the landward side); and these authors say that they were first called Aborigines because they were the founders of the p33families of their descendants, or, as we should call them, genearchai or prôtogonoi.26 2 Others claim that certain vagabonds without house or home, coming together out of many places, met one another there by chance and took up their abode in the fastnesses, living by robbery and grazing their herds. And these writers change their name, also, to one more suitable to their condition, calling them Aberrigenes,27 to show that they were wanderers; indeed, according to these, the race of the Aborigines would seem to be no different from those the ancients called Leleges; for this is the name they generally gave to the homeless and mixed peoples who had no fixed abode which they could call their country.28 3 Still others have a story to the effect that they were colonists sent out by those Ligurians who are neighbours of the Umbrians. For the Ligurians inhabit not only many parts of Italy but some parts of Gaul as well, but which of these lands is their native country is not known, since nothing certain is said of them further. 11 1 But the most learned of the Roman historians, among whom is Porcius Cato, who compiled with the greatest care the "origins"29 of the Italian cities, p35Gaius Sempronius30 and a great many others, say that they were Greeks, part of those who once dwelt in Achaia, and that they migrated many generations before the Trojan war. But they do not go on to indicate either the Greek tribe to which they belonged or the city from which they removed, or the date or the leader of the colony, or as the result of what turns of fortune they left their mother country; and although they are following a Greek legend, they have cited no Greek historian as their authority. It is uncertain, therefore, what the truth of the matter is. But if what they say is true, the Aborigines can be a colony of no other people but of those who are now called Arcadians; 2 for these were the first of all the Greeks to cross the Ionian Gulf, under the leadership of Oenotrus, the son of Lycaon, and to settle in Italy. This Oenotrus was the fifth from Aezeius and Phoroneus, who were the first kings in the Peloponnesus. For Niobê was the daughter of Phoroneus, and Pelasgus was the son of Niobê and Zeus, it is said; Lycaon was the son of Aezeius and Deïanira was the daughter of Lycaon; Deïanira and Pelasgus were the parents of another Lycaon, whose son Oenotrus was born seventeen generations before the Trojan expedition. This, then, was the time when the Greeks sent the colony into Italy. 3 Oenotrus left Greece because he was dissatisfied with his portion of his father's land; for, as Lycaon had twenty-two sons, it was necessary to divide Arcadia into as many shares. For this reason Oenotrus left the Peloponnesus, p37prepared a fleet, and crossed the Ionian Gulf with Peucetius, one of his brothers. They were accompanied by many of their own people — for this nation is said to have been very populous in early times — and by as many other Greeks as had less land than was sufficient for them. 4 Peucetius landed his people above the Iapygian Promontory, which was the first part of Italy they made, and settled there; and from him the inhabitants of this region were called Peucetians. But Oenotrus with the greater part of the expedition came into the other sea that washes the western regions along the coast of Italy; it was then called the Ausonian Sea, from the Ausonians who dwelt beside it, but after the Tyrrhenians became masters at sea its name was changed to that which it now bears. 12 1 And finding there much land suitable for pasturage and much for tillage, but for the most part unoccupied, and even that which was inhabited not thickly populated, he cleared some of it of the barbarians and built small towns contiguous to one another on the mountains, which was the customary manner of habitation in use among the ancients. And all the land he occupied, which was very extensive, was called Oenotria, and all the people under his command Oenotrians, which was the third name they had borne. For in the reign of Aezeius they were called Aezeians, when Lycaon succeeded to the rule, Lycaonians, and after Oenotrus p39led them into Italy they were for a while called Oenotrians. 2 What I say is supported by the testimony of Sophocles, the tragic poet, in his drama entitledTriptolemus; for he there represents Demeter as informing Triptolemus how large a tract of land he would have to travel over while sowing it with the seeds she had given him. For, after first referring to the eastern part of Italy, which reaches from the Iapygian Promontory to the Sicilian Strait, and then touching upon Sicily on the opposite side, she returns again to the western part of Italy and enumerates the most important nations that inhabit this coast, beginning with the settlement of the Oenotrians. But it is enough to quote merely the iambics in which he says: "And after this, — first, then, upon the right, Oenotria wide-outstretched and Tyrrhene Gulf, And next the Ligurian land shall welcome thee."31 3 And Antiochus of Syracuse,32 a very early historian, in his account of the settlement of Italy, when enumerating the most ancient inhabitants in the order in which each of them held possession of any part of it, says that the first who are reported to have inhabited that country are the Oenotrians. His words are these: "Antiochus, the son of Xenophanes, wrote this account of Italy, which comprises all that is most credible and certain out of p41the ancient tales; this country, which is now called Italy, was formerly possessed by the Oenotrians." Then he relates in what manner they were governed and says that in the course of time Italus came to be their king, after whom they were named Italians; that this man was succeeded by Morges, after whom they were called Morgetes, and that Sicelus, being received as a guest by Morges and setting up a kingdom for himself, divided the nation. After which he adds these words: "Thus those who had been Oenotrians became Sicels, Morgetes and Italians." 13 1 Now let me also show the origin of the Oenotrian race, offering as my witness another of the early historians, Pherecydes of Athens,33 who was a genealogist inferior to none. He thus expresses himself concerning the kings of Arcadia: "Of Pelasgus and Deïanira was born Lycaon; this man married Cyllenê, a Naiad nymph, after whom Mount Cyllenê is named." Then, having given an account of their children and of the places each of them inhabited, he mentions Oenotrus and Peucetius, in these words: "And Oenotrus, after whom are named the Oenotrians who live in Italy, and Peucetius, after whom are named the Peucetians who live on the Ionian Gulf." 2 Such, then, are the accounts given by the ancient poets and writers of legends concerning the places of abode and the origin of the Oenotrians; and on their authority p43I assume that if the Aborigines were in reality a Greek nation, according to the opinion of Cato, Sempronius and many others, they were descendants of these Oenotrians. For I find that the Pelasgians and Cretans and the other nations that lived in Italy came thither afterwards; nor can I discover that any other expedition more ancient than this came from Greece to the western parts of Europe. 3 I am of the opinion that the Oenotrians, besides making themselves masters of many other regions in Italy, some of which they found unoccupied and others but thinly inhabited, also seized a portion of the country of the Umbrians, and that they were called Aborigines from their dwelling on the mountains34 (for it is characteristic of the Arcadians to be fond of the mountains), in the same manner as at Athens some are called Hyperakriori,35 and others Paralioi.36 4 But if any are naturally slow in giving credit to accounts of ancient matters without due examination, let them be slow also in believing the Aborigines to be Ligurians, Umbrians, or any other barbarians, and let them suspend their judgment till they have heard what remains to be told and then determine which opinion out of all is the most probable. 14 1 Of the cities first inhabited by the Aborigines few remained in my day; the greatest part of them, having been laid waste both by wars and other calamities, are abandoned. These cities were in the Reatine territory, not far from the Apennine p45mountains, as Terentius Varro writes in his Antiquities,37 the nearest being one day's journey distant from Rome. I shall enumerate the most celebrated of them, following his account. 2 Palatium, twenty-five stades distant from Reate (a city that was still inhabited by Romans down to my time),38near the Quintian Way.39 Tribula, about sixty stades from Reate and standing upon a low hill. Suesbula, at the same distance from Tribula, near the Ceraunian Mountains. Suna, a famous city forty stades from Suesbula; in it there is a very ancient temple of Mars.3 Mefula, about thirty stades from Suna; its ruins and traces of its walls are pointed out. Orvinium, forty stades from Mefula, a city as famous and large as any in that region; for the foundations of its walls are still to be seen and some tombs of venerable antiquity, as well as the circuits of burying-places40 extending over lofty mounds; and p47there is also an ancient temple of Minerva built on the summit. 4 At the distance of eighty stades from Reate, as one goes along the Curian Way41 past Mount Coretus, stood Corsula, a town but recently destroyed. There is also pointed out an island, called Issa, surrounded by a lake; the Aborigines are said to have lived on this island without any artificial fortification, relying on the marshy waters of the lake instead of walls. Near Issa is Maruvium, situated on an arm of the same lake and distant forty stades from what they call the Septem Aquae. 5 Again, as one goes from Reate by the road towards the Listine district,42 there is Batia,43 thirty stades distant; then Tiora, called Matiene, at a distance of p49three hundred stades. In this city, they say, there was a very ancient oracle of Mars, the nature of which was similar to that of the oracle which legend says once existed at Dodona; only there a pigeon was said to prophesy, sitting on a sacred oak,44 whereas among the Aborigines a heaven-sent bird, which they call picus and the Greeks dryokolaptês,45 appearing on a pillar of wood, did the same. 6 Twenty-four stades from the afore-mentioned city46 stood Lista, the mother-city of the Aborigines, which at a still earlier time the Sabines had captured by a surprise attack, having set out against it from Amiternum by night. Those who survived the taking of the place, after being received by the Reatines, made many attempts to retake their former home, but being unable to do so, they consecrated the country to the gods, as if it were still their own, invoking curses against those who should enjoy the fruits of it. 15 1 Seventy stades from Reate stood Cutilia,47 a famous city, beside a mountain. Not far from it there is a lake, four hundred feet in diameter, filled by everflowing natural springs and, it is said, bottomless. This lake, as having something divine about p51it, the inhabitants of the country look upon as sacred to Victory; and surrounding it with a palisade, so that no one may approach the water, they keep it inviolate; except that at certain times each year those whose sacred office it is go to the little island in the lake and perform the sacrifices required by custom. 2 This island is about fifty feet in diameter and rises not more than a foot above the water; it is not fixed, and floats about in any direction, according to as the wind gently wafts it from one place to another. An herb grows on the island like the flowering rush and also certain small shrubs, a phenomenon which to those who are unacquainted with the works of Nature seems unaccountable and a marvel second to none.48 16 1 The Aborigines are said to have settled first in these places after they had driven out the Umbrians. And making excursions from there, they warred not only upon the barbarians in general but particularly upon the Sicels, their neighbours, in order to dispossess them of their lands. First, a sacred band of young men went forth, consisting of a few who were sent out by their parents to seek a livelihood, according to a custom which I know many barbarians and Greeks have followed.49 2 For whenever the population of any of their cities increased to such a degree that the produce of their p53lands no longer sufficed for them all, or the earth, injured by unseasonable changes of the weather, brought forth her fruits in less abundance than usual, or any other occurrence of like nature, either good or bad, introduced a necessity of lessening their numbers, they would dedicate to some god or other all the men born within a certain year, and providing them with arms, would send them out of their country. If, indeed, this was done by way of thanksgiving for populousness or for victory in war, they would first offer the usual sacrifices and then send forth their colonies under happy auspices; but if, having incurred the wrath of Heaven, they were seeking deliverance from the evils that beset them, they would perform much the same ceremony, but sorrowfully and begging forgiveness of the youths they were sending away. 3 And those who departed, feeling that henceforth they would have no share in the land of their fathers but must acquire another, looked upon any land that received them in friendship or that they conquered in war as their country. And the god to whom they had been dedicated when they were sent out seemed generally to assist them and to prosper the colonies beyond all human expectation. 4 In pursuance, therefore, of this custom some of the Aborigines also at that time, as their places were growing very populous (for they would not put any of their children to death, looking on this as one of the greatest of crimes), dedicated to some god or other the offspring of a certain year and when these children were grown to be men they sent them out of their country as colonists; and they, after leaving their own land, were p55continually plundering the Sicels. 5 And as soon as they became masters of any places in the enemy's country the rest of the Aborigines, also, who needed lands now attacked each of them their neighbours with greater security and built various cities, some of which are inhabited to this day — Antemnae, Tellenae, Ficulea, which is near the Corniculan mountains, as they are called, and Tibur, where a quarter of the city is even to this day called the Sicel quarter;50 and of all their neighbours they harassed the Sicels most. From these quarrels there arose a general war between the nations more important than any that had occurred previously in Italy, and it went on extending over a long period of time. 17 1 Afterwards some of the Pelasgians who inhabited Thessaly, as it is now called, being obliged to leave their country, settled among the Aborigines and jointly with them made war upon the Sicels. It is possible that the Aborigines received them partly in the hope of gaining their assistance, but I believe it was chiefly on account of their kinship; 2 for the Pelasgians, too, were a Greek nation originally from the Peloponnesus. They were unfortunate in many ways but particularly in wandering much and in having no fixed abode. For they first lived in the neighbourhood of the Achaean Argos, as it is now called, being natives of the country, according to most accounts. They received their name originally from Pelasgus, their king. 3 Pelasgus was the p57son of Zeus, it is said, and of Niobê the daughter of Phoroneus, who, as the legend goes, was the first mortal woman Zeus had knowledge of. In the sixth generation afterwards, leaving the Peloponnesus, they removed to the country which was then called Haemonia and now Thessaly. The leaders of the colony were Achaeus, Phthius and Pelasgus, the sons of Larisa and Poseidon. When they arrived in Haemonia they drove out the barbarian inhabitants and divided the country into three parts, calling them, after the names of their leaders, Phthiotis, Achaia and Pelasgiotis. After they had remained there five generations, during which they attained to the greatest prosperity while enjoying the produce of the most fertile plains in Thessaly, about the sixth generation they were driven out of it by the Curetes and Leleges, who are now called Aetolians and Locrians, and by many others who lived near Parnassus, their enemies being commanded by Deucalion, the son of Prometheus and Clymenê, the daughter of Oceanus. 18 1 And dispersing themselves in their flight, some went to Crete, others occupied some of the islands called the Cyclades, some settled in the region called Hestiaeotis near Olympus and Ossa, others crossed into Boeotia, Phocis and Euboea; and some, passing over into Asia, occupied many places on the coast along the Hellespont and many of the adjacent islands, particularly the one now called Lesbos, uniting with those who composed the first colony that was sent thither from Greece under p59Macar, the son of Crinacus.51 2 But the greater part of them, turning inland, took refuge among the inhabitants of Dodona, their kinsmen, against whom, as a sacred people, none would make war; and there they remained for a reasonable time. But when they perceived they were growing burdensome to their hosts, since the land could not support them all, they left it in obedience to an oracle that commanded them to sail to Italy, which was then called Saturnia. 3 And having prepared a great many ships they set out to cross the Ionian Gulf, endeavouring to reach the nearest parts of Italy. But as the wind was in the south and they were unacquainted with those regions, they were carried too far out to sea and landed at one of the mouths of the Po called the Spinetic mouth. In that very place they left their ships and such of their people as were least able to bear hardships, placing a guard over the ships, to the end that, if their affairs did not prosper, they might be sure of a retreat. 4 Those who were left behind there surrounded their camp with a wall and brought in plenty of provisions in their ships; and when their affairs seemed to prosper satisfactorily, they built a city and called it by the same name as the mouth of the river.52 These people attained to a greater degree of prosperity than any others who dwelt on the Ionian Gulf; for they had the mastery at sea for a long time, and p61out of their revenues from the sea they used to send tithes to the god at Delphi, which were among the most magnificent sent by any people.5 But later, when the barbarians in the neighbourhood made war upon them in great numbers, they deserted the city; and these barbarians in the course of time were driven out by the Romans. So perished that part of the Pelasgians that was left at Spina. 19 1 Those, however, who had turned inland crossed the mountainous part of Italy and came to the territory of the Umbrians who were neighbours to the Aborigines. (The Umbrians inhabited a great many other part of Italy also and were an exceeding great and ancient people.) At first the Pelasgians made themselves masters of the lands where they first settled and took some of the small towns belonging to the Umbrians. But when a great army came together against them, they were terrified at the number of their enemies and betook themselves to the country of the Aborigines. 2 And these, seeing fit to treat them as enemies, made haste to assemble out of the places nearest at hand, in order to drive them out of the country. But the Pelasgians luckily chanced to be encamped at that time near Cutilia, a city of the Aborigines hard by the sacred lake, and observing the little island circling round in it and learning from the captives they had taken in the fields the name of the inhabitants, they concluded that their oracle was now fulfilled. p633 For this oracle, which had been delivered to them in Dodona and which Lucius Mallius,53 no obscure man, says he himself saw engraved in ancient characters upon one of the tripods standing in the precinct of Zeus, was as follows: "Fare forth the Sicels' Saturnian land to seek, Aborigines' Cotylê,54 too, where floats an isle; With these men mingling, to Phoebus send a tithe, And heads to Cronus' son, and send to the sire a man."55

Clicking "Terrain Data" on the FE1 main page redirects me to the FE2 main page.

Welcome! You're a lot quicker at uploading an avatar than I am. Enjoy your time here.

Hello, fellow newcomer. Welcome to the forest, enjoy your time here, and other more or less generic greetings.

Unused tracks is what I was beginning to think too. I've played through the entire game and remember all the tracks (even the really short ones), but I can't remember ever having heard these.

I've been going through the sound test in FE1 lately. Most of the names of the tracks are given in FE1's OST (called "The Best Vol. 1"), but a couple of the short tracks aren't on that album. There are two tracks of which I have no idea when in the game they play, and I would like to know if anyone here could help me out. I've attached these tracks to this post (I've named them "こうか", which means "effect", and "何", meaning "what?", because I have no idea when they play). I have little hope, to be honest, but any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

I get that all these limitations play a part, and I don't mind some predictability. Generally, I'm fine with the AI as it is now. It's just that I wish enemies would stop making decisions that hurt only themselves.

No, the myrmidon couldn't attack anyone else in my example. I know the AI isn't that stupid to go for 0 damage if they can actually deal damage to someone. Unless it's FE1, then enemies always gang up on Marth, even if they would do no damage to him and could do damage to others (I've even had enemies attack Marth for 0 damage when they could have killed another character). The AI can indeed be very predictable, and some patterns become clearly visible quite early on. I'm not very fond of that predictability. It makes the game less challenging if I can predict what my opponent is going to do, and I can just take advantage of its most stupid actions.

I was playing Awakening yesterday, and this enemy myrmidon decided it would be a good idea to attack Kellam, doubling him for no damage and taking 15 damage in return. Then I thought: "Overall, the AI may have become a lot better since FE1, but at least in FE1 enemies didn't just attack you for no damage" (well, unless it's Marth; the AI in that game always goes after Marth). Enemies attacking your units for no damage is something that has been bothering me for a long time now, especially when they take a lot of damage in return. I wanted to ask: what do you think of Fire Emblem's AI? What issues do you experience with the current (FE13's) AI? How do you feel it has improved over the course of the series, and do you think it has ever taken a step back (as in my example)? Feel free to share whatever odd things the AI has done in your playthroughs.

I've never ragequit a chapter (yet), but the one that made me come closest to it was FE1 chapter 22. You have to advance quickly if you want to save the village (necessary to get the Falchion), but you're stopped halfway through by a horde of Dragon Knights with their immense DEF. So you'll have to warp someone over to the village who can kill the Thief and survive all the enemies who then gang up on him. Then you have to kill the horde quickly and retreat, unless you want to get overrun by Dragon Knight, Paladin and Bishop reinforcements. The FE11 chapters which were hard because of Ballisticians aren't really difficult in FE1, where Ballisticians only have 2 range. I also found FE8 chapter 11 on Ephraim's route quite annoying. And the first time I played Lunatic in FE13 was a disaster. I really had to adapt my playing style to that difficulty.

Depending on the game, either build, CON or STR.

Yes, their own attack speed is reduced, but they do not reduce the player's attack speed, which was my point. The effects of the player's growing attack, hit and critical are balanced by the enemies' growing attack reduce, hit reduce and critical reduce, but as the player's weight buffer grows, the enemy's "weight buffer reduce" does not grow, because there is no weight buffer reduce. This makes weight less and less relevant as the game progresses.

The main issue with weight is that it functions entirely differently from other weapon statistics. Might gives a bonus to attack, hit gives a bonus to accuracy, critical gives a bonus to critical, but weight gives a penalty to attack speed. If we're debating whether we want a static stat like Con or a progressing stat like Str to reduce the penalty, the point of the debate is: do we want units to be impaired by weight the entire game or do we want units to grow out of weight being a hindrance to them? I would certainly choose the former. Despite weight functioning so differently than other weapon stats, it still is a weapon stat. All other weapon stats remain important throughout the entire game: the further you are into the game, the higher your units' attack, hit and critical will be (because of strength and skill growing as they level-up). However enemies will have higher defence, resistance, avoid and critical evade, so your increase in attack, hit and critical is balanced by the enemies' increase in attack reduce, hit reduce and critical reduce, so the "might issue", "hit issue" and "critical issue" remain. But enemies have no attack speed reduce. As a unit's weight buffer grows, it simply grows, and the "weight issue" simply grows smaller and smaller, until it ceases to exist altogether. That's why I am in favour of a static buffer rather than a progressing one.

I would like to see weapon weight return because I consider it one of the strategic factors in choosing one weapon over the other. I don't its absence in FE12 or FE13, but I prefer its presence. It just requires you to give more thought to which weapons to use, and which weapons to use when. However, if it were to return, it ought to be balanced. I'll go over all the options (so prepare for a lengthy post). Having no buffer would make weight too important of a factor. To take FE1 as an example, a fighter with capped speed (20) would still suffer a penalty of 7 from an Iron Axe. That's 35% of the speed cap. The Bishop with 15 SPD and Fire would double the Dragon Knight with 20 SPD and Iron Lance. Now later games did a better job at balancing speed and penalty, but the penalty is always there and it can be quite big. I don't consider strength affecting the penalty very desirable. I mean, the people who want to use stronger weapons the most are exactly those people who have low strength in the first place (so it's actually counterproductive). It also makes weight irrelevant later into the game, except for mages, who are just stuck with bad strength all the way through. So overall I think CON or build would be the best options to go. But that would require some balancing.

I know 'Side Story' sounds silly, but then, '外伝' is not really a word that is easy to translate. That's probably why it's called Gaiden. But I don't like 'Gaiden'. It's not really Japanese, and it's not really English either. Translation of names is a topic I have often thought about, but without ever reaching really satisfactory conclusions. So let's just call it FE2 from now on. Anyway, thanks for the welcomes.

I've made sheet music for the melody of "Destiny". I play keyboards though, so I don't know whether it will be of any use to you. It's in G-clef, and the notes range from E4 to A6.

http://www.gamefaqs.com/nes/562649-fire-emblem-ankoku-ryu-to-hikari-no-tsurugi/faqs/21975 Found it, it actually wasn't that hard of a search. The site uses a very circuitous way of explaining it, using calculations rather than growth rates, but it basically comes down to this: Class growth rate for HP is 150. Class growth rate for luck is 0. Class growth rates are 50 for all other stats (keep in mind that resistance is not considered a growing stat in this game). And all classes indeed have the same growth rates.

I remember reading on a website (it was an FAQ or game mechanics guide or something similar) that all class growth rates, for all classes, in all stats, are 50. I remember the site also having some other information that isn't on the FE1 page yet (such as arena data and the calculations for gaining experience). I'll see if I can find the site somewhere, and will let you know when I do.

Hello, fellow fans of Fire Emblem! I suppose introductions are in order. First things first: My name is Daniel Boerman. I have always been really bad at thinking up usernames, so my username is the name of a Hittite king. My hobbies: justice, law, history, linguistics, Fire Emblem, the works of Tolkien. I am quite scrupulous, sometimes to an annoying extent, so apologies in advance if I ever annoy anyone here with my attention to detail. Now the Fire Emblem related stuff: I've been a fan of Fire Emblem for quite a few years now (I think six, maybe even seven). I haven't played that many Fire Emblem games though, mainly due to lack of time (I am a big fan though, and intend to play all Fire Emblem games). The first game I played was Shadow Dragon and I have since then also played The Sacred Stones and Awakening, but I haven't beaten either of the three, because the thought entered my head: 'I should play all Fire Emblem games in order.' So I have now beaten Shadow Dragons and the Sword of Light and am currently playing Side Story (don't expect me to ever call it 'Gaiden', because, even though it's its official English name, it isn't even English). Don't expect me to be very active, as I haven't got much time to spare, but being the Fire Emblem fan I am, I could not resist the urge to create an account anyway. Being the Fire Emblem fan I am, I probably also won't be able to resist the urge to post things on these forums from time to time, though. And closing, a summary of this lengthy introduction: Hi!