Page:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography Volume II.djvu/336

 320 JIELINOPITAGI. (II. ii. 717). It was bituated upon the sca-co.ist (Herod, vii. 188; Scylax, p. 25; Apoll. Rhod. i. 592), andis described by Livy (xliv. 13) as situated at the roots of Mt. Ossa, and by Strabo (ix. p. 443) as lying in the gulf between Ossa and Peliuni. Leake therefore places it near AgMa {Northern Greece, vol. iv. p. 414). Meliboea was taken and plundered by the Romans under Cn. Octavius, b. C. 168. (Liv. xliv 46: Meliboea is also mentioned by Strab. is. p. 436; Steph. B. s. v. Mela, ii. 3; Plin. iv. 9. s. 16.) The Meliboean purple is said by Lucretius (ii. 499; Virg. Am. v. 251) to have derived its name from this town. Many modern writers, however, suppose the name to have come from the small island Meliboea at the mouth of the Orontes in Syria ; but there is no reason for this supposition, as the shellfish from which the purple dye is obtained is found in the present day off the coast of Thessaly. 2. A town of Histiaeotis in Thessaly, is conjec- tured by Leake to be represented by Voivoda. (Liv. sxsvi. 13; Leake, Northern Greece, vol. iv. p. 536.) JIELINO'PHAGI {Meivo(pdyoi), a people of Thrace upon the coast of the Euxine, near Salmy- dessus. (Xen. Anab. vii. 5. § 12 ; Theopomp. ap. Steph. B. s. V.) They are, perhaps, the same people as the Asti ('Ao-toi) whom Strabo places in the same neighbourhood (vii. pp. 319, 320). ME'LItA {MeAiTTj : Eth. MeiTa7os, IMelitensis : Malta), an island in the Mediterranean sea, to the S. of Sicily, from the nearest point of which it is dis- tant 47 geogr. miles, but 55 from cape Pachynum. Strabo gives this last distance as 88 miles, which is greatly overstated ; while Pliny calls it 84 miles distant from Camarina, which equally exceeds the truth. (Strab. vi. p. 277; Plin. iii. 8. s. 14.) The island is about 17 miles long, and between 9 and 10 in breadth, and is separated only by a narrow channel from the adjoining island of Gaulos, now Gozo. Notwithstanding its small extent, the opportune situ- ation of Melita in the channel between Sicily and Africa, and the excellence of its harbours, must have early rendered it a place of importance as a commercial station, and it was occupied, probably at a very early period, by a Phoenician colony. (Diud. V. 12.) The date of this is wholly uncertain, and it is called by later writers for the most part a Carthaginian settlement (Scyl. p. 50. § 110 ; Steph. B. s. v.), which it certainly became in after times; but there can be no doubt that Diodorus is right in describing it as originally a Phoenician one, established by that people as an emporium and har- bour of refuge during their long voyages towards the west. The same author tells us that in con- sequence of this commercial traffic, the colony rose rapidly to prosperity, which was increased by the industry of its inhabitants, who practised various kinds of manufactures with great success. (Diod. I. c.) But notwithstanding this account of its pros- perity we have scarcely any knowledge of its his- tory. The notice of it by Scylax as a Carthaginian colony, seems to prove that it had not in his day received a Greek settlement; and indeed there is no trace in history of its having ever fallen into the hands of the Greeks of Sicily, though its coins, as well as inscriptions, indicate that it received a strong tincture of Greek civilisation; and at a later period it appears to have been in a great measure Hellen- ised. Some of these inscriptions point to a close coimectiun with Syracuse in particular, but of the origin and nature of this we have no account. MELITA. (Boeckli, Corp. laser. Or. 5752, &c.) In the First Punic War we find Melita still in the hands of the Carthaginians; and though it was ravaged in B. c. 257 by a Roman fleet under Atilius Regulus, it does not appear that it fell permanently into the hands of the Romans. At the outbreak of the Second Punic War it was held by a Carthaginian garrison under Haniilcar, the son of Gisgo, who, however, surrendered the island to Tib. Sempronius, with a Roman fleet, b. c. 218 (Liv. xxi. 51); and from this time it continued without intermission subject to the Roman rule. It was annexed to the pi-ovince of Sicily, and subject to the government of the praetor of that island. During the period that the Mediterranean was so severely infested by the Cilician pii'ates, Melita was a favourite resort of those corsairs, who often made it their winter-quar- ters. (Cic. Verr. iv. 46, 47.) Notwithstanding this it appears to have been in the days of Cicero in a flourishing condition, and the great orator more than once during periods of civil disturbances en- tertained the project of retiring thither into a kind of voluntary exile. (Cic. ad Att. iii. 4, x. 7, 8, 9, &c.) The inhabitants of Melita were at this period famous for their skill in manufacturing a kind of fine linen, or rather cotton, stuffs, which appear to have been in great request at Rome, and were gene- rally known under the name of " vestis Melitensis." (Cic. Verr. ii. 72, iv. 46; Diod. v. 12.) There is no doubt that these were manufactured from the cotton, which still forms the staple production of the island. Melita is celebrated in sacred history as the scene of the shipwreck of St. Paul on his voyage to Rome, A. D. 60. {Act. Apost. xxviii.) The error of several earlier writers, who have transferred this to the Melita on the E. coast of the Adriatic (now Meleda), has evidently arisen from the vague use of the name of the Adriatic, which is employed in the Acts of the Apostles (xxvii. 27), in the manner that was customary under the Roman Empire, as corresponding to the Ionian and Sicilian seas of geographers. [Adriaticum Make.] The whole i course and circumstances of the voyage leave no doubt that the Melita in question was no other than the modern Malta, where a bay called 5^ Paul<> Bay is still pointed out by tradition as the landing-place of ' the Apostle. (The question is fully examined and discussed by Mr. J. Smith, in his Voi/arje and Ship- lurech of St. Paul, 8vo. Lond. 1848 ; also inConybeare and Howson's Life of St. Paul, vol. ii. p. 353, &c.) j No other mention is found of Jlelita during the ' period of the Roman Empire, except in the geo- graphers and the Slaritime Itinerary, in which last the name already appears corrupted into its modern form of Malta. (Strab. vi. p. 277; Plin. iii. 8. s. 13; Mel ii. 7. § 18; Ptol. iv. 3. § 37; /im. Ma- rit. p. 518; Sil. Ital. xiv. 251.) After the fall of the Roman Empire it fell for a time into the hands of the Vandals ; but was recovered from them by Belisarius in A. d. 533 (Procop. B. V. i. 14), and appears to have continued from this time subject to the Byzantine empire, until it was conquered by the Arabs in A. d. 870. The present population is principally derived from an Arabic stock; but it is probable that the Arab conquerors here, as well as in Africa, have been to a great extent amalgamated with the previously existing Punic population. The inscriptions discovered at Malta sufficiently prove that the Greek language was at one time in ha-