Page:EB1911 - Volume 20.djvu/88

 defend itself against the surrounding barbarians. We know of these difficulties and of the democratic constitution of the city from a decree in honour of Protogenes in the 3rd century (C.I.G. ii. 2058, Inscr. Or. Septent. Pont. Euxin. i. 16). In the following century it fell under the suzerainty of Scilurus, whose name appears on its coins, and when his power was broken by Mithradates VI. the Great, of Pontus, it submitted to the latter. About 50 it was entirely destroyed by the Getae and lay waste for many years. Ultimately at the wish of, and, to judge by the coins, under the protection of the natives themselves, it was restored, but Dio Chrysostom (Or. xxxvi.), who visited it about 83, gives a curious picture of its poor state. During the 2nd century it prospered better with Roman support and was quite flourishing from the time of Septimius Severus, when it was incorporated in Lower Moesia, to 248, when its coins came to an end, probably owing to its sack by the Goths. It was once more restored in some sort and lingered on to an unknown date. Excavations have shown the position of the old Greek walls and of those which enclosed the narrower site of the Roman city, an interesting Hellenistic house, and cemeteries of various dates. The principal cult was that of Achilles Pontarches, to whom the archons made dedications. It has another centre at Leuce (Phidonisi) and at various points in the north Euxine. Secondary was that of Apollo Prostates, the patron of the strategi; but the worship of most of the Hellenic deities is testified to in the inscriptions. The coinage begins with large round copper pieces comparable only to the Roman aes grave and smaller pieces in the shape of dolphins; these both go back into the 6th century Later the city adopted silver and gold coins of the Aeginetic standard.

See E. H. Minns, Scythians and Greeks (Cambridge, 1909); V. V. Latyshev, Olbia (St Petersburg, 1887, in Russian). For inscriptions, Boeckh, C.I.G. vol. ii.; V. V. Latyshev, ''Inscr. Orae Septent. Ponti'' Euxini, vols. i. and iv. For excavations, Reports of B. V. Pharmakovsky in ''Compte rendu de la Comm. imp. archéolog. (St Petersburg, 1901 sqq.), and Bulletin'' of the same, Nos. 8, 13, &c., summarized in Archäologischer Anzeiger (1903 sqq.).

 OLBIA (Gr. , i.e. happy; mod. , q.v.), an ancient seaport city of Sardinia, on the east coast. The name indicates that it was of Greek origin, and tradition attributes its foundation to the Boeotians and Thespians under lolaus (see ). Pais considers that it was founded by the Phocaeans of Massilia before the 4th century (in Tamponi, op. cit. p. 83). It is situated on low ground, at the extremity of a deep recess, now called the Golfo di Terranova. It was besieged unsuccessfully by L. Cornelius Scipio in 259 Its territory was ravaged in 210 by a Carthaginian fleet. In Roman times it was the regular landing-place for travellers from Italy. Cicero notes the receipt of a letter from his brother from Olbia in 56, and obviously shared the prevailing belief as to the unhealthiness of Sardinia. Traces of the pre-Roman city have not been found. The line of the Roman city walls has been determined on the N. and E., the N.E. angle being at the ancient harbour, which lay to the N. of the modern (Notizie degli Scavi, 1890, p. 224). Among the inscriptions are two tombstones, one of an imperial freedwoman, the other of a freedman of Acte, the concubine of Nero; a similar tombstone was also found at Carales, and tiles bearing her name have been found in several parts of the island, but especially at Olbia, where in building a modern house in 1881 about one thousand were discovered. Pais (op. cit. 89 sqq.) attributes to Olbia an inscription now in the Campo Santo at Pisa, an epistyle bearing the words “Cereri sacrum Claudia Aug. lib. Acte,” and made of Sardinian (?) granite. In any case it is clear that Acte must have had considerable property in the island (Corp. Inscr. Lat. x. 7980). Discoveries of buildings and tombs have frequently occurred within the area of the town and in its neighbourhood. Some scanty remains of an aqueduct exist outside the town, but hardly anything else of antiquity is to be seen in situ. A large number of milestones, fifty-one in all, with inscriptions, and several more with illegible ones, belonging to the first twelve miles of the Roman road between Olbia and Carales, have been discovered, and are now kept in the church of S. Simplicio (Notizie degli Scavi, 1888, p. 535; 1889, p. 258; 1892, pp. 217, 366; Classical Review, 1889, p. 228; 1890, p. 65; P. Tamponi, Silloge Epigrafica, Olbiense, Sassari, 1895). This large number may be accounted for by the fact that a new stone was often erected for a new emperor. They range in date from 245 to 375 (one is possibly of Domitian). The itineraries state that the main road from Carales to Olbia ran through the centre of the island to the east of Gennargentu (see ); but a branch certainly diverged from the main road from Carales to Turris Libisonis (which kept farther west, more or less along the line followed by the modern railway) and came to Olbia. The distance by both lines is much the same; and all these milestones belong to the last portion which was common to both roads.

 OLD-AGE PENSIONS. The provision of annuities for aged poor by the state was proposed in England in the 18th century—e.g. by Francis Maseres, cursitor baron of the Exchequer, in 1772, and by Mr Mark Rolle, M.P., in 1787. Suggestions for subsidizing friendly societies have also been frequent—e.g. by T. Paine in 1795, tentatively in Sturges Bourne’s Report on the Poor Laws, 1817, and by Lord Lansdowne in 1837. The subject again became prominent in the latter part of the 19th century. Canon Blackley, who started this movement, proposed to compel every one to insure with a state department against sickness and old age, and essentially his scheme was one for the relief of the ratepayers and a more equitable readjustment of the poor-rate. The terms provisionally put forward by him required that every one in youth should pay £10, in return for which the state was to grant 8s. a week sick allowance and 4s. pension after seventy. These proposals were submitted to the Select Committee on National Provident Insurance, 1885–1887. This body reported unfavourably, more especially on the sick insurance part of the scheme, but the idea of old-age pension survived, and was taken up by the National Provident League, of which Mr (afterwards Sir) J. Rankin, M.P., was chairman. The subject was discussed in the constituencies and expectation was aroused. An unofficial parliamentary committee was formed, with Mr J. Chamberlain as chairman. This committee published proposals in March 1892, which show a very interesting change of attitude on the part of the promoters. Compulsion, which at the earlier period had found favour with Canon Blackley, Sir J. Rankin and even Mr Chamberlain, was no longer urged. The annuitant was no longer required to pay a premium adequate to the benefits promised, as in Canon Blackley’s proposal. The benefit was no longer a pure annuity, but premiums were, in certain cases, returnable, and allowances were provided for widows, children (if any) and for the next of kin. Canon Blackley’s professed object was to supersede the friendly societies, which, he alleged, were more or less insolvent; a proposal was now introduced to double every half-crown of pension derived by members from their friendly societies. This suggestion was criticized, even by supporters of the principle of state aid, on the ground that unless a pension was gratuitous, the class from which pauperism is really drawn could not profit by it. Mr Charles Booth in particular took this line. He accordingly proposed that there should be a general endowment of old age, 5s. a week to every one at the age of sixty-five. This proposal was calculated to involve an expenditure of £18,000,000 for England and Wales and £24,000,000 for the United Kingdom, exclusive of the cost of administration. While Mr Booth severely criticized the weak points of the contributory and voluntary schemes, their most influential advocate, Mr Chamberlain, did not spare Mr Booth’s proposals. Speaking at Highbury, for instance, on the 24th of May 1899, he described Mr Booth’s universal scheme as “a gigantic system of out-door relief for every one, good and bad, thrifty and unthrifty, the waster, drunkard and idler, as well as the industrious,” and very forcibly stated his inability to support it.