Chapter II · THE MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT OF PRÆNESTE. (continued 2)

[136]

Not d. Scavi, Ser. 5, 4 (1896), p. 330.

[137]

Livy XXIII, 19, 17-18: statua cius (M. Anicii) indicio fuit, Præneste in foro statuta, loricata, amicta toga, velato capite, etc.

[138]

See also the drawing and illustrations, one of which, no. 2, is from a photograph of mine, in Not. d. Scavi, 1907, pp. 290-292. The basilica is built in old opus quadratum of tufa, Not. d. Scavi, I (1885), p. 256.

[139]

In April, 1882 (Not. d. Scavi, 10 (1882-83), p. 418), during a reconstruction of the cathedral of S. Agapito, ancient pavement was found in a street back of the cathedral, and many pieces of Doric columns which must have been from the peristile of the basilica. See Plate IV for new pieces just found of these Doric columns.

[140]

Not. d. Scavi, Ser. 5, 4 (1896), p. 49. Also in same place: "l'area sacra adiacente al celebre santuario della Fortuna Primigenia" is the description of the cortile of the Seminary.

[141]

More discussion of this point above in connection with the temple, page 51.

[142]

I was in Præneste during all the excavations of 1907, and made these photographs while I was there.

[143]

The drawing of the Not. d. Scavi, 1907, p. 290, which shows a probable portico is not exact.

[144]

It is now called the Via delle Scalette.

[145]

Delbrueck, Hellenistische Bauten in Latium, p. 58.

[146]

See full-page illustration in Delbrueck, l.c., p. 79.

[147]

See page 30. But ex d(ecreto) d(ecurionum) would refer better to the Sullan forum below the town, especially as the two bases set up to Pax Augusti and Securitas Augusti (C.I.L., XIV, 2898, 2899) were found down on the site of the lower forum.

[148]

C.I.L., XIV, 2908, 2919, 2916, 2937, 2946, 3314, 3340.

[149]

C.I.L., XIV, 2917, 2919, 2922, 2924, 2929, 2934, 2955, 2997, 3014, Not. d. Scavi, 1903, p. 576.

[150]

F. Barnabei, Not. d. Scavi, 1894, p. 96.

[151]

C.I.L., XIV, 2914.

[152]

Not. d. Scavi, 1897, p. 421; 1904, p. 393.

[153]

Foggini, Fast. anni romani, 1774, preface, and Mommsen, C.I.L., I, p. 311 (from Acta acad. Berol., 1864, p. 235; See also Henzen, Bull. dell'Inst., 1864, p. 70), were both wrong in putting the new forum out at le quadrelle, because a number of fragments of the calendar of Verrius Flaccus were found there. Marucchi proves this in his Guida Arch., p. 100, Nuovo Bull. d'Arch. crist., 1899, pp. 229-230; Bull. Com., XXXII (1904), p. 276.

The passage from Suetonius, De Gram., 17 (vita M. Verri Flacci), is always to be cited as proof of the forum, and that it had a well-marked upper and lower portion; Statuam habet (M. Verrius Flaccus) Præneste in superiore fori parte circa hemicyclium, in quo fastos a se ordinatos et marmoreo parieti incisos publicarat.

[154]

Delbrueck, Hellenistische Bauten in Latium, p. 50, n. 1, from Preller, Roemische Mythologie, II, p. 191, n. 1.

[155]

C.I.L., XIV, 4097, 4105a, 4106f.

[156]

Petrini, Memorie Prenestine, p. 320, n. 19.

[157]

Cecconi, Storia di Palestrina, p. 35.

[158]

Tibur shows 1 to 32 and Præneste 1 to 49 names of inhabitants from the Umbro-Sabellians of the Appennines. These statistics are from A. Schulten, Italische Namen und Stæmme, Beitræge zur alten Geschichte, II, 2, p. 171. The same proof comes from the likeness between the tombs here and in the Faliscan country: "Le tombe a casse soprapposte possono considerarsi come repositori per famiglie intere, e corrispondono alle grande tombe a loculo del territorio falisco". Not. d. Scavi, Ser. 5, 5 (1897), p. 257, from Mon. ant. pubb. dall'Acc. dei Lincei, Ant. falische, IV, p. 162.

[159]

Ed. Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums, V, p. 159.

[160]

Livy VI, 29; C.I.L., XIV, 2987.

[161]

Livy VII, 11; VII, 19; VIII, 12.

[162]

Præneste is not in the dedication list of Diana at Nemi, which dates about 500 B.C., Priscian, Cato IV, 4, 21 (Keil II, p. 129), and VII, 12, 60 (Keil II, p. 337). Livy II, 19, says Præneste deserted the Latins for Rome.

[163]

Livy VIII, 14.

[164]

Val. Max., De Superstitionibus, I, 3, 2; C.I.L., XIV, 2929, with Dessau's note.

[165]

See note 185.

[166]

"Præneste wird immer eine selbstændige Stellung eingenommen haben" Ed. Meyer, Geschichte des Alt., II, p. 523. Præneste is mentioned first of the league cities in the list given by [Aurelius Victor], Origo-gentis Rom., XVII, 6, and second in the list in Diodorus Siculus, VII, 5, 9 Vogel and also in Paulus, p. 159 (de Ponor). Præneste is called by Florus II, 9, 27 (III, 21, 27) one of the municipia Italiæ splendidissima along with Spoletium, Interamnium, Florentia.

[167]

Livy XXIII, 20, 2.

[168]

Livy I, 30, 1.

[169]

Cicero, de Leg., II, 2, 5.

[170]

Pauly-Wissowa, Real Enc. under "Anicia."

[171]

The old Oscan names in Pompeii, and the Etruscan names on the small grave stones of Cære, C.I.L., X, 3635-3692, are neither so numerous.

[172]

Dionysius III, 2.

[173]

Polybius VI, 14, 8; Livy XLIII, 2, 10.

[174]

Festus, p. 122 (de Ponor): Cives fuissent ut semper rempublicam separatim a populo Romano haberent, and supplemented, l.c., Pauli excerpta, p. 159 (de Ponor): participes—fuerunt omnium rerum—præterquam de suffragio ferendo, aut magistratu capiendo.

[175]

Civitas sine suffragio, quorum civitas universa in civitatem Romanam venit, Livy VIII, 14; IX, 43; Festus, l.c., p. 159.

[176]

Paulus, p. 159 (de Ponor): Qui ad civitatem Romanam ita venerunt, ut municipes essent suæ cuiusque civitatis et coloniæ, ut Tiburtes, Prænestini, etc.

[177]

I do not think so. The argument is taken up later on page 73. It is enough to say here that Tusculum was estranged from the Latin League because she was made a municipium (Livy VI, 25-26), and how much less likely that Præneste would ever have taken such a status.

[178]

C. Gracchus in Gellius X, 3.

[179]

Tibur had censors in 204 B.C. (Livy XXIX, 15), and later again, C.I.L, I, 1113, 1120 = XIV, 3541, 3685. See also Marquardt, Staatsverwaltung, I, p. 159.

[180]

C.I.L, XIV, 171, 172, 2070.

[181]

C.I.L., XIV, 2169, 2213, 4195

[182]

Cicero, pro Milone, 10, 27; 17, 45; Asconius, in Milonianam, p. 27, l. 15 (Kiessling); C.I.L., XIV, 2097, 2110, 2112, 2121.

[183]

C.I.L., XIV, 3941, 3955.

[184]

Livy III, 18, 2; VI, 26, 4.

[185]

Livy IX, 16, 17; Dio, frag. 36, 24; Pliny XVII, 81. Ammianus Marcellinus XXX, 8, 5; compare Gellius X, 3, 2-4. This does not show, I think, what Dessau (C.I.L., XIV, p. 288) says it does: "quanta fuerit potestas imperatoris Romani in magistratus sociorum," but shows rather that the Roman dictator took advantage of his power to pay off some of the ancient grudge against the Latins, especially Præneste. The story of M. Marius at Teanum Sidicinum, and the provisions made at Cales and Ferentinum on that account, as told in Gellius X, 3, 2-3, also show plainly that not constitutional powers but arbitrary ones, are in question. In fact, it was in the year 173 B.C., that the consul L. Postumius Albinus, enraged at a previous cool reception at Præneste, imposed a burden on the magistrates of the town, which seems to have been held as an arbitrary political precedent. Livy XLII, 1: Ante hunc consulem NEMO umquam sociis in ULLA re oneri aut sumptui fuit.

[186]

Prænestinus prætor ... ex subsidiis suos duxerat, Livy IX, 16, 17.

[187]

A prætor led the contingent from Lavinium, Livy VIII, 11, 4; the prætor M. Anicius led from Præneste the cohort which gained such a reputation at Casilinum, Livy XXIII, 17-19. Strabo V, 249; cohors Pæligna, cuius præfectus, etc., proves nothing for a Latin contingent.

[188]

For the evidence that the consuls were first called prætors, see Pauly-Wissowa, Real Enc. under the word "consul" (Vol. IV, p. 1114) and the old Pauly under "prætor."

Mommsen, Staatsrecht, II, 1, p. 74, notes 1 and 2, from other evidence there quoted, and especially from Varro, de l.l., V, 80: prætor dictus qui præiret iure et exercitu, thinks that the consuls were not necessarily called prætors at first, but that probably even in the time of the kings the leader of the army was called the præ-itor. This is a modification of the statement six years earlier in Marquardt, Staatsverwaltung, I, p. 149, n. 4.

[189]

This caption I owe to Jos. H. Drake, Prof. of Roman Law at the University of Michigan.

[190]

Livy VIII, 3, 9; Dionysius III, 5, 3; 7, 3; 34, 3; V, 61.

[191]

Pauly-Wissowa under "dictator," and Mommsen, Staatsrecht, II, 171, 2.

[192]

Whether Egerius Lævius Tusculanus (Priscian, Inst., IV, p. 129 Keil) was dictator of the whole of the Latin league, as Beloch (Italischer Bund, p. 180) thinks, or not, according to Wissowa (Religion und Kultus der Roemer, p. 199), at least a dictator was the head of some sort of a Latin league, and gives us the name of the office (Pais, Storia di Roma, I, p. 335).

[193]

If it be objected that the survival of the dictatorship as a priestly office (Dictator Albanus, Orelli 2293, Marquardt, Staatsverw., I, p. 149, n. 2) means only a dictator for Alba Longa, rather than for the league of which Alba Longa seems to have been at one time the head, there can be no question about the Dictator Latina(rum) fer(iarum) caussa of the year 497 (C.I.L., I.p. 434 Fasti Cos. Capitolini), the same as in the year 208 B.C. (Livy XXVII, 33, 6). This survival is an exact parallel of the rex sacrorum in Rome (for references and discussion, see Marquardt, Staatsverw., III, p. 321), and the rex sacrificolus of Varro, de l.l. VI, 31. Compare Jordan, Topog. d. Stadt Rom, I, p. 508, n. 32, and Wissowa, Rel. u. Kult d. Roemer, p. 432. Note also that there were reges sacrorum in Lanuvium (C.I.L, XIV, 2089), Tusculum (C.I.L, XIV, 2634), Velitræ (C.I.L., X, 8417), Bovillæ (C.I.L., XIV, 2431 == VI, 2125). Compare also rex nemorensis, Suetonius, Caligula, 35 (Wissowa, Rel. u. Kult. d. Roemer, p. 199).

[194]

C.I.L., XIV, 2990, 3000, 3001, 3002.

[195]

C.I.L., XIV, 2890, 2902, 2906, 2994, 2999 (possibly 3008).

[196]

C.I.L., XIV, 2975, 3000.

[197]

C.I.L., XIV, 2990, 3001, 3002.

[198]

See note 185 above.

[199]

Livy XXIII, 17-19; Strabo V, 4, 10.

[200]

Magistrates sociorum, Livy XLII, 1, 6-12.

[201]

For references etc., see Beloch, Italischer Bund, p. 170, notes 1 and 2.

[202]

The mention of one prætor in C.I.L., XIV, 2890, a dedication to Hercules, is later than other mention of two prætors, and is not irregular at any rate.

[203]

C.I.L., XIV, 3000, two ædiles of the gens Saufeia, probably cousins. In C.I.L., XIV, 2890, 2902, 2906, 2975, 2990, 2994, 2999, 3000, 3001, 3002, 3008, out of eighteen prætors, ædiles, and quæstors mentioned, fifteen belong to the old families of Præneste, two to families that belong to the people living back in the Sabines, and one to a man from Fidenæ.

[204]

Cicero, pro Balbo, VIII, 21: Leges de civili iure sunt latæ: quas Latini voluerunt, adsciverunt; ipsa denique Iulia lege civitas ita est sociis et Latinis data ut, qui fundi populi facti non essent civitatem non haberent. Velleius Pater. II, 16: Recipiendo in civitatem, qui arma aut non ceperant aut deposuerant maturius, vires refectæ sunt. Gellius IV, 4, 3; Civitas universo Latio lege Iulia data est. Appian, Bell. Civ., I, 49: Ιταλιωτων δε τους ετι εν τη συμμαχια παραμενοντας εψηφισατο (η βουλη) ειναι πολιτας, ου δη μαλιστα μονον ου παντες επεθυμουν κτλ.

Marquardt, Staatsverw., I, p. 60; Greenidge, Roman Public Life, p. 311; Abbott, Roman Political Institutions, p. 102; Granrud, Roman Constitutional History, pp. 190-191.

[205]

Cicero, pro Archia, IV, 7: Data est civitas Silvani lege et Carbonis: si qui foederatis civitatibus adscripti fuissent, si tum cum lex ferebatur in Italia domicilium habuissent, et si sexaginta diebus apud prætorem essent professi. See also Schol. Bobiensia, p. 353 (Orelli corrects the mistake Silanus for Silvanus); Cicero, ad Fam., XIII, 30; Marquardt, Staatsverwaltung, I, p. 60. Greenidge, Roman Public Life, p. 311 thinks this law did not apply to any but the incolæ of federate communities; Abbott, Roman Political Institutions, p. 102.

[206]

Livy VIII, 14, 9: Tiburtes Prænestinique agro multati, neque ob recens tantum rebellionis commune cum aliis Latinis crimen, etc., ... ceterisque Latinis populis conubia commerciaque et concilia inter se ademerunt. Marquardt, Staatsverw., I, p. 46, n. 3, thinks not an æquum foedus, but from the words: ut is populus alterius populi maiestatem comiter conservaret, a clause in the treaty found in Proculus, Dig., 49, 15, 7 (Corpus Iuris Civ., I, p. 833) (compare Livy IX, 20, 8: sed ut in dicione populi Romani essent) thinks that the new treaty was an agreement based on dependence or clientage "ein Abhængigkeits—oder Clientelverhæltniss."

[207]

Mommsen, Geschichte des roem. Muenzwesens, p. 179 (French trans, de Blacas, I, p. 186), thinks two series of æs grave are to be assigned to Præneste and Tibur.

[208]

Livy XLIII, 2, 10: Furius Præneste, Matienus Tibur exulatum abierunt.

[209]

Polybius VI, 14, 8: εστι δ'ασφαλεια τοις φευγουσιν εν τε τη, Νεαπολιτω και Πραινεςτινων ετι δε Τιβουρινων πολει . Beloch, Italischer Bund, pp. 215, 221. Marquardt, Staatsverw., I, p. 45.

[210]

Livy XXIII, 20, 2; (Prænestini) civitate cum donarentur ob virtutem, non MUTAVERUNT.

[211]

The celebration of the feriæ Latinæ on Mons Albanus in 91 B.C., was to have been the scene of the spectacular beginning of the revolt against Rome, for the plan was to kill the two Roman consuls Iulius Cæsar and Marcius Philippus at that time. The presence of the Roman consuls and the attendance of the members of the old Latin league is proof of the outward continuance of the old foedus (Florus, II, 6 (III, 18)).

[212]

The lex Plautia-Papiria is the same as the law mentioned by Cicero, pro Archia, IV, 7, under the names of Silvanus and Carbo. The tribunes who proposed the law were C. Papirius Carbo and M. Plautius Silvanus. See Mommsen, Hermes 16 (1881), p. 30, n. 2. Also a good note in Long, Ciceronis Orationes, III, p. 215.

[213]

-

[213bis]

Appian, Bell. Civ., I, 65: εξεδραμεν ες τας αγχου πολεις, τας ου προ πολλου πολιτιδας Ρωμαιων μενομενας, Τιβυρτον τε και Πραινεστον, και οσαι μεχρι Νωλης. ερεθιζων απαντας ες αποστασιν, καιχρηματα ες τον πολεμον συλλεγων. See Dessau, C.I.L., XIV, p. 289.

It is worth noting that there is no thought of saying anything about Praaneste and Tibur, except to call them cities (πολεις). Had they been made municipia, after so many years of alliance as foederati, it seems likely that such a noteworthy change would have been specified.

Note also that for 88 B.C. Appian (Bell. Civ., I, 53) says: εως Ιταια πασα προσεχωρησει ες την Ρωμαιων πολιτειαν, χωρις γε Λευκανων καιΣαυνιτων τοτε.

[214]

Mommsen, Zum Roemischen Bodenrecht, Hermes 27 (1892), pp. 109 ff.

[215]

Marquardt, Staatsverw., I, p. 34.

[216]

Paulus, p. 159 (de Ponor): tertio, quum id genus hominum definitur, qui ad civitatem Romanam ita venerunt, ut municipes essent suæ cuiusque civitatis et coloniæ, ut Tiburtes, Prænestini, etc.

[217]

It is not strange perhaps, that there are no inscriptions which can be proved to date between 89 and 82 B.C., but inscriptions are numerous from the time of the empire, and although Tiberius granted Præneste the favor she asked, that of being a municipium, still no præfectus is found, not even a survival of the title.

The PRA ... in C.I.L., XIV, 2897, is præco, not præfectus, as I shall show soon in the publication of corrections of Præneste inscriptions, along with some new ones. For the government of a municipium, see Bull. dell'Inst., 1896, p. 7 ff.; Revue Arch., XXIX (1896), p. 398.

[218]

Mommsen, Hermes, 27 (1892), p. 109.

[219]

Marquardt, Staatsverw., I, p. 47 and note 3.

[220]

Val. Max. IX, 2, 1; Plutarch, Sulla, 32; Appian, Bell. Civ., I, 94; Lucan II, 194; Plutarch, præc. ger. reip., ch. 19 (p. 816); Augustinus, de civ. Dei, III, 28; Dessau, C.I.L., XIV, p. 289, n. 2.

[221]

One third of the land was the usual amount taken.

[222]

Note Mommsen's guess, as yet unproved (Hermes, 27 (1892), p. 109), that tribus, colonia, and duoviri iure dicundo go together, as do curia, municipium and IIIIviri i.d. and æd. pot.

[223]

Florus II, 9, 27 (III, 21): municipia Italiæ splendidissima sub hasta venierunt, Spoletium, Interamnium, Præneste, Florentia. See C.I.L., IX, 5074, 5075 for lack of distinction between colonia and municipium even in inscriptions. Florentia remained a colony (Mommsen, Hermes, 18 (1883), p. 176). Especially for difference in meaning of municipium from Roman and municipal point of view, see Marquardt, Staatsverw., I, p. 28, n. 2. For difference in earlier and later meaning of municipes, Marquardt, l.c., p. 34, n. 8. Valerius Maximus IX, 2, 1, speaking of Præneste in connection with Sulla says: quinque milia Prænestinorum extra moenia municipii evocata, where municipium means "town," and Dessau, C.I.L., XIV, p. 289, n. 1, speaking of the use of the word says: "ei rei non multum tribuerim."

[224]

Gellius XVI, 13, 5, ex colonia in municipii statum redegit. See Mommsen, Hermes, 18 (1883), p. 167.

[225]

Mommsen, Hermes, 27 (1892), p. 110; C.I.L., XIV, 2889: genio municipii; 2941, 3004: patrono municipii, which Dessau (Hermes, 18 (1883), p. 167, n. 1) recognizes from the cutting as dating certainly later than Tiberius' time.

[226]

Regular colony officials appear all along in the incriptions down into the third century A.D.

[227]

Gellius XVI, 13, 5.

[228]

More in detail by Mommsen, Hermes, 27 (1892), p. 110.

[229]

Livy VII, 12, 8; VIII, 12, 8.

[230]

Mommsen, Hermes, 18 (1883), p. 161.

[231]

Cicero, pro P. Sulla, XXI, 61.

[232]

Niebuhr, R.G., II, 55, says the colonists from Rome were the patricians of the place, and were the only citizens who had full rights (civitas cum suffragio et iure honorum). Peter, Zeitschrift fuer Alterth., 1844, p. 198 takes the same view as Niebuhr. Against them are Kuhn, Zeitschrift fuer Alterth., 1854, Sec. 67-68, and Zumpt, Studia Rom., p. 367. Marquardt, Staatsverw., I, p. 36, n. 7, says that neither thesis is proved.

[233]

Dessau, C.I.L., XIV, p. 289.

[234]

Cicero, de leg. agr., II, 28, 78, complains that the property once owned by the colonists was now in the hands of a few. This means certainly, mostly bought up by old inhabitants, and a few does not mean a score, but few in comparison to the number of soldiers who had taken their small allotments of land.

[235]

C.I.L., XIV, p. 289.

[236]

C.I.L., XIV, 2964-2969.

[237]

-

[237bis]

C.I.L., XIV, 2964, 2965. No. 2964 dates before 14 A.D. when Augustus died, for had it been within the few years more which Drusus lived before he was poisoned by Sejanus in 23 A.D., he would have been termed divi Augusti nep. In the Acta Arvalium, C.I.L., VI, 2023a of 14 A.D. his name is followed by T i.f. and probably divi Augusti n.

[238]

C.I.L., XIV, 2966, 2968.

[239]

The first column of both inscriptions shows alternate lines spaced in, while the second column has the prænominal abbreviations exactly lined. More certain yet is the likeness which shows in a list of 27 names, and all but one without cognomina.

[240]

C.I.L., XIV, 2967.

[241]

Out of 201 examples of names from Præneste pigne inscriptions, in the C.I.L., XIV, in the Notizie degli Scavi of 1905 and 1907, in the unpublished pigne belonging both to the American School in Rome, and to the Johns Hopkins University, all but 15 are simple prænomina and nomina.

[242]

C.I.L., X, 1233.

[243]

C.I.L., IX, 422.

[244]

Marquardt, Staatsverw., I, p. 161, n. 5.

[245]

Lex Iulia Municipalis, C.I.L., I, 206, l. 142 ff. == Dessau, Inscrip. Lat. Sel., 6085.

[246]

Marquardt, Staatsverw., I, p. 160.

[247]

C.I.L., XIV, 2966.

[248]

Pauly-Wissowa under "Dolabella," and "Cornelius," nos. 127-148.

[249]

The real founder of Sulla's colony and the rebuilder of the city of Præneste seems to have been M. Terentius Varro Lucullus. This is argued by Vaglieri, who reports in Not. d. Scavi, 1907, p. 293 ff. the fragment of an architrave of some splendid building on which are the letters ... RO.LVCVL ... These letters Vaglieri thinks are cut in the style of the age of Sulla. They are fine deep letters, very well cut indeed, although they might perhaps be put a little later in date. An argument from the use of the name Terentia, as in the case of Cornelia, will be of some service here. The nomen Terentia was also very unpopular in Præneste. It occurs but seven times and every inscription is well down in the late imperial period. C.I.L., XIV, 3376, 3384, 2850, 4091, 75, 3273; Not. d. Scavi, 1896, p. 48.

[250]

C.I.L., XIV, 2967: ... elius Rufus Æd(ilis). I take him to be a Cornelius rather than an Ælius, because of the cognomen.

[251]

One Cornelius, a freedman (C.I.L., XIV, 3382), and three Corneliæ, freed women or slaves (C.I.L., XIV, 2992, 3032, 3361), but all at so late a date that the hatred or meaning of the name had been forgotten.

[252]

A full treatment of the use of the nomen Cornelia in Præneste will be published soon by the author in connection with his Prosographia Prænestina, and also something on the nomen Terentia (see note 92). The cutting of one of the two inscriptions under consideration, no. 2968, which fragment I saw in Præneste in 1907, bears out the early date. The larger fragment could not be seen.

[253]

Schulze, Zur Geschichte Lateinischer Eigennamen, p. 222, under "Rutenius." He finds the same form Rotanius only in Turin, Rutenius only in North Italy.

[254]

From the appearance of the name Rudia at Præneste (C.I.L., XIV, 3295) which Schulze (l.c., note 95) connects with Rutenia and Rotania, there is even a faint chance to believe that this Rotanius might have been a resident of Præneste before the colonization.

[255]

C.I.L., XIV, 3230-3237, 3315; Not. d. Scavi, 1905, p. 123; the one in question is C.I.L., XIV, 2966, I, 4.

[256]

C.I.L., VI, 22436: (Mess)iena Messieni, an inscription now in Warwick Castle, Warwick, England, supposedly from Rome, is the only instance of the name in the sepulcrales of the C.I.L., VI. In Præneste, C.I.L., XIV, 2966, I, 5, 3360; compare Schulze, Geschichte Lat. Eigennamen, p. 193, n. 6.

[257]

Cæsia at Præneste, C.I.L., XIV, 2852, 2966 I, 6, 2980, 3311, 3359, and the old form Ceisia, 4104.

[258]

See Schulze, l.c., index under Caleius.

[259]

C.I.L., XIV, 2964 II, 15.

[260]

Vibia especially in the old inscription C.I.L., XIV, 4098. Also in 2903, 2966 II, 9; Not. d. Scavi, 1900, p. 94.

[261]

Statioleia: C.I.L., XIV, 2966 I, 10, 3381.

[262]

C.I.L., XIV, 3210; Not. d. Scavi, 1905, p. 123; also found in two pigna inscriptions in the Johns Hopkins University collection, as yet unpublished.

[263]

There is a L. Aponius Mitheres on a basis in the Barberini garden in Præneste, but it may have come from Rome. The name is found Abonius in Etruria, but Aponia is found well scattered. See Schulze, Geschichte Lat. Eigennamen, p. 66.

[264]

C.I.L., XIV, 2855, 2626, 3336.

[265]

C.I.L., XIV, 3116. It may not be on a pigna.

[266]

Not. d. Scavi, 1907, p. 131. The nomen Paccia is a common name in the sepulchral inscriptions of Rome. C.I.L., VI, 23653-23675, but all are of a late date.

[267]

C.I.L., IX, 5016: C. Capive Vitali (Hadria).

[268]

A better restoration than Ninn(eius). The (N)inneius Sappæus (C.I.L., VI, 33610) is a freedman, and the inscription is late.

[269]

In the year 216 B.C. the Ninnii Celeres were hostages of Hannibal's at Capua (Livy XXIII, 8).

[270]

C.I.L., X, 2776-2779, but all late.

[271]

C.I.L., X, 885-886. A Ninnius was procurator to Domitian, according to a fistula plumbea found at Rome (Bull. Com., 1882, p. 171, n. 597). A.Q. Ninnius Hasta was consul ordinarius in 114 A.D. (C.I.L., XI, 3614, compare Paulus, Dig. 48, 8, 5 [Corpus Iuris Civ., I, p. 802]). See also a Ninnius Crassus, Dessau, Prosographia Imp. Romani, II, p. 407, n. 79.

[272]

It is interesting to note that C. Paccius and C. Ninnius are officials, one would guess duovirs, of the same year in Pompeii, and thus parallel the men here in Præneste: C.I.L., X, 885-886: N. Paccius Chilo and M. Ninnius Pollio, who in 14 B.C. are duoviri v.a.s.p.p. (viis annonæ sacris publicis procurandis), Henzen; (votis Augustalibus sacris publicis procurandis), Mommsen; (viis ædibus, etc.), Cagnat; See Liebenam in Pauly-Wissowa, Real Encyc., V, 1842, 9.

[273]

Liebenam in Pauly-Wissowa, Real Encyc., V, 1806.

[274]

Marquardt, Staatsverw., I, p. 157 ff.; Liebenam in Pauly-Wissowa, Real Enc., V, 1825. Sometimes the officers were designated simply quinquennales, and this seems to have been the early method. For all the various differences in the title, see Marquardt, l.c., p. 160, n. 13.

[275]

All at least except the regimen morum, so Marquardt, l.c., p. 162 and n. 2.

[276]

Marquardt, Staatsverw., I, p. 161, n. 6.

[277]

Marquardt, Staatsverw., I, p. 161, n. 7.

[278]

Beloch, Italischer Bund, p. 78 ff.; Nissen, Italische Landeskunde, II, p. 99 ff.

[279]

C.I.L., IX, 422 = Dessau, Insc. Lat. Sel., 6123.

[280]

C.I.L., X, 1233 = Dessau 6124.

[281]

Near Aquinum. C.I.L., X, 5405 = Dessau 6125.

[282]

C.I.L., XIV, 245 = Dessau 6126.

[283]

C.I.L., XIV, 2964.

[284]

He is not even mentioned in Pauly-Wissowa or Ruggiero.

[285]

C.I.L., XIV, 2966.

[286]

C.I.L., XIV, 2964.

[287]

C.I.L., XIV, 2965.

[288]

Marquardt, Staatsverw., I, p. 169 for full discussion, with references to other cases.

[289]

C.I.L., XIV, 172: præt(or) Laur(entium) Lavin(atium) IIIIvir q(uin) q(uennalis) Fæsulis.

[290]

C.I.L., XIV, 3599.

[291]

C.I.L., XIV, 3609.

[292]

C.I.L., XIV, 3650.

[293]

C.I.L., I, 1236 == X, 1573 == Dessau 6345.

[294]

C.I.L., XIV, 3665.

[295]

C.I.L., XI, 421 == Dessau 6662.

[296]

C. Alfius C.f. Lem. Ruf(us) IIvir quin(q). col. Iul. Hispelli et IIvir quinq. in municipio suo Casini, C.I.L., XI, 5278 == Dessau 6624. Bormann, C.I.L., XI, p. 766, considers this to be an inscription of the time of Augustus and thinks the man here mentioned is one of his colonists.

[297]

Not. d. Scav, 1884, p. 418 == Dessau 6598.

[298]

C.I.L., IX, 5831 == Dessau 6572.

[299]

C.I.L., IX, 3311 == Dessau 6532.

[300]

L. Septimio L.f. Arn. Calvo. æd., IIIIvir. i.d., præf. ex s.c. [q]uinquennalicia potestate, etc., Eph. Ep. 8, 120 == Dessau 6527.

[301]

C.I.L., IX, 1618 == Dessau 6507.

[302]

C.I.L., IX, 652 == Dessau 6481.

[303]

The full title is worth notice: IIIIvir i(ure) d(icundo) q(uinquennalis) c(ensoria) p(otestate), C.I.L., X, 49 == Dessau 6463.

[304]

C.I.L., X, 344 == Dessau 6450.

[305]

C.I.L., X, 1036 == Dessau 6365.

[306]

C.I.L., X, 840 == Dessau 6362: M. Holconio Celeri d.v.i.d. quinq. designato. Augusti sacerdoti.

[307]

C.I.L., X, 1273 == Dessau 6344.

[308]

C.I.L., X, 4641 == Dessau 6301.

[309]

C.I.L., X, 5401 == Dessau 6291.

[310]

C.I.L., X, 5393 == Dessau 6286.

[311]

C.I.L., XIV, 4148.

[312]

C.I.L., XIV, 4097, 4105a, 4106f.

[313]

C.I.L., XIV, 2795.

[314]

C.I.L., XIV, 4237. Another case of the same kind is seen in the fragment C.I.L., XIV, 4247.

[315]

Zangemeister, C.I.L., IV., Index, shows 75 duoviri and but 4 quinquennales.

[316]

L. Veranius Hypsæus 6 times: C.I.L., IV, 170, 187, 193, 200, 270, 394(?). Q. Postumius Modestus 7 times: 195, 279, 736, 756, 786, 1156. Only two other men appear, one 3 times; 214, 596, 824, the other once: 504.

[317]

(1) Verulæ, C.I.L., X, 5796; Acerræ, C.I.L., X, 3759; (2) Anagnia, C.I.L., X, 5919; Allifæ, C.I.L., IX, 2354; Æclanum, C.I.L., IX, 1160; (3) Sutrium, C.I.L., XI, 3261; Tergeste, C.I.L., V, 545; (4) Tibur, C.I.L., XIV, 3665; Ausculum Apulorum, C.I.L., IX, 668; Sora, C.I.L, X, 5714; (5) Formiæ, C.I.L., X, 6101; Pompeii, C.I.L., X, 1036; (6) Ferentinum, C.I.L., X, 5844, 5853; Falerii, C.I.L., XI, 3123; (7) Pompeii, Not. d. Scavi, 1898, p. 171, and C.I.L., X, 788, 789, 851; Bovianum, C.I.L., IX, 2568; (8) Telesia, C.I.L., IX, 2234; Allifæ, C.I.L., IX, 2353; Hispellum, C.I.L., XI, 5283.

[318]

The same certainly as M. Antonius Sobarus of 4091,17 and duovir with T. Diadumenius, as is shown by the connective et. Compare 4091, 4, 6, 7.

[319]

C.I.L., I, p. 311 reads Lucius, which is certainly wrong. There is but one Lucius in Dessau, Prosographia Imp. Rom.; there is however a Lucilius with this same cognomen Dessau, l.c.

[320]

Probably not the M. Iuventius Laterensis, the Roman quæstor, for the brick stamps of Præneste in other cases seem to show the quæstors of the city.