[Footnote 211: The celebration of the feriae Latinae on Mons Alba.n.u.s 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 Caesar 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)).]

[Footnote 212: The lex Plautia-Papiria is the same as the law mentioned by Cicero, pro Archia, IV, 7, under the names of Silva.n.u.s and Carbo. The tribunes who proposed the law were C. Papirius Carbo and M. Plautius Silva.n.u.s. See Mommsen, Hermes 16 (1881), p. 30, n. 2. Also a good note in Long, Ciceronis Orationes, III, p. 215.]

[Footnote 213: Appian, Bell. Civ., I, 65: [Greek: exedramen es tas agchou poleis, tas ou pro pollou politidas Romaion menomenas, Tiburton te kai Praineston, kai osai mechri Nolaes. erethizon apantas es apostasin, kai chraemata es ton polemon sullegon.] 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 ([Greek: poleis]). 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: [Greek: eos Italia pasa prosechomaesei es taen Romaion politeian, choris ge Leukanon kai Sauniton tote.]]

[Footnote 214: Mommsen, Zum Roemischen Bodenrecht, Hermes 27 (1892), pp.

109 ff.]

[Footnote 215: Marquardt, Staatsverw., I, p. 34.]

[Footnote 216: Paulus, p. 159 (de Ponor): tertio, quum id genus hominum definitur, qui ad civitatem Romanam ita venerunt, ut municipes essent suae cuiusque civitatis et coloniae, ut Tiburtes, Praenestini, etc.]

[Footnote 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 Praeneste the favor she asked, that of being a municipium, still no praefectus is found, not even a survival of the t.i.tle.

The PRA ... in C.I.L., XIV, 2897, is praeco, not praefectus, as I shall show soon in the publication of corrections of Praeneste 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.]

[Footnote 218: Mommsen, Hermes, 27 (1892), p. 109.]

[Footnote 219: Marquardt, Staatsverw., I, p. 47 and note 3.]

[Footnote 220: Val. Max. IX, 2, 1; Plutarch, Sulla, 32; Appian, Bell.

Civ., I, 94; Lucan II, 194; Plutarch, praec. ger. reip., ch. 19 (p.

816); Augustinus, de civ. Dei, III, 28; Dessau, C.I.L., XIV, p. 289, n.

2.]

[Footnote 221: One third of the land was the usual amount taken.]

[Footnote 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 aed. pot.]

[Footnote 223: Florus II, 9, 27 (III, 21): municipia Italiae splendidissima sub hasta venierunt, Spoletium, Interamnium, Praeneste, 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 munic.i.p.al 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 Praeneste in connection with Sulla says: quinque milia Praenestinorum 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."]

[Footnote 224: Gellius XVI, 13, 5, ex colonia in municipii statum redegit. See Mommsen, Hermes, 18 (1883), p. 167.]

[Footnote 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.]

[Footnote 226: Regular colony officials appear all along in the incriptions down into the third century A.D.]

[Footnote 227: Gellius XVI, 13, 5.]

[Footnote 228: More in detail by Mommsen, Hermes, 27 (1892), p. 110.]

[Footnote 229: Livy VII, 12, 8; VIII, 12, 8.]

[Footnote 230: Mommsen, Hermes, 18 (1883), p. 161.]

[Footnote 231: Cicero, pro P. Sulla, XXI, 61.]

[Footnote 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 c.u.m 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.]

[Footnote 233: Dessau, C.I.L., XIV, p. 289.]

[Footnote 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.]

[Footnote 235: C.I.L., XIV, p. 289.]

[Footnote 236: C.I.L., XIV, 2964-2969.]

[Footnote 237: 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 Seja.n.u.s 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.]

[Footnote 238: C.I.L., XIV, 2966, 2968.]

[Footnote 239: The first column of both inscriptions shows alternate lines s.p.a.ced in, while the second column has the praenominal abbreviations exactly lined. More certain yet is the likeness which shows in a list of 27 names, and all but one without cognomina.]

[Footnote 240: C.I.L., XIV, 2967.]

[Footnote 241: Out of 201 examples of names from Praeneste 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 praenomina and nomina.]

[Footnote 242: C.I.L., X, 1233.]

[Footnote 243: C.I.L., IX, 422.]

[Footnote 244: Marquardt, Staatsverw., I, p. 161, n. 5.]

[Footnote 245: Lex Iulia Munic.i.p.alis, C.I.L., I, 206, l. 142 ff. == Dessau, Inscrip. Lat. Sel., 6085.]

[Footnote 246: Marquardt, Staatsverw., I, p. 160.]

[Footnote 247: C.I.L., XIV, 2966.]

[Footnote 248: Pauly-Wissowa under "Dolabella," and "Cornelius," nos.

127-148.]

[Footnote 249: The real founder of Sulla's colony and the rebuilder of the city of Praeneste 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 Praeneste. 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.]

[Footnote 250: C.I.L., XIV, 2967: ... elius Rufus Aed(ilis). I take him to be a Cornelius rather than an Aelius, because of the cognomen.]

[Footnote 251: One Cornelius, a freedman (C.I.L., XIV, 3382), and three Corneliae, 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.]

[Footnote 252: A full treatment of the use of the nomen Cornelia in Praeneste will be published soon by the author in connection with his Prosographia Praenestina, 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 Praeneste in 1907, bears out the early date. The larger fragment could not be seen.]

[Footnote 253: Schulze, Zur Geschichte Lateinischer Eigennamen, p. 222, under "Rutenius." He finds the same form Rotanius only in Turin, Rutenius only in North Italy.]