14.  If Quintus Fabius Maximus Eburnus consul in 638 went to Macedonia (C.  I. Gr. 1534; Zumpt, Comm.  Epigr. ii. 167), he too must have suffered a misfortune there, since Cicero, in Pison. 16, 38, says:  -ex (Macedonia) aliquot praetorio imperio, consulari quidem nemo rediit, qui incolumis fuerit, quin triumpharit-; for the triumphal list, which is complete for this epoch, knows only the three Macedonian triumphs of Metellus in 643, of Drusus in 644, and of Minucius in 648.

15.  As, according to Frontinus (ii. 43), Velleius and Eutropius, the tribe conquered by Minucius was the Scordisci, it can only be through an error on the part of Florus that he mentions the Hebrus (the Maritza) instead of the Margus (Morava).

16.  This annihilation of the Scordisci, while the Maedi and Dardani were admitted to treaty, is reported by Appian (Illyr. 5), and in fact thence forth the Scordisci disappear from this region.  If the final subjugation took place in the 32nd year —­apo teis proteis es Keltous peiras—­, it would seem that this must be understood of a thirty-two years’ war between the Romans and the Scordisci, the commencement of which presumably falls not long after the constituting of the province of Macedonia (608) and of which the incidents in arms above recorded, 636-647, are a part.  It is obvious from Appian’s narrative that the conquest ensued shortly before the outbreak of the Italian civil wars, and so probably at the latest in 663.  It falls between 650 and 656, if a triumph followed it, for the triumphal list before and after is complete; it is possible however that for some reason there was no triumph.  The victor is not further known; perhaps it was no other than the consul of the year 671; since the latter may well have been late in attaining the consulate in consequence of the Cinnan-Marian troubles.

17.  The account that large tracts on the coasts of the North Sea had been torn away by inundations, and that this had occasioned the migration of the Cimbri in a body (Strabo, vii. 293), does not indeed appear to us fabulous, as it seemed to those who recorded it; but whether it was based on tradition or on conjecture, cannot be decided.

18.  III.  VII.  Measures Adopted to Check the Immigrations of the Transalpine Gauls

19.  IV.  III.  Modifications of the Penal Law

20.  The usual hypothesis, that the Tougeni and Tigorini had advanced at the same time with the Cimbri into Gaul, cannot be supported by Strabo (vii. 293), and is little in harmony with the separate part acted by the Helvetii.  Our traditional accounts of this war are, besides, so fragmentary that, just as in the case of the Samnite wars, a connected historical narration can only lay claim to approximate accuracy.

21.  To this, beyond doubt, the fragment of Diodorus (Vat. p. 122) relates.

22.  IV.  IV.  The Proletariate and Equestrian Order under the Restoration