[Footnote 50:  “Quaestors,” this is the first mention of these officers in Livy; in early times it appears to have been part of their duty to prosecute those who were guilty of treason, and to carry out the punishment.]

[Footnote 51:  On the west slope of the Esquiline.—­D.O.]

[Footnote 52:  There seems to be something wrong in the text here, as the subterfuge was distinctively a patrician one, and the commons had nothing to gain and all to lose by it.  If Livy means that the commons provoked war by giving cause for the patricians to seek refuge in it, he certainly puts it very vaguely.—­D.  O.]

[Footnote 53:  July 15th.]

[Footnote 54:  By being buried alive.  The idea being that the ceremonies could not be duly performed by an unchaste vestal.—­D.  O.]

[Footnote 55:  By his power of veto.—­D.O.]

[Footnote 56:  These were veterans and formed the third line.  The first were the “hastati,” so called from their carrying long spears, which were later discarded for heavy javelins.  The second were the “principes,” the main line.—­D.  O.]

[Footnote 57:  The space assigned for the general’s tent.—­D.  O.]

[Footnote 58:  The legati of a general were at once his council of war and his staff.—­D.  O.]

[Footnote 59:  There is much in the description of this battle not easy to understand, and I am inclined to believe it was at least no better than drawn.  The plundered camp, the defeat of the triarii, and the failure to mention pursuit or consequences, all favour this supposition.—­D.  O.]

[Footnote 60:  It was to be victory or annihilation.—­D.  O.]

[Footnote 61:  so called from the altar of Carmenta, which stood near it.  It was located in or near what is now the Piazza Montanara, and was always after considered a gate of evil omen.—­D.  O.]

[Footnote 62:  Now the Valchetta.—­D.  O.]

[Footnote 63:  Probably of mercenaries, as the Veientines are alluded to throughout the paragraph as commanding, and it was apparently not a case of alliance.—­D.  O.]

[Footnote 64:  On the Via Flaminia (near the grotta rossa).]

[Footnote 65:  This story has been much questioned by learned commentators.  I see nothing improbable in it if we pare down the exploits a little, and the evidence, such as it is all pro.—­D.O.]

[Footnote 66:  As this temple was about a mile from the city, it is probable the Romans were defeated and that the second fight at the gate means simply that they repulsed an assault on the walls.—­D.O.]

[Footnote 67:  That is, did not renew their assault on the walls.—­D.O.]

[Footnote 68:  Evidently only a small detatchment, since they were in condition to assault a fortified consular camp despite their defeat.—­D.O.]

[Footnote 69:  The story of this war is much more doubtful than the exploit of the Fabii, and Livy, as usual, furnishes the material for his own criticism.—­D.O.]