[Footnote 97:  At the close of this chapter there are undoubtedly certain gaps in the MS., as Dindorf discerned.  In the Tauchnitz stereotyped edition, which usually insists upon wresting some sense from such passages either by conjecture or by emendation, the following sentence appears:  “But Pompey made light of these supernatural effects, and the war shrank to the compass of a battle.”  Boissevain (with a suggestion by Kuiper) reads:  [Greek:  all haege gar to daimonion hen te oligoria auto hepoihaesato chai es polin Moundan pros machaen dae chatestae].  This would mean:  “But Heaven, which he had slighted, led his steps, and he took up his quarters in a city called Munda preparatory to battle.”]

[Footnote 98:  Mommsen in his Roman History (third German edition, p. 627, note 1), remarks that Dio must have confused the son of Bocchus with the son of Massinissa, Arabio, who certainly did align himself with the Pompeian party (Appian, Civil Wars, IV, 54).  All other evidence, outside of this one passage, shows the two kings to have been steadfastly loyal to Caesar, behavior which brought them tangible profit in the shape of enlargement of their domains.]

[Footnote 99:  I.e., they were in arms against Caesar a second time.  Compare the note on chapter 12.]

[Footnote 100:  This name is spelled Coesonius in Florus’s Epitome of Livy’s Thirteenth Book (=Florus II, 13, 86) and also in Orosius’s Narratives for the Discomfiture of Pagans (VI, 16, 9), but appears with the same form as here in Cicero’s Philippics, XII, 9, 23.]

[Footnote 101:  The MS. has only “Fabius and Quintus.”  Mommsen supplies their entire names from chapter 31 of this book.]

[Footnote 102:  This was originally a festival of Pales-Palatua, and information regarding its introduction is intercepted by remote antiquity.  In historical times we find it celebrated as the commemoration of the founding of Rome, because Pales-Palatua was a divinity closely connected with the Palatine, where the city first stood.  From Hadrian’s time on special brilliance attached to the occasion, and it was dignified by the epithet “Roman” (Athenaeus).  As late as the fifth century it was still known as “the birthday of the city of Rome.”  Both forms, Parilia and Palilia occur. (Mentioned also in Book Forty-five, chapter 6.)]

[Footnote 103:  Licentiousness and general laxity of morals.]

[Footnote 104:  The last clause of this chapter as it appears in the MS. is evidently corrupt.  The reading adopted is that of Madvig, modified by Melber.]

[Footnote 105:  Verb supplied (to fill MS gap) by R. Stephanus and Leunclavius.]

[Footnote 106:  L.  Minucius Basilus.]

[Footnote 107:  Reading, with Boissevain, [Greek:  antecharteraese].]

[Footnote 108:  A gap in the MS.—­Verb conjectured by Bekker on the analogy of a passage in chapter 53.]

[Footnote 109:  The father of Pompey the Great.]