[Footnote 187:  A praetor led the contingent from Lavinium, Livy VIII, 11, 4; the praetor M. Anicius led from Praeneste the cohort which gained such a reputation at Casilinum, Livy XXIII, 17-19.  Strabo V, 249; cohors Paeligna, cuius praefectus, etc., proves nothing for a Latin contingent.]

[Footnote 188:  For the evidence that the consuls were first called praetors, see Pauly-Wissowa, Real Enc. under the word “consul” (Vol.  IV, p. 1114) and the old Pauly under “praetor.”

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

[Footnote 189:  This caption I owe to Jos.  H. Drake, Prof. of Roman Law at the University of Michigan.]

[Footnote 190:  Livy VIII, 3, 9; Dionysius III, 5, 3; 7, 3; 34, 3; V, 61.]

[Footnote 191:  Pauly-Wissowa under “dictator,” and Mommsen, Staatsrecht, II, 171, 2.]

[Footnote 192:  Whether Egerius Laevius 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).]

[Footnote 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), Velitrae (C.I.L., X, 8417), Bovillae (C.I.L., XIV, 2431 == VI, 2125).  Compare also rex nemorensis, Suetonius, Caligula, 35 (Wissowa, Rel. u.  Kult. d.  Roemer, p. 199).]

[Footnote 194:  C.I.L., XIV, 2990, 3000, 3001, 3002.]

[Footnote 195:  C.I.L., XIV, 2890, 2902, 2906, 2994, 2999 (possibly 3008).]

[Footnote 196:  C.I.L., XIV, 2975, 3000.]

[Footnote 197:  C.I.L., XIV, 2990, 3001, 3002.]

[Footnote 198:  See note 28 above.]