Part 28 (2/2)

[659] Plut. _C. Gracch_. 7.

[660] Nitzsch _Die Gracchen_ p. 402.

[661] These are apparently the _Viasii vicani_ of the _lex Agraria_.

Sometimes the service was performed by personal labour (_operae_), at other times a _vectigal_ was demanded. See Mommsen in C.I.L. l.c.

[662] Cic. _ad Fam_. viii. 6. 5; cf. Mommsen l.c.

[663] This was prohibited by a _lex Licinia_ and a _lex Aebutia_ which Cicero (_de Leg. Agr_. ii. 8. 21) calls _veteres tribuniciae_. But it is possible that they were post-Gracchan. See Mommsen _Staatsr_. ii.

p. 630.

[664] App. _Bell. Civ_. i. 23 [Greek: _ho de Grakchos kai hodous etemnen ana ten Italian makras, plaethos ergolabon kai cheirotechnon hyph' eauto poionmenos, hetoimon es ho ti keleuoi_]

[665] Plut. _C. Gracch_. 8.

[666] Cic. _Brut_. 26, 100.

[667] Mommsen in C.I.L. i. p. 158.

[668] Plut. _C. Gracch_. 6.

[669] Seneca _de Ben_, vi. 34. 2 Apud nos primi omnium Gracchus et mox Livius Drusus inst.i.tuerunt segregate turbam suam et alios in secretum recipere, alios c.u.m pluribus, alios universos. Habuerunt itaque isti amicos primos, habuerunt secundos, numquam veros.

[670] The name of the law was probably _lex de sociis et nomine Latino_.

See Cic. _Brut_. 26. 99.

[671] App. _Bell. Civ_. i. 23 [Greek: _kai tous Latinous epi panta ekalei ta Rhomaion, hos ouk euprepos sygnenesi taes boulaes antistaenai dynamenaes; ton de heteron symmachon hois ouk ezaen psaephon en tais Rhomaion cheirotoniais pherein, edidous pherein apo toude, epi to echein kai tousde en tais cherotioniais ton nomon auto syntelountas_]. The words [Greek: _psaephon k.t.l._] refer to the limited suffrage granted to Latin _incolae_ (Liv. xxv. 3. 16); but the voting power of his new Latins would be so small that the motive attributed to this measure by Appian is improbable. See Strachan-Davidson in loc. Other accounts of Gracchus's proposal ignore this distinction between Latins and Italians, e.g. Plutarch (_C. Gracch_. 5) describes his law as [Greek: _isopsaephous toion tois politais tous Italiotas_] and Velleius says (ii. 6) Dabat civitatem omnibus Italicis.

[672] If we may trust Velleius (ii. 6) Dabat civitatem omnibus Italicis, extendebat eam paene usque Alpis. Cisalpine Gaul was not yet a separate province, but it was not regarded as a part of Italy. The Latin colonies between the Padus and the Rubicon would certainly have received Roman rights, and this may have been the case with a Latin towns.h.i.+p north of the Padus such as Aquileia. But it is doubtful whether Latin rights would have been given to the towns between the Padus and the Alps. These _Transpadani_ received _Latinitas_ in 89 B.C. (Ascon. _in Pisonian_.

P. 3).

[673] C. Gracch. ap, Gell. x. 3. 3.

[674] Fann. ap. Jul. Victor 6. 6. A speech of Fannius as consul against Caius Gracchus is also mentioned by Charisius p. 143 Keil.

[675] Cic. Brut. 26. 99.

[676] App. _Bell. Civ_. i. 23.

[677] Plut. _C. Gracch_. 12 [Greek: _antexethaeken ho Gaios diagramma kataegoron ton hypaton, kai tois symmachois, an menosi, boaethaesein epangellomenos_.] The invective may have been directed against Fannius, According to Appian (l.c.) both consuls had been instructed by the senate to issue the edict.

[678] If it had been hampered in this way, the judicial protection of _peregrini_ against the judgments of the Praetor Peregrinus would have been impossible.

[679] Plut. _C. Gracch_. 12.

[680] App. _Bell. Civ_. i. 23.

[681] [Sall.] _de Rep. Ord_. ii. 8 Magistratibus creandis haud mihi quidem apsurde placet lex quam C. Gracchus in tribunatu promulgaverat, ut ex confusis quinque cla.s.sibus sorte centuriae vocarentur. Ita coaequatus dignitate pecunia, virtute anteire alius alium properabit.

<script>