10. Among the eight ritual institutions of Numa, Dionysius (ii. 64) after naming the Curiones and Flamines, specifies as the third the leaders of the horsemen (oi eigemones ton Kelerion). According to the Praenestine calendar a festival was celebrated at the Comitium on the 19th March [adstantibus pon]tificibus et trib(unis) celer(um). Valerius Antias (in Dionys. i. 13, comp. iii. 41) assigns to the earliest Roman cavalry a leader, Celer, and three centurions; whereas in the treatise De viris ill. i, Celer himself is termed centurio. Moreover Brutus is affirmed to have been tribunus celerum at the expulsion of the kings (Liv. i. 59), and according to Dionysius (iv. 71) to have even by virtue of this office made the proposal to banish the Tarquins.  And, lastly, Pomponius (Dig. i. 2, 2, 15, 19) and Lydus in a similar way, partly perhaps borrowing from him (De Mag.  i. 14, 37), identify the tribunus celerum with the Celer of Antias, the magister equitum of the dictator under the republic, and the Praefectus praetorio of the empire. Of these-the only statements which are extant regarding the tribuni celerum - the last mentioned not only proceeds from late and quite untrustworthy authorities, but is inconsistent with the meaning of the term, which can only signify "divisional leaders of horsemen," and above all the master of the horse of the republican period, who was nominated only on extraordinary occasions and was in later times no longer nominated at all, cannot possibly have been identical with the magistracy that was required for the annual festival of the 19th March and was consequently a standing office. Laying aside, as we necessarily must, the account of Pomponius, which has evidently arisen solely out of the anecdote of Brutus dressed up with ever-increasing ignorance as history, we reach the simple result that the tribuni celerum entirely correspond in number and character to the tribuni militum, and that they were the leaders-of-division of the horsemen, consequently quite distinct from the magister equitum.

11. This is indicated by the evidently very old forms velites and arquites and by the subsequent organization of the legion.

12. I. V. The King

13. I. IV. The Tibur and Its Traffic

14.Lex ("that which binds," related to legare, "to bind to something") denotes, as is well known, a contract in general, along, however, with the connotation of a contract whose terms the proposer dictates and the other party simply accepts or declines; as was usually the case, e. g. with public licitationes. In the lex publica populi Romani the proposer was the king, the acceptor the people; the limited co-operation of the latter was thus significantly indicated in the very language.

1. I. V. Dependents of the Household

2.Habuit plebem in clientelas principium descriptam.  Cicero, de Rep. ii. 9.

3. I. III. The Latin League

4. The enactments of the Twelve Tables respecting usus show clearly that they found the civil marriage already in existence. In like manner the high antiquity of the civil marriage is clearly evident from the fact that it, equally with the religious marriage, necessarily involved the marital power (v. The House-father and His Household), and only differed from the religious marriage as respected the manner in which that power was acquired. The religious marriage itself was held as the proprietary and legally necessary form of acquiring a wife; whereas, in the case of civil marriage, one of the general forms of acquiring property used on other occasions - delivery on the part of a person entitled to give away, or prescription - was requisite in order to lay the foundation of a valid marital power.

5. I. V. The House-father and His Household.

6.Hufe, hide, as much as can be properly tilled with one plough, called in Scotland a plough-gate.

7. For the same reason, when the levy was enlarged after the admission of the Hill-Romans, the equites were doubled, while in the infantry force instead of the single "gathering" (legio) two legions were called out (vi. Amalgamation of the Palatine and Quirinal Cities).

8. I. IV. Oldest Settlements In the Palatine and Suburan Regions

9. I. V. Burdens of the Burgesses

10.velites, see v. Burdens of the Burgesses, note

11. I. V. Rights of the Burgesses

12. Even about 480, allotments of land of seven jugera appeared to those that received them small (Val. Max. iii. 3, 5; Colum. i, praef.  14; i. 3, ii; Plin. H. N. xviii. 3, 18: fourteen jugera, Victor, 33; Plutarch, Apophth. Reg. et Imp. p. 235 Dubner, in accordance with which Plutarch, Crass. 2, is to be corrected). A comparison of the Germanic proportions gives the same result. The jugerum and the morgen [nearly 5/8 of an English acre], both originally measures rather of labour than of surface, may be looked upon as originally identical. As the German hide consisted ordinarily of 30, but not unfrequently of 20 or 40 morgen, and the homestead frequently, at least among the Anglo-Saxons, amounted to a tenth of the hide, it will appear, taking into account the diversity of climate and the size of the Roman heredium of 2 jugera, that the hypothesis of a Roman hide of 20 jugera is not unsuitable to the circumstances of the case. It is to be regretted certainly that on this very point tradition leaves us without precise information.

13. The analogy also between the so-called Servian constitution and the treatment of the Attic metoeci deserves to be particularly noticed. Athens, like Rome, opened her gates at a comparatively early period to the metoeci, and afterwards summoned them also to share the burdens of the state. We cannot suppose that any direct connection existed in this instance between Athens and Rome; but the coincidence serves all the more distinctly to show how the same causes - urban centralization and urban development - everywhere and of necessity produce similar effects.

1. I. IV. Earliest Limits of the Roman Territory

2. The formulae of accursing for Gabii and Fidenae are quite as characteristic (Macrob. Sat. iii. 9). It cannot, however, be proved and is extremely improbable that, as respects these towns, there was an actual historical accursing of the ground on which they were built, such as really took place at Veii, Carthage, and Fregellae.  It may be conjectured that old accursing formularies were applied to those two hated towns, and were considered by later antiquaries as historical documents.

3. But there seems to be no good ground for the doubt recently expressed in a quarter deserving of respect as to the destruction of Alba having really been the act of Rome.  It is true, indeed, that the account of the destruction of Alba is in its details a series of improbabilities and impossibilities; but that is true of every historical fact inwoven into legend.  To the question as to the attitude of the rest of Latium towards the struggle between Rome and Alba, we are unable to give an answer; but the question itself rests on a false assumption, for it is not proved that the constitution of the Latin league absolutely prohibited a separate war between two Latin communities (I. III. The Latin League). Still less is the fact that a number of Alban families were received into the burgess-union of Rome inconsistent with the destruction of Alba by the Romans.  Why may there not have been a Roman party in Alba just as there was in Capua? The circumstance, however, of Rome claiming to be in a religious and political point of view the heir-at-law of Alba may be regarded as decisive of the matter; for such a claim could not be based on the migration of individual clans to Rome, but could only be based, as it actually was, on the conquest of the town.