[1159]. Ibid. vi. 24.
[1160]. Antistius Labeo, ap. Festum, 348: ‘Septimontio, ut ait Antistius Labeo, hisce montibus feriae. Palatio, cui sacrificium quod fit Palatuar dicitur. Veliae, cui item sacrificium, Fagutali, Suburae, Cermalo, Oppio, Cispio monti.’ Before ‘Cispio’ the MS. has ‘Caelio monti,’ which must be a copyist’s blunder. The Subura is by courtesy a mons; also a pagus (Festus, 309), a regio (ib.), and a tribus (ib.).
[1161]. Staatsrecht, iii. 112. O. Gilbert has made a great to-do about the development of these communities; Gesch. u. Topogr. i. 39 foll. But where else will he find three distinct settlements in a space as small as that of the Palatine? The discoveries at Falerii and Narce would have saved him the labour of much web-spinning. Plutarch, Q. R. 69, has (accidentally perhaps) expressed the matter rightly.
[1162]. Monumenti Antichi, vol. v. p. 15 foll.
[1163]. Mon. Ant. p. 110 foll. (Barnabei).
[1164]. Cic. de Domo, 28. 74.
[1165]. At Ariminum, and Antioch in Pisidia (Mommsen, Staatsrecht, iii. 113, note).
[1166]. Festus, 348, cp. 245.
[1167]. Preller, i. 414.
[1168]. Q. R. 69. Plutarch does not say in what parts of the city the vehicles were forbidden. The feast existed in his day, and indeed long afterwards (Tertull. Idololatr. 10). It seems to have become a general feast of the whole people.