A Study of the Topography and Municipal History of Praeneste Part 7

| | | 3d year | {C. Salvius. | {L. Curtius. | {-- Statiolenus.

| {T. Lucretius. | {C. Vibius. | {C. Ca.s.sius.

| | | 4th year | M. Petronius, Quinq. | Q. Arrasidius. | T. Aponius.

| | | 75-50 | | | | | | {M. Dec.u.mius.

1st year | | | {L. Ferlidius.

| | | 2d year | {C. Paccius. | {C. Albinius. | {s.e.x. Capivas.

| {C. Ninn(ius). | {s.e.x Po ... | {C. M ...

| | | ? | {C. Caesius M.f. } Duoviri | | | {C. Flavius L.f. } Quinq. | | | | | ? | {Q. Vettius T. (f.) Pulcher. | | | {-- Tedusius T. (f.). | | | | | ? | {Q. Vibuleius L.f. | | | {L. Statius Sal. f. | | | | | A.D. | | | 12 | | | M. Atellius.

| | | 13 | C. Raecius. | {-- (--) lius. | {-- Accius ... us | | {C. Velius. | {M. Valerius.

| | | | {Germanicus Caesar. | | | { Quinq. | | 14 | {Drusus Caesar. | | | {M. Cominius Ba.s.sus. | | | { Pr. | {C. Dindius. | {C. Iuc .. Rufus.

| {M. Petronius Rufus | {Cn. Egnatius. | {C. Th.o.r.enas.

| | | 15 | {Cn. Pom(pei)us. | | {M. Raecius.

| {-- Cur (tius?) Sura. | | {-- Cordus.

| | | 16 | {L. Petisius Potens | {C. Dindius. | {L. Aiacius.

| {C. Salvius. | {T. Livius. | {C. Arrius.

| | | ? | | -- Va.s.sius. | | | | ? | -- Punicus. | -- Manilei. | | | | ? | ... Minus Quinq. | -- (?) rius. | | | | ? | (Se)x Truttidi(us). | C. Caecilius. | | | | ? | (M.) Petronius Rufus | -- (I)nstacilius.| | | | 1st year | | | -- Sedatus.

| | | 2d year | ... lus | | -- (Fl)avius Musca.

| | | | {Nero et Drusus } Duoviri | | 3d year | {Germanici f. } Quinq. | | | {....... } Praef. | | | {... Sedatus. } | | | | | 101 | {Ti. Claudius Attalus Mamilia.n.u.s. | | | {T. Sabidius Sabinus. | | | | | 100-256 | {P. Annius Septimus. | | | {s.e.x. Geganius Fimbria. | | | | | | P. Aquilius Gallus. | | -----------+-----------------------------------+------------------+----------------------

========================================================================================== DATE | IIVIRI. | AEDILES. | QUAESTORES.

-----------+-----------------------------------+------------------+---------------------- O. | | | | | | 250 | {--Egnat(ius). | | | {P. Scrib(onius). | | | {T. Long ... Prisc(us) | | | {C. Treb ... Planta. | | | --Mecanius. | | | {Q. Mestrius. | | | {C. Tappurius. | | | M. Tere ... Cl ... | | | C. Voluntilius Q.f. Varus. | | | | --Macrin(ius) | | | Nerian(us). | | | | M'. Later ...

| | | L. Mag(ulnius) M.f.

| {(M). Antonius Subarus. | | M. Naut(ius).

| {T. Diadumenius. | | -----------+-----------------------------------+------------------+----------------------

Decuriones populusque colonia Praenestin., C.I.L., XIV, 2898, 2899; decuriones populusque 2970, 2971, Not. d. Scavi 1894, P. 96; other mention of decuriones 2980, 2987, 2992, 3013; ordo populusque 2914; decretum ordinis 2991; curiales, in the late empire, Symmachus, Rel., 28, 4.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 1: Strabo V, 3, II.]

[Footnote 2: We know that in 380 B.C. Praeneste had eight towns under her jurisdiction, and that they must have been relatively near by. Livy VI, 29, 6: octo praeterea oppida erant sub dicione Praenestinorum.

Festus, p. 550 (de Ponor): T. Quintius Dictator c.u.m per novem dies totidem urbes et decimam Praeneste cep.i.s.set, and the story of the golden crown offered to Jupiter as the result of this rapid campaign, and the statue which was carried away from Praeneste (Livy VI, 29, 8), all show that the domain of Praeneste was both of extent and of consequence.]

[Footnote 3: Nibby, a.n.a.lisi, II, p. 475.]

[Footnote 4: Cecconi, Storia di Palestrina, p. 11, n. 74.]

[Footnote 5: Cecconi, Storia di Palestrina, p. 227 ff.; Marucchi, Guida Archeologica, p. 14; Nibby, a.n.a.lisi, p. 483; Volpi, Latium vetus de Praen., chap 2; Toma.s.setti, Delia Campagna Romana, p. 167.]

[Footnote 6: Cecconi, Storia di Palestrina, p. 11.]

[Footnote 7: Nibby, a.n.a.lisi, II, p. 484 from Muratori, Rerum Italicarum Scriptores, III, i, p. 301.]

[Footnote 8: Cecconi, Storia di Palestrina, p. 402.]

[Footnote 9: Cecconi, Storia di Palestrina, p. 277, n. 36, from Epist., 474: Bonifacius VIII concedit Episcopo Civitatis Papalis Loc.u.m, ubi fuerunt olim Civitas Praenestina, eiusque Castrum, quod dicebatur Mons, et Rocca; ac etiam Civitas Papalis postmodum destructa, c.u.m Territorio et Turri de Marmoribus, et Valle Gloriae; nec non Castrum Novum Tiburtinum 2 Id. April. an. VI; Petrini, Memorie Prenestine, p. 136; Civitas praedicta c.u.m Rocca, et Monte, c.u.m Territorio ipsius posita est in districtu Urbis in contrata, quae dicitur Romangia.]

[Footnote 10: Ashby, Papers of the British School at Rome, Vol. I, p.

213, and Maps IV and VI. Cecconi, Storia di Palestrina, p. 19, n. 34.]

[Footnote 11: Livy VIII, 12, 7: Pedanos tuebatur Tiburs, Praenestinus Veliternusque populus, etc. Livy VII, 12, 8: quod Gallos mox Praeneste venisse atque inde circa Pedum consedisse auditum est. Livy II, 39, 4; Dion. Hal. VIII, 19, 3; Horace, Epist, I, 4, 2. Cluverius, p. 966, thinks Pedum is Gallicano, as does Nibby with very good reason, a.n.a.lisi, II, p. 552, and Toma.s.setti, Delia Campagna Romana, p. 176. Ashby, Cla.s.sical Topography of the Roman Campagna in Papers of the British School at Rome, I, p. 205, thinks Pedum can not be located with certainty, but rather inclines to Zagarolo.]

[Footnote 12: There are some good ancient tufa quarries too on the southern slope of Colle S. Rocco, to which a branch road from Praeneste ran. Fernique, etude sur Preneste, p. 104.]

[Footnote 13: C.I.L., XIV, 2940 found at S. Pastore.]

[Footnote 14: Now the Maremmana inferiore, Ashby, Cla.s.sical Topog. of the Roman Campagna, I, pp. 205, 267.]

[Footnote 15: Ashby, Cla.s.sical Topog. of the Roman Campagna, I, p. 206, finds on the Colle del Pero an ampitheatre and a great many remains of imperial times, but considers it the probable site of an early village.]

[Footnote 16: Fernique, etude sur Preneste, p. 120, wishes to connect Marcigliano and Ceciliano with the gentes Marcia and Caecilia, but it is impossible to do more than guess, and the rather few names of these gentes at Praeneste make the guess improbable. It is also impossible to locate regio Caesariana mentioned as a possession of Praeneste by Symmachus, Rel., XXVIII, 4, in the year 384 A.D. Eutropius II, 12 gets some confirmation of his argument from the modern name Campo di Pirro which still clings to the ridge west of Praeneste.]

[Footnote 17: The author himself saw all the excavations here along the road during the year 1907, of which there is a full account in the Not.

d. Scavi, Ser. 5, 4 (1907), p. 19. Excavations began on these tombs in 1738, and have been carried on spasmodically ever since. There were excavations again in 1825 (Marucchi, Guida Archeologica, p. 21), but it was in 1855 that the more extensive excavations were made which caused so much stir among archaeologists (Marucchi, l.c., p. 21, notes 1-7).

For the excavations see Bull, dell'Inst.i.tuto. 1858, p. 93 ff., 1866, p.

133, 1869, p. 164, 1870, p. 97, 1883, p. 12; Not. d. Scavi, 2 (1877-78), pp. 101, 157, 390, 10 (1882-83), p. 584; Revue Arch., x.x.xV (1878), p.

234; Plan of necropolis in Garucci, Dissertazioni Arch., plate XII.

Again in 1862 there were excavations of importance made in the Vigna Velluti, to the right of the road to Marcigliano. It was thought that the exact boundaries of the necropolis on the north and south had been found because of the little columns of peperino 41 inches high by 8-8/10 inches square, which were in situ, and seemed to serve no other purpose than that of sepulchral cippi or boundary stones. Garucci, Dissertazioni Arch., I, p. 148; Archaeologia, 41 (1867), p. 190.]

[Footnote 18: C.I.L., XIV, 2987.]

[Footnote 19: The papal doc.u.ments read sometimes in Latin, territorium Praenestinum or Civitas Praenestina, but often the town itself is mentioned in its changing nomenclature, Pellestrina, Pinestrino, Penestre (Cecconi, Storia di Palestrina, p. II; Nibby, a.n.a.lisi, II, pp.

475, 483).]

[Footnote 20: There is nothing to show that Poli ever belonged in any way to ancient Praeneste.]

[Footnote 21: Rather a variety of cappellaccio, according to my own observations. See Not. d. Scavi, Ser. 5, 5 (1897), p. 259.]

[Footnote 22: The temple in Cave is of the same tufa (Fernique, etude sur Preneste, p. 104). The quarries down toward Gallicano supplied tufa of the same texture, but the quarries are too small to have supplied much. But this tufa from the ridge back of the town seems not to have been used in Gallicano to any great extent, for the tufa there is of a different kind and comes from the different cuts in the ridges on either side of the town, and from a quarry just west of the town across the valley.]

[Footnote 23: Plautus, Truc., 691 (see [Probus] de ultimis syllabis, p.

263, 8 (Keil); C.I.L., XIV, p. 288, n. 9); Plautus, Trin., 609 (Festus, p. 544 (de Ponor), Mommsen, Abhand. d. berl. Akad., 1864, p. 70); Quintilian I, 5, 56; Festus under "tongere," p. 539 (de Ponor), and under "nefrendes," p. 161 (de Ponor).]

[Footnote 24: Cave has been attached rather more to Genazzano during Papal rule than to Praeneste, and it belongs to the electoral college of Subiaco, Toma.s.setti, Delia Campagna Romana, p. 182.]

[Footnote 25: I heard everywhere bitter and slighting remarks in Praeneste about Cave, and much fun made of the Cave dialect. When there are church festivals at Cave the women usually go, but the men not often, for the facts bear out the tradition that there is usually a fight. Toma.s.setti, Della Campagna Romana, p. 183, remarks upon the differences in dialect.]

[Footnote 26: Mommsen, Bull. dell'Inst.i.tuto, 1862, p. 38, thinks that the civilization in Praeneste was far ahead of that of the other Latin cities.]

[Footnote 27: It is to be noted that this Marcigliana road was not to tap the trade route along the Volscian side of the Liris-Trerus valley, which ran under Artena and through Valmontone. It did not reach so far.

It was meant rather as a threat to that route.]

[Footnote 28: Whether these towns are Pedum or Bola, Scaptia, and Querquetula is not a question here at all.]

[Footnote 29: Gatti, in Not. d. Scavi, 1903, p. 576, in connection with the Arlenius inscription, found on the site of the new Forum below Praeneste in 1903, which mentions Ad Duas Casas as confinium territorio Praenestinae, thought that it was possible to identify this place with a fundus and possessio Duas Casas below Tibur under Monte Gennaro, and thus to extend the domain of Praeneste that far, but as Huelsen saw (Mitth. des k.d. Arch, Inst., 19 (1904), p. 150), that is manifestly impossible, doubly so from the modern a.n.a.logies which he quotes (l.c., note 2) from the Dizionario dei Comuni d'Italia.]

[Footnote 30: It might be objected that because Pietro Colonna in 1092 A.D. a.s.saulted and took Cave as his first step in his revolt against Clement III (Cecconi, Storia di Palestrina, p. 240), that Cave was at that time a dependency of Praeneste. But it has been shown that Praeneste's diocesan territory expanded and shrunk very much at different times, and that in general the extent of a diocese, when larger, depends on principles which ancient topography will not allow.