chapter 5) says that the senate-meeting in question was called to
consider the conspiracy of Catiline. Since, however, Augustus is on all hands admitted to have been born a. d. IX. Kal. Octobr. and mention of Catiline's conspiracy was first made in the senate a. d. XII. Kal. Nov. (Cicero, Against Catiline, I, 3, 7), the claim of coincidence is evidently based on error.]
[Footnote 4: Compare again the same Byzantine writer quoted in footnote to chapter 1,--two excerpts:
d) Again, while he was growing up in the country, an eagle swooping down snatched from his hands the loaf of bread and again returning replaced it in his hands.
e) Again, during his boyhood, Cicero saw in a dream Octavius himself fastened to a golden chain and wielding a whip being let down from the sky to the summit of the Capitol.]
[Footnote 5: Compare Súetonius, Life of Augustus, chapter 94]
[Footnote 6: See footnote to Book Forty-three, chapter 42.]
[Footnote 7: The senate-house already mentioned in Book Forty, chapter 50.]
[Footnote 8: This word is inserted by Boissevain on the authority of a symbol in the manuscript's margin, indicating a gap.]
[Footnote 9: Inserting with Reimar [Greek: proihemenos], to complete the sense.]
[Footnote 10: See Roscher I, col. 1458, on the Puperci Iulii. And compare Suetonius, Life of Caesar, chapter 76.]
[Footnote 11: For further particulars about Sex. Clodius and the _ager Leontinus_ (held to be the best in Sicily, Cicero, Against Verres, III, 46) see Suetonius, On Rhetoric, 5; Arnobuis, V, 18; Cicero, Philippics, II, 4, 8; II, 17; II, 34, 84; II, 39, 101; III, 9, 22.]
[Footnote 12: Compare here (and particularly with, reference to the plural _Spurii_) the passage in Cicero, Philippics, III, 44, 114:
Quod si se ipsos illi nostri liberatores e conspectu nostro abstulerunt, at exemplum facti reliquerunt: illi, quod nemo fecerat, fecerunt: Tarquinium Brutus bello est persecutus, qui tum rex fuit, cum esse Romae licebat; Sp. Cassius, Sp. Maelius, M. Manlius propter suspitionem regni appetendi sunt necati; hi primum cum gladiis non in regnum appetentem, sed in regnum impetum fecerunt.]
[Footnote 13: For the figure, compare Aristophanes, The Acharnians, vv. 380-381 (about Cleon):
[Greek: dieballe chai pseudae chateglottise mou chachychloborei chaplunen.]]
[Footnote 14: Dio has in this sentence imitated almost word for word the utterance of Demosthenes, inveighing against Aischines, in the speech on the crown (Demosthenes XVIII, 129).]
[Footnote 15: Compare Book Forty-five, chapter 30.]
[Footnote 16: There is a play on words here which can not be exactly rendered. The Greek verb [Greek: _pheaegein_] means either "to flee" or "to be exiled."]
[Footnote 17: Various diminutive endings, expressing contempt.]
[Footnote 18: The MS. reading is not wholly satisfactory here. Bekker, by a slight change, would produce (after "Bambalio"): "nor by declaring war because of," etc.]
[Footnote 19: The Greek word is [Greek: obolos] a coin which in the fifth century B.C. would have amounted to considerably more than the Roman _as_; but as time went on the value of the [Greek: obolos] diminished indefinitely, so that glossaries eventually translate it as _as_ in Latin.]
[Footnote 20: I. e., epilepsy.]
[Footnote 21: Sturz changes this reading of _sixty_ days to _fifty_, comparing Appian, Civil Wars, Book Three, chapter 74. Between the two authorities it is difficult to decide, and the only consideration that would incline one to favor Appian is the fact that he says this period of fifty days was unusually long ("more than the Romans had ever voted upon vanquishing the Celtae or winning any war"). Boissevain remarks that Dio is not very careful about such details.]
[Footnote 22: Adopting Reiske's reading, [Greek: _tinas_].]
[Footnote 23: Compare here Mommsen (_Staatsrecht_, 23, 644, 2 or 23, 663, 3), who says that since the only objection to be found with this arrangement was that since the praetor urbanus could not himself conduct the comitia, he ought not properly to have empowered others to do so.]
[Footnote 24: _M. Juventius Laterensis._]
[Footnote 25: This refers to the latter half of chapter 42, where Caesar binds his soldiers by oath never to fight against any of their former comrades.]
[Footnote 26: [Greek: _pragmaton_] here is somewhat uncertain and might give the sense "as a result of the troubles in which they had been involved, one with another." Sturz and Wagner appear to have viewed it in that light: Boissée and friends consulted by the translator choose the meaning found in the text above.]
[Footnote 27: The name of this freedman as given by Appian (Civil Wars, IV, 44) is Philemon; but Suetonius (Life of Augustus, chapter 27) agrees with Dio in writing Philopoemen.]
[Footnote 28: In B.C. 208 the Ludi Apollinares were set for July thirteenth, but by the year B.C. 190 they occupied three days, and in B.C. 42 the entire period of the sixth to the thirteenth of July was allotted to their celebration. Now Caesar's birthday fell on July twelfth and the day before that, July eleventh, would have conflicted quite as much with the festival of Apollo. Hence this expression "the previous day" must mean July fifth. (See Fowler's Roman Festivals, p. 174.)]
[Footnote 29: There seems to be an error here made either by Dio or by some scribe in the course of the ages. For, according to many reliable authorities (Plutarch, Life of Brutus, chapter 21; Appian, Civil Wars,