[1] _Cf._ A. Ernout, _Le Parler de Préneste_, Paris, 1905.
[2] The relation between Latin and the Italic dialects may be illustrated
by an extract or two from them with a Latin translation. An Umbrian
specimen may be taken from one of the bronze tablets found at Iguvium,
which reads in Umbrian: Di Grabouie, saluo seritu ocrem Fisim, saluam
seritu totam Iiouinam (_Iguvinian Tables_ VI, a. 51), and in Latin: Deus
Grabovi, salvam servato arcem Fisiam, salvam servato civitatem Iguvinam. A
bit of Oscan from the Tabula Bantina (Tab. Bant. 2, 11) reads: suaepis
contrud exeic fefacust auti comono hipust, molto etanto estud, and in
Latin: siquis contra hoc fecerit aut comitia habuerit, multa tanta esto.
[3] _Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum_, IX, 782, furnishes a case in point.
[4] _Cf._ G. Mohl, _Introduction à la chronologie du Latin vulgaire_,
Paris, 1899.
[5] Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encyclopadie_, IV, 1179 _ff._
[6] Marquardt, _Römische Staatsverwaltung_, II, p. 463.
[7] _Cf._, _e.g._, Pirson, _La langue des inscriptions Latines de la
Gaule_, Bruxelles, 1901; Carnoy, _Le Latin d'Espagne d'après les
inscriptions_, Bruxelles, 1906; Hoffmann, _De titulis Africæ Latinis
quæstiones phoneticæ_, 1907; Kuebler, _Die lateinische Sprache auf
afrikanischen Inschriften_ (_Arch, für lat. Lex._, vol. VIII), and Martin,
_Notes on the Syntax of the Latin Inscriptions Found in Spain_, Baltimore,
1909.
[8] _Cf._ L. Hahn, _Rom und Romanismus im griechisch-römischen Osten_
(esp. pp. 222-268), Leipzig, 1906.
[9] _Proceedings of the American Philological Association_, XXIX (1898),
pp. 31-47. For a different theory of the results of language-conflict,
_cf._ Gröber, _Grundriss der romanischen Philologie_, I, pp. 516, 517.
[10] A very interesting sketch of the history of the Latin language in
this region may be seen in Ovide Densusianu's _Histoire de la langue
Roumaine_, Paris, 1902.
[11] Gorra, _Lingue Neolatine_, pp. 66-68.
[12] Gröber, _Grundriss der romanischen Philologie_, pp. 517 and 524.
[13] _Cf._ Gröber in _Archiv für lateinische Lexikographie und Grammatik_,
I, p. 210 _ff._
[14] _Is Modern-Language Teaching a Failure?_ Chicago, 1907.
[15] _Cf._ Abbott, _History of Rome_, pp. 246-249.
[16] Schuchardt, _Vokalismus des Vulgärlateins, I_, 103 _ff._
[17] _Cf._ Gröber, _Archiv für lateinische Lexikographie und Grammatik_,
I, 45.
[18] Thielmann, _Archiv_, II, 48 _ff._; 157 _ff._
[19] From the "Laws of the Twelve Tables" of the fifth century B.C. See
Bruns, _Fontes iuris Romani antiqui_, sixth edition, p. 31.
[20] _Appendix Probi_, in Keil's _Grammatici Latini_, IV, 197 _ff._
[21] "The Accent in Vulgar and Formal Latin," in _Classical Philology_, II
(1907), 445 _ff._
[22] Bücheler, _Carmina Latina epigraphica_, No. 53. The originals of all
the bits of verse which are translated in this paper may be found in the
collection whose title is given here. Hereafter reference to this work
will be by number only.
[23] No. 443.
[24] No. 92.
[25] No. 128.
[26] No. 127.
[27] No. 876.
[28] No. 1414.
[29] No. 765.
[30] No. 843.
[31] No. 95.
[32] No. 1578.
[33] Nos. 1192 and 1472.
[34] No. 1037.
[35] No. 1039.
[36] G. W. Van Bleek, Quae de hominum post mortem eondicione doceant
carmina sepulcralia Latina.
[37] No. 1495.
[38] No. 1496.
[39] No. 86.
[40] No. 1465.
[41] No. 1143.
[42] No. 1559.
[43] No. 1433.
[44] No. 225.
[45] No. 143.
[46] No. 83.
[47] No. 1500.
[48] No. 190.
[49] No. 244.
[50] No. 1499.
[51] No. 856.
[52] Society and Politics in Ancient Rome, p. 183.
[53] No. 562.
[54] No. 52.
[55] No. 1251.
[56] No. 106.
[57] No. 967.
[58] No. 152.
[59] No. 1042.
[60] No. 1064.
[61] No. 98.
[62] Bücheler, _Carmina Latino epigraphica_, No. 899.
[63] No. 19.
[64] No. 866.
[65] No. 863.
[66] No. 937.
[67] No. 949.
[68] No. 943.
[69] No. 945.
[70] No. 354.
[71] _Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum_, IV, 6892.
[72] Bücheler, No. 928.
[73] No. 333.
[74] No. 931.
[75] No. 933.
[76] No. 38.
[77] No. 270.
[78] Habeat scabiem quisquis ad me venerit novissimus.
[79] Rex erit qui recte faciet, qui non faciet non erit.
[80]
Gallos Cæsar in triumphum ducit, idem in curiam;
Galli bracas deposuerunt, latum clavom sumpserunt.
[81]
Brutus quia reges eiecit, consul primus factus est;
Hic quia consoles eiecit, rex postremo factus est.
[82] Salva Roma, salva patria, salvus est Germanicus.
[83] _Cf._ Schmid, "Der griechische Roman," _Neue Jahrb._, Bd XIII (1904),
465-85; Wilcken, in _Hermes_, XXVIII, 161 _ff._, and in _Archiv f.
Papyrusforschung_, I, 255 _ff._; Grenfell-Hunt, _Fayûm Towns and Their
Papyri_ (1900), 75 _ff._, and _Rivista di Filologia_, XXIII, I _ff._
[84] Some of the important late discussions of the Milesian tale are by
Bürger, _Hermes_ (1892), 351 _ff._; Norden, _Die antike Kunstprosa_, II,
602, 604, n.; Rohde, _Kleine Schriften_, II, 25 _ff._; Bürger, _Studien
zur Geschichte d. griech. Romans_, I (_Programm von Blankenburg a. H._,
1902); W. Schmid, _Neue Jahrb. f. d. klass. Alt._ (1904), 474 _ff._;
Lucas, "Zu den Milesiaca des Aristides," _Philologus_, 61 (1907), 16 _ff._
[85] On the origin of the _prosimetrum cf._ Hirzel, _Der Dialog_, 381
_ff._; Norden, _Die antike Kunstprosa_, 755.
[86] _Cf._ Rosenbluth, _Beiträge zur Quellenkunde von Petrons Satiren_.
Berlin, 1909.
[87] This theory in the main is suggested by Rohde, _Der griechische
Roman_, 2d ed., 267 (Leipzig, 1900), and by Ribbeck, _Geschichte d. röm.
Dichtung_, 2d ed., III, 150.
[88] _Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum_, vol. III, pp. 1926-1953. Mommsen's
text with a commentary has been published by H. Blümner, in _Der
Maximaltarif des Diocletian_, Berlin, 1893. A brief description of the
edict may be found in the Pauly-Wissowa _Real-Encyclopadie der classischen
Altertumswissenschaft_, under "Edictum Diocletiani," and K. Bücher has
discussed some points in it in the _Zeitschrift für die gesamte
Staatswissenschaft_, vol. L (1894), pp. 189-219 and 672-717.
[89] The method of arrangement may be illustrated by an extract from the
first table, which deals with grain and vegetables.
[90] The present-day prices which are given in the third column of these
two tables are taken from Bulletin No. 77 of the Bureau of Labor, and from
the majority and minority reports of the Select Committee of the U.S.
Senate on "Wages and Prices of Commodities" (Report, No. 912, Documents,
Nos. 421 and 477). In setting down a number to represent the current price
of an article naturally a rough average had to be struck of the rates
charged in different parts of the country. Bulletin No. 77, for instance,
gives the retail price charged for butter at 226 places in 68 different
cities, situated in 39 different States. At one point in Illinois the
price quoted in 1906 was 22 cents, while at a point in Pennsylvania 36
cents was reported, but the prevailing price throughout the country ranged
from 26 to 32, so that these figures were set down in the table. A similar
method has been adopted for the other items. A special difficulty arises
in the case of beef, where the price varies according to the cut. The
price of wheat is not given in the extant fragment of the edict, but has
been calculated by Blümner from statements in ancient writers. So far as
the wages of the ancient and modern workman are concerned we must remember
that the Roman laborer in many cases received "keep" from his employer.
Probably from one-third to three-sevenths should be added to his daily
wage to cover this item. Statistics published by the Department of
Agriculture show that the average wage of American farm laborers per month
during 1910 was $27.50 without board and $19.21 with board. The item of
board, therefore, is three-sevenths of the money paid to the laborer when
he keeps himself. One other point of difference between ancient and modern
working conditions must be borne in mind in attempting a comparison. We
have no means of knowing the length of the Roman working day. However, it
was probably much longer than our modern working day, which, for
convenience' sake, is estimated at eight hours.
[91] Wholesale price in 1909.
[92] Receives "keep" also.
[93] Eight-hour day assumed.
[94] _Cf._ Report of the Commissioner of Labor, pp. 622-625. In England
between one-third and one-fourth; _cf._ Bulletin, No. 77, p. 345.
[95] _Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum_, II, 5489.
[96] Wilmanns, _Exempla Inscriptionum Latinarum_, 1772.
[97] _Ibid._, 2037.
[98] _Ibid._, 1859.
[99] _Ibid._, 2054.
[100] _Ibid._, 2099.
[101] 23:48_f._
[102] _Cic., ad Att._, 5.21. 10-13; 6.1. 5-7; 6.2.7; 6.3.5.
[103] 6.17.
[104] _Captivi_, 489 _ff._
[105] _Livy_, 38. 35.
[106] Plautus, _Pseudolus_, 189.
[107] Some of the most important discussions of workmen's guilds among the
Romans are to be found in Waltzing's _Etude historique sur les
corporations professionnelles chez les Romains_, 3 vols., Louvain, 1895-9;
Liebenam's _Zur Geschichte und Organisation des römischen Vereinswesen_,
Leipzig, 1890; Ziebarth's _Das Griechische Vereinswesen_, Leipzig, 1896,
pp. 96-110; Kornemann's article, "Collegium," in the Pauly-Wissowa _Real
Encyclopadie_. Other literature is cited by Waltzing, I, pp. 17-30, and by
Kornemann, IV, columns 479-480.
[108] _Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum_, XI, 5047.
[109] _Ibid._, V, 7906.
[110] _Ibid._, III, p. 953.
[111] _Ibid._, VIII, 14683.
[112] _Ibid._, III, 3583.
[113] _Ibid._, XIV, 2112.
[114] _Ibid._, XIV, 326.
[115] _E.g._, Clodius and Milo.
[116] Lucan, 4. 814 _ff._; Velleius, 2. 48; Pliny, Nat. Hist., 7. 116
_ff._
[117] Cicero, Brutus, 122, 210, 214.
[118] _Ibid._, 280.
[119] Cicero, _Epist. ad Fam._, 2. 1.
[120] Cicero, _Phil._, 2. 45 _f._
[121] Cicero, _ad Att._, 1. 14. 5.
[122] _Ibid._, 1. 14. 5.
[123] _Ibid._, 2. 12. 2.
[124] _Ibid._, 2.7.3; 2.8.1; 2.12.2.
[125] Suet., _Julius_, 52.
[126]_Ad Att._, 2. 19. 3.
[127] _Ad fam._, 2.4.
[128] _Ibid._, 2.6.
[129]_Ibid._, 8. 4. 2.
[130] Dio's account (40. 61) of Curio's course seems to harmonize with
this interpretation.
[131] "Cicero, _ad fam._, 8.10.4.
[132] White's Civil Wars of Appian, 2.27.
[133] Cicero, _ad fam._, 8.6.5.
[134] Valerius Maximus, 9.1.6.
[135] Vell. Pat., 2.48.
[136] Civil Wars, 2.30.
[137] _Ad Att._, 6.9.4.
[138] Civil Wars of Appian, 2.31.
[139] Velleius Paterculus, 2.48.
[140] Cæsar, Civil War, 1. 12.
[141] _Ibid._, 1.182
[142] _Ibid._, 2.23.
[143] _Ibid._, 2.42.
[144] _Pharsalia_, 4. 807-824.
[145] Cicero, _Epistulæ ad famiares_, 11.27.
[146] Cicero, _Epist. ad fam._, 11.28.
[147] 12.46.1.
[148] Apicius, 4.174.
[149] _Naturalis Historia_, 12.13.