^{page 16 note 1} Cf. Halm's edition ad loc.

^{page 16 note 2} Cf. Pro Sest. 57; Caesar, , Bell. Chi. III. 107Google Scholar; Bell. Gall. I. 35.

^{page 17 note 1} Cf. Plut, . Pomp. 48Google Scholar.

^{page 17 note 2} Ibid.

^{page 17 note 3} Cf. Daremberg and Saglio, Rotondi, etc., sub leges Iuliae.

^{page 17 note 4} Various other references are given, but are undecisive—e.g. Velleius II. 44, 2; Bell. Alex. 68, I; Plutarch, , Lucullus 42Google Scholar, Pompey 48,

^{page 17 note 5} Cf. also Meyer, , Caesar's Monarchic, p. 419Google Scholar. Bell. Ciu. III. 1 reads: ‘Itemque praetoribus., tribunisque plebis rogationes ad populum feren tibus nonnullos ambitus Pompeia lege damnatos in integrum restituit.’ Dio (41, 36), Appian(II. 48), and Plutarch (Cues. 37) all to Caesar personally.

^{page 18 note 1} Cf. Livy XXIX. 12. 15 sq.

^{page 18 note 2} Plut, . Pomp. 48Google Scholar.

^{page 18 note 3} In Vat. § 17.

^{page 19 note 1} A complete proof of this requires consider.able space; the speeches. Post reditum. and the letters of 57–56 B.C. provide the evidence.

^{page 19 note 2} In Vat. 29, and cf.Att. II. 9, 1.

^{page 19 note 3} Cf. again Appian, B.C. II. ix., ςσα βασιλɛ⋯σι και δυνáσταις και ιóǒλɛσιν ɛδɛδωκɛι

^{page 20 note 1} Cf. In Vat. 33 and 34.

^{page 20 note 2} Fam. I. 9. 7 and 8.

^{page 20 note 3} ‘Qui per alterum facit, ipse facit’.1 Cf. De Domo, § 40, and C.Q., April, 1924, p. 59.

^{page 20 note 4} In Vat. § 34.

^{page 20 note 5} For a full discussionsee Halm's In Vat., p. 107 ad loc.

^{page 20 note 6} In Vat. § 16.

^{page 20 note 7} Cf. ibid. § 25.

^{page 20 note 8} Ibid. 34 ad fin.

^{page 21 note 1} 1 Important not only from a constitutional reipoint of view; the validity of the whole of Caesar's and his own legislation stood or fell by it, the most critical political question of the day. Cf. De Domo, §§ 39 and 40; Prou. Cons. § 46, etc.

^{page 21 note 2} Cf. Att. II. 9, 1: ‘qui omnia remedia reipoint publicae effuderunt.’

^{page 20 note 3} In Vat. 33.

^{page 21 note 4} Att. II. 9, 1.

^{page 21 note 5} For other examples of Vatinius's anti- Senatorial views, cf. In Vat. §§ 14,23, 35, and 36.