the view that
Caesar levied no soldiers at all from the Latin communities, that
is to say from by far the greater part of his province, is in
itself utterly incredible, and is directly refuted by the fact that
the opposition-party slightingly designates the force levied by
Caesar as "for the most part natives of the Transpadane colonies"
(Caes. B. C. iii. 87); for here the Latin colonies of Strabo
(Ascon. in Pison. p. 3; Sueton. Caes. 8) are evidently meant.
Yet there is no trace of Latin cohorts in Caesar's Gallic army;
on the contrary according to his express statements all the recruits
levied by him in Cisalpine Gaul were added to the legions or
distributed into legions. It is possible that Caesar combined
with the levy the bestowal of the franchise; but more probably he
adhered in this matter to the standpoint of his party, which did
not so much seek to procure for the Transpadanes the Roman
franchise as rather regarded it as already legally belonging to
them (iv. 457). Only thus could the report spread, that Caesar had
introduced of his own authority the Roman municipal constitution
among the Transpadane communities (Cic. Ad Att. v. 3, 2; Ad Fam.
viii. 1, 2). This hypothesis too explains why Hirtius designates
the Transpadane towns as "colonies of Roman burgesses" (B. G. viii.
24), and why Caesar treated the colony of Comum founded by him as
a burgess-colony (Sueton. Caes. 28; Strabo, v. 1, p. 213; Plutarch,
Caes. 29), while the moderate party of the aristocracy conceded to
it only the same rights as to the other Transpadane communities,
viz. Latin rights, and the ultras even declared the civic rights
conferred on the settlers as altogether null, and consequently did
not concede to the Comenses the privileges attached to the holding
of a Latin municipal magistracy (Cic. Ad Att. v. 11, 2; Appian, B.
C. ii. 26). Comp. Hermes, xvi. 30.

8. V. VII. Fresh Violations of the Rhine-Boundary by the Germans

9. The collection handed down to us is full of references to
the events of 699 and 700 and was doubtless published in the latter
year; the most recent event, which it mentions, is the prosecution
of Vatinius (Aug. 700). The statement of Hieronymus that Catullus
died in 697-698 requires therefore to be altered only by a few
years. From the circumstance that Vatinius "swears falsely by his
consulship," it has been erroneously inferred that the collection
did not appear till after the consulate of Vatinius (707); it