The first Greek historians to deal with Roman history are Hieronymus of Cardia and Timaeus, both of the fourth century B.C.E. Footnote 231: Pliny, Nat. Hist. III. lvii. Footnote 232: Psalms of Solomon, ii. Footnote 233: Livy, XLIX. v.: _Syros omnis esse, haud paulo mancipiorum melius propter servilia ingenia quam militum genus_. Footnote 234: Cf. ch. III., n. 9. Footnote 235: Servile origin has been ascribed to such a family as the Sempronian, and is assumed for the praenomen Servius, as for the nomen Servilius. Footnote 236: Macrob. Saturn. II. i. 13. Footnote 237: The reading of the last phrase in the mss. is _quod servata_, which is scarcely consistent with the rest of the passage. Bernays, Rh. Mus. 1857, p. 464 seq., conjectured that it was a Jewish or Christian marginal gloss which found its way into the text, a supposition by no means to be dismissed as cavalierly as Reinach does (Textes, p. 241, n. 1). A Christian scribe might easily have been moved by the taunt _quam dis cara_, to retort with the triumphant _quod servata!_ It will be remembered that the Christians accepted as part of their own all the history and literature of the Jews till the birth of Christ, and resented as attacks upon themselves any slur against the Jews of pre-Christian times. Cf. the very interesting passage in Lactantius, Div. inst. iv. 2. Footnote 238: Cic. In Vat. 5, 12. Footnote 239: It may be worth while to indicate briefly the relation between the senatorial authority and the executive power at Rome. Unless the senate acted at the instance of the magistrate himself, a _senatusconsultum_ was an advisory resolution, passed upon motion and suggesting to the holder of executive power, or _imperium_, a certain course of action. The words were generally: _Placet senatui ut A. A., N. N. consules, alter ambove, si eis videretur, ilia faciant_. In practice, it is true, such a resolution was almost mandatory. A strong magistrate, however, or a rash one, might and did disregard it. While, accordingly, a magistrate might neglect a course of action prescribed by the senate, there was nothing to hinder any action on his part (whether or not there was senatorial authority for it), except the veto power residing in the tribune or in an equal or superior magistrate. The only restrictions were made by the laws concerning the inviolability of the person of a _civis Romanus_, and of the _aerarium_. Footnote 240: