Antistius Labeo, ap. Festum, 348: ‘Septimontio, ut ait Antistius Labeo, hisce montibus feriae. Palatio, cui sacrificium quod fit Palatuar dicitur. Veliae, cui item sacrificium, Fagutali, Suburae, Cermalo, Oppio, Cispio monti.’ Before ‘Cispio’ the MS. has ‘Caelio monti,’ which must be a copyist’s blunder. The Subura is by courtesy a _mons_; also a _pagus_ (Festus, 309), a _regio_ (ib.), and a _tribus_ (ib.). Footnote 1161: _Staatsrecht_, iii. 112. O. Gilbert has made a great to-do about the development of these communities; _Gesch. u. Topogr._ i. 39 foll. But where else will he find three distinct settlements in a space as small as that of the Palatine? The discoveries at Falerii and Narce would have saved him the labour of much web-spinning. Plutarch, _Q. R._ 69, has (accidentally perhaps) expressed the matter rightly. Footnote 1162: _Monumenti Antichi_, vol. v. p. 15 foll. Footnote 1163: _Mon. Ant._ p. 110 foll. (Barnabei). Footnote 1164: Cic. _de Domo_, 28. 74. Footnote 1165: At Ariminum, and Antioch in Pisidia (Mommsen, _Staatsrecht_, iii. 113, note). Footnote 1166: Festus, 348, cp. 245. Footnote 1167: Preller, i. 414. Footnote 1168: _Q. R._ 69. Plutarch does not say in what parts of the city the vehicles were forbidden. The feast existed in his day, and indeed long afterwards (Tertull. _Idololatr._ 10). It seems to have become a general feast of the whole people. Footnote 1169: Macrob. i. 10. 2. Footnote 1170: See below on Saturnalia, p. 271. Footnote 1171: Macrob. 1. 10. 2. Macr. tells us that after the change some people in error held the festival on the 19th, i. e. on the day which was now xiv K. Ian. Footnote 1172: Hartmann, _Der Röm. Kalender_, p. 203 foll., thinks it was originally one of the _feriae conceptivae_, like the Compitalia, Paganalia, &c., and only became fixed (_stativae_) when it was reorganized in 217 B.C. But if so, why is it marked in the calendars in large letters? And Hartmann himself points out (p. 208) that Dec. 17 is the first day of Capricornus, i. e. the coldest season, which in the oldest natural reckoning would be likely to fix the day (Colum. 11. 2. 94). Footnote 1173: Macr. l. c.; Cic. _Att._ 13. 52. Footnote 1174: Mommsen, _C. I. L._ i. 337. Footnote 1175: Frazer, _Golden Bough_, ii. 172; Brand, _Popular Antiquities_, ch. 13; Usener, _Religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen_, 1. 214 foll. See for Italy, _Academy_, Jan. 20, 1888. Footnote 1176: _C. I. L._ i. 48. But Prof. Gardner tells me that the reading Saet. is not certain. Footnote 1177: Macrob. 1. 10. 19 foll.; 1. 7. 24 and 25; Marq. p. 11 note 3. The conjunction of Ops with him in this function is rejected (rightly, I think) by Wissowa, _de Feriis_, iv. But see below on Opalia. Footnote 1178: Jordan’s note on Preller, ii. 10. Footnote 1179: e. g. Virg. _Aen._ 8. 321. Footnote 1180: