^{page 321 note 1} See Tac. Ann. I. 14–15.

^{page 321 note 2} For the use of modo … aliquando as equivalent to modo … modo, see Gerber, A. and Greef, A., Lexicon Taciteum;Google Scholar and cf. et Vespasiantts modo in spem erectus, aliquando adversa reputabat (Tac. Hist. a. 74. 2)Google Scholar, modo muliebri eiulatu, aliquando sexum egressa voce infensa clamitabat (Tac. Ann. 16. 10. 5).Google Scholar

^{page 321 note 3} Marsh, F. B., The Reign of Tiberius, p. 301 (cf. note on modo by Miller in her edition of Tac. Ann. 1, p. 210).Google Scholar

^{page 321 note 4} See Suet. Div. Aug. 56 and Dio 58. 20.

^{page 322 note 1} Cf. Dio 58. 20.

^{page 322 note 2} Marsh, , op. cit. 296;Google Scholarcf. Miller, , op. cit.,Google Scholar note on nominavit, pp. 133–4.Google Scholar

^{page 323 note 1} Marsh, F. B., op. cit. 300.Google Scholar

^{page 323 note 2} Miller, , op. cit. 211 (note on speciosa).Google Scholar

^{page 323 note 3} For this interpretation of potissima, see Gerber and Greef (s.v. potis), and Marsh, , op. cit. 297.Google Scholar It would be difficult to understand potissima as referring to the consulship and praetorship, and quaedam to the other magistracies, because in the next sentence, where the subject must surely be the praetorship, it would not be easy to follow the change in subject-matter; cf. Lacey, W. K., ‘Nominatio and the elections under Tiberius’, Historia xii (1963), 171.Google Scholar

^{page 323 note 4} Nobody had to canvass the people because the senate became the electing body. This proves only that the supposed preelecting body had no real weight, and that to secure election the senators had to bribe the people. The change in procedure that Tacitus mentions (Ann. 1. 15. 1) relieved the senate of this tiresome necessity (cf. Lacey, , op. cit. 169).Google Scholar

^{page 323 note 5} Dio 56. 25.

^{page 323 note 6} See Marsh, , op. cit. 297.Google Scholar

^{page 323 note 7} Furneaux, H., The Annals of Tacitus, i. 94–95.Google Scholar

^{page 324 note 1} See above on p. 322 and note 2.

^{page 324 note 2} Marsh, , op. cit. 298.Google Scholar

^{page 324 note 3} Dio 58. 20.

^{page 324 note 4} Cf. Pliny, , Pan. 69Google Scholar (see below on p. 329 and Lacey, , op. cit. 173).Google Scholar

^{page 324 note 5} Jones, A. H. M., ‘The Elections under Augustus’, J.R.S. xlv (1955), 12.Google Scholar

^{page 324 note 6} See Liddell-Scott-Jones, , Greek-English Lexicon, s.v. I c, d.Google Scholar

^{page 324 note 7} Jones, , op. cit. 20.Google Scholar

^{page 325 note 1} See Lex de Imperio VespasianiGoogle Scholar (C.I.L. vi. 930).Google Scholar

^{page 325 note 2} See above on p. 321 and note 4.

^{page 325 note 3} The senate's request to Tiberius to raise the number of nominati on Caesar's list was a compliment (cf. Tibiletti, G., Principe e magistrati repubblicani, p. 145Google Scholar), in so far as it meant that they could have a free election without going outside the emperor's list of nominati. The compliment was not specifi cally that Tiberius should add names of his own to Augustus' list. If it is understood as a long-term undertaking, the swearing can be seen as a genuine attempt by Tiberius to prevent the emperor's part in the elections being overwhelming (cf. Pliny, Pan. 69, where Trajan is evidently concerned for the same problem). Certainly the senate's request does not imply also raising the number of praetors (cf. Lacey, , op. cit. 171).Google Scholar

^{page 325 note 4} Haverfield, F., ‘Four notes on Tacitus’, J.R.S. ii (1912), 195–200Google Scholar (see note iv); cf. Jones, , op. cit. 20.Google Scholar Also Dio 58. 20, where there is evidence of great variation in the number of praetors.

^{page 325 note 5} Haverfield, F., op. cit. 200.Google Scholar

^{page 325 note 6} Marsh, , op. cit. 298.Google Scholar

^{page 325 note 7} See Haverfield, , op. cit. 199.Google Scholar

^{page 325 note 8} Numerum ab Augusto traditum: this may well have been in this year the same people that Augustus had nominated; but such is not Tacitus' point. Had he meant that he would surely have said quos Augustus nominaverat. It is, in fact, a much more significant indication of Tiberius' determination to follow Augustus' lines that he should stand by the number 12 for the whole of his principate (and swear to that effect) than that he should merely keep to the number and names for that year only. After all, there is little point in swearing for one particular occasion (cf. Lacey, , op. cit. 168).Google Scholar

^{page 326 note 1} Tac. Ann. 1. 8. 6.

^{page 326 note 2} e.g. ibid. 1. 73 and 2. 50.

^{page 326 note 3} Ibid. 1. 3. 5; cf. 1. 14. 4.

^{page 326 note 4} Ibid. 1. 11. 7; cf. 4. 32. 3.

^{page 326 note 5} Marsh, , op. cit. 303.Google Scholar

^{page 326 note 6} Gallus had surely not seen through the constitutional facade to the reality of power in the army. He was evidently concerned with electoral irregularities (see below on p. 327 and cf. Lacey, , op. cit. 168).Google Scholar

^{page 326 note 7} Walker, B., The Annals of Tacitus, p. 208.Google Scholar

^{page 326 note 8} Tac. Ann. 1. 6.

^{page 326 note 9} Shotter, D., ‘Tiberius and the senate—Three problems in Annals I’, Mnemosyne (forthcoming).Google Scholar

^{page 326 note 10} Birley, E., ‘Senators in the Emperor's service’, P.B.A. xxxix (1953), 201.Google Scholar

^{page 326 note 11} Ibid. 199.

^{page 327 note 1} See McCrum, M. and Woodhead, A. G., Select Documents of the Principates of the Flavian Emperors, p. 82 (no. 300; I.L.S. 991).Google Scholar

^{page 327 note 2} Tac. Ann. 1. 15. 2.

^{page 327 note 3} Marsh, , op. cit. 303.Google Scholar

^{page 327 note 4} See Jones, , op. cit. 19 and n. 103.Google Scholar

^{page 327 note 5} Walker, , op. cit. 47–48.Google Scholar

^{page 328 note 1} Tac. Ann. 1. 12. 6.

^{page 328 note 2} Asinius Gallus was not trying to flatter; Tacitus' language will not bear this interpretation (cf. Lacey, , op. cit. 168).Google Scholar

^{page 328 note 3} See Lacey, , op. cit. 167 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 328 note 4} Syme, R., Tacitus, ii. 760: ‘It is fanciful to discard a consular historian in favour of ephemeral arrangements, dutifully commemorated on tablets of bronze by the loyal zeal of small towns.’Google Scholar

^{page 329 note 1} Cf. Pliny, , Ep. 2. 9. 2:Google Scholar ‘meo suffragio per- venit ad ius tribunatus petendi, quem nisi obtinet in senatu, vereor, ne decepisse Caesarem videar.’

^{page 329 note 2} Cf. Tac. Ann. 1. 81. 3, where Tiberius appears to have done the same thing, though in a less congenial manner—posse et alios profiteri, si gratiae out mentis confiderent.

^{page 329 note 3} Durry, M., Panégyrique de Trajan, p. 242.Google Scholar

^{page 330 note 1} Note the use of the verb gratulari (gratulantibus in ch. 71 and gratulandum in ch. 69).

^{page 330 note 2} Pliny, , Pan. 63.Google Scholar

^{page 330 note 3} Lacey, , op. cit. 172.Google Scholar

^{page 330 note 4} See above on p. 324.

^{page 330 note 5} Lacey, , op. cit. 174.Google Scholar

^{page 330 note 6} See Syme, , op. cit. ii. 756–7.Google Scholar

^{page 330 note 7} Tac. Ann. 1. 15. 1.

^{page 331 note 1} Syme, , op. cit. ii. 758.Google Scholar

^{page 331 note 2} For the provisions of this law, see Ehrenberg, V. and Jones, A. H. M., Documents illustrating the reigns of Augustus and Tiberius, pp. 76 ff. (no. 94a).Google Scholar

^{page 331 note 3} Velleius 2. 124. 3 f.

^{page 331 note 4} e.g. Tac. Hist. 1. 14. 1 and 1. 45. 2.

^{page 331 note 5} Mommsen, T., Staatsrecht, ii. 918.Google Scholar

^{page 331 note 6} Cf. Tac. Ann. 1. 81. 3.

^{page 331 note 7} Ibid. 1. 18. 3.