<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:U.vibulanus_5</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:U.vibulanus_5</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text xml:base="urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1"><body xml:lang="eng" n="urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1"><div type="textpart" subtype="alphabetic_letter" n="U"><div type="textpart" subtype="entry" xml:id="vibulanus-bio-5" n="vibulanus_5"><head><persName xml:lang="la"><surname full="yes">Vibula'nus</surname></persName></head><p>4. <persName xml:lang="la"><forename full="yes">Q.</forename><surname full="yes">Fabius</surname><addName full="yes">Vibulanus</addName></persName>, M. F., K. F., the son of No. 3, is said to have been
      the only one of the Fabii who survived the destruction of his gens at the Cremera, but he
      could not have been left behind at Rome on account of his youth, as the legend relates. [See
      above, No. 2, sub finem.] He was consul in <date when-custom="-467">B. C. 467</date> with Ti.
      Aemilius Mamercus, when he supported the patrician party against the tribunes. The latter,
      having the cooperation of the other consul, made a vigorous effort to carry the agrarian law;
      but Fabius effected a compromise by proposing that a colony should be founded at Antium, which
      had been conquered by the Romans in the preceding year. He subsequently marched against the
      Aequians, who sued for peace, which was granted them; but they soon afterwards broke it and
      made an inroad into the Latin territory. (<bibl n="Liv. 3.1">Liv. 3.1</bibl>; <bibl n="Dionys. A. R. 9.59">Dionys. A. R. 9.59</bibl>.)</p><p>In <date when-custom="-465">B. C. 465</date> Fabius was consul a second time with T. Quintius
      Capitolinus Barbatus. He was appointed to carry on the war with the Aequians, which had been
      continued ever since his first consulship. The ambassadors whom he sent to the Aequians were
      treated with contempt, at which the Romans were so much enraged that Quintius marched out of
      the city with another consular army to support his colleague. According to Livy the consuls
      defeated the Aequians, who withdrew from Mount Algidus into their own territory ; but
      Dionysius says that the battle was not decisive, which is more in accordance with Livy's
      subsequent narrative, in which it is stated that the Aequians made incursions into the Roman
      territory for plunder, which were avenged by Fabius devastating the lands of the Aequians.
       (<bibl n="Liv. 3.2">Liv. 3.2</bibl>, <bibl n="Liv. 3.3">3</bibl>; <bibl n="Dionys. A. R. 9.61">Dionys. A. R. 9.61</bibl>.) Three years afterwards, <date when-custom="_462">B. C. 462</date>, Fabius was appointed Praefectus Urbi, while the two consuls were absent
      from the city. The tribune C. Terentillus Arsa took advantage of the absence of the consuls to
      propose a rogation for appointing five commissioners, who might draw up laws to limit the
      power of the consuls. Thereupon Fabius called together the senate and inveighed with such
      vehemence against the rogation and its author, that even both the consuls could not have
      inspired greater fear. On the advice of his colleagues Terentillus withdrew his proposal.
       (<bibl n="Liv. 3.9">Liv. 3.9</bibl>; <bibl n="Dionys. A. R. 9.69">Dionys. A. R.
      9.69</bibl>.)</p><p>In <date when-custom="-459">B. C. 459</date> Fabius was consul a third time with L. Cornelius
      Maluginensis. In this year he defeated the Volscians, who had laid siege to Antium, and also
      the Aequians, who had taken Tusculum, and on account of these victories celebrated a triumph
      on his return to Rome. In the following year, <date when-custom="-458">B. C. 458</date>, when the
      two consuls marched with their two armies against the Sabines and Aequians, Fabius was left
      behind with a third for the protection of Rome. This is the account of Dionysius, but Livy
      simply says that he was one of the three ambassadors sent in that year to Cloelius Gracchus,
      the leader of the Aequians. (<bibl n="Liv. 3.22">Liv. 3.22</bibl>_<bibl n="Liv. 3.25">25</bibl>; <bibl n="Dionys. A. R. 10.20">Dionys. A. R. 10.20</bibl>-<bibl n="Dionys. A. R. 10.22">22</bibl>.)</p><p>In <date when-custom="-450">B. C. 450</date> Fabius was elected a member of the second
      decemvirate, and along with his colleagues continued illegally in power in the following year.
      Ap. Claudius and Fabius were the two leading members of the second decemvirate, and Fabius
      supported his colleague in all his tyran nical acts. When the war with the Aequians and
      Sabines broke out Fabius was appointed to the command with two colleagues, while Appius
      remained in the city. Fabius must have ordered the murder of L. Siccius [<hi rend="smallcaps">SICCIUS</hi>], who was serving in the army against the Sabines, but his name is not
      mentioned in connection with this foul deed. This probably arose from Livy and Dionysius
      having the Annals of Fabius Pictor before them, in which the virtues of the Fabii were
      extolled and their faults omitted. After the abolition of the decemvirate and the death of Ap.
      Claudius and Oppius, Fabius shared the fate of his remaining colleagues; he went into exile
      and his property was confiscated. (<bibl n="Liv. 3.35">Liv. 3.35</bibl>, <bibl n="Liv. 3.41">41</bibl>, <bibl n="Liv. 3.58">58</bibl>; <bibl n="Dionys. A. R. 10.58">Dionys. A. R.
       10.58</bibl>, <bibl n="Dionys. A. R. 11.23">11.23</bibl>, <bibl n="Dionys. A. R. 11.46">46</bibl>.)</p><p>Q. Fabius is said to have married the daughter of Numerius Otacilius of Maleventum on
      account of her wealth, with the condition that his first child should receive the praenomen of
      its maternal grandfather ; and it is stated that it was in this way that Numerius became a
      praenomen in a patrician gens, which it had not been before. (Festus, <hi rend="ital">s. v.
       Numerius,</hi> pp. 170,173, ed. Müller.) We find however that the elder of his two sons
      bore the praenomen Marcus, and the younger that of Numerius [Nos. 5 and 6]; but it has been
      conjectured that the elder may have been a son by a former marriage.</p></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>