[1146] Cic. Att. iv. 17. 2.
[1147] Cic. Att. iv. 17. 4; Q. Fr. iii. 3. 2; cf. p. 111 above.
[1148] Cic. Att. iv. 17. 3 ff.; 18. 3; Q. Fr. iii. 2. 3; 3. 2 f.
[1149] Cic. Att. iv. 17. 3.
[1150] The compact (Cic. Att. iv. 17. 2) made between Appius and his colleague in the consulship, 54, parties of the first part, and Memmius and Domitius, candidates for the consulship for the ensuing year, parties of the second part, that the parties of the second part in the event of their election should produce three augurs to testify that the parties of the first part had proposed and carried a lex curiata, or in failure to produce the witnesses should forfeit to the parties of the first part a specified sum of money, assumes, inasmuch as the evidence was not to be forthcoming till after the election, (1) that the lex curiata was not essential to holding the elective comitia, but (2) that it was highly advantageous to the promagistrate. Cicero, who often refers to the postponement of the elective comitia of this year, never intimates that the want of a lex curiata stood in the way.
Varro, consul in 216, must have found it extremely difficult, though perhaps not impossible, after carrying his lex de imperio in the comitium, to complete the consular and pretorian elections in the Campus Martius—all between sunrise and sunset on the same day; Livy xxii. 35. 4.
[1151] P. 192.
[1152] Dio Cass. xli. 43. 3. Livy, v. 52. 15, proves that the comitia curiata could meet only within the pomerium.
[1153] Dio Cass. xli. 43. 2.
[1154] Cf. Livy v. 52. 15.