[1498] Livy ix. 33. 4 f.
[1499] Ibid. 34. 26.
[1500] Val. Max. viii. 1. abs. 9.
[1501] Livy ix. 23. 2; Mommsen, Röm. Staatsr. ii. 323, n. 5.
[1502] The same thing is true of the finable actions of this period; p. 290.
[1503] This view has no other warrant than the uncertainty of our sources for the fifth and early fourth centuries B.C. That the tribunes should make early gains in jurisdiction, to be afterward partially lost, is thoroughly consistent with the law of plebeian progress, which consisted, not in a steady forward movement, but in successive advances and retreats.
[1504] Livy, ep. xix.; Cic. Div. ii. 33. 71; N. D. ii. 3. 7; Polyb. i. 52. 1-3; Schol. Bob. 337; Val. Max. viii. 1. abs. 4; Lange, Röm. Alt. ii. 556; Mommsen, Röm. Staatsr. ii. 321, n. 1; iii. 357, n. 1; p. 317 below.
[1505] Cic. Div. ii. 33. 71; N. D. ii. 3. 7; Val. Max. i. 4. 3.
[1506] P. 318.
[1507] Greenidge, Leg. Proced. 328 f., wrongly assumes that in this case the charge of perduellio came before the tribes; the interdiction of the man by the tribes after his departure was not a iudicium but a lex.