[1715] Livy v. 9. 6 (402).
[1716] Livy v. 9; 17. 2 f. (397); 31 f. (392, 391); viii. 3. 4 (341).
[1717] Livy viii. 16. 11; 20. 7; 39. 15 (322).
[1718] P. 277, n. 4.
[1719] Livy vi. 19. 3 (384).
[1720] Livy iii. 54. 5, 9, 11 (449).
[1721] Livy iii. 65. 1 (448). That the coöptation of tribunes was once legal is proved by a formula quoted by Livy iii. 61. 10. That the coöpted tribunes were patrician is now generally disbelieved (cf. Herzog, Röm. Staatsverf. i. 195) because it does not accord with the conventional view of a constitution kept in perfect working order from the beginning to the end of Roman history. The irregular is possible and is less likely to be invented.
[1722] Livy iii. 65. 1-4; Diod. xii. 25. 3. Diodorus, who mentions the penalty, connects the law closely in time, as does Livy, with the reëstablishment of the constitution.
[1723] V. 10. 11; 11. 1-3.
[1724] Livy iv. 16. 3 (439).