[1795] Livy iv. 12. 8. This alleged act of the tribes is suspicious because of its isolation; for in this period offices were instituted by the centuries. It is either exceptional or an anticipation of later usage; cf. p. 306.
[1796] Livy iv. 25. 13 f. The same author, vii. 15. 12 f., states that the first lex de ambitu was enacted in 358; p. 296.
[1797] Livy iv. 51. 2 f.; Flor. i. 17. 2 (22); Zon. vii. 20. 5. The act, like that of 440, is either exceptional or an anticipation of later usage; cf. p. 309.
[1798] Livy vi. 20. 13. The context indicates that in Livy’s opinion it was a resolution of the plebs. Dio Cass. Frag. 25.
Whether the order of the people, 437, directing the dictator at public expense to present a golden crown of a pound weight to Jupiter was dictatorial or tribunician cannot be determined; Livy iv. 20. 4.
[1799] Cf. iv. 48. 1; 53. 6; v. 12. 3; vi. 5. 2; 6. 1.
[1800] Livy iv. 36. 2 (424).
[1801] Livy iv. 59. 11; Diod. xiv. 16. 5; Zon. vii. 20. 6; Flor. i. 6 (12). 8; cf. Lange, Röm. Alt. i. 540, 668 f.; ii. 627; Herzog, Röm. Staatsverf. i. 212 f.; p. 284 above.
[1802] Livy vi. 42. 2; cf. Wissowa, Relig. u. Kult. d. Röm. 461.
[1803] The word utique, “at least,” inserted in this article by Livy, vi. 35. 5, belongs to the Genucian law of 342; p. 299.