The patriciate was acquired not only through bestowal by the state, but also through the adoption of a plebeian into a patrician family. Several cases of the kind have been ascertained.[963] The act took place before the praetor[964] and did not concern the comitia. Probably a preliminary examination by the pontiffs was necessary to adoptions as well as to arrogations.[965] Rubino, J., _Röm. Verfassung_, 241-53; Mommsen, _Röm. Forschungen_, i. 123-7, 397-409; _Röm. Chronologie_, 241 ff.; _Röm. Staatsrecht_, ii. 33-41; iii. 38-40; Lange, L., _Röm. Altertümer_, i. 131-4, 177 f., 356 f., 362, 398-401, 459, 795; ii. 518, see also indices s. Adrogatio, Calatores, Detestatio sacrorum; _Transitio ad plebem_, in _Kleine Schriften_, ii. 1-90; Madvig, J. N., _Verf. u. Verw. d. röm. Staates_, i. 222-6; Herzog, E., _Röm. Staatsverfassung_, i. 108-11, 1062-4, 1075; Mispoulet, J. B., _Institutions politiques des Romains_, i. 202 f.; Willems, P., _Droit public Rom._ 53 f.; Drumann-Gröbe, _Gesch. Roms_, ii. 187 ff.; Wissowa, G., _Religion und Kultus der Römer_, 440 f.; Hallays, A., _Comices à Rome_, 16-9; Mercklein, D. L., _Coöptation der Römer_, 11-44 (of the gentes and of the senate); Helbig, W., in _Comptes rendus de l’acad. des inscr. et belles-lettres_, xxi (1893). 350-3; Büdinger, M., _Cicero und die Patriciat_, in _Denkschr. d. Kaiserl. Akad. d. Wiss. Phil.-hist. Cl._ xxxi (1881). 211-73; _Der Patriciat und das Fehderecht in den letzten Jahrzehnten der röm. Rep._, ibid. xxxvi (1888). 81-125; Baudry, F., _Adrogatio_, in Daremberg et Saglio, _Dict._ i. 83 f.; Saglio, E., _Calator_, ibid. i. 814; Humbert, G., ibid. i. 1375 f.; _Detestatio sacrorum_, ibid. ii. 113; Leonhard, _Adrogatio_, in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encycl._ i. 419-21; Samter, _Calatores_, ibid. iii. 1335 f.; Kübler, _Calata comitia_, ibid. iii. 1330-4; Ruggiero, E., _Diz. ep._ ii. 1185; Smith, _Dict._ i. 26 f.; Nettleship, _Contrib. to Lat. Lexicog._ 400. CHAPTER IX. THE COMITIA CURIATA The primitive European assembly, of which the Roman is a variety, may be reconstructed in broad outline by a comparison of the forms and functions of the institution as found among the earliest Italians, Greeks, Celts, Germans, Slavs, and kindred peoples, among whom it differed in detail while possessing the same general features. The usual tendency of development was toward the abridgment of popular powers to the advantage of the nobles or of the king;[966] but in some instances may be discovered a growth in the opposite direction.