that Mommsen’s theory is refuted by the language of Cicero,[1318] who speaks of the voting divisions of the four lower classes not as groups of centuries but simply as centuries, the absence of a name for such a group being one of the strongest arguments against its existence. Mommsen’s interpretation of the passage is in brief too strained and unnatural to commend itself to the understanding. Apart from its lack of support in the sources, an objection to the theory is its extreme impracticability. Holding that juniors and seniors could not have been brought together in the same voting divisions, and assuming that the combinations were made by twos and threes and that the four lower classes had an equal number of votes, Klebs has worked out the simplest arrangement as follows: ===============+===========+==================================+========= CLASS | CENTURIES | | VOTES ---------------+-----------+----------------------------------+--------- I | 70 | One vote each | 70 II | 70 | 35 of seniors | | | 8 in groups of two 4 votes | | | 27 in groups of three 9 votes | | | -- | | | 13 votes | | | 35 of juniors | | | 2 in a group 1 vote | | | 33 in groups of three 11 votes | | | 12 votes | | | -- | | | Total | 25 | | | If the remaining classes are like the second, we shall have: | | | III | 70 | | 25 IV | 70 | | 25 V | 70 | | 25 Equites | 18 | One vote each | 18 Supernumeraries| 5 | One vote each | 5 | | | --- | | Total | 193[1319] ===============+===========+==================================+==========