publications 
 
 oF THE _^ 
 
 IHnivetsit^ of (Pennsylvania 
 
 SERIES IN 
 
 Philology and Literature 
 
 voi^. VI n x'C), -^ 
 
 THE SOUkCKS OF PUnARCH'S 
 LIFE OF CiCERO 
 
 ALFRED GUDEMAN 
 
 Sumetinie Associate Professor of Classical Philology 
 t'niversity of Pennsylvania 
 
 Puhlialiecl for f/ir IJnivi>rsity 
 
 PHlLAUELPHiA 
 
 \qoi 
 
 friNN & Company'. Selling Agents, 29 Beacon Street, BoRton, Mass. 
 
-"Slow 
 
 THE GIFT OF 
 
 A \ (-1^ ^ ^ \..f>Ai^Q. . 
 
The date shows when this volume was taken. 
 
 1, ^ 1 fM 11 m 
 
 All books not in use 
 for instruclion or re- 
 
 Compliments of 
 
 The Publication Committee, 
 
 University of Pennsylvania, 
 
 Philadelphia, U. S. A. 
 
 book is not needed by 
 
 j)taerSj___^ 
 
 Books not needed 
 during recess periods 
 should be returned to 
 the library, or arrange- 
 ments made for their 
 return during borrow- 
 er's absence, if wanted. 
 Books needed by 
 more than one person 
 belong on the reserve 
 list. 
 
 Cornell University Library 
 
 DG 260.C56G92 
 
 Sources of Plutarch's Life of Cicero, 
 
 3 1924 028 299 885 
 
^^!:^z:-^-P5:Y^ 
 
publications 
 
 OF THE 
 
 XDlnivetsit^ of Pennsylvania 
 
 SERIES IN 
 
 Philology and Literature 
 
 VOL. VIII NO. 2 
 
 THE SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S 
 LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 ALFRED GUDEMAN 
 
 Sometime Associate Professor of Classical Philology 
 University of Pennsylvania 
 
 Published for th e University 
 
 PHILADELPHIA 
 
 1902 
 
 T 
 
 GiNN & Company, Selling Agents, 29 Beacon Street, Boston, Mass. 
 
JiJf-' 
 
 ;l.l^rH6 
 
 TO 
 MY FRIEND AND COLLEAGUE 
 
 Professor CHARLES E. BENNETT 
 OF CORNELL UNIVERSITY 
 
 THIS MONOGRAPH IS 
 GRATEFULLY DEDICATED 
 
THE SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S 
 LIFE OF CICERO^ 
 
 I. The results of source investigations have but rarely met 
 with an acquiescence at all commensurate with the labor, 
 the acumen, and the learning so often expended upon them. 
 This is due to several causes. In the first place, the entire 
 or partial loss of the original or earlier authorities naturally 
 gives a more or less wide latitude to the constructive imagi- 
 nation, and, in consequence, different conclusions are often 
 drawn from the same concrete material. In the second place, 
 any one who has even superficially examined the contributions 
 in the field of source research must needs have observed 
 that scholars have, with few laudable exceptions, failed to 
 ascertain at the very outset, as far as this is still possible, 
 
 1 Bibliography : Heeren, De fontibus etc. Plutarchi, Gottingen, 1820, 
 pp. 184-187 ; J. G. Lagus, Plutarchus vitae Ciceronis scriptor, Helsingfors, 
 1846; Linker, Emendationen zu Sallust in Wiener Akad. vol. XIII (1854) 
 pp. 266 ff. ; H. Klapp, De vitarum Plutarchi auctoribus Jiomanis, Bonn, 1862 ; 
 G. S. Sibinga, De Plutarchi in vita Ciceronis fontibus etc. (c. 1-23), Leid«n 
 Diss. 1863 ; H. Peter, Vie Quellen Plutarchs in den Biographien der Pdmer, 
 Halle, 1865, pp. 129-135 ; Weizsacker, Cicero's {nrd/ivrnia u. Plut. in Fleck, fahrb. 
 CXI (1875) pp. 417 ff. ; Diibi, Die jiingeren Quellen der Catil. Verschwbrung, 
 ibid. CXIII (1876) pp. 851 ff. ; G. Thouret, De Cic, Asin., . . . rerum Caesar, 
 scriptoribus, Leipz. Diss. 1877 (= Leipz. Stud. I pp. 313 ff.); Schliephacke, 
 Ueber die griech. Quellen der Catil. Verschwbrung, Goslar, 1877 ; J. Besser, 
 De Coniurat. Catil., Leipz. Diss. 1880; Ch. Graux, Jntrod. to his edition of 
 Dem. and Cic, Paris, 1881 ; E. Schmidt, De Cic. commentario . . . a Plutarcho 
 . . . expresso, Jena Diss. 1884 ; id. Plut. 's Bericht ilber die Catil. Verschwbrung, 
 Liibeck, 1885 ; Thiaucourt, jStude sur la Conjuration de Cat. de Sail., Paris, 
 1887 ; K. Bnresch, Die Quellen zu den vorhand. Ber. iiber die Catil. Ver- 
 schwbrung in Comment, in honorem Ribbeckii, 1888, pp. 217 ff. ; Gudeman, 
 A New Source in Plutarch's Life of Cicero in Transactions Amer. Philol. Assoc. 
 vol. XX (1889) pp. 139-158 (cited as Transact^; Willrich, De Coniurat. Catil. 
 fontibus, Gottingen Diss. 1893 ; Felke, De Sallustii Catilina, Munster Diss. 1894 ; 
 E. Schwartz, Bericht iiber die Catilin. Verschwbrung in Hermes vol. XXXII 
 (1897) pp. 554-609 ; F. Leo, Die Griech.-Rbm. Biographic etc., 1901, pp. 162-165. 
 
 I 
 
2 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 what authorities were accessible to the later writer, as well 
 as the extent to which he would be likely to have utilized all 
 the available material — a problem which can only be solved, 
 if soluble at all, by a thorough examination of the working 
 method, as it is revealed in the writings of the particular 
 author under investigation. But even where these conditions 
 have been complied with, a practice has been all but univer- 
 sally followed which in my judgment must be held primarily 
 responsible for the many failures met with in this field of 
 philological study. I refer to the constant practice of at 
 once assuming direct indebtedness on the score of more or 
 less striking coincidences, whether in form or substance or 
 both, the very probable contingency being tod often lost 
 sight of that such parallelisms may have been unavoidable, 
 the similarity of the subject-matter naturally leading to simi- 
 larity in its stylistic presentation, or that they had passed 
 more or less intact through intermediary channels, or, finally, 
 that two writers were independently indebted to a third 
 source common to both. Unfortunately we are rarely in a 
 position to determine with anything like satisfactory accuracy 
 the real condition of affairs, but there is, at least, one criterion 
 which almost invariably enables us to state dogmatically, if 
 not what actually did happen, at all events what did not. It 
 is a principle which, so far as my observation goes, has hitherto 
 been ignored in source investigations. I have elsewhere had 
 occasion to dwell upon this,^ but its prime importance for the 
 present study may justify my formulating it again : 
 
 Mere coincideitce or similitude of statement with some 
 earlier author, be it never so striking when taken by 
 itself, not only affords no reliable clue to dij'ect indebted- 
 ness, but actually renders such an assumption frequently 
 impossible, in case there be found to exist side by side 
 equally noteworthy divergences or contradictions. 
 
 2 Cp. Transact. Amer. Philol. Assoc, vol. XXXI (1900) p. 95 f . ; Introd. to 
 Tac. Germ., p. L. 
 
'SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 3 
 
 It will thus be apparent that the only method that can 
 yield acceptable results will consist in a process of elimination, 
 i.e. we must endeavor to determine what predecessors, from out 
 the list possibly accessible, an author could not, for one reason 
 or another, have consulted. It will then be, in many cases, 
 comparatively easy to decide to what extent he probably util- 
 ized the authorities still remaining, provided, of course, that their 
 character, purpose, and scope are satisfactorily ascertainable. 
 
 II. If we apply these general methodological principles to 
 an investigation into the Sources of Plutarch's Life of Cicero, 
 our first task would naturally be to acquire an adequate 
 conception of his biographical method ^ in regard to the 
 faithfulness or freedom with which he followed still extant 
 authorities^ and to his habits of citing or suppressing his 
 sources of information. Finally, as we are here dealing with 
 the biography of a Roman, the question also arises whether 
 Plutarch was sufficiently conversant with Latin to enable him 
 to make an intelligent use of the Latin works, so indispensable 
 to a satisfactory treatment of the career of the great orator. 
 That the answer can only be a strong affirmative has been 
 shown elsewhere.^ As regards the other problems a careful 
 and unbiased examination yields the following conclusions : 
 
 The extent of Plutarch's indebtedness to his Roman prede- 
 cessors is largely conditioned by their number, their char- 
 acter, their exhaustiveness, and their accessibility. It must, 
 
 1 Cp. H. Peter, Die Quellen Plutarchs etc. pp. 1-4 ; Wachsmuth, Einleit. 
 in das Stud. d. alt. Gesch. s.n. : B. Perrin, Plutarch's Themistocles and Aristides, 
 New York, 1901, pp. 1-20 ; Leo I.e. pp. 155 ff. 
 
 2 Especially instructive in this connection is his life of Coriolanus, for which 
 the narrative of Dionysius of Halicarnassus constituted almost the only source. 
 Cf. Peter, Die Quellen etc. pp. 7-17. 
 
 ^ Cp. Transact, p. 140 ff. and the useful but far from exhaustive discussion 
 of Sickinger, De linguae Latinae apud Plutarchum reliquiis et vestigiis, Freiburg 
 Diss. 1883. W. Vornefeld, De scriptoriim Latinorum locis a Plutarcho citatis, 
 Miinster Diss. 1901, is superficial and worthless. The famous statement in 
 Plut. Dem. c. 3 (see Appendix III) merely signifies that he did not feel com- 
 petent to Institute a comparison between Demosthenes and Cicero as orators. 
 Cp. Klapp I.e. p. 3 and Peter, Die Quellen etc. p. 61. 
 
4 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 therefore, be determined for each biography independently. 
 On the other hand, Plutarch, following the all but universal prac- 
 tice of ancient historians, did not feel called upon to ransack 
 the primary and often widely scattered sources, in case this 
 laborious task had already been satisfactorily performed by 
 others.* That this had been done for the life and career of 
 Cicero before Plutarch became his biographer can admit of no 
 doubt. He was, therefore, relieved of the necessity of con- 
 sulting a great variet)' of authors who wrote in what was to 
 him after all a foreign, albeit not an unfamiliar language. 
 But quite apart from this consideration, an extensive Latin 
 library was certainly not accessible to him in his small native 
 town which, as he tells us with touching local pride, he did 
 not care to desert, lest it grow less by even one inhabitant. 
 This assumption is, indeed, confirmed by his own words in 
 Dem. 2,^ which must have been written with special reference 
 to the biography of Cicero, for the following reasons : In the 
 first place, this complaint would have been unjustified, if he 
 had taken advantage of his residence in Rome to acquaint 
 himself fully with the extensive literature on Cicero at his 
 disposal or had taken pains to collect such traditions con- 
 cerning him as still survived in the imperial city. In the 
 second place, in composing the life of Demosthenes he was 
 not in the predicament of which he speaks, for all the sources 
 were written in Greek, and the orations, in particular, must 
 have' long been familiar to him. The proximity of Athens, 
 moreover, rendered these sources easy of access, and his 
 opportunities for acquiring hearsay information were, to judge 
 from his associations, unquestionably abundant.® 
 
 Again, Plutarch conforms to the usage of ancient historiog- 
 raphy in habitually suppressing the authorities whom he most 
 
 * Cp. H. Peter, Die geschichtl. Literat, etc. II, pp. 191 f. ; Leo I.e. p. 162. 
 6 See Appetidix III. 
 
 8 It will not therefore appear accidental that the biography of Cicero contains 
 no such phrases as Dem. c. 31, Thv )x.kv oSv Ai)/xo(rS^raus, &w4xm, S6irTie, ^lov i^ 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 5 
 
 extensively followedJ Where he does cite them, it is gener- 
 ally with reference to minor details, or because of discrepan- 
 cies in the traditional records which he did not care or was 
 unable to reconcile. In such cases, he often quotes the 
 account of some noted author which differed from the one 
 accepted by him, and allows the reader to make his own 
 inferences as to their respective validity. The paucity of 
 sources, finally, which we must postulate at all events for 
 Plutarch's Roman Lives, involves the necessary corollary that 
 he did not constantly pass from one to the other, but that he 
 would follow one guide for continuous stretches at a time, 
 digressions or ifx^Xi^/j-aTa being usually labeled as such by a 
 Xeyerai or some similar phrase. 
 
 III. Now of the writings which dealt, directly or indirectly, 
 incidentally or exclusively, with the career of Cicero and 
 which were still extant in the days of Plutarch, the following 
 list will probably be found to be fairly exhaustive ; for it is 
 unlikely that important sources of information existed of which 
 no trace has survived.* 
 
 I. Cicero. 
 
 a. *'Y'7r6iJ.vrjiJia r^s VTraTeias-^ 
 *Epistula ad Pompeium? 
 
 *Poem de consulatu, in 3 books (Urania, Minerva, Calliope).' 
 *Poem de tentporibus suis,'^ in 3 books. 
 *De consiliis suis? 
 
 * Those marked with an asterisk have not come down to us. 
 
 ' Thus, to mention at least one indubitable instance, the name of Dionysius 
 occurs but once in the Compar. Ale. et Cor. 2, never in the Camillus, and yet 
 both the Coriolanus (see above p. 3 2) and the biography of the latter are based 
 upon the account in the Archaeology. 
 
 1 Cp. ad Att. I. 19, 10; 20, 6; II. i, i ; Plut. Caes. 8 ; Crass. 13 ; Dio Cass. 
 XLVI. 21. 
 
 2 Schol. Bob. p. 270 non mediocris ad instar voluminis scripta ; pro Sull. 
 24, 67. Perhaps identical in contents with the Greek memoir. 
 
 8 Cic. de div. I. 17-22. * ad Quint, frat. III. I, 24 ; ad/am. I. 9, 23. 
 
 5 Cp. Ascon. Ped. p. 831 Or.; Charisius G. L. I. 146; Boethius de inst. 
 
 mils. I. I. It is admittedly identical with the aviKSora, and is frequently 
 
6 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 b. Brutus (esp. c. 89, 305-92, 316). 
 
 c. Epistles. 
 
 d. Orations. 
 
 II. a. *Tiro, de vita Ciceronis — *de iocis Ciceronis. 
 
 b. *C. Trebonius, de facete dictis Ciceronis. 
 
 c. *Corn. Nepos, de vita Ciceronis. 
 
 d. *T. Pomponiiis Atticus, Ilepi KiKc'pwvos VTraretas.^ 
 *Herodes, Ilept KtKcpcovos inraTctas.^* 
 
 III. a. Political Pamphlets' : e.g. *Antonius, II/dos roiis •I'lA.iTr- 
 TTiKov% o.va.ypa.<^a.l, (Cic. c. 41); 
 ' b. Rhetorical Exercises : Ps. Sallustii Invectiva in Ciceronem 
 — \\.'z.\xC)T\ Declarnatio in Catilinam — Suasoriae and 
 Controversiae^ and perhaps the De petitione coitsulatus, 
 attributed to Q. Cicero. 
 IV. a. Sallust's Catiline. 
 
 b. *Livy (esp. books 91-120). 
 
 c. *Asinius Pollio, Bella Civilia. 
 
 d. *Tanusius Geminus, Historia; *M. Bibulus, Edicta; *C. 
 
 Curio, Orationes J *M. Actorius Naso.' 
 
 mentioned by Cicero himself, e.g. ad Att. II. 6, 2; XIV. 17, 6. It is alluded 
 to in Plut. Crass. 13, ^v tlvi \byifi . . . ovto^ ^kv 6 X670S i^edddrj fjLera ttjv dficpocv 
 (sc. Crassus and Caesar) reXeDT^c, and perhaps Cic. 20, as airds (j>'r)<nv (de 
 Terentia). According to Dio Cass. XXXIX. 10, i it was sealed and entrusted 
 to his son with the injunction that it should neither be read nor published 
 before his death. 
 
 « Nepos Att. 25, 18, 6; Cic. ad Att. II. i, i. 
 
 ^a Harshly criticised by Cic. ad Att. II. 2 and not mentioned elsewhere. 
 
 ' The virulent speech against Cicero put into the mouth of Fufius Calenus 
 by Dio Cass. XLVI. 1-28 may give us an idea of their character. When the 
 conditions which gave rise to these publications had passed away, they were 
 naturally allowed to perish, and probably but few survived until Plutarch's 
 time. Cp. also Ascon. Fed. p. 95 feruntur orationes illorum (sc. Antonius and 
 Catiline) non ab ipsis scriptae sed ab Ciceronis obtrectatoribus, and, on some 
 others, O. E. Schmidt, Flugschriften aus der Zeit des i. Triumvirats in Neue 
 Jahrb.f. class. Alt. IV. 9 (1901) pp. 620-655, and H. Peter, Ges'chichtl. Literat. 
 etc. I, pp. 163 ff. 
 
 ^ Sen. Suas. VI : Deliberat Cicero an Antonium deprecetur ; VII : Deliberat 
 Cicero an scripta sua comburat, promittente Antonio incolumitatem sifecisset ; 
 Controv. VII. 17: Popillium parricidii reum Cicero defendit, absolutus est. 
 Proscriptum Ciceronem ab Antonio missus occidit Popillius et caput eius ad 
 Antonium rettuiit. 
 
 ' With the exception of Bibulus, we owe the mention of these otherwise 
 unknown writers to Suet. Caes. 9, where they are cited for the so-called first 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 7 
 
 e. *Cremutius Cordus ; *Aufidius Bassus ; *Brutidius Niger. i" 
 V. a. *Fenestella, Annales. 
 
 b.. Asconius Pedianus, Covimentary to Cicero's Speeches 
 (extant : in Pis. ; pro Scauro ; pro Mil.; pro Cornelio j 
 in tog. canci.'). 
 YI. a. *Diodorus, *Strabo, and *NicoIaus Damascenus. 
 
 b. *The ante-Plutarchean sources of Appian and Dio Cassius. 
 VII. *Suetonius, de vita Ciceronis, a part of the De viris illus- 
 tribtis. 
 
 It is irrelevant to my present purpose to enumerate even 
 the most important Roman authors referred to directly in 
 Plutarch's voluminous writings,^^ we being here more immedi- 
 ately concerned with his allusions to such as are given in the 
 above list, although the explicit quotation of authorities by 
 no means, as we shall have frequent occasion to see, involves 
 direct knowledge of them — no more, in fact, than the failure 
 to cite them necessarily implies Plutarch's ignorance of their 
 existence. 
 
 Plutarch quotes Cicero's {nroixvrjiJia rij? uTraretayand avmhoTa 
 {Crass. 1 3), his Laudatio Catonis {Cic. c. 39), and the philo- 
 sophical works in a vague and general way (c. 24. 40 ; Comp. 
 Dem. et Cic. 2). Out of a total of about a dozen references to 
 the Letters and some twenty to the Speeches, four ^^ of the 
 
 conspiracy of Catiline. Cp. Cic. ad Ait. II. 20, 4, Bibulus hominum admira- 
 tione et benevolentia in caelo est. Edicta eius et contiones describunt et 
 legurtt. They seem to have been directed against Caesar. 
 
 1^ Cited by Sen. Suas. VI. 18 ff., togetlier with Livy and PoUio, as historians 
 who gave an account of Cicero's assassination. 
 
 11 This is done, with the indication of the passages, if still extant, in Transact. 
 p. 124 f. note 4. 
 
 12 It is perhaps not accidental that three of them were written in Greek. 
 Besides these we have allusions to letters of Trebatius (c. 37) and Brutus 
 (Comp. Dem. et Cic. 4) to Cicero-and one written by Brutus to Atticus (c. 45). 
 A number of items, found in the extant Correspondence, are given without any 
 hint as to their ultimate source, e.g. c. 36, 6, Cicero's answer to a request of 
 Caelius (= ad fam. II. 11) ; some again are introduced by a vague ypd<pei iv 
 iinaToXaZs (c. 37) or credited to him by a phrase like to iikv oSv iv rais iiria-To'KaTs 
 yeypaiiiUva ToiaOrd Itrri-y. That they were all taken at second or third hand 
 will be shown below. 
 
8 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 former and fifteen ^^ of the latter occur in the biography of 
 Cicero. Nepos, though not the vita Ciceronis, is cited five 
 times 1* ; Salliist, but not the Catilina, three times ^^ ; Asinius 
 Pollio'^^ and Tiros'^'* exhaustive ^^ biography twice each. 
 Livy's'^^ name occurs a dozen times in Plutarch, but nowhere 
 in his Cicero. The latest literary allusion is the incidental 
 reference to the Memoirs of Augustus?^ 
 
 To these must be added the far more numerous references 
 to earlier authorities, indicated by vague and general phrases. 
 They often introduce a digression, or incidental observations ; 
 nor must the plural number be taken as a proof of a plurality 
 of sources, as it often merely corresponds to an 'on dit,' or 
 was, in some instances, perhaps occasioned by the citation of 
 several authorities in the source directly consulted : 
 
 a. XeycTat, Xe'y overt V : c. I, I. 28 Si.; 2, 4 ; 4, 28 ; 5, 22; 9, 7 ; 
 
 17, 29. 6 ; 25, IS ; 32, 15 ; 33, 27; 36, 8 ; 39, 22 ; 40, 18 ; 
 41, I ; 46, 2; 49, I; Comp. I, 18 — A,cyd/*evai : c. 41, 16; 
 
 45. 14- 
 
 b. ^iq(Ti, <f>a(Ti, Ttves 8e i^acri, <us <j>acriv ivioi: c. 6, 16; 
 
 20, 6 (u)s avTO'i <f>ri<Tiv 6 Kucepcov); 41, 29 — c. 40, 12 ; 
 44, 31 ; 44, 9 — c- 20, 24 — c. 4, 7. 
 
 c. SoKci, eSoKEt: c. 2, 7 ; 12, II ; 14, 3 ; 23, 27 ; 29, 12. 
 
 13 c. 3 (pro Roscio), 7 (in Verrem), 9 (pro Manilio), 10 ff. (in Cat.), 12 (de 
 leg. agrar.), 24. 48 (Philippica), 35 (pro Murena, pro Milone), 37 (pro Ligario), 
 Comp. I (pro Caelio), and a number no longer extant, c. 6. 13 (pro Othone) 
 and esp. c. 26. On the reference to the pro Plancio, see below. 
 
 1* Marc. 12. 30; Tib. Gracch. 21 ; Lucull. 43 ; Comp. Pelop. et Marc. i. 
 
 15 Lucull. II. 33 ; Comp. Lys. et Sull. 3. 
 
 l« Caes. 46; Pomp. 72. 
 
 1' Cic. 41. 49 ; Tac. Dial. 17 ; Cell. N. A. IV. 10, 5. 
 
 1' The 4th book had not advanced beyond the Clodian episode. Cp. Ascon. 
 Ped. in Milan, p. 49. 
 
 13 The citations extend from Bks. V-CXVI. But as Plutarch's perusal of 
 the Liviiis ingens Quern mea non totum bibliotheca capit is quite out of the 
 question, either all these quotations were taken at second hand, or else he read 
 an Epitome of Livy, such as is known to have existed in the time of Domltian 
 (Mart. XIV. 190; Stat. Silv. IV. 7, 53), if not actually as early as the reign of 
 Tiberius. 
 
 20 Comp. Dem. et Cic. 3 and Cic. 45. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 9 
 
 d. <i)s €oiKe: c. I, 23; 35, 6; 44, 17. 
 
 e. la-Topova-iv, IdTop-qTai: c. I, 3; 5, 26; 44, 19 — ivioi 
 
 Tu>v (Tvyypa(j)€(iiv lcrTop-ijKa(Tiv : c. 49, 32. 
 
 f. a-7rop.vrjp.ovcvov(Tiv : C. 24, 11 — TroXAa xapUvra Sia- 
 
 fi.vqp,ovf.veTOLL: c. 7, 24. 
 
 g. rjv trvOea-Oai, ■jrvv6a.vop,aL : c. 1,3 — c. 49, 3. 
 
 h. a p.iv ovv a$ia ix.vqp.-q's tS>v Trepi . . . KiKepwvos 
 la-Topovfiivaiv eis ttjv rjix.f.T ipav a.<f>iKTaL yvuxriv, 
 TavT icTTiv : Comp. Dem. et Cic. c. i, 22 f. 
 
 i. TO. ptpXia TtXevTuiv KariTrX-qtre. Kai ra <Tvyypa.p.fi.aTa 
 TO)v iyKO}fji,Lu>v: c. 24,3 — ws Ik riov crvyypafifidTuyv 
 XaySeiv e(TTi: c. 24, 10 — liratvwv, ots ■rroXkayov 
 )(prJTaL Trepi tov dvSpos: c. 24, 21 — tcm, 8e tis Kai 
 Tov ^dov^ tv Tois koyois iKaripov St'oi/'is: Comp. 
 Dem. et Cic. \, 5. 
 
 j. Tiv€s . . . €TrL<f>vovTai . , . dfjLVrjfJLOvovcri: c. 24, 18. 24. 
 
 k. Twv o€ KaT avTov evSd^ft)!' . . . ovk co-tiv ovSei's, ov 
 ovK eTTOirjo'ev ivSo^oTtpov rj Xiyuiv ^ ypa.^u>v 
 
 £v;u,evo)S TTtpl e/cao-TOv: c. 24, 24 ff ttoWo. filv 
 
 K.aL<TapL ypacjxov: c. 37, 32. 
 
 IV. This preliminary discussion will, I hope, have paved 
 the way for a detailed examination into the sources of the 
 information contained in Plutarch's Life of Cicero, but, before 
 I proceed to this analysis, I deem it expedient to survey, as 
 briefly as possible, the results at which previous investigators 
 have arrived, particularly as my own conclusions will be found 
 to differ so materially from those which have hitherto been 
 more or less generally accepted. 
 
 While opinions have naturally varied as to the precise 
 extent of Plutarch's indebtedness to the several authorities 
 who, in the conviction of scholars, had been consulted by the 
 biographer, substantial unanimity seems to exist as regards 
 the following points : Plutarch, we are assured, unquestion- 
 ably read and utilized Cicero's vironvqua Tr)<; {nraTeia<;, the 
 Letters and Speeches (of the latter particularly the Catilinian, 
 the Philippics, and the pro Plancio), and the autobiographical 
 chapters of the Brutus. 
 
lO SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 Finally, it is generally held that he was under deep obhga- 
 tions to Sallust's Catiline and to Tiro's de vita Ciceronis and 
 de iocis Ciceronis. 
 
 These confident allegations, however, rest upon no founda- 
 tion. Plutarch, as I hope to demonstrate in the following 
 pages, did not consult for the purpose of this biography a 
 single work of Cicero's nor Sallust's monograph nor Tiro nor 
 Livy. While this part of my analysis is strictly negative in 
 character, I shall also show that Plutarch's biography con- 
 tains a very considerable amount of information of post-Livian 
 or post-Augustan origin and that one of the principal sources 
 for these portions was none other than Suetonius 's Life of 
 Cicero. 
 
 V*. To begin with the works expressly cited by Plutarch, 
 for these quotations must naturally create the impression of 
 having been secured at first hand,i we may first take up the 
 Letters of Cicero. Now the mere presumption that Plutarch 
 had been acquainted with this unique and inexhaustible 
 thesaurus of historical and autobiographical information at 
 once puts us on the horns of a dilemma : if he was, he must 
 either have read the entire correspondence (which, as may be 
 observed in passing, was probably double the size of our extant 
 collection^) and then have culled from it, like a modern Dru- 
 mann, what appeared relevant to his purpose, or else he did 
 not consult any part of it at first hand. 
 
 That the latter is the only acceptable alternative can be 
 easily shown. In the first place, Plutarch on his own statement 
 had not the leisure, and, as I have also pointed out above, he 
 could not have had the disposition, to ransack so vast a store- 
 house for his materials, not to mention that the ancients, with 
 the possible exception of Suetonius,^ utterly failed to realize 
 
 1 Particularly such expressions as we find in c. 24, <rxe56<' . . . iiia. Kid Sevr^pa . . . 
 if dpyy TtvL y^ypaTTTat 37 to. fi^v odv 4v rah iTTLaToKati yeypa/xfji^va. ToiauTa iimv. 
 
 2 We possess in all 864 letters, of which 774 are written by Cicero himself. 
 
 ^ The extensive use which he makes of these Letters is all the more note- 
 worthy, because the subjects of his extant writings would not naturally nor 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO II 
 
 the incomparable value of these contemporary documents.* 
 Finally, even if we were to grant, on the strength of the 
 direct and indirect allusions to these Letters, that Plutarch 
 perused only a part of them, the capriciousness of the selec- 
 tion no less than the comparatively trivial information which 
 such reading yielded would still remain quite inexplicable. But 
 if these general considerations should not prove convincing, 
 positive evidence that the biographer never read the Corre- 
 spondence of Cicero will be furnished by c. 37. We are there 
 told that Trebatius wrote to the orator that Caesar would be 
 pleased with the support of Cicero, but if his ad\'anced age 
 should forbid an active participation, he might at least retire to 
 Greece, remaining neutral throughout the impending struggle. 
 Cicero, however, vexed that Caesar did not write to him a 
 personal letter, replied in anger,^ saying that he would do 
 nothing unworthy of his past career. Plutarch concludes 
 with the clause ta txev ovv iv Tali eTnaroXaK yeypa/xfjieva 
 roiavrd iari. Now we still possess a letter of Cicero which 
 seems to refer to this very incident ; but unless we gratui- 
 tously assume that the allusion is based upon some letter now 
 lost, it differs, in spite of a general agreement, in a number 
 of details sufficiently significant to preclude Plutarch's perusal 
 of the original.^ Thus, we find nothing in the Latin about 
 
 often suggest the expediency of their consultation. We may, therefore, be 
 reasonably certain that he exploited the Correspondence to the fullest extent 
 in his Life of Cicero. Cp. also Mace, Essai sur Sicetone pp. 284-298 (Ciclron 
 chez Suet one). 
 
 * Cp. H.' Peter, Der Brief in der rom. Literatiir, 1901, p. 51. 
 
 5 The Greek does not make it clear, whether the letter was sent to Caesar 
 or to Trebatius. If the former is meant, the discrepancy pointed out above 
 would be still greater. 
 
 s ad. Ait. VII. 17, 3 : Trebatius quidem scribit se ab illo . . . rogatum esse 
 ut scriberet ad me ut essera ad urbem, nihil ei me gratius facere posse. Haec 
 verbis plurimis. Intellexi ex dierum ratione, ut primum de discessu nostro 
 Caesar audisset, laborare eum coepisse, ne omnes abessemus. . . . lUud admiror 
 non ipsum ad me scripsisse (= daviidiras Sn Kaio-a/) airbs ovk ^ypa\f/ci') . . . 
 rescripsi ad Trebatium — nam ad ipsum Caesarem qui mihi nihil scripsisset 
 nolui (aTTfKphaTo irpbs dpyr/vf) — quam illud hoc tempore difficile esse . . . sin 
 
12 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 Caesar's proposal of eventual neutrality, nothing which would 
 justify the assertion that Cicero replied tt/jo? 6p<yriv. Finally, 
 the extant collection contains a number of letters which passed 
 between these parties at this time, and they are all couched 
 in friendly terms.^ They throw considerable light upon the 
 attitude of the two men toward each other, and yet we are 
 asked to believe that Plutarch overlooked these altogether 
 while he inaccurately reproduced the tenor of another ! 
 
 V''. So much for the Letters} I pass on to the Speeches. 
 In the detailed account of the Catilinian Conspiracy, the 
 famous orations are expressly alluded to in four'^ places, 
 coincidences with Plutarch's narrative are also numerous, and 
 hence scholars have had no hesitation in ascribing a direct 
 knowledge of them to the biographer. But if ever mere 
 coincidences have proved to be worthless as evidence of direct 
 indebtedness, it would be in this case, for the reason that 
 this episode was certainly dealt with at greater or less length 
 in all histories or biographies of Cicero, and hence the salient, 
 well-established facts are related with substantial unanimity 
 in Cicero, Sallust, Appian, Florus, and Dio, to mention only 
 the extant accounts. It is in the arrangement of the subject- 
 matter and in details that divergences are revealed, and they 
 are all incompatible with the assumption that Plutarch had 
 carefully perused the original records. A few particularly 
 significant illustrations will suffice : 
 
 In Cic. in Cat. I. 4, 9, we read : reperti sunt duo equites 
 Romani qui . . . me meo in lectulo interfecturos pollice- 
 rentur . . . exclusi eos quos Catilina mane ad vie salutatum 
 miserat. Here no names are given, but in the pro Stilla 
 6, 1 8 one Cornelius is introduced as qui me in sedibus meis 
 in conspectu uxoris meae ac liberorum meorum, trucidar'et, and 
 
 bellum geretur, non deero officio nee dignitati meae, pueros iireKdifitvos in 
 Graeciam (ws ov5^v 6.v6.^iov wpd^ei t(ov TreTroKireufjiivttiv). 
 
 ' ad Att. IX. 6 a. 16 ; X. 8 b (ad Ciceronem) ; IX. 1 1 a (ad Caesarem). 
 
 1 For other evidence, see notes to the text (Appendix I). 
 
 2 c. 14. 16. 19. 21. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 13 
 
 he also figures in Sail. Cat. 28, together with L. Vargunteius, 
 a senator, as a would-be assassin of Cicero. Now in Plut. c. 16 
 two others, Cethegus and one Marcius, are mentioned as those 
 who had been delegated for this murderous task ; he also 
 knows the informant who warned Cicero and adds the absurd 
 detail /crnXu^eWe? eicrekdelv ■^yavd.KTovv /cal Kare^ocov iirl 
 0vpaL<;, S(TTe viro-moTepot, yevecrdat,.^ 
 
 Doubtless the names of these men were originally unknown, 
 but subsequently suspicion fastened upon several conspirators, 
 which gave rise to the variants in our extant accounts of the 
 episode. Whether the correct one is found among them is 
 indeterminable and immaterial, but there can be no question 
 that neither the ^w^ speech against Catiline nor the/w Sui/a 
 could have been Plutarch's source, and, to anticipate the 
 discussion below, Salliist is, at least for this particular item, 
 also excluded. 
 
 Again, in Cat. II. 2, 4, Cicero says moleste tuli quod ex 
 tirbe parum comitatus exierit. Utinam ille omnes secum copias 
 ediixisset, and this is confirmed by Sail. Cat. 32, cum paucis in 
 Manliana castra profectus est, whereas Plutarch c. 16 reports 
 fiera Tpiaicocrioav oirXoipopav . . . tt/so? tov MaWtoy ej^to/aet. 
 
 Cic. in Cat. III. 3, 6. 5, 10 speaks of a large number of 
 daggers and swords having been found in the house of 
 Cethegus, but Plut. c. 18 adds hemp and sulphur and that 
 the weapons were all veoOijKTovv. 
 
 According to in Cat. III. 4, 8, urbem ex omnibus partibus 
 quern ad m^odum. descriptum distributumque erat, incendissent. 
 Sallust Cat. 43 and Appian II. 3 mention twelve districts. 
 Plut. c. 18, on the other hand, says 100 men were assigned 
 to as many districts, and adds further details not found else- 
 where, but ignores L. Cassius {in Cat. III. 6, 14; IV. 6, 13). 
 
 ^ Appian's account (II. 3) is still more circumstantial and in flat contradic- 
 tion with both Cicero and Plutarch. He says Lentulus and Cethegus intended 
 to entice Cicero into taking an early morning walk and then by engaging him 
 in conversation and thus drawing him away from his people to murder him. 
 Dio Cass. 37, 32 mentions only 5i)ai n^'ds. 
 
14 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 The story of Cicero's energetic measures to crush the con- 
 spiracy in the bud, of his shrewd dealings with the Allobrogians, 
 and of the exposure in the senate, so graphically told in Cat. 
 III. 2, 4 ff., again differs in important details from the narra- 
 tive in Plut. c. 1 8. We may conclude with one other exam- 
 ple, though the list of discrepancies is by no means exhausted. 
 When Plut. c. 2i says that Cicero after hearing Caesar's plea 
 for clemency immediately avacnoM h)i-)(eipi](jev et? ktcdnpov ra 
 fxiv rfj irporepa, ra Se ry yvcofirj Katcraj009 crvvenrov, ol re 
 <pt'\oi TTcivTev olofievoi tw IS^iKepwvi (7Vfji,(f)epeiv ttjv K.aicrapof 
 yvio/xrjv etc., it must be evident that he never read the /oiirt/i 
 speech against Catiline.* 
 
 A similar analysis of Plutarch's statements in c. 12 (de lege 
 agraria), c. 23 (where, e.g., Cato is said to have been the first 
 to hail Cicero as pater patriae, whereas he himself ' mentions 
 O. Catulus), his account of the trial of Roscius (c. 3)," of 
 Verres (c. 7 f.), of Milo and Murena (c. 35), can leave no doubt 
 in any unprejudiced mind that the biographer had not con- 
 sulted these speeches. Finally, even \he pro Plancio must be 
 eliminated from the list of Plutarch's possible sources, although 
 Cicero is expressly cited as his authority. The juxtaposition 
 and analysis of the two passages will make this clear : 
 
 pro Plancio 26, 64 f. : Vere me hercule Plut. Cic. c.'6 : hn rai- 
 
 hoc dicam : Sic turn existimabam, nihil homi- toi% ovv /ieyo. cj>poi>Siv ek 
 
 nes aliud Romae nisi de quaestura mea loqui 'P(o/Ar;v j3a8Li,(iiv yeXolov ti 
 
 . . . excogitati quidam erant a Siculis hono- waOuv <l>r]aiv. ^vvtv^uiv 
 
 res in me inauditi : itaque hac spe decede- yap avBpl rwv iTn(j>avmv 
 
 bam, ut mihi populum Romanum ultro omnia <j>iXw Sokovvti wtpl Kafuwa- 
 
 delaturum putarem. At ego cum casu diebus vuxv, ipea-Bai, riVa 8^ t<2v 
 
 lis itineris faciendi causa decedens e pro- irewpayfx.ivoiv vtt avrov X6- 
 
 vincia Puteolos forte venissem . . . concidi yov txovcri 'Pcu/iaioi /cai ri 
 
 * This view is also advocated by Sibinga I.e. p. 77, though he regards this 
 oration as non-Ciceronian. 
 
 ' z« Pis. 3, 6; pro Sexiio 57, 121. Both of these speeches are full of 
 biographical detail vphich Plutarch would not likely have ignored had he known 
 them. And the same is true of many others in the Ciceronian collection. 
 
 c Cf. Sibinga I.e. pp. 16-19, and notes to text. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 15 
 
 paene, iudices, cum ex me quidam quaesis- cjypovovcriv, ws ovo/«xtos Kal 
 
 set, quo die Roma exissem et num quid- So^Tys toV 7re.Trpa.yfji.eviov 
 
 nam novi. Cui cum respondissem me e avroi Tqv ttoXiv airauav e/j.- 
 
 provincia decedere, " Etiam me hercule," ireirXijKuis ■ tov S' uttuv 
 
 inquit, " ut opinor, ex Africa." Huic ego " IIoB yap rj's, o) K.LKip<Dv, 
 
 iam stomachans fastidiose " Immo ex Sici- tov )(p6vov tovtov ; " rore 
 
 lia " inquam. Tum quidam quasi qui omnia pxv ovv i^adv/jk^crai iravTa- 
 
 sciret, "Quid tu nescis," inquit, "hunc iracriv, d Kadairep eh ireXa- 
 
 quaestorem Syracusis fuisse?" . . ; ea res, yos a^avk'; tyjv ttoXlv ifjure- 
 
 iudices, baud scio an plus mihi profuerit, o-wv o wepl auVov Xoyos 
 
 quam si mihi tum essent omnes gratulati. ovSiv ek Sd^av itri^Xov 
 
 Nam posteaquam sensi populi Romani aures ireirovn^Ktv vcrrepov Se Xo- 
 
 hebetiores, oculos autem esse acres atque yi.(Tp.ov eaurco StSovs iroXv 
 
 acutos, destiti quid de me audituri essent r^s (^iXort/iuis i<^€iXci/, i>s 
 
 homines, cogitare ; feci ut postea cotidie Trpos aopitrrov wpaypjo. T-qv 
 
 praesentem me viderent, habitavi in oculis, Sd^av ap-iXXiii/jLefo^ kol 
 
 pressi forum. Trcpas ovk i<j>i,KTov t)(ov(Tav. 
 
 That the ultimate source of this exquisite story was the 
 Ciceronian speech is, of course, self-evident, only Plutarch 
 could not possibly have had it before his eyes when he 
 penned this paragraph,'' so thoroughly spoiled has it been in 
 the retelling. Thus, the best part of the joke turns upon the 
 interlocutor's failure to distinguish Lilybaeum, Cicero's dis- 
 trict, from Syracuse, the two together forming the province 
 of Sicily. Plutarch knew nothing of this and calmly speaks 
 of Cicero as quaestor of Sicily. Again, according to the 
 original Cicero made an excursion, in Plutarch he has left his 
 province at the expiration of his term of office. In the Latin 
 an unknown individual puts the annoying question, in the 
 Greek Cicero questions an eminent friend. Cicero is very 
 explicit as to the locality, Plutarch speaks vaguely of Cam- 
 pania. In the Latin, once more, we have the delightful col- 
 loquy which culminates in Cicero's complete discomfiture, in 
 the Greek only a simple question is asked. Finally, Cicero's 
 application of the story, and the lesson he drew from the 
 
 ' This is also recognized by H. Peter, Die Quellen etc. p. 130, and by 
 Sibinga 1 c. p. 26-28. 
 
l6 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 incident, are partly omitted, partly misunderstood, and partly 
 contradicted in the clumsy reproduction. Certainly no Roman 
 biographer or historian, such as Tiro, Nepos, Livy, or Sue- 
 tonius, could have transmitted this anecdote in the emascu- 
 lated shape in which we find it in Plutarch. It represents 
 doubtless what in modern parlance would be called a news- 
 paper clipping, a stray item which Plutarch may have come 
 upon in some of the many post-Augustan collectanea of 
 rcnivi mcmorabilium and which he had hastily transferred 
 to his Commonplace Book, or else he was here quoting a 
 story he had once heard, but had imperfectly retained in his 
 memory. 
 
 A close analysis, then, of Plutarch's references to Cicero's 
 orations, whether direct or indirect, can, I feel convinced, 
 justify but one conclusion : to wit, that, while he may have 
 glanced at some speeches, he did not use them as biographical 
 sources of information.^ 
 
 V<=. That Cicero's Brutus, especially the famous autobio- 
 graphical chapters at the close, was consulted by Plutarch 
 seems to be universally admitted, this conviction being based 
 upon c. 3 and 4, which are chiefly devoted to the philosophical 
 and rhetorical training of the young Cicero. No doubt the 
 numerous coincidences existing between the two accounts, 
 more particularly the enumeration of the Asianic rhetoricians, 
 might lend color to this supposition, for even Strabo, the only 
 later writer who besides Plutarch speaks of them, cites the 
 Brutus as his authority. ^ And yet Plutarch cannot have read 
 a line of this work, so glaring are the contradictions. In the 
 first place, Plutarch's knowledge of the history of Greek phi- 
 losophy and rhetoric was unquestionably profound and exten- 
 sive, and he was not, therefore, called upon to consult a 
 
 * We possess 54 speeches entire, 17 in fragments, and we know the titles, in 
 some cases also the contents, of 30 more. Plutarch, therefore, had he desired 
 to read some of Cicero's speeches, would have been confronted with a collec- 
 tion of over one hundred from which to choose ! See Appendix I. 
 
 1 Strabo XIII. 660. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 17 
 
 Latin writer for his information on these subjects.^ But we 
 are happily not compelled to rely upon such considerations. 
 If Plutarch read the Brutus, how was it possible that he 
 should represent Cicero as leaving Rome immediately after 
 the Roscian trial, whereas Cicero says expressly that he 
 remained two years longer actively engaged in forensic occu- 
 pation until his health gave out, a statement which Plutarch, 
 after asserting that it was put forth as a pretext by the orator 
 to conceal his cowardly departure out of fear of Sulla, con- 
 firms in the very next paragraph ? Again, Plutarch makes 
 him return on the news of the dictator's death, whereas 
 Cicero did not do so until two years later, when, as he tells 
 us himself, the objects which had caused him to leave Rome 
 had been attained. Finally, in the enumeration of Cicero's 
 teachers Plutarch omits Demetrius the Syrian and Aeschylus 
 the Cnidian, but adds Posidonius and refers to Molo as 
 Apollonius the son of Molo. Posidonius, although his name 
 occurs no fewer than eighteen times in the extant writings of 
 Cicero, is referred to but twice, and that in a parenthetical 
 way, as the orator's teacher ; but these passages were certainly 
 unknown to Plutarch, not to mention that neither the time 
 when nor the place where Cicero enjoyed his instruction is 
 there given.^ The confusion between Apollonius fj-aXaico';, 
 much the older man, and Molo, Cicero's teacher both in 
 Rome and in Rhodes,* furnishes still another proof that Plu- 
 tarch was not indebted to the Brutus. Their identification, it 
 is true, is extremely common both in Greek and Latin writers 
 after the time of Cicero, Strabo, and Valerius Maximus,^ the 
 
 2 If his biographical source had said no more than that Cicero had been a 
 pupil of Rhodian rhetoricians, their names would readily suggest themselves 
 to him. But if he found them already mentioned, there is only one biographer 
 of Cicero known to us who would be likely to have done so, namely Suetonius, 
 the author of the de grammaticis et rhetorihis. 
 
 ' de fato 3, 5, Posido7iius quaedam (pace magistri dixerim) comminisci 
 videtur ; de nat. deor. I. 3, 5, Diodotus, Philo, Antiochus, Posidonius a quibus 
 instituti sumus. * Brut. 89, 307. 90, 312. 91, 316. 
 
 5 Cf. Susemihl, Gesch. der alex. Lit. II. pp. 489-493. 
 
l8 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 younger rhetorician being referred to often as Apollonius or 
 ApoUonius Molo — for Plutarch's 'AttoWcovlo) tSi Mo'A.cdi/o'} ^ 
 is in my judgment due to a misunderstanding of his Latin 
 source, which probably contained the genitive Apollonii 
 Molonis, he being ignorant of the fact that the Latin, unlike 
 the Greek, does not expresa descent by the genitive case. 
 
 N^. Of the writings of Cicero still to be discussed there 
 remain only his poems de considatii and de temporibus sziis, 
 the Greek Memoir on his Consulship and the de consiliis suis 
 or aveicBoTa. On general considerations, it is to the highest 
 degree improbable that Plutarch utilized any of the poetic^ 
 effusions for his narrative, although certain items may be 
 ultimately based upon them, as the following passage in 
 Servius ad Verg. Eci. VIII. 104 f. seems to show : hoc uxori 
 Ciceronis dicitur contigisse, cum post peractum sacrificium 
 libare vellet, in cinerem ex ipso cinere flamma surrexit quae 
 flamma eodem anno consulem futurum ostendit eius maritum, 
 sicut Cicero in sno testatur poemate. This same omen is 
 related by Dio Cass. 37, 35 and with circumstantiality of 
 detail in Plut. Cic. 20, Terentia's characterization being 
 introduced by the words to? auTo? (jtija-iv 6 K-iKeprnv. What 
 more probable, than that the poem de consulatu is the original 
 source of both Dio and Plutarch ! A closer examination, 
 however, reveals considerable objections to this assumption. 
 In the first place, Servius, who, as the dicitur perhaps 
 indicates, cites only at second hand, places the incident at 
 an earlier time, when Cicero was again a private citizen, 
 whereas Plutarch expressly informs us that the annual festi- 
 val of the Bona Dea always took place in the house of the 
 
 1 So again in Plut. Caes. 3, but not elsewliere. It is, however, significant to 
 note in tliis connection that Suet. Caes. 4 also speaks of Apollonius Molo 
 where Molo was meant. 
 
 2 The one solitary allusion to a Latin poet, throughout all the voluminous 
 writings of Plutarch, is found in Lucull. 39, where the reference to Horace 
 (viz. Epist. I. 6, 40 ff.), if not an actual interpolation, as I still believe it to be, 
 is in any case taken at second or third hand. Cp. Transact, p. 149 note 16. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 19 
 
 consul,-' and that Cicero accordingly went to the residence of a 
 neighbor, there to deliberate upon the best mode of dealing 
 with the conspirators. In the second place, the interpreta- 
 tion of the omen, as well as the time of its occurrence, 
 exhibits noteworthy divergences. If we are to believe 
 Servius, Cicero himself spoke of it as having happened 
 before he was elected ; according to Plutarch and Dio (who, 
 however, makes no mention of the Bona Dea or of Teren- 
 tia) the miracle occurred shortly before the famous debate 
 in the senate and was interpreted as justifying Cicero in 
 insisting on the death penalty.* Again, the deliberations of 
 the consul in Plutarch follow the arrest of the conspira- 
 tors, whereas in Sallust c. 46 they are made to precede 
 the sensational exposure, and there is no allusion to the 
 prodigy. 
 
 The narrative in Plutarch is homogeneous throughout and 
 not marred by any irrelevant additions. Now, unless we 
 gratuitously maintain that the authority of Cicero is specially 
 invoked for the sole purpose of substantiating the parenthetical 
 remark concerning Terentia, while the truth of the curious 
 story immediately precediftg was allowed to stand on its own 
 merits, we must conclude that the entire passage was culled 
 from one and the same source. But if so, this authority 
 cannot have been the Ciceronian poem, even if we lay no 
 stress upon the chronological difficulty in Servius for the 
 reasons given above. The Greek Memoir, on the other 
 hand, is no less out of the question, and that chiefly for two 
 
 8 Dio Cass. I.e. iv t5 oUiq. auroO, but in c. 45 he speaks of these ceremonies 
 as taking place Trapd re rots {nrdrois Kal irapa rots trrpaTTiyo'ts. May not 
 this statement be ultimately due to some scholar, like Fenestella, who wished 
 to reconcile the conflicting chronology in the traditional accounts of this 
 incident ? 
 
 * Dio, however, places the incident early in the morning, Plutarch in the 
 evening. In the former again t6 irCp iirl fiaKp&raTov irapb, rb eUis fjpSri, in the 
 latter iK ttjs r^ippas Kal twv KeKavixivoiv ^XoiSv ifKbya iroW^v avrJKe koX 'Kaforpdv. 
 Plutarch and Dio, therefore, unquestionably followed different authorities. 
 
20 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 reasons : In the first place, Cicero's own reflections ^ could 
 not have assumed the condemnatory form which Plutarch 
 has given to them (avT6<; re So^eiv avavSpo<; Koi /xaXuKov etc.) ; 
 in the second place, the disparaging remarks concerning his 
 wife could not well have been made at a time when their 
 estrangement had not yet taken place, the vTro/jLvrj/xa having 
 been written in 60 B.C. In the ave/cBora published after 
 the divorce they might, of course, have occurred, but then 
 there is no evidence that this work rehearsed the story of the 
 conspiracy from the beginning, nor are we justified in ascrib- 
 ing to Plutarch any first-hand acquaintance with the aveichoTa 
 on the strength of so vague a reference as the 'iv nvi \6yq) 
 etc. in his Life of Crassus.^ 
 
 That the {nr6/j,vr]fj,a ttj? vTrareia?, on the other hand, cited 
 in the same passage, had been read by Plutarch, it were no 
 less rash to conclude from this solitary and incidental allusion ; 
 and yet, since the time of Heeren, scholars have with ever- 
 increasing confidence "maintained that we must indeed recog- 
 nize in this Greek Memoir the principal, if not actually the 
 only, source of Plutarch's information on this subject.'' We 
 shall see subsequently that there is no satisfactory evidence 
 for this assumption. 
 
 VI. Turning to a consideration of Sallust's De coniuratione 
 Catilinae, it might be supposed that a comparison between 
 the extant monograph and the account in Plutarch would 
 definitely settle any question as to the indebtedness of the 
 
 ^ These deliberations seem to be ultimately based upon a suasoria, possibly 
 suggested by Sallust I.e., and entitled : Deliberat Cicero an coniuratores inter- 
 ficiat. See also p. 6 *. If so, a post-Augustan origin for this chapter, probable 
 on independent grounds, would be revealed. 
 
 ^ See above p. 7. 
 
 ' So e.g. Weizsacker, Schmidt in special treatises, Buresch, Willrich, and, 
 preceding them all, Sibinga, whose discussion is, however, strangely ignored 
 by the German advocates of the hypothesis. Heeren, as usual, merely postu- 
 lates it as a fact. Peter, Die Quellen etc. p. 129 f., seems to be the only critic 
 who denies Plutarch's indebtedness to the vTrd/ivriiia, though he does so on 
 insufficient grounds. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 21 
 
 one to the other ; and, as a matter of fact, the great majority 
 of scholars are convinced that Plutarch did make a more or 
 less extensive use of the Sallustian narrative, a conclusion 
 which rests solely on the unquestionably numerous coinci- 
 dences between them. But the equally numerous divergences 
 in matters of detail, certain chronological discrepancies, the 
 different attitude of Sallust and Plutarch toward the principal 
 actors in the drama, the noteworthy circumstance, finally, that 
 they have not a single item of information in common which 
 is either omitted or contradicted in all other extant sources, 
 these are facts which certainly far outweigh in significance and 
 argumentative validity the existing parallelisms, the more so 
 as the latter reveal no peculiarities in style or substance which 
 might seem incompatible with a non- Sallustian origin. Many 
 of these dissimilarities have, of course, been noticed ; but so 
 far from their leading to the only inference which is psycho- 
 logically reasonable, namely that Plutarch could never have 
 consulted Sallust, we are seriously asked to believe that 
 Plutarch, while industriously appropriating Sallust 's material, 
 had from some unaccountable, capricious fancy repeatedl}- 
 and suddenly abandoned his guide, in order to incorporate 
 from other sources numerous items which partly contradict 
 or modify or expand his previous basic narrative. That such 
 a patchwork method, even if it were justly attributable to 
 Plutarch, must have resulted in producing an incoherent 
 mosaic instead of an admittedly consistent and homogeneous 
 narrative, goes without saying ; and yet it is precisely some 
 such conception which underlies many of the source analyses 
 to which Plutarch's Lives have been subjected. 
 
 In order to establish the falsity of the current belief, it will 
 only be necessary to enumerate some of the more flagrant 
 contradictions between the two authors.^ 
 
 1 For others see Schmidt, Liibeck Progr. 1. c. pp. 2-7, who, wholly intent 
 upon proving Plutarch's extensive indebtedness to Cicero's inrbiivriixa, is of 
 course compelled to eliminate Sallust as far as possible as one of his sources. 
 See also notes in Appendix I. 
 
22 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 In Sallust c. 23. 25. 28, we read how Q. Curius and Fulvia 
 came to reveal to Cicero the secrets of the conspirators. In 
 Plutarch, on the other hand, the name of Curius is conspicuous 
 by its absence, and Fulvia's information is confined to the 
 contemplated assassination of the consul at the hands of 
 Marcius and Cethegus, for whom Sallust substitutes C. 
 Cornelius and L. Vargunteius. 
 
 In Sallust c. 30, L. Saenius, a senator, announces the sus- 
 picious movements of Manlius in Etruria, a few days after 
 the famous decree videant consiiles etc. had been passed ; in 
 Plutarch c. 15 this information is given by Q. Arriiis and it 
 is \m.-m^&\zXe\.y followed by the same decree. 
 
 In Sallust c. 30, Q. Metellus Creticus and Q. Metellus Celer 
 are mentioned among a number of other. generals as having 
 been dispatched by a decree of the senate to prevent or quell 
 any uprisings in other cities; in Plutarch c. 16 Q. Metellus, 
 without the distinguishing cognomen, is appointed by Cicero 
 himself as commander-in-chief (ra yJkv efw irpd'^fiaTa K. M. 
 hLeiTicnevcre). 
 
 In Sallust c. 32, Catiline cum panels in Matiliana castra 
 profectiLS est ; in Plutarch c. 16 ^tera TpuaKOcr Icov o-rfKo^opmv 
 . . . 7r/3o? Tov MdWiov e')(<i>peL. Neither can this passage 
 nor Sail. c. 43, Statllius et Gabinlus uti cuin magna mann 
 duodecim simul opportuna loca urbis incenderent etc., have 
 been the source of Plut. c. 18, as already pointed out above 
 (p. 13). We may add that the Greek author says that 
 /iia Twi" KpovidBeov was selected for the deed, whereas no date 
 at all is given in the Latin. 
 
 The story of the arrest of the conspirators (Sail. c. 47 and 
 Plut. c. 19) also exhibits noteworthy discrepancies. ' Thus the 
 latter says that they were handed over to the praetors, but 
 Sallust gives the names of all the custodians, and there is 
 not a praetor among them ; nor does he add the picturesque, 
 albeit absurd, touch, that Lentulus on abdicating immediately 
 exchanged his senatorial toga for a garb of mourning, iv rj) 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 23 
 
 fiovXjj KUTaOefievo';, he having probably brought it with him 
 for just such a contingency ! Stress has been laid upon the 
 phrases abdicato magistratu and in liberis custodiis habeantur 
 as closely corresponding to inrafjioa-aTO rrjv apxrjv and nrape- 
 B66r)a-av et? aSecr/xov (j)v\aKrjv ; but, even if the parallelisms 
 were more exact than they are, how, we ask, could a verbal 
 resemblance ^ in statements of this kind be avoided ? The 
 same hojds true of other verbal similarities. 
 
 Plutarch c. 10, after attributing to Catiline two atrocious 
 crimes which are not mentioned in Sallust, says dXXa'i re 
 TTiffTet? aXX^Xot? ehocrav kuI KaTaSvcravrei avdptoirov iyev- 
 aavro rwv aapKoiv. Sail. c. 22 also refers to .these pledges, 
 but speaks only of the drinking of a mixture of human blood 
 and wine and then adds the significant remark : nonnulli ficia 
 et haec et miilta praeterea existumabant ab eis qui Ciceronis 
 invidiixm quae postea orta est leniri credebant atrocitate sceleris 
 eorum qui poenas dederunt. Nobis ea res pro magnitudine 
 paruwi comperta est. 
 
 In the account of the memorable debate in the senate, 
 Sallust c. 50 f. mentions Tiberius Nero ^ as the one who first 
 proposed the milder sentence and says nothing of the oppo- 
 sition of Lutatius Catulus ; Plutarch on the other hand (c. 20) 
 omits the name of Nero and maintains that all followed the 
 first speaker Silanus in recommending the death penalty, 
 until it came to Caesar.* 
 
 2 So Dio XXXVII. 34 says of Lentulus: direiirerv t^v ffTparriytav, Appian 
 II. 5 17 PovXti AinrXov irapiXvtre t^s i-PXV^ a-nd Cic. in Cat. III. 6, 15, magis- 
 tratu se ahidicavit. 
 
 s So also Appian II. 5, whose narrative is otherwise independent of Sallust 
 and in closer agreement with Plutarch. 
 
 * Tpo<TeTlBevTO Toinp TrdvTes i^c^ijs M^XP' Taitoi/ Kal(rapos and Cat. Min. 22 
 oi Si p^t' airbv ^0ej^s ■^Ko\oi8ri<rav fix/" ^ila-apos Dio Cass. XXXVII. 36, 
 6 Kaiaap, ttclvtuv ivpb auroC \pri(t>uTpiivwv airoBavtiv cr^as, jvilip.rjv eSu/ce etc. So 
 also Cic. Cat. IV. 4, 7, duae dictae sunt sententiae : una D. Silani . . . altera 
 C. Caesaris ; ati Att. XII. 21, i, illud turpiter ignorat (sc. Brutus) : Catonem 
 primum putat de animadversione dixisse, quam omnes ante dixerant praeter 
 Caesarem ; et cum ipsius Caesaris tam severa fuerit, qui turn praetorio loco 
 
24 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 It is needless to multiply illustrations. These discrep- 
 ancies, when added to the well-known facts that Plutarch 
 and Sallust do not agree in their chronology, that the Greek 
 account is written from a decidedly Ciceronian standpoint 
 with only an occasional unfriendly note, and, finally, that the 
 whole creates the impression of being a consistent narrative 
 and not a piece of patchwork made up of ill-assorted stones 
 taken from numerous quarries,^ make it clear that Sallust 
 cannot under any circumstances be regarded as a direct source 
 of Plutarch's information regarding the conspiracy. 
 
 VII. The question as to Plutarch's possible indebtedness 
 to Livy, though this is improbable for the reason given above 
 (p. 8 ^^), is intimately associated with the determination of the 
 sources of Dio Cassius, whose acquaintance with the libri ab 
 urbe condita, whether in the original or in the Epitome, is 
 reasonably certain.^ But the extent to which he consulted this 
 authority must ever remain problematical, in view of the fact 
 that Dio's first-hand knowledge of contemporary historical 
 sources covering the period of Cicero's career (for it is with 
 this that we are here alone concerned) is equally well 
 established,^ although we are not justified in crediting him 
 
 dixerit, consularium putat leniores fuisse Catuli, Servilii, Lucullorum, Curionis, 
 Torquati, Lepidi, Gellii, Volcatii, Figuli, Cottae, L. Caesaris, C. Pisonis, etiam 
 M'. Glabrionis, Silani, Murenae, designatorum consulum, and Suet. Caes. 14, 
 senatu universe . . . ultimam statuente poenam, solus . . . censuit. 
 
 ° The technical difficulty involved in such a process for an ancient investi- 
 gator has been well pointed out by Nissen, Ueber die Quellen der 4. u. j'. 
 Dekade des Livius, 1865, p. 78, although the famous One Source Theory which 
 he deduces from it cannot be accepted without very considerable modifica- 
 tions and restrictions. 
 
 1 Cp. e.g. M. Grasshoff, de fontihus et auctoritate Dionis Cassii, Bonn 
 Dissert. 1867 ; W. Heimbach, Quaeritur quid Dio . . . a libra 4.0 tisque ad 
 librum 4"; e Livio desumpserit, Bonn Dissert. 1878 ; Willrich I.e. pp. 43-52. 
 
 2 E.g., the long speech put into the mouth of Cicero (Dio XLV. 18-45) 
 exhibits a first-hand acquaintance especially with the second Philippic oration. 
 Cp. I. G. Fischer, de fontibus et auctoritate Cassii Dionis in enarrandis a 
 Cicerone post Caesaris mortem . . . habitis orationibus, 'Leipzig 1870. And the 
 reply of Calenus (XLVI, 1-28) is probably very extensively indebted to 
 Antonius's speech (Sept. 19, 43) and the pamphlet literature of the day. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 25 
 
 with the extensive reading of the works of Cicero, Sallust, 
 and others, attributed to him by many scholars.^ Under these 
 circumstances it is impossible to say with any degree of con- 
 fidence to what extent Dio was directly indebted to Livy for 
 those events in which Cicero was a conspicuous participant. 
 If Dio's strange hostility toward the man was in any way 
 conditioned by the character of his sources, then Livy's 
 alleged influence must be confined within still narrower limits, 
 for his attitude toward Cicero was demonstrably favorable, 
 though his admiration for the orator need not have blinded 
 him to the defects of the statesman. But, be this as it may, 
 if Livy must needs be regarded as a fons primarius of Dio, 
 then Plutarch's Cicero could not also have been under obliga- 
 tions to him,* the chiefly unavoidable coincidences with Dio 
 here too not counterbalancing the significant divergences in 
 matters of detail and in the general historical setting, so to 
 speak, which an unprejudiced comparison brings to light. 
 
 VIII. Appian, especially in his account of the Conspiracy, 
 contains some remarkable parallelisms ^ with Plutarch. Some 
 scholars have accordingly maintained that the historian 
 directly consulted the biographer, while others contended that 
 they were both indebted to a common third source, such as 
 Cicero's vTrofivrjfjia, Sallust, Livy, or Asinius Pollio.^ Appian's 
 
 ^ Especially R. Wilmans, De fontibus et auctoritate Dionis Cassii (lib. 36-52), 
 Berlin Diss. 1835 ; Peter and Besser U.cc. 
 
 * This is certainly true of the narrative of Cicero's death, as may be seen 
 from Livy's account, preserved by Seneca Rhetor, Suas. VI. If what Val. 
 Max. IX. 12, 7 says of Licinius Macer is based, like so much of his material, 
 upon Livy, then Plut. c. 9, who deals with the same incident, is also quite 
 independent of the historian. 
 
 1 See notes to the text. 
 
 2 Cp. Willrich I.e. pp. 38-42, with the literature there cited, to which may 
 be added C. Peter, Zur Kritik der Quellen der dlteren rihn. Gesch., 1879, 
 pp. 132-138; Witte, De Nicolai Dmnasceni fragmentorum Romanorum fon- 
 tibus, Berlin 1900 ; and E. Schwartz's article in Pauly-Wissowa, Realencycl., s.v. 
 According to Soltau, he made an extensive use of Asinius PolUo through the 
 medium of Strabo, Nicolaus, and Socrates Rhodius, the same material being 
 also transmitted to Plutarch by several Greek 'go-betweens.' 
 
26 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 partiality for Augustus and his equally marked unfriendliness 
 toward Cicero, combined with many palpable errors which 
 Plutarch does not share with him, are sufficient to disprove 
 the above hypotheses. Everything, on the contrary, goes to 
 show that Appian's narrative is to a large extent a hasty and 
 slipshod compilation, based upon sources which I do not 
 venture to name, but which, unless all signs fail, betray a 
 post-Augiistan origin. 
 
 IX*. Tiro's biography of his patron was unquestionably 
 as exhaustive as it was authoritative, for it was based upon a 
 most intimate knowledge of the orator's works and a deep 
 familiarity with his character and conduct, acquired through 
 life-long association in the capacity of literary executor, 
 amanuensis, and friend. Nor can there be any doubt that 
 considerable information came to him from the living lips of 
 Cicero himself. That it long remained the standard authority 
 on the subject may perhaps be inferred from the fact that a 
 century later Tacitus cites Tiro for the date of Cicero's 
 death.i Its eulogistic and apologetic character would cer- 
 tainly have attracted rather than repelled a man like Plutarch ; 
 and, as we find that Tiro is actually cited twice, the conclu- 
 sion that he had been consulted directly may seem irre- 
 sistible. Hence we are not surprised to find that scholars 
 are well-nigh unanimous in regarding Tiro's vita Ciceronis as 
 one of the chief sources of Plutarch.^ And yet, an unprej- 
 udiced examination of the allusions in question is quite fatal 
 to such an inference. In the first instance (c. 41), Tiro is 
 cited in a merely parenthetical sort of way in defense of 
 Cicero's conduct and the motives which led to the divorce 
 from Terentia and to his subsequent marriage with his 
 wealthy young ward. The account, which takes up an entire 
 page, is distinctly unfavorable to Cicero, his own reasons 
 
 1 Dial. 17. 
 
 2 Heeren, Lagus, Sibinga, Peter, Graux, and others unhesitatingly assign all 
 passages of a strictly biographical or personal nature to this source. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 27 
 
 being regarded as at best plausible pretexts which his sub- 
 sequent conduct stamped as such. The severe' criticism of 
 Antony, moreover, ei' rat? tt/jo? tov<; ^iXi7nriKov<; avaypa- 
 <^at?, as well as similar references in later writers,^ show that 
 we are here face to face with a chapter taken from the con- 
 temporary chroniqiie scandaleuse, which some author, fond of 
 gossip and conversant with the criticisms and explanations 
 put forth on both sides, impartially welded together. That 
 this was not done by Plutarch will not be seriously denied, 
 nor can any contemporary biographer, such as Tiro, be 
 responsible for so objective a r^siim^. The whole passage, 
 in fact, not only has a suspicious post-Augustan look, but is 
 quite in the manner of Suetonius. 
 
 The pathetic story of Cicero's proscription and assassination, 
 told at length and in a most graphic manner in c. 46-49, 
 contains, at its close, the other allusion to Tiro's biography. 
 After relating the inhuman treatment of Cicero's body at the 
 hands of Pomponia, and how she compelled Philologus, his 
 alleged betrayer (c. 48), to eat of his flesh, Plutarch, habitually 
 unable to reject a story, however incredible, so long as it points 
 a suitable moral, tells us (as if to relieve his conscience for 
 having accepted what evioi tojv a-vyypa^ecov IcnopriKaaLv) that 
 Tiro nowhere even so much as mentions this Philologus whose 
 treacherous conduct forms an integral part of the preceding 
 narrative. But if so, then Tiro cannot have been Plutarch's 
 source for the closing period of Cicero's life. The grewsome 
 character of the tale' itself, the moral which it is made to point, 
 and the very reference to 'ivioi a-vyypa^el';, would alone show 
 that contemporary authorities are out of question ; for such 
 apocryphal anecdotes could not arise until the real facts con- 
 cerning Cicero had become obscured by time and thus brought 
 
 * Quint. VI. 3, 75, obiurgantibus quod sexagenarius Publiliam virginem 
 duxlsset ; Dio Cass. XLVI. 18, 3, ris S'ovk otSev Sti tt)v /ih yvvaiKo. tt]v Trporipav 
 ripr TCKOvaav aoi dio rixva i^^paXes, iripav Sk (ireaTiyAyov irapSevov, iirfpyfipai liv, 
 tva 4k TTJs oiifflas a^TTJs rd davdcfxara dwoTlffris ; 
 
28 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 within the pale of the ideaUzing imagination, until a kind of 
 legendary halo had formed about the historical individual. 
 And, as a matter of fact, we know that the death of the 
 great orator appealed powerfully to the sympathetic fancy of 
 subsequent generations. But if the post-Augustan origin of 
 the chapters under notice is thus established on general 
 grounds, the correctness of this view may be concretely 
 demonstrated by the following observation. In one of the 
 Controversiae of Seneca, the title of which is given in full 
 above (p. 6 '' ), no fewer than sixteen rhetoricians are intro- 
 duced who, each in his own way, discuss the ingratitude of 
 one Popillius who, though acquitted of the charge of parricide 
 through the efforts of Cicero, thereafter became the murderer 
 of his benefactor. In the midst of this recital, Seneca inserts 
 the following significant statement : Popillium panci ex his- 
 toricis tradiderunt interfectorcm Ciceronis et hi quoque non 
 parricidii rcuni a Cicerone defensimi sed in privato iudicio : * 
 declamatoribus placidt parricidii remn ficisse. This passage, 
 of course, admits of but one interpretation, to wit, that the 
 connection of Popillius with the death of Cicero is unhistorical, 
 being an invention of rhetoricians which was subsequently 
 improved upon for epideictic purposes by making the alleged 
 assassin a former client of Cicero in a murder trial, this cir- 
 cumstance naturally enhancing the pathetic features of his 
 base ingratitude. Now when we read in Plut. Cic. c. 48, 
 that among the assassins of Cicero there was one Popillius 
 & iraTpoKTOVia^ irore Slktjv (f)ev'yovTi avveiirev 6 Kt- 
 Kepoiv, it will be at once manifest that the authority here fol- 
 lowed had already abandoned the sober, unembellished facts 
 of history in favor of the presumably more popular fiction of 
 later declaniatores, and Plutarch is so completely under its 
 spell that he did not, as in the case of the Philologus incident, 
 virtually stamp the story as apocryphal by the half-frank, 
 half-naive avowal that earlier, contemporary writers, such as 
 
 * This is indirectly confirmed by Sen. Suas. VI. See the following note. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 29 
 
 Tiro, had failed to record it. And yet the apparently insig- 
 nificant circumstance that in this very narrative it is not 
 Popillius, as we should expect, but Herennius who after pursu- 
 ing and overtaking Cicero deals the fatal blow, has still pre- 
 served an unmistakable trace of the genuine account in which 
 Popillius either played only a subordinate r61e or, what is more 
 likely, did not figure at all.^ 
 
 Finally, we cannot but recognize the handiwork of these same 
 rhetoricians in the suicidal deliberations^ which Cicero is alleged 
 to have indulged in on reaching Astyra in his flight. KaKel 
 SievvKTepevcrev iirl Setvaiv koI airopcov Xoyicrficov, aare Koi 
 7rape\delv ek ttjv K.aiaapo<; oiKiav BievoTJdr) Kpixpa Kal crcjid^a'; 
 eaVTOV e-TTi ttj? ecrrta? aXdaropa Trpocr/SaXelv, a passage 
 which bears a most suspicious family likeness to the suasoriae 
 of the Deliberat Cicero type.'^ 
 
 IX''. But if Plutarch was independent of Tiro in the \"ery 
 chapters in which the latter is expressly quoted, any one of 
 
 ^ It is also worthy of notice that neither the historians quoted by Sen. 
 Sicas. VI (and both Livy and Asinius are among them), nor the sources of 
 Appian and Dio Cassius, seem to be acquainted witli the parricide version. 
 Cp. Appian .ff. C. IV. 20, 6 5^ Aaii/os (so always in his account) koI dlKijv 
 Ttva dLCL Tov Klk^poiv6s TTore KarojpduiKibs etc., and Dio XLVII. II, I, 'Aper-^s 
 ixk V 8t) Kal €i<T e^eias Totraura tStc ^ir K^avij epya ^y^ v€ t o. UoiriKto^ 
 dk 5i} Aatvas rdv KiKdpojva rbv ^dpKov dir^KTeive Kaiwep evepy 4t7}v aiiTov €k 
 (Tvv7iyopifip.aTO! ivra. The opening sentence, the quite gratuitous addition 
 of riv MdpKov, as well as the illustrations which follow, clearly point to a collec- 
 tion a la Valerius Maximus as the ultimate source of Dio. The narrative in 
 Val. Max. V. 3, 4, however, appears to be based upon Livy, for just as Livy 
 ap. Sen. I.e. declared, in cuius (sc. Ciceronis) laudes persequendas Cicerone 
 laudatore opus fuerit, so Valerius maintains that only another Cicero could 
 adequately deplore the sad end of the orator ; but he too seems as yet ignorant 
 of the later story, unless the words, C. Popillium Laenatem defendit, eumque 
 salvum ad penates suos remisit, and the frigid antithesis, se caput ferre quod 
 pro capite eius quondam peroraverat, must needs be interpreted as covert 
 allusions to a murder trial. 
 
 ^ Cp. Ps. Cic. ad Octavium, a rhetorical exercise of an early date : una cum 
 istis vitam simul fugere decrevi. 
 
 ' Cp. above p. 6' and esp. the perfectly analogous conception underlying 
 the advice given in Sen. Suas. VII. 3, fac moriendo Antonium nocentiorem \ 8, 
 sine durare post te . . . perpetiiaiti Antonii proscriptionem. 
 
30 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 the following criteria will justify us in still further eliminating 
 his vita Ciceronis in numerous other passages of the Greek 
 biography, where scholars have nevertheless on general prin- 
 ciples, it would seem, postulated an extensive indebtedness 
 to it. 
 
 Tiro, we contend, must be rejected as a direct source of 
 Plutarch : (i) Wherever recorded items of information are 
 distinctly unfavorable to Cicero ; and, if such occur within an 
 otherwise homogeneous narrative, it will follow as a neces- 
 sary corollary that the entire chapter is equally non-Tironian. 
 (2) All paragraphs of importance which clearly contradict, or 
 are inconsistent with, the extant utterances of Cicero cannot 
 possibly have emanated from the editor of his correspondence 
 and speeches. (3) All details which manifestly betray, for 
 one reason or another, a non-contemporary or post- Augustan 
 origin, must naturally have been wanting in Tiro's vita 
 Ciceronis. 
 
 Now in applying these principles to the work under investi- 
 gation I must again emphasize the necessity of keeping stead- 
 fastly in mind that Plutarch cannot, on psychological grounds 
 alone, have accumulated his biographical information by con- 
 sulting one particular authority, only to abandon it at the 
 next moment, then reverting to it in the succeeding para- 
 graph, and so on with kaleidoscopic variation. ^ 
 
 The very first chapter furnishes a number of variants con- 
 cerning Cicero's father (ovSev rjv irvdiadai jierpiov — ol /xev 
 — 01 Se) which are mutually exclusive, one being unquestion- 
 ably slanderous. Again, the reason given for the retention of 
 the cognomen on the part of the first Cicero, and the refusal 
 of his famous descendant to discard it in spite of the solicita- 
 tion of his friends, absurdly imply that the Romans habitually 
 regarded this appellative in the light of an opprobrious nick- 
 name. Plutarch's explanation must, therefore, have origi- 
 nated at a later time, when these cognomina had attracted 
 
 1 See above pp. 4. 21. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 31 
 
 the attention of philologians,^ particularly as the alleged con- 
 notation of the term is due to a false etymology.^ 
 
 Chapter 2. The prediction of Cicero's future greatness, 
 though clearly a vaticiniiim ex eventu, may have been recorded 
 by Tiro as well as the detailed account of his career at school. 
 The statement, however, that he was taken fxeaov avrSiv 
 eirl Tifirj casts some doubts upon this assumption, for a sim- 
 ilar story is told by Nepos of Atticus, Cicero's fellow pupil* 
 In any case. Tiro cannot have been Plutarch's authority for 
 the ippvT] TTtB? TTpoOvfiorepov iirl iroi.-qTt.KrjV and for the esti- 
 mate of Cicero's poetic productions. This paragraph, as well 
 as the passage in C. 40, Ty Se tt/oo? ttjv iroirjcnv evKoXia irai^cov 
 C'^prJTO. AeyeruL yap, oTrrjviKa pveCrj tt/so? ro toiovtov, rr)? 
 vvKTo^ eirr] iroielv irevraKoaia, is unquestionably post -Augustan,^ 
 and in all probability the entire narrative was taken directly 
 from Suetonius's vita Ciceronis. 
 
 Chapters 3-5, which are closely connected, deal with the 
 life of the young Cicero up to the time of his quaestorship. 
 They contain the following indisputable evidence of non- 
 Tironian origin, although they are habitually attributed to this 
 source. Not to lay stress upon the fact that Plutarch does 
 not seem to have known that Cicero associated himself with 
 both Mucii, the augur and the pontifex, the statement that 
 he subsequently served under Sulla in the Marsian War is 
 notoriously false, for according to Cicero himself^ he served 
 under the consul Pompeius Strabo.''' Again, we learn that 
 
 2 Cp. esp. Plut. Coriol. 1 1 ; Public. 1 1 ; Fab. Max. i. On the Roman use of 
 cognomina designating bodily defects, cp. _Hor. Sat. I. 3, 48 ft. 
 
 ' Cp. Plin. Nat. Hist. XVIII. 10, 3, iam Fabiorum, Lentulorum, Cicerotmm 
 ut quisque aliquod optime genus screret. 
 
 * Nep. Att. I. This seems to have been a usual mark of honor. Cf. Plut. 
 Cat. Mitt. 57 ; Ovid Fast. V. 67. 
 
 ^ Cp. Transact, pp. 148-150. 
 
 6 Phil. XIL II, 27. 
 
 " Perhaps we may recognize in this error a deliberate attempt to bring 
 the two great men into synchronistic association, Pompeius Strabo being 
 too obscure and unimportant a figure. To cite only Roman analogies, cp. the 
 
32 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 immediately on leaving school Cicero 4>(fX,eoi'o? rjKovae, 
 whereas his first teacher was Phaedrus,^ Philo not reaching 
 Rome till after the death of Mucius, if the augur be meant. 
 The account of the Roscian trial, to which we shall have 
 occasion to refer again, is also full of errors which Tiro could 
 not have committed. 
 
 Chapter 4, on the philosophical and rhetorical studies of 
 Cicero, has been analyzed above (p. 1 7) ; and the same con- 
 siderations which proved Plutarch not to have been indebted 
 to the Bnittts apply with equal force to Tiro's biography. 
 
 Chapter 5 is no less replete with errors and contradictions. 
 That Tiro was well acquainted with the de divinatione, which 
 contains a violent attack upon the Delphic oracle,® goes with- 
 out saying ; but if so, it is difficult to understand how he could 
 have spoken of Cicero's visit to the shrine and of the answer 
 of the priestess recorded by Plutarch. Following the advice 
 of Apollo to keep aloof from politics, Cicero, we are told, lived 
 in retirement for a while, his scholarly seclusion earning for 
 him the nicknames of Greekling and pedant. This is also 
 demonstrably erroneous, as Cicero immediately on his return 
 from Asia {JJ b.c.) applied himself assiduously to forensic 
 pleading,!" being elected unanimously to the quaestorship 
 the year following. Surely an invention so palpably apocry- 
 phal — the chronological contradictions may well be attributed 
 to Plutarch's notorious negligence in such matters — cannot 
 have emanated from so trustworthy a source as Tiro. 
 
 The anecdote of the impassioned acting of Aesopus, the 
 alleged teacher of Cicero, is an irrelevant addition, its 
 
 story of Sulla and the young Caesar (Suet. Caes. i), of Accius and Pacuvius 
 Caecilius and Terence. If so, all early contemporaneous authorities would 
 here be excluded as possible sources for Plutarch's statement. 
 
 * Cf. Cic. ad fam. XIII. I, 2, magis Phaedrus nobis cum pueri essemus, 
 antequam Philonera cognovimus, ut philosophus . . . probabatur. 
 
 3IL 56, 115. 
 
 w Brut. 92, 318, Unum igitur annum cum rediissemus ex Asia, causas nobiles 
 egimus cum quaesturam nos . . . peteret ; ad Ait. IV. i6a, i. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 33 
 
 digressional character being plainly indicated by laropovaiv. 
 That the story was still unknown to Cicero may be shown 
 by a passage in the Tuscul. DisputP- 
 
 Finally, the remark at the end of the chapter, that Cicero 
 by his excessive use of raillery and repartee ttoXXou? ekvirei 
 Kol KaKor]6eva^ iXd/jb^ave So^av, will certainly not be attributed 
 to the author who carefully collected the dicta Ciceronis?^ 
 
 Chapters 6-9, which bring the narrative down to the con- 
 sulship of Cicero, are perhaps the most incoherent in the 
 entire biography, being made up of anecdotes, witticisms, per- 
 sonal characteristics, and historical items, some of which are 
 open to serious objections. In at least two instances a 
 post-Augustan origin must be assumed, and in another we 
 unexpectedly come upon a statement highly derogatory to 
 the orator, although these chapters are otherwise extremely 
 eulogistic. 
 
 After relating the story of Cicero's quaestorship, which 
 culminates in the anecdote discussed above, Plutarch speaks 
 of his hero's efforts to win popularity and then suddenly tells 
 us of his moderate means, adding that people marveled at 
 his not accepting legal fees. Now the lex Cincia de donis ei 
 muneribus, which forbade this, had, indeed, become virtually 
 a dead letter even in Cicero's time ; ^^ but it does not seem 
 likely that any contemporary writers would have expressed 
 their astonishment that the orator had failed to violate an 
 existing statute. This was, however, entirely natural after 
 the time of Claudius, who repealed the old law and substituted 
 
 Ji IV. 25, 55, oratorem vero irasci minime decet . . . num egisse umquam 
 iratum Aesopum ? 
 
 12 Cp. also c. 27, t6 S'oZs ?tux« irpoaKpoiciv ivcKO. toC jeKolov ToKi <rvv^je /ua-os 
 airif 28 init., iK ToiTiav iylvero iroWots liraxSiis Comp. Dem. et Cic. i, TroWaxoO 
 ry <TKiinrTiK(ff ir/ibs ri paiJUi\6xov iK^epS/iems etc. 
 
 13 Cp. the interesting passage in Verr. I. 13, 37, where Cicero deplores the 
 fact that so salutary a measure was falling into desuetude and severely 
 arraigns Hortensius and others for its open violation. It was again enforced 
 by Augustus. Cf. Die LIV. 18 and Ovid Am. I. 10, 39, turpe reos empta 
 miseros defendere lingua. 
 
34 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 definite fees, the maximum being fixed at 10,000 sesterces.^* 
 The remark of Plutarch, as may be observed in passing, also 
 proves that he did not consult the speeches against Verres, a 
 fact confirmed by the conflicting statements regarding the 'litis 
 aestimatio,' ^^ the extremely low figure (750,000 sesterces) 
 given by Plutarch being taken from some writer unfriendly to 
 Cicero, as shown by the words which follow : Sia^oXrjv eay(ev, 
 w'i e7r' apyvpLcp to TifiT^fxa icaOv(f>€ifi,evo<;, an accusation all the 
 more remarkable as he repeatedly emphasizes the scrupulous 
 honesty of Cicero in these very paragraphs and elsewhere, 
 e.g. c. 36, Comp. Dem. et Cic. 3. The statement concerning 
 the orator's precarious health is contradicted by Plutarch him- 
 self (c. 4) and by Asinius Pollio.^^ Again, the purchase of 
 three villas and a house on the Palatine cannot, of course, be 
 reconciled with the remark touching his modest means above 
 referred to, but seems in some way directly associated with 
 the bribery charge immediately preceding. The confusion 
 and misrepresentation here pointed out would be unaccount- 
 able had Plutarch in these chapters been following Tiro or 
 any other contemporary biographer. This inference is still 
 further confirmed by the observation that Cicero did not buy 
 the house on the Palatine until after his consulship, ^^ and 
 above all by the use of ev "AjOttoi?, for which we should cer- 
 tainly expect Iv 'KpirCvoi^, as Arpi is a town of Apulia, where 
 Cicero possessed no estate. All editors, from Xylander to 
 Graux, accordingly agree that Plutarch here blundered. They 
 strangely, however, overlooked the following passage in Mar- 
 tial, IV. 55, 3, 
 
 Luci, gloria temporum tuorum 
 
 Qui Gaium veterem Tagumque nostrum 
 
 Arpis cedere non sin is disertis, 
 
 " Tac. Attn. XI. 6 f. is Cp. Sibinga I.e. p. 37. 
 
 1^ ap. Sen. Suas. VI. 24 ad senectutem prospera permansit valetudo, but 
 Dio Cass. XXXVIII. 16 says exactly the opposite : to, ■ykp ivoKKh. iippiicrTei. I 
 1" adfam. V. 6, 2 ; ad Att. I. i6, lo. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 35 
 
 an unmistakable allusion to Cicero. That the poet here com- 
 mitted the very same error, ^^ is quite incredible. The only- 
 plausible explanation of this coincidence is to assume that Arfii 
 was an abbreviated form of Arpinum in use in Domitian's time 
 or possibly earlier, but it is quite unlikely that Plutarch found 
 it in any Augustan or pre-Augustan author. 
 
 The tiintJi chapter exemplifies by means of three illustra- 
 tions the rigid integrity of Cicero as praetor. That these 
 were not taken from a continuous narrative, such as Tiro's, 
 but rather represent " clippings," is indicated by the introduc- 
 tory Xi'^e.Tai, and by the yirtually identical phrases at the 
 beginning and the end of the Licinius anecdote,-'^ which have 
 all the appearance of labels for collectanea or chapter headings 
 in a commonplace book. This origin seems further strength- 
 ened by the observation that the description of OvaTivio<; as 
 •X^oipdScov Se TOP Tpd'XTjXov Tre/oiTrXe'co? again occurs in c. 26 : 
 Bariviov ej^ovTa j^oipdha'; iv ra Tpwx^ijXo), as if he had been 
 here mentioned for the first time. That the two anecdotes 
 in this chapter, the nineteen examples of wit and repartee 
 which take up c. 25 and 26, and the batch of satirical 
 sayings collected in c. 38 ultimately go back to one and the 
 same sourcCj^" such as the collections of Tiro or Trebonius, is 
 generally believed ; but that Plutarch had himself consulted 
 these is highly improbable,^i as he might have taken them 
 
 ^' e.g. Friedlander ad loc. : " Arpis aus Versehen statt Arpinum, Cicero's 
 Geburtsort, genannt " ! Other editors also fail to cite the Greek parallel. 
 
 1^ TCLS Kpiffeis fdo^e Kadapuis Kal Ka\ujs ^pa^eutraL — t6 dk irpdyna t^ Kt/c^pwvt 
 dd^av TjvejKev us ^7rt/teXws ^pa^eitravTi rb diKa<rT-jptoi'. 
 
 ^ This seems clear from such phrases as -ypd^j/ui 5i Kal Toirav SKlya (c. 27) 
 and p4\TU>v Si Kal roiruiv d\t-Ya TrapaBiaBai. 
 
 21 Cp. Leo I.e. p. 164 : Die c. 24-27 kennzeichnen sich selbst deutlich als 
 eine Einlage in den Zusammenhang der Erziihlung. . . . Es liegt nahe 
 anzunehmen, dass der Stoff der Einlage aus Tiro's de iocis Ciceronis stamme, 
 aber nicht wahrscheinlich ist es, dass Plutarch selbst ihn daher entnommen 
 hat. Die diro^e^Y^ara gehorten in die Biographie eines als witzig bekannten 
 Mannes; Cicero's dicta brauchte man anderthalb Jahrhunderte nach seinem 
 Tode wahrlich nicht an der Quelle suchen. Cp. note to text § 53I. 
 
2,6 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 more conveniently from Suetonius ^^ or from one of the 
 numerous compilations of airoj>de'yixara existing in his time. 
 
 Cicero's conduct in the Manilian affair, ^^ with which the 
 chapter closes, is related only in Plutarch and Dio (XXXVI. 
 44). According to Plutarch, Manilius was accused, in the prae- 
 torship of Cicero, irepl KXoTri]';.^ If this corresponds lofurtiim 
 or peciilatiis, the case would not have come under Cicero's 
 jurisdiction at all, but under that of his colleague, C. Orchivius, 
 Cicero having charge of matters de pcciiniis repetundis?^ But 
 even if the Greek could mean the latter, the difficulty would 
 still not be removed, for Manilius had not at that time been 
 the governor of a province. Again, when Plutarch says that 
 in this alleged trial, •wepl kXott?)?, there was considerable oppo- 
 sition to Manilius on the part of the nobility, we have an 
 evident confusion with the lex Maniliana, so well known to 
 us through Cicero's extant speech pro imperio Cn. Pompei. 
 This preceded the defense of Manilius, here spoken of, which 
 was not undertaken until after his term of office had expired. 
 It is impossible, therefore, that Plutarch was indebted for this 
 paragraph to an early and trustworthy authority. 
 
 The narrative of the Catilinian Conspiracy (c. 10-23) has, 
 owing to the numerous extant accounts of this same episode, 
 engaged the special attention of scholars who, though differing 
 in details, have yet come to the unanimous conclusion that 
 Plutarch here, if anywhere, drank deeply of the original foun- 
 tains, making extensive use of Sallust and of Cicero's orations, 
 his Greek Memoir, and the de consiliis suis. We have shown 
 
 22 To no Roman writer known to us is the (rireipe:.v S\<fi t$ 8v\dK(i> in the 
 matter of bons mots so applicable as it is to him. 
 
 2^ Sibinga I.e. p. 43 f. discusses the subject, but his conclusions are quite 
 erroneous. 
 
 2* Dio I.e. does not state the nature of the charge {SiKijs rd titos) and places 
 it a/ier the praetorship, Cicero Cornel, fragm. i agrees as to the date with 
 Plutarch, while Ascon. V&A. pro Corn. p. 59, in a mutilated passage, says the 
 charge was de vi. 
 
 2^ Op. />•» Rab. Posth. 4, 9 ; pro Cluent. 53, 147 quid C. Orchivii peculatus, 
 quid mea de pecuniis repetundis ? 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 37 
 
 that these assumptions are erroneous and that the entire story 
 is not a mere mosaic of isolated facts pieced together capri- 
 ciously from many sources, but is a consistent and coherent 
 narrative, in spite of some unimportant chronological diver- 
 gences, such as the enumeration of the Ciceronian speeches 
 preceding the Catilinian,^^ and one undoubted efi^rjfia which 
 gives a fanciful explanation of Sura, the cognomen of Lentulus 
 (c. 17). 
 
 But if so, the question at once arises, whether Tiro may not 
 have been Plutarch's fons primarius, at least for this strictly 
 historical portion. 
 
 That his narrative was based upon a Latin authority may 
 perhaps be inferred from the occurrence of an evident Latinism 
 in c. 14 which seems to have escaped observation. It is the 
 phrase tov? irpa'yij.dTwv Kaiv&v i(f>iefj,6vov<;, which is exactly 
 equivalent to the idiom novanim renim cupidus or rebus novis 
 sticdere. The expression is exceedingly common in Greek, 
 but it seems to be always used with the comparative^' The 
 only way to escape from the conclusion to which this remark- 
 able departure from a well-established usage leads would be the 
 assumption that the Latinism might have occurred in Cicero's 
 
 26 The " orationes consulares," according to Cic. ad Att. II. i, 3, followed in 
 this order : Two speeches de lege agraria, de Othone^ pro Rabirio^ de proscriptd- 
 rum Jiliis. Plutarch merely omits the fourth, and puts the last of these in 
 first place. As they all belong in one year, the error is not very serious. 
 Again, when Cicero in 63 B.C. defended Otho's lex theatralis, its author may 
 well have been praetor (c. 13), although the law was passed in his tribune- 
 ship, in 67 B.C. The fact, however, that he is called Marcus, which was the 
 praenomen of the emperor, instead of Lucius, if not a slip of the pen on the 
 part of Plutarch himself, would certainly point to a source later than the reign 
 of Nero. 
 
 2^ e.g. Herod. VII^ 6 vear^pav ipyav iwidv/xriTTJs Xen. //ell. V. 2, g veari- 
 poiv ^iriBv/wSiiTes irpay/JidTav, and similarly veaTepl^eiv. The only exceptions 
 which I have been able to find, in spite of a long and diligent search, occur in 
 Dio Cass. XXXVII. 50, curiously enough also in the account of the Catilinian 
 conspiracy : hmvusp ad Tore itpayixaToiv iTn.8vfir]Tds, and in Plut. Atit. 9 I'^wx 
 irpay/iiTuv 6pey6p£ms, but both, these passages were undoubtedly based upon 
 Latin authors and the former, in particular, is not surprising in an author who 
 exhibits so many Latinisms as Dio Cassius. 
 
38 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 vTr6fj.vr]fjia rfj'; vTraTeia<;, but this solution of the difficulty must 
 be rejected on the strength of the following passage in Cic. 
 ad. Alt. I. 19, 10 : cormnentarium consulatns met Graece 
 coinpositiim vtisi ad tc, in quo, si quid crit quod homini Attico 
 minus Gj'aecum eruditiimque videatur, non dico quod tibi . . . 
 Lucullus de suis historiis dixerat, se quo facilius illas probarct 
 Romani hominis esse idcirco Barbara quaedam et aoXoiica dis- 
 persisse. Apud nic si quid erit eiusmodi me imprudente crit 
 ct invito. It is not likely that the man whose cognomen was 
 Atticus would have allowed the aoX.oi.Kov in question to pass 
 unnoticed. 
 
 The numerous differences between the Greek narrative 
 and Cicero's speeches, and the distinctly derogatory remark 
 in c. 19 already discussed, are, in my judgment, as incom- 
 patible with the assumption of direct indebtedness to Tiro's 
 biography as we found them irreconcilable with a first-hand 
 knowledge of Cicero's writings bearing upon this subject. 
 
 The 24th chapter, which constitutes a sort of sequel to the 
 preceding story, leading up to the long string of Ciceronian 
 facetiae collected in c. 25-28, is perhaps the most instruc- 
 tive efi^Xrjfia in the entire biography, for in no other chapter 
 is there such an ostentatious array of authorities, and yet 
 nowhere is the second-hand character of the information more 
 easily demonstrable. 
 
 Plutarch begins by saying that Cicero's excessive self- 
 laudation and the exaggerated estimate which he, with nau- 
 seating reiteration, placed upon the achievements of his con- 
 sulship^^ disgusted many and exposed him to attack. The 
 fact is notorious and has found epigrammatic expression in 
 Seneca.^^' But that the effect here attributed to Cicero's self- 
 praise, however repugnant it may have seemed to some later 
 
 ^* Cp. also the still more emphatic censure of this failing in Comp. Dem. et 
 Cic. c. 2. 
 
 23 de brev. vitae 5, I, quotiens ilium ipsum consulatum suum non sine causa 
 sed sine fine laudatum detestatur. Dio Cass. XXXVIII. 12 expatiates on the 
 subject with his usual anti-Ciceronian bias. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 39 
 
 Romans, reflects any actual contemporary feeling, must be 
 seriously questioned, in view of the entire lack of a modest 
 self-restraint , which the ancients habitually exhibit when 
 speaking of their own achievements. 
 
 Nay more, the very phrase which follows : to, ^i^Xia reXev- 
 Tav KaTeTrXrjo-e ical to, avyypdfifA.aTa seems to me to reveal a 
 /a(er source, in that the juxtaposition of the two substantives 
 would be intolerably tautological, unless we assume that the 
 collocation was occasioned by the post-Augustan use of liber 
 in the sense of oratio^ crv^'ypdiJi.iJLaTa ^^ appropriately designat- 
 ing the other scripta of Cicero. And, as a matter of fact, we 
 find that of the numerous illustrations of Cicero's readiness 
 to praise not only himself but others as well, which Plutarch 
 introduces by the words a5? Ik t&v a-vyypafi^ndTCDv Xafielv 
 ecTTi, not one, so far as we can still make out, occurs in an 
 oration. The phrase itself, of course, no more proves that 
 Plutarch had himself laboriously selected all these examples 
 from the works of Cicero ^^ than the statement of Tac. 
 Germ. 5, est videre apud illos argentea vasa, points to the 
 author's personal presence in Germany. 
 
 The same conclusion must be drawn from the confident and 
 sweeping statements contained in the succeeding words of 
 this same chapter : tSv Se fieydXav xal davixacnSv eiraCvaiv 
 oh TroXXwx^ov^ 'x^pTJrai irepl tov avSpov and again t(Sv Se Kar 
 avTOV ivSo^av . . . ovk eariv ovSek, ov ovk ewoliqcrev ivSo^orepov 
 rj Xeycov 17 ypdcjxov eufievm<; ■wepl eKdcTTov. For if we were 
 to accept the first on Plutarch's own responsibility, it would 
 
 ^'' Cp. my note to Tac. Dial. 3 (p. 70) and Landwehr in Archivf. lat. Lexic. 
 VII pp. 223-235. 
 
 31 It is the very term which Cicero himself used for his essays and dialogues. 
 Cp. &ii Ati. XVI. 6, 4, ex eo (sc. volumine prooemioram) eligere soleo, cum 
 aliquod a&yypaixtxa institui. 
 
 3^ The words immediately following TroXXi 5'aiTov Kal diro/ivrifioiicljova-iv (sc. 
 0! ircpi ^mipoivos ypcifaPTes) may, indeed, have been intefntionally inserted here 
 to forestall such an inference, for they are not necessary to the context. 
 
 53 Some twenty eulogistic references to Demosthenes occur in Cicero's 
 extant writings, and they are widely scattered at that. 
 
40 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 involve an absolutely exhaustive knowledge of the opera omnia 
 of Cicero, such as but few Romans could ever have boasted 
 of, while the latter assertion would at the same time imply a 
 most profound acquaintance with the posthumous reputation of 
 the individuals in question, such as the Greek biographer cer- 
 tainly did not possess. Nevertheless scholars have had no 
 scruples in attributing all these items concerning Plato, 
 Aristotle, Theophrastus, and Demosthenes, as well as the 
 information based upon the letters to Herodes, Gorgias, 
 Pelops, and the young Cicero, to Plutarch's perusal of the 
 original passages, though some are not averse to accepting an 
 intermediary source, such as Tiro, as a possible contingency. 
 But that Plutarch was indebted for this learned digression to 
 some later authority — the chapter reminds us of Suetonius 
 at every turn — is made evident by the allusion to certain 
 pedantic critics of Cicero,^ who took him to task for a dispar- 
 aging remark concerning Demosthenes, found in his Letters, 
 probably in one addressed to Calvus.^^ Plutarch refutes these 
 obtrectatores Ciceronis by reminding them that they forget 
 to cite or intentionally ignore the fie'yaXoi ical Bavfiaarol 
 (iiraivoi 06? TToWaT^oj) ^pr/rai irepi rov avhp6<i. Unless all 
 signs fail, we possess in this defense a faint echo of the liter- 
 ary controversies of later scholars, of which Aper's attack 
 upon Cicero in the Tacitean Dialogus may furnish an illustra- 
 tion. This seems to me at least to be a more reasonable sup- 
 position than to assume that Tiro had taken occasion to free 
 
 ^ Such as Didymus e.g., against whose attack upon Cicero, it will be remem- 
 bered, Suetonius a hundred years later wrote a separate treatise. Cp. also 
 Tac. Dial. c. 12 plures hodie invenies qui Ciceronis gloriam . . . detrectent 
 and my notes ad loc. (p. 153). 
 
 35 The reference seems to be to the lost correspondence of Cicero with 
 Calvus and Brutus, cited by Quintilian and Tac. Dial. 18, 21 f., where see my 
 note p. 204. That the letter was addressed to Calvus I am inclined to infer 
 from the vagueness of the allusion 7rp6s Tiva twv cTaipuv eSijKev ^i- iwuTToKri 
 ypd\fias, for if it had been written to the "well-known " Brutus, his biographer 
 would probably have said so, as in c. 43. Calvus's name occurs nowhere in 
 Plutarch and was presumably unknown to him. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 41 
 
 his hero of a charge, in reality too trivial and unjust to be 
 dignified by serious refutation. 
 
 Having already discussed the sources of c. 25-27, we may 
 now turn to what may be called the Clodian Episode, in 
 c. 28-35. It is the other .long and continuous narrative 
 which, together with the account of the Catilinian Conspir- 
 acy, takes up one half of the entire biography. Here, as 
 there, our sources of information are unusually full and varied, 
 for, besides the works of Cicero, Appian ^^ and, above all, Dio 
 Cassius ^^ have devoted considerable space to the narrative of 
 these stirring times. To them we should add the more or 
 less incidental discussions and references in Asconius Pedianus, 
 Plutarch's Caio Mm., Crassus, Pompey, Caesar, and Suetonius's 
 Life of Caesar, not to mention other more scattered allusions. 
 Finally, of accounts now no longer extant, those of Tiro and 
 Livy were probably the most valuable and exhaustive. 
 
 Plutarch's narrative, though full of details,- is, with few 
 exceptions to be noted presently, in remarkable agreement 
 not only with the testimony of Cicero, but also with that of 
 Dio, who, in the story of the Clodian episode, on the whole 
 exhibits a sympathetic attitude toward the orator, in striking 
 contrast with the almost Mommsenian hostility displayed 
 toward him elsewhere in his history. This circumstance 
 finds its only plausible explanation in the assumption that he 
 did not hate Cicero less but Clodius more, and hence did 
 not hesitate to base his account upon a writer who, though 
 kindly disposed toward Cicero, appealed to him because of 
 the exhaustive character of his treatment. Now Plutarch's 
 account is no less eulogistic, and, in at least one instance, 
 relating to Cicero's timid conduct in the Milonian affair 
 (c. 35), clearly apologetic. This attitude, taken in connection 
 
 86 Bell. Civ. II. 14-16. 20-22. 
 
 87 XXXVII. 45 f. 51 ; XXXVIII. 10-17. 18-30 (Philiscus's speech to console 
 the exiled Cicero); XXXIX. 6-1 1 (the return of Cicero). 13-24 (Clodiana); 
 XL. 44-57 (Clodius and Milo). 
 
42 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 with the unflattering role assigned to Terentia in c. 29 and 30, 
 naturally suggests the probability that here at all events 
 Tiro's biography was closely followed by Plutarch ; for even 
 the one unqualified censure which he directs against the 
 unmanly conduct of Cicero in exile (c. 32) would not militate 
 against this assumption, inasmuch as the author of the Par- 
 allel Lives may have designedly inserted so well-deserved a 
 criticism,^^ in order to point the contrast with the laudable 
 demeanor of Demosthenes under similar circumstances.^^ 
 But the abundant evidence already adduced of Plutarch's 
 independence of Tiro in cases where we should expect him 
 to have been consulted above others, and the undoubtedly 
 unhistorical statement that Terentia's jealousy, caused by her 
 husband's alleged relations with the notorious Clodia, eventu- 
 ally led Cicero by way of exculpation to make an enemy of 
 her equally profligate brother, a story which a Suetonius, 
 we may be sure, would have seized upon with avidity — these 
 considerations, I maintain, render Plutarch's indebtedness to 
 Tiro for the Clodian episode far less plausible than it might 
 seem on superficial analysis. But if any concrete confirma- 
 tion of this view be thought necessary, it will be found in 
 certain items dealing with Cicero's exile which either contra- 
 dict the explicit testimony of Cicero or are objectionable on 
 other grounds ; for I regard it as self-evident that Tiro could 
 not have erred in matters of detail with which he must have 
 been as familiar as his patron. 
 
 Thus, we read in Plut. c. 32 that Cicero was forbidden to 
 take shelter eyro? yuCKiwv'^ irevTaKoa-iaiv 'IraXta?, whereas we 
 
 ^8 Certain curious resemblances between Plutarch and Dio may show that 
 while the consolatio of Philiscus is undoubtedly a rhetorical composition of Dio 
 himself, many of its ideas were not of his own invention. 
 
 ^^ Cp. also Covip. Dem. et Cic. 4. 
 
 *' An evident Latinism, as may be observed in passing. Dio Cass. XXXVIII. 
 17, 6 practically agrees with Plutarch, when he says rpurxMovs re yip Kal 
 €wraKO(Tlov$ Kal TrevrriKQVTa (TraSiovs vir^p ttjv ''Pdifi-riv VTrepiapicrdri (= ultra 
 CCCCLXVIII millia passuum Roma exulare iussus est). 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 43 
 
 learn from Cic. ad Att. III. 4, iti qua (sc. rogatione) ei'at 
 ciiismodi ttt mihi ultra quadrmgenta milia liceret esse. 
 Again the statement ev 8' 'iTrwrnvioi, -n-oXei t^? AevKavCa<;, rjv 
 Ovi^wva vvv KaXova-iv, Ovt^i,o<;, Et/ceXo? avijp, who had been 
 greatly benefited by Cicero, oIklo, fnev ovk iSe^aro, when 
 compared with ad Att. I.e. a Vibone . . . subito discessimiis 
 . . . statim iter Brundisium contuli . . . ne et Sicca, apud 
 quein eram, periret, reveal an amazing confusion which cannot 
 be accounted for satisfactorily, if Tiro was Plutarch's source, 
 for the two passages unquestionably relate to the same inci- 
 dent. In the first place, Vibo is a town of Bruttium, not of 
 Lucania, and it was so called in Cicero's day. An individual 
 Vibius, a Sicilian, nowhere occurs in Cicero's works ; on the 
 other hand. Sicca, an old friend, had an estate at Vibo, and he 
 received the exile kindly. Finally, it were passing curious,. 
 if one Vibius had lived in a town Vibo which, according to 
 Plutarch's explicit albeit demonstrably erroneous informa- 
 tion, had not at the time in question borne that name ! In 
 all likelihood this Sicilian owes his existence to Vibo or one 
 of its inflected forms being taken for the name of an 
 individual. The description of Cicero's departure from 
 Brundisium, his landing at Dyrrhachium, the portents 
 which followed, their interpretation by ol yuavriicoi, whose 
 opportune presence is as miraculous as the a-rj/xela them- 
 selves, — all these items not only constitute, as the Xeyerai 
 indeed foreshadows, an eix^iqixa of different origin from 
 the preceding, but, what is still more important, none of 
 them are found in Cicero's itinerary as given in his 
 Correspondence. 
 
 The brief paragraph which follows (c. 36) deals with 
 Cicero's proconsulship in Cilicia. It is written in a tone of 
 panegyric, and with the exception of two statements, one of 
 which is significantly introduced by Xeyerai, substantially 
 coincides with the extant utterances of Cicero, the closing 
 sentence making, indeed, the impression of a direct paraphrase 
 
44 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 from one of his letters.*^ Still, as this was written 
 from Rome Jan. 4, 49, after Cicero had been on Italian soil 
 again since Nov. 24, 50, it is incredible that Plutarch had 
 capriciously selected a brief note to Tiro merely to borrow a 
 metaphor, while he overlooked the earlier and more important 
 letters to Atticus (e.g. VII. 4. 5), in which the writer with 
 equal confidence predicts the Civil War. But if the second- 
 er third-hand character of Plutarch's information needed any 
 further confirmation, it would be furnished by the immediately 
 preceding allusion to Cicero's facetious reply to the request 
 of Caelius to send him some panthers ; for not only does the 
 answer not strictly coincide with the Latin original, ^^ but, 
 what is far more significant, the orator's well known corre- 
 spondent is styled Caecilius,^'^ an amusing blunder which 
 Plutarch cannot, of course, have found either in Cicero's 
 letters or in Tiro, their editor. 
 
 The brevity and incidental character of the narrative of 
 the Civil War, from its beginning to the proscription of 
 Cicero (c. 37-47), was naturally due to the fact that through- 
 out this period Cicero, with the memorable exception of the 
 last year of his life, was condemned to complete political 
 inactivity or played but a subordinate role, Pompey, Caesar, 
 Brutus, Antony, and finally Octavianus occupying simultane- 
 ously or successively the center of the historical stage. The 
 
 *l e/s TT\v irbXiv iiravijXdeVy tjStj tCiv irpayfidrajv wtrirep virh (f>\ey^0V7Js 
 d<pL<7Tap^vuv iirl rbv ifji,<pij\iov Tr6\e/jMv = adfam. XVI. II, 2 (addressed to Tiro) : 
 ego ad urbem access! . . . sed incidi hi ipsam Jlavimani civilis discordiae vel 
 potius belli. 
 
 *^ Cp. 7/)ci0et 7rp6s a.\nhv oiiK eivat. TrapSaXeiS iv'K.L\iKlq^ Tre^evyivaiy&p els 
 Kapiav dyavaKrot!/(7as, Htl p.6yat TroKep-ouvrai, TrdvTwv elp-fivqv kx^vruiv and Cic. ad 
 fam. II. II, 2,de pantheris . . . agitur mandatu meo diligenter, sed mira 
 paucitas est et eas quae sunt, valde aiunt queri quod nihil cuiquam insidiarum in 
 mea provincia nisi sibi fiat ; itaque constituisse dicuntur in Cariam ex nostra 
 provincia decedere, sed tamen sedulo fit et in primis a Patisco. 
 
 *3 That Ke/ciXfou is not here, as occasionally elsewhere, e.g. Comp. Deni. et 
 Cic. c. I, 14, a mere slip of the pen for KeXiou or KaiXfou, is made evident by 
 the addition toO prjTopos which clearly identifies him with the famous critic, 
 a younger contemporary of Cicero. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 45 
 
 fascinating story of the death struggle of the Repubhc was 
 told by many illustrious writers whose material, after passing 
 through various channels, found its way into Plutarch's Lives 
 of the protagonists. Only the biographers of Cicero would, 
 therefore, have had any motive or occasion to pay particu- 
 lar attention to his part in the conflict which preceded the 
 assassination of Caesar. Accordingly the chapters under 
 notice are chiefly devoted to the man Cicero, to his personal 
 traits and domestic affairs, only so much of the history of 
 the times being given as was essential to an adequate under- 
 standing of his conduct. Hence also the anecdotal and 
 digressive character of these paragraphs, one entire chapter 
 (c. 3 8) being taken up, as we have seen, with the witticisms of 
 Cicero in Pompey's camp,** favorable*^ and unfavorable*^ criti- 
 cisms standing amicably side by side. Some of these items 
 are not found elsewhere in extant sources, a comparatively 
 late origin being, moreover, highly probable in most of them. 
 Thus the pleasant story (c. 40) — it is introduced by 
 Xe'7eTat — of the effect of Cicero's eloquence upon Caesar in 
 the case of Ligarius, told with circumstantiality of detail and 
 in Plutarch's best style, is undoubtedly a later embellishment, 
 as may be seen from a comparison with Cicero's own account ;*" 
 for if Caesar's deep emotion had actually manifested itself in 
 the manner related by Plutarch, the orator would hardly have 
 confessed his inability to describe it. In the Greek, Caesar 
 
 ^* Cp. Cic. Phil. II. 16, 39 ne de iocis quidem respondebo quibus me in cas- 
 tris usum esse dixisti etc. 
 
 *^ e.g. c. 39, 22 fit. ; 45, 26 ff. 
 
 16 e.g. c. 38, 32 f. ; 39, I ff. ; 41, i ft.; 42.8 ff. ; 43. 4^-; 45. H «• 12 ff-; 
 46, 17 ff. 
 
 *' ad fam. VI. 14, 2 (to Ligarius): non solum ex oratione Caesaris quae 
 sane mollis et liberalis fuit, sed etiam ex oculis et vultu, ex multis praeterea 
 signis quae facilius perspicere potui quam scribere, hac opinione discessi, ut 
 mihi tua salus dubia non esset. It is liard for us moderns, who read the pro 
 Ligario in cold print, to realize the emotional effect which it is said to have 
 produced, for that it was a much admired oration is also confirmed by Cic. ad 
 Att. XIII. 12, 2. 19, 2. 
 
46 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 had fully made up his mind in advance to condemn Ligarius 
 at all hazards, in the Latin speech he is represented as having 
 been amenable to the pleas of mercy from the start. *^ Again, 
 when Plutarch says re'Xo? Se roov Kara ^dpcraXov d-^a/jLevov 
 Tov pijTopo<; dydovwv i/CTraOrj yevofievov TLVaydrivac t5> aco/jiaTi 
 etc., neither he nor the author of the story can have had the 
 extant speech before them, for the only direct allusion to the 
 battle (which, at least to modern feeling, does not even rise 
 to any great heights of pathos) occurs at the beginning rather 
 than at the end ! ^^ Finally, rov yovv avdpcoTrov (nreXvcre t?)? 
 alTia<; ^e^iaa fievo<;, unless interpreted as an acquittal on 
 the spot, would spoil the effect of the anecdote ; and yet, 
 according to Cicero, Caesar reserved his decision, though the 
 advocate left the court room convinced of the ultimate 
 triumph of his client. 
 
 The determination of the sources in the closing chapters, 
 which briefly touch upon events of the Civil War, does not 
 fall within the scope of this investigation, as it involves the 
 far larger question concerning the authorities which Plutarch 
 followed in his Lives of Caesar, Pompey, Antony, Brutus, 
 and Cato Minor. 
 
 The patient reader who has followed my analysis so far 
 will, I hope, have carried away the conviction that all the 
 evidence is strongly against the universal assumption of 
 Plutarch's direct indebtedness to the numerous authorities 
 belonging to the Ciceronian or early Augustan period ; that, 
 in other words, neither the works of Cicero nor the Catiline 
 of Sallust nor the biography of Tiro nor the history of Livy, 
 to mention only the most important, furnished him, at first 
 hand, with any of the material accumulated in his life of the 
 orator. But the foregoing examination has at the same time 
 
 <8 Cp. also ad fain. VI. 13, 2 (to Ligarius) : non fore in te Caesarem 
 duriorem, nam et res eum cotidie et dies et opinio hominum et, ut mihi 
 videtur, etiam sua natura mitiorem facit. 
 
 ^^ In § 9, there being 37 in all. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 47 
 
 given abundant positive proofs that numerous details must, 
 for one reason or another, be assigned to a post-Augustan 
 origin, a contingency which Sibinga had timidly suggested 
 in one or two instances, while Leo and Schwartz both seem 
 to imply that the authors whom they postulate as Plutarch's 
 principal source belonged to the same period. 
 
 X^ But however strong the foundation may be upon 
 which, as I believe I have shown, the above conclusion is 
 based, we cannot as yet rest satisfied with it. We must still 
 inquire, whether it be not also possible to give to this post- 
 Augustan authority of Plutarch " a local habitation and a 
 name." 
 
 If we carefully survey the passages in question, his charac- 
 teristics will combine into the following picture : He was a 
 scholar of exceptional erudition who had an exhaustive first- 
 hand knowledge of the entire literature on his subject, who, 
 though a warm admirer of Cicero, was impartial and objec- 
 tive enough not to exclude such unfavorable criticisms of his 
 hero as he met with in his sources. He was extremely 
 fond of anecdotes, scandalous gossip, and 'bons mots,' a firm 
 believer in dreams and prodigies as premonitions of the future. 
 Not over punctilious in matters chronological nor imbued 
 with a desire to distinguish with scrupulous care the true and 
 the false, he did not weigh the validity of conflicting evidence, 
 everything being grist that came to his mill. Of a philological 
 turn of mind, he had a predilection for certain details and loved 
 to dwell upon the literary manifestations and intellectual char- 
 acteristics of the individuals whose careers he had set himself 
 to describe. Finally, he must have lived sufficiently far removed 
 in time from Cicero to account on the one hand for the acciden- 
 tal discoloration of many incidents in the orator's life and for 
 the erroneous interpretation of many facts, the usual result of 
 a dimmed historical perspective, and, on the other, to allow for 
 the ivy-growth of biographical fiction, the inevitable penalty 
 which great men pay to posterity for the boon of immortality. 
 
48 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 Now there is unquestionably no known scholar of the 
 imperial age who so perfectly fulfills all the above conditions, 
 none whose method of work, no less than the character of 
 whose information, would be more likely to have attracted 
 the author who professed to write Lives not Histories, than 
 Suetonius Tranquillus. And if we further add that he not 
 only wrote a defense of the orator against an attack of 
 Didymus,^ but also a Life of Cicero, the conclusion, that many 
 of the items in Plutarch which have been shown to be post- 
 Augustan were taken directly from this work of his con- 
 temporary, will acquire a very high degree of probability. 
 It will become all but certain, however, if we finally succeed 
 in establishing this indebtedness, so far inferred on internal 
 grounds alone, on the basis of a number of passages in other 
 Latin authors indubitably taken from the Suetonian biography.^ 
 
 1 Cp. Amm. Marcell. XXII. i6, i6, Chalcenterus Didymus . . . qui in illis 
 sex libris ubi nonnumquam imperfecte [locutum] Tullium reprehendit, sillo- 
 graphos imitatus scriptores maledicos, iudicio doctarum aurium incusatur ut 
 immania frementem leonem putidulis vocibiis canis catulus longius circumla- 
 trans ; and Sitidas s. v. Tpa7/ci5\Xos: itepl rijs KiKipiovos TroKtreias /3i/3X/oi/[(i] • dvrtK^- 
 yci di Aidi/iiii. See also the discussion in Mace, Essai sur Siietone pp. 284-287. 
 
 ^ See my paper in the Transact., esp. pp. 151-158. Its results have been 
 accepted by Christ, Griech. Literal!^ p. 652 note i ; 653, note 7, and Mace, Essai 
 sur Sultone p. 244. 411. Other scholars who have had occasion to touch upon 
 the sources of Plutarch's Cicero have ignored the article. Willrich I.e. p. 36-38, 
 though he devotes a chapter to Suetonius, remains, in consequence, in blissful 
 ignorance of the true state of affairs, as do Leo and Schwartz (11. cc). Their 
 conclusions, however, deserve quotation on other grounds. The former (p. 165) 
 says : " Die Biographie ist einheitlich gearbeitet, von einem Manne angelegt der 
 Tiro und wenigstens einen anderen Biographen Cicero's, Cicero's Memoiren 
 und Briefe und, ausser anderem, historische Gewahrsmanner heranzog und 
 seinen Standpunkt zwar auf der Cicero freundlichen Seite nahm, aber die 
 Gegner zu Wort kommen liess und selbst tadelte. Plutarch war es gewiss 
 nicht, nennen konnen wir ihn uicki," and Schwartz p. 602 : " Der plutarchische 
 Gewahrsmann war kein Politiker und kein Historiker grossen Stils, es war ein 
 sehr belesener I'edant, der keine Lesefrucht umkommen liess und aus Gutem 
 und Schlechtem, aus Sallust und Cicero, sowie aus der Pamphlet- und Klatsch- 
 litteratur ein buntes Mosaik zusammenfiigte, das bald werthvolles Detail, bald 
 gleichgiltigen Kleinkram, bald giftiges Gerede zu einem seltsamen Bilde 
 vereinigte." My own characterization above, though independently drawn 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 49 
 
 I refer, in particular, to the items on Roman Literature in S(. 
 Jerome's additions to the Chronicle of Eusebius and to the 
 anonymous treatise de viris illustribiis, usually printed with 
 the Caesares of S. Aurelius Victor and attributed in the 
 majority of MSS. to Pliny the Younger, while the scholars 
 of the Renaissance, chiefly it would seem misled by the title, 
 identified it with its famous namesake.^ St. Jerome's obliga- 
 tions to Suetonius are universally admitted, but it does not 
 appear to have been noticed that, whatever the other sources 
 of the de viris illustribiis may have been,* its eighty-first 
 chapter at all events, which deals with the life of Cicero, was 
 also drawn from the same fountain, though, like the rest of 
 the treatise, it has come down to us only in a horribly epit- 
 omized form. I base this conviction not so much upon the 
 identity of the titles or even upon the circumstance that 
 Suetonius' s de viris illustribiis no less than his Caesares were 
 demonstrably pillaged by later historians who had occasion to 
 treat of the same topics,^ but rather upon the numerous 
 coincidences existing between the anonymous writer and 
 admittedly Suetonian fragments,^ in particular those passages 
 
 up, agrees in all essential particulars with the two sketches just cited. I was, 
 therefore, all the more surprised to find that Suetonius had not sat for the por- 
 trait so well painted by the two Gottingen scholars. Suetonius had, indeed, 
 drunk deeply from pure historical fountains, but at the same time he would 
 cast his dragnet far into the murky and polluted waters of tradition, and its 
 rich haul was no less palatable to him. Cp. also, Peck, Suetonius' Lives of 
 Caesar and Augustus, New York 1889, p. x: He can only accumulate with 
 patient industry a vast number of details. Nothing is too unpleasant, nothing 
 too personal to be left unrecorded. He pins a scandal and adds it to his col- 
 lection, as a naturalist would a butterfly, but at the same time he does not 
 dwell upon these matters. ^ Cp. Mace I.e. p. 344. 
 
 * H. Peter, Die geschichtl. Literal, etc. II. pp. 367-372. In spite of what 
 has been written on the subject, the identity of the author of the unepitomized 
 original and Aurelius Victor, the author of the Caesares, is a by no means 
 improbable contingency. The indebtedness of Victor to the Caesares of 
 Suetonius is well established. Cp. Peter I.e. II. 356 ff. 
 
 5 Mace I.e. p. 401-420; Peter I.e. IT. 35. 
 
 8 E.g. de vir. ill. 2 = Suet. p. 318, 4 Rf. ; id. 3, 2 = id. p. 319, 2 ; id. 5, i = 
 id. p. 320, 5. 
 
50 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 concerning Cicero which the Anonymus and St. Jerome 
 have in common. 
 
 X"^. Remembering then that both these writers were 
 ahke indebted to Siietonius's de viris illustribus, we may 
 now turn to c. 3 of Plutarch's biography, a paragraph, 
 be it observed, so perfectly coherent, that it must needs 
 have been taken in its entirety from one and the same 
 source. 
 
 Now this passage contains at least two errors. The one con- 
 sists in the implication that the pro Roscio Amerino was the 
 earliest speech of Cicero, whereas it is known that he made 
 his oratorical debut with the/r^ Quinctio in 81 B.C., in the 26th 
 year of his age, the former belonging to the next year.^ As 
 St. Jerome gives the correct date, it might be argued that 
 Plutarch did not here follow Suetonius ; but this inference is 
 neutralized by the second error, to the effect that Cicero 
 after the Roscian trial left for Greece fearing the anger of 
 Sulla, though he alleged ill health as the cause for his sudden 
 departure. This statement flatly contradicts the facts of 
 history, for so far from leaving Rome out of any dread of 
 the dictator the young orator remained in the 'city for nearly 
 two years more, delivering in the meantime at least two 
 .trpeeches, one for L. Varenus and another in behalf of a 
 
 ^ That Plutarch did not purposely ignore the pro Quinctio, as relating only 
 to a causa private, is made clear by the fact that the very same error, as Gellius 
 jV. a. XV. 28, I informs us on the authority of Asconius Pedianus, was shared 
 by Cornelius Nepos and Fenestella : in librorum primo quos de vita illius 
 (sc. Ciceronis) composuit (sc. Nepos) errasse videtur cum eum scripsit tres et 
 viginti annos natum pvimum iudicii publici egisse Sextumque Roscium . . . 
 defendisse. In qua re etiam Fenestellam errasse Pedianus Asconius animad- 
 vertit quod eum scripserit sexto vicesimo aetatis anno pro Sextio Roscio 
 dixisse. Longior autem Nepotis quam F'enestellae error est nisi quis vult in 
 animum inducere Nepotem studio amoris et amicitiae adductum amplificandae 
 admirationis gratiae quadriennium suppressisse ut M. Cicero orationem floren- 
 tissimam dixisse pro Roscio admodum adulescens videretur. Cicero himself 
 makes no distinction between the two causae, where he speaks of his first 
 oratorical efforts. Cp. in Verr. II. 2, 65, 159, turn primum nos ad causas et 
 privatas et publicas adire coepimus. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 51 
 
 woman of Arretium.^ It must be perfectly clear that such 
 a calumny, or, if you will, misunderstanding, cannot well have 
 arisen until post- Augustan times ; and when I add that there 
 are but tivo authors, besides Plutarch, who are guilty of the 
 same misstatement, namely Hieronymus and the AnonyniJis^ 
 the conclusion that all three are equally indebted to Suetonius's 
 vita Ciceronis will be irresistibly forced upon us,* the more so 
 as palpable errors shared in common often furnish a safer clue 
 to interdependence than coincidences in matters of fact. 
 
 Plutarch's remarks concerning Cicero's father in c. i, as 
 the ovSei' r]V irvdecrdai fierptov and the ol fxev — ol Se indicate, 
 must have been based upon an author who was wont to collect 
 such traditions, leaving the reader to select what suited his 
 fancy ; on the other hand, the calumny involved in iv Kvacfieiq) 
 Tivl Kal ryeveffdai Kol Tpa(f>7Jvai tov avhpa excludes contem- 
 porary biographers and historians.^ The whole passage has, 
 
 2 Cp. esp. ad Att. I. 19, 4 Arretinos quorum agrum Sulla publicarat neque 
 diviserat, in sua possessione retinebam ; pro Caec. 33, 97, (de eadem causa) at- 
 que hoc et contra dicente Cotta et Sulla vivo iudicatum est; Brut. 91, 314, 
 sed cum censerem remissione et moderatione vocis et commutato genere 
 dicendi me et periculum vitare posse et temperatius dicere, ut consuetudinem 
 dicendi mutarem, ea causa mihi in Asiam proficiscendi fuit. Itaque cum 
 essem bie7inium versatus in causis et iam in foro celebratum meum nomen 
 esset, Roma sum profectus. 
 
 3 Hieronymus : Roscio contra Chrysogonum defenso Cicero Athenas secessit 
 et inde post triennium Romam regreditur ; de viris illust. 81 : Adolescens 
 Rosciano iudicio eloquentiam et libertatem suam adversus SuUanos ostendit 
 ex quo veritus invidiam Athenas studiorum gratia petivit. It will be also 
 noticed that all three authors speak of Athens or Greece {els t^v 'EXXdSa) as 
 Cicero's immediate destination, whereas he expressly says that it was Asia. 
 
 * That no injustice is done to Suetonius by ascribing to him a slanderous 
 statement of this nature is made evident by Suet. lul. 4, composita seditione 
 civili, Comelium Dolabellam . . . repetundarum postulavit; absolutoque 
 Rhodum secedere statuit et ad declinandam invidiam et ut per otium et requiem 
 Apollonio Moloni darissinio tunc dicendi magistro operam daret (cp. Plut. c. 4 
 and above p. 17). All the circumstances here afford an admirable parallel to 
 the passage of Plutarch, and the motive given for Caesar's departure is as 
 similar as it is unquestionably false. 
 
 6 The same reproach is made by Calenus ap. Dio Cass. XLVI. 4, but this 
 rhetorical invective could at best be only an echo of some contemporary 
 
52 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE, OF CICERO 
 
 in fact, the true color Suetonianus ; and that this impression 
 is not purely subjective is again shown by two passages in 
 Hieronymus and the Anonymus** concerning Cicero's alleged 
 royal descent, the statement being also found in Plutarch, 
 but nowhere else in extant sources,^ while the name of the 
 orator's mother and that of Herennms as one of the murderers 
 of Cicero ^ are preserved only in St. Jerome and Plutarch. 
 
 We have already seen that c. 4 could not have been taken 
 from an early authority and it was intimated that Suetonius 
 may well be made responsible for it. This hypothesis will be 
 rendered all but certain by the following consideration. At 
 the close of the chapter, Plutarch relates that Apollonius 
 (Molo), after listening in sullen silence to a Greek oration 
 which Cicero had delivered amid the applause of his fellow 
 pupils, finally, instead of also praising the effort, cried out 
 that he pitied the fate of Greece, in that culture and eloquence, 
 the only glory which still remained to her, would now also be 
 transferred to Rome.^ This anecdote is nowhere even alluded 
 to by Cicero ;i° there is, indeed, but one other reference to it 
 
 slander which did not in any case reach Plutarch directly from such remote and 
 early sources. 
 
 ^ Hieronymtts : M. Tullius Cicero Arpini nascitur Helvia, patre equestris 
 ordinis ex regio Volscorum genere; de vir. ill. 8i : M. Tullius genere Arpinas 
 patre equite Romano natus genus a TuUo Attio rege duxit. 
 
 ' Unless, indeed, we except Sil. Ital. Pun. VIII. 406, Regia progenies et 
 TuUo sanguis ab alto ; XII. 175, Clarum Volscorum TuUi decus. Its origin 
 may be due to a jesting remark of Cicero, Tusc. I. 16, 38, Pherecydes Syrius 
 . . . antiquus sane; fuit enim meo regnante gentili. Cp. Brut. 16, 62, ut si ego 
 me a M'. Tullio esse dicerem qui patricius cum Servio Sulpicio consul anno X 
 post exactos reges fuit. 
 
 * In view of the numerous extant accounts, this is a very significant 
 parallelism. 
 
 ^ A similar story is told of John Reuchlin and his teacher Argyropolus. 
 Cf. Raumer, Gesch. der Paedag. I. 65. 
 
 1' That it was, in fact, unknown to him appears from Brut. 91, 316 : ibi me 
 ad . . . Molonem applicavi ... in notandis animadvertendisque vitiis . . . 
 prudentissimum. Is dedit operam (si modo id consequi potuit) ut nimis 
 redundantes nos et superfluentes . . . reprimeret et quasi extra ripas diffluentes 
 coerceret. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 53 
 
 ia extant sources, and curiously it is found in none other than 
 in the vita of the Anonymus, who mentions it, moreover, in 
 precisely the same connection, for after speaking of Cicero's 
 studies at Athens (cited above) he continues as follows : 
 Inde eloquentiae gratia Asiam, post Rhodum petiit, ubi Molo- 
 nem . . . magistrum habuit qui flesse dicihir quod per hunc 
 Graecia eloquentiae laude privaretur. In view of the inter- 
 dependence between the Anonymus, Plutarch, and Suetonius 
 already established, this parallelism must be regarded as add- 
 ing but another link in the chain of evidence for Plutarch's 
 direct indebtedness to Suetonius's vita Ciceronis}^ 
 
 Plutarch's statement (c. 46, Xe^erat) concerning the alleged 
 reluctance of Octavian to sacrifice Cicero leads to the same 
 conclusion. This transparent fiction, designed by apologists 
 to clear the founder of the empire of one of the darkest 
 stains in his entire career, is first met with in a famous pas- 
 sage of Velleius,'^^ though it doubtless did not originate with 
 him. Thereafter, excepting Plutarch, I have been able to find 
 but two passages which imply a knowledge of this apology, for, 
 strange as it may seem, neither Appian nor Dio make any 
 allusion to it.^^ The one occurs in our anonymous vita : cum 
 triumviros se fecissent Caesar, Lepidus Antoniusqice concordia 
 
 11 An incidental remark in Suet, de rhet. i, Cicero ad praeturam usque etiam 
 Graece declamitavit, Latine vero .senior quoque et quidetn cum consulibus 
 Hirtio et Pansa, may show that he was not likely to have neglected a discus- 
 sion of Cicero's rhetorical studies in his biography. 
 
 12 II. 66, I, repugnante Caesare sed frustra adversus duos, instauratum 
 Sullani exempU malum, proscriptio. Nihil tam indignum illo tempore fult 
 quam quod aut Caesar aliquem proscribere coactus est aut ab uUo Cicero pro- 
 scriptus est etc. 
 
 13 Unless App. B. C. IV. 51, ^s dnoXoyiav ttjs 'Kmipavot iKdSjeas . . . vvaTov 
 (sc. &Tr4(prive t6v vibv rod KiK^puivos) be so construed. Their silence may either 
 have been due to their well-known hostility to Cicero which blinded them to 
 the reprehensibility of Octavian's conduct, or, what seems more probable, their 
 sources were still ignorant of this particular attempt to whitewash the emperor. 
 Livy's famous comment can, of course, be interpreted only as a quasi justifica- 
 tion of Antony. Cp. Liv. ap. Sen. Suas. VI. 22, quae (sc. mors Ciceronis) vere 
 aestimanti minus indigna videri potuit quod a victore inimico (sc. Antonio) nil 
 crudelius passus est quam quod eiusdem fortunae compoti fecisset. 
 
54 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 iwn aliter visa est inter cos iungi posse nisi Ticllins necarctiir, 
 the other in — Suetonius Aug. 27, in quo (sc. triumvirato) 
 restitit qnidem aliquamdiii collegis tie qua fieret proscriptio 
 sed inceptani utroque acerbius exereuit. The latter statement 
 is thereupon substantiated by numerous illustrations, whereas 
 the tradition of Augustus's previous reluctance is allowed to 
 stand by itself. This circumstance would be most plausibly 
 explained by the assumption that Suetonius had already dis- 
 cussed it elsewhere ; but this was most appropriately done in 
 his narrative of the death of Cicero, the most noted victim of 
 the proscription. 
 
 In the light of these passages, pointing as they all do in 
 one and the same direction, another fact which a comparison 
 between Plutarch and the anonymous vita reveals now at once 
 assumes a peculiar significance. The latter contains thirty-six 
 items of information. Of these all are met with in the Greek 
 narrative, 1* and, with two exceptions, in the identical chrono- 
 logical order}^ As an isolated observation, this, coincidence 
 
 " See Appendix II. 
 
 15 Qaaestor — Aedilis — Praetor Ciliciam latrociniis liberavit — Consul. If 
 the italicized sentence were sound, /rac/u;- would be absurd and the chronolog- 
 ical sequence of events, otherwise strictly observed throughout, rudely destroyed. 
 Two solutions of the difficulty suggest themselves, (a) Some words like fuit 
 eodein tempore quo Pompeius dropped out after praetor, the temporal coinci- 
 dence being sufficiently close (67, 66) to have caused the two to be mentioned 
 together, particularly as Cicero's praetorship was not marked by any conspicu- 
 ous achievement, (b) The allusion is to Cicero's proconsulship in Cilicia, in 
 51 B.C. This is rendered probable, because otherwise all reference to his victo- 
 rious campaign would be wanting. It is also not without significance that 
 Plutarch and the Latin vita would here again alone coincide, in that both speak 
 of Cicero's iusta victoria as a defeat of a band of robbers. If so, the words 
 Ciliciam etc. may have been accidentally omitted, then placed in the margin, 
 opposite Siciliam, owing to its graphical similarity to Ciliciam. Subsequently 
 they intruded into the text in the wrong place, causing a conflation of two pas- 
 sages, but the resulting blunder was not noticed, because the retention oi praetor 
 did not disturb the regular sequence of the cursus honorum. Whether the con- 
 fusion was due to a later scribe or to the epitomator, whose condensation of the 
 original has here, in fact, been so merciless as to leave little more than bald 
 chapter-headings, I do not venture to determine. — The other disagreement 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CI'CERO 
 
 ss 
 
 would possess no argumentative validity whatever ; but when 
 it is taken in connection with the preceding discussion, the 
 inference that the anonymous vita and Plutarch's biography 
 were alike based upon Suetonius will appear not merely 
 plausible, but unavoidable and convincing. 
 
 X<=. So far we were compelled to invoke the aid of authors 
 under demonstrable obligations to Suetonius to prove Plu- 
 tarch's indebtedness to him. In the following passage an 
 extant utterance of Suetonius himself will, I hope, enable us 
 to reach the same goal, although the road to it is a long one 
 and obstructed with difficulties. I refer to the Dream of 
 Cicero, related at length and with picturesque details by Plu- 
 tarch in c. 44. It is a digression, abundantly marked as such 
 by an iBoKei, a cJ? eoiKe, and a (j>a(Ti in two places. While Pom- 
 pey and Caesar were still alive, the orator dreamed that the sons 
 of senators had been summoned to the Capitoline hill, Jupiter 
 intending to choose from out their number the future ruler of 
 Rome. They all passed in review before him, whereupon he 
 selected one boy, and, taking him by the right hand, said : 
 "This one, O Romans, as your ruler will put an end to the 
 Civil Wars." Going down to the Campus Martius next day, 
 among some boys at exercise Cicero's eyes fell first of all 
 upon the very lad whom he had beheld in his dream. Amazed 
 at this, he inquired about the boy's parents and learned that 
 he was the son of one Octavius, a man not of noble descent, 
 and of Attia, and that Julius Caesar was his uncle. By a 
 curious coincidence also he was born in the very year of 
 Cicero's consulship.^ These circumstances prompted him to 
 
 occurs in a digression in c. 20. Plutarcii there says that Cicero at an early date 
 suspected Caesar of monarchical designs ; the same prescience is attributed to 
 him in the viia, but in connection with the Clodian episode. The only other 
 extant writer to confirm this is- — Suetonius (Caes. 14) who cites a letter of 
 Cicero to that effect. See note to text (§ 46^). 
 
 1 Suet. Aug. 94 and Dio Cass. XLV. 2, in placing the birth of Augustus 
 not only in the same year, but on the very day and hour of the famous senate 
 meeting which decided the fate of the conspirators, show that the synchronistic 
 
56 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 pay assiduous court to the youth, and at a later period they 
 were alleged as the reason, or rather the pretext, for Cicero's 
 efforts to win the favor of Octavianus. 
 
 Now the question as to Plutarch's authority for this story, 
 granting that it originally came from the living lips of Cicero 
 and was not a transparent fiction ex evenUi, might appear on 
 first glance to be most satisfactorily answered by Tertull. 
 de anima c. 46, M. TuUius Cicero civilium turbinum cultorem 
 de soinnio ^ narrat quod m vitae illius coinmentariis conditum, 
 particularly as Plutarch expressly quotes these very Memoirs 
 in one place ^ and evidently alludes to them in another pas- 
 sage* of his biography of Cicero. And yet, even if we were 
 to admit, what is after all extremely doubtful,^ that Plutarch 
 himself perused the thirteen books de vita siia^ the statement 
 that Octavian's father was twv ovk ayav iiri(f)ava)v cannot 
 well have been taken from this source, although the emperor 
 did not, like some of his panegyrical biographers, trace his 
 descent back to Tarquinius PriscusJ The real difficulties 
 
 method, so dear to the ancients, had as yet lost little of its fatal fascination, 
 Cp. Veil. Pat. II. 36, I, consulatui Ciceronts non mediocre adiecit decus natus 
 eo anno divus Augustus, and above p. 31^. 
 
 2 Cp. also Suet. Au^. 91 somnia neque sua neque aliena de se neglegebat. 
 
 3 Cpitip. Dim. et Cic. 3, 6 Katcap kv to?s 7rp6s 'A.'yplinrav Kai MaLKTjvav 
 VTroixvrjixatriP eiprjKev. 
 
 * Cic, 45 tjjfj.o\6yci S^ Katcrap auros ws . . . XP'H^^'-'^^ "^V KiK^pw;*©? iv S4ovtl 
 <j>i\apxig-- Cp. also Plut. Brut. 27, 41 ; Ant. 20, iv Tois iiroiivfiixatriv. 
 
 ^ Cp. H. Peter, Die Biographien etc. p. 136 f. 
 
 ^ Suet. Aug. 85, aliqua de vita sua quam tredecim libris, Cantabrico tenus 
 bello (27 B.C.) nee ultra exposuit. 
 
 ' Suet. Aug. 2 f. Sed haec alii (Plut. Cic. I, oJ 5^ d$ TiJXXov "Attiok a.va.-^ovaiv) : 
 ipse Augustus nihil amplius quam equestri familia ortum scribit vetere ac 
 locuplete et in qua primus senator pater suus fuerit (a.irb% 76 y.'tiv Y^iKipav etc.). 
 M. Antonius libertinum ei proavum exprobrat, restionem e pago Thurino, avum 
 argentarium (= oi ii^v yap iv Kva(f>€iip tlvI Kal yev^ffdai Kai TpafpTjvai rdv &v8pa 
 \(yovaiv). Nee quidquam ultra de paternis Augusti maioribus repperi (raCra 
 p.iv oSv . . . IcTTiprjTai). C. Octavius pater a principio aetatis et re et existima- 
 tione magna fuit (0 n^vroi irpwros iK rod yivovs 'KtK^piov iirovo/xaa-Oeis &^los \6yov 
 doKei yeviffdai etc.) ut equidem mirer hunc quoque a nonnullis argentarium 
 . . . proditum. I have cited this paragraph in extenso to show the remarkable 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 57 
 
 begin, however, when we examine the two other references to 
 this incident, preserved in Suetonius and Dio Cassius. It will 
 be necessary to cite them in full. 
 
 Suetonius Aug. 94 : quoniam ad haec ventum est, non ab re 
 fuerit subtexere quae ei prius quam nasceretur et ipso natali 
 die ac deinceps evenerint, quibus fiitura niagnitudo eius et 
 perpetua felicitas sperari animadvertique posset.^ . . . Quo 
 natus est die, cum de Catilinae coniuratione ageretur in curia 
 . . . vulgata res est P. Nigidium . . . affirmasse dominum terra- 
 ruin orbi natum? ... Q. Catulus post dedicatum Capitolium 
 duabus continuis noctibus somniavit : prima, lovem Optimum 
 Maxirnum e praetextatis compluribus circum aram ludenti- 
 bus imum secrevisse atque in eius sinum rem publicam quam 
 manu gestaret reposuisse ; at insequenti animadvertisse se 
 in gremio Capitolini lovis eundem puerum, quem cum detrahi 
 iussisset, prohibitum monitu dei, tamquam is ad tutelam rei 
 publicae educaretur; ac die proximo obvium sibi Augustura, 
 cum incognitum alias haberet non sine admiratione contuitus, 
 simillimum dixit puero de quo somniasset. Quidam prius 
 somnium Catuli aliter exponunt, quasi luppiter compluribus 
 praetextatis tutorem a se poscentibus, unum ex eis demons- 
 trasset ad quem omnia desideria sua referrent, eiusque 
 osculum delibatum digitis ad os suum retuHsset. 
 
 M. Cicero C. Caesarem in Capitolium prosecutus somnium 
 
 family likeness between it and the opening chapter of Plutarch, which has 
 already been proved on independent grounds to have been based upon 
 Suetonius's vita Ciceronis. Here, as in the case of Augustus, evidently Trepi 
 ToO 7raTp6s oihiv ^v irvBiadai. fxirpuiv. Cf. also Suet. Vitell. I, Vitelliorum 
 originem alii aliam et quidem diversissimam tradunt, partim veterem et 
 nobilem, partim vero novam et obscuram atque etiam sordidam etc.; Vesp. 1. 
 
 8 Suetonius never loses an opportunity to report such predictions. Cp. also 
 Serv. ad Aen. VI. 799, Suetonius ait in vita Caesaris (in the now lost opening 
 chapter) responsa esse data per totum orbem nasci invictum imperatorem, 
 and Suet. Vesf. 5. The similar passage in Plut. Cic. 2, t% Si rireri ^do-fia SokcI 
 ■yev4<T6a(. Kal TrpoaireTv ws 6(j>e\os li^ya ira<n 'Pw/ialois iKTpecjioiari etc. has, there- 
 fore, like the rest of the paragraph, a strong Suetonian flavor. 
 
 9 It will be observed that the birth of Octavian in the year of Cicero's con- 
 sulship is in Plutarch referred to in close connection with the dream. 
 
58 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 pristinae noctis familiaribus forte narrabat: puerum facie 
 liberali, demissum e caelo catena aurea, ad fores Capitolii con- 
 stitisse eique lovem flagellum tradidisse ; deinde repente 
 Augusto viso quern ignotum plerisque adhuc avunculus 
 Caesar ad sacrificandum acciverat, affirmavit ipsum esse 
 cuius imago secundum quietem sibi obversata sit. 
 
 Dio Cass. XLV. 2 after relating four of the five 'prodigia' 
 given by Suetonius, including the prediction of Nigidius, 
 likewise continues with the story of the dreams : 
 
 IIat8io"«oii re avTOv ovto? Kal ttjv SiaTpi^rjV ev rfj 'Poo/irj 
 TTOLOVfievov eSo^e iroTe 6 liiKepcov ovap, aXvaea i Te avrov 
 ypvaal'i e? to T^aimdXiov e« tov ovpavov KaOiixrjaOai Kal 
 fidariya irapa tov Ato? el\r](j)evai • Kal (oy yap r)7rCaTaT0 
 oo"Ti? rjV) TrepieTV^e re avTip t?5? vcrT£pai,a<; ev avrw tu> J^atrirw- 
 Xt'o) Kal yvoopiaa^ avrov BirjiyijaaTO rot? Trapovcri. rrjv oyjriv. 6 re 
 KaTo{)Xo9, ovh' avrot; rrov empaKW'i rov 'OKraoviov, ivofjuLae 
 row TraiSa? iv T0t9 vttvoi'; rov<; evyeveh Trdvra<; ev ra 
 KaTTtTcoX/a) TrpoaoSov ttjOO? tov Aia TreTroirjadai Kal iv avrrj 
 rov deov eoKova rivd rrj<; 'Vu)p,r)'i e? rov eKelvov koXttov 
 ifijSe^XTjKevai. eK7r\ayel<; Se iirl rovrco, avrjXBev e? ro 
 aaTTircoXiov rrpoaev^ojMevo'i ra> Oeq> ■ Kal eKel rov 'OKraoviov 
 evpcov d'XXa)? ava/Se^rjKora, ro re etSo? avrov tt/jo? ro ivvirviov 
 7rpo(Tijpfi,o(7e Kal rrjv aKrjdeiav rfj'; 6-\^e&)? eySe/SatcocraTO. He 
 then proceeds, again precisely as in Suetonius, i" /xerd rovro . . . 
 rrjV re eaOrjra rfjV dvSpiKrjv evSvvro'i, 6 ')(^i.raiv irepteppdyr] re 
 eKarepwdev drro rSiV eTray/jLLBmv Kal P'S-^pi rwv irohSiv Kareppvrj. 
 rovro avro fiev Kad' eavro ov'^ OTTtu? reKfJi,apaiv riva, (109 Kal 
 dyaOov Tt irpoarj/jialvov, €cj)epev, dXXd Kal rivlaae row rrapov- 
 rai. . . . etreXdov he rep 'OKraovtm elirelv, on. ro a^tco/xa ro 
 ^ovXevriKov rrdv vrro row iroSa^ /xov (T'^'tjcrco . . . e^ ovv rov- 
 rwv 6 K.alaap fieydXa iir' avra> iXiriaa'; . . . eTrl rr)v dp')(r)v -rjaKei 
 
 ^^ Aug' 94, Sumenti virilem togam tunica lati clavi, resuta ex utraqiie parte, 
 ad pedes decidit. Fuerunt qui interpretarentur non aliud significare, quam ut 
 is ordo cuius insigne id esset quandoque ei subiceretur. . . . Another mira- 
 cle is related, and then : illo et praecipue ostento motum Caesarem ferunt, ne 
 quern alium sibi succedere quam sororis nepotem vellet. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 59 
 
 Kal TrdvO' eaa TrpocrijKec t&) fxeWovTi Ka\bi)<; . . . TrfKiKOvrov 
 Kpdro'i hioiKrja-eiv vTrdp')(eiv, dKpi^w<; i^eTrai'Sevcre. 
 
 Dio, as is generally admitted, handles his borrowed material 
 with considerable freedom, expanding or condensing to suit his 
 purpose ; accordingly we meet with some items in the above 
 narrative which he could not have found in Suetonius, although 
 the coincidences between them are otherwise remarkably close 
 and numerous. Now, unless we are prepared to regard all 
 the accretions in question as emanating from Dio himself, the 
 resemblance just pointed out must be attributed to a common 
 third source, such as the @eoXo 70 u/iei^a of Asclepiades Mendes 
 perhaps, whom Suetonius expressly cites as one of his authori- 
 ties, for it cannot be denied that the story of the dream might 
 also have found an appropriate place in such a work. The 
 further inference, however, that Plutarch may be likewise 
 indebted to this " a-vva'yai'^rj Oavfiacrmv," since all direct obliga- 
 tions to Augustus's vTrofivij/^ara are out of the question, must 
 be rejected the moment we analyze the passages in Dio, Sue- 
 tonius, and Plutarch a little more closely. In the first place, 
 it must be noted that the account of the last named differs in 
 essential particulars and in the very setting from the narra- 
 tive of the others. Then again, Plutarch omits Catulus alto- 
 gether, though some of the details of Cicero's dream are 
 incorporated by Suetonius and Dio in the dream which they 
 attribute to Catulus, Dio, moreover, to make matters worse, 
 in his turn combining some features of both dreams. 
 
 Tertullian unfortunately fails to inform us how the orator's 
 dream was related in the emperor's Memoirs, ^^ nor can we 
 gather from his silence that no mention at all was made of 
 the similar experience of Catulus. Now, as Suetonius demon- 
 strably made a most extensive use of Augustus's autobiography 
 
 11 Perhaps TertuUian's reference to Augustus as the man destined to put an 
 end to the civil wars, the very prediction in which the vision of Cicero culmi- 
 nates, may point to the Memoirs as the ultimate source of Plutarch ; for in the 
 other versions the civil wars do not figure at all. 
 
6o SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 and yet tells an essentially different story, two possible 
 solutions suggest themselves. Either Plutarch, through an 
 oversight or intentionally, substituted Cicero for Catulus who, 
 if known to him at all, may have appeared too unimpor- 
 tant an individual for his purpose, or else Suetonius related 
 the anecdote differently in his Cicero and in his Augustus. 
 In the one, following some such authority as Asclepiades 
 or lulius Marathus,^ he gave it as we read it in the extant 
 biography; in the other, adopting the version of Augustus's 
 own narrative, he told it as we find it in Plutarch. I believe 
 that the latter alternative more accurately represents the 
 actual state of affairs, a conviction confirmed by the remark 
 of Suetonius I.e. Qtcidam firms somniuni Catuli aliter exponunt 
 etc. For, just as we here learn that Catulus was credited with 
 two dreams on the same subject during successive nights, but 
 that tradition varied as to the contents of the first, so we may 
 plausibly conjecture that a dream which some attributed to 
 Catulus was by others assigned to Cicero, and that the latter 
 version had been accepted by Suetonius in his Life of Cicero 
 and thus transmitted to Plutarch; the interval of time which 
 separated the two Latin biographies, as well as the various 
 sources consulted by Suetonius, being quite sufficient to 
 account for the divergences in question. 
 
 X'i. Having thus established Plutarch's indebtedness to 
 Suetonius's vita Ciceronis with the aid of the Suetonian mate- 
 rial still extant, we shall now be methodically justified in 
 assigning to the same source those portions of Plutarch's 
 biography for which in a majority of instances we were com- 
 pelled on internal grounds to assume a fiost-Augtistati origin, 
 provided they at the same time clearly exhibit the well-known 
 characteristics of Suetonius. 
 
 Now the items which completely satisfy the aforesaid con- 
 ditions are above all those pertaining to the fiersonal or strictly 
 
 ^^ Cited by Suet. I.e. as one of his sources. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 6l 
 
 biographical traits of Cicero ^ for which, as we have seen, Tiro 
 had hitherto, though on insufificient grounds or positively 
 erroneous surmises, been regarded as the fons primaries of 
 Plutarch. To be more specific, I maintain, and I hope the 
 preceding discussion has justified the claim, that the following 
 topics were taken by Plutarch directly from Suetonius's vita 
 Ciceronis: 
 
 The information concerning the parentage, the name (c. i), 
 the birth and the early youth of Cicero, the statement about 
 his poetic effusions (c. 2 and 40), the criticism passed upon 
 them (c. 2), the entire contents of c. 5, the stray notes on 
 Cicero's property (c. 5. 6) and on the state of his health (c. 8). 
 Furthermore, the learned digression concerning Cicero's self- 
 glorification and eulogy of others (c. 24), the alleged origin of 
 his feud with Clodius (c. 27), the philological comment on 
 Cicero's merits in enriching the Latin language by the coinage 
 of philosophical terms (c. 40) and the remark on Cicero's design 
 to write a Roman History (c. 41), the story of his matrimonial 
 troubles (c. 41), and finally the narrative of his proscription and 
 assassination (c. 46-49). 
 
 That the important events in the career of Cicero which in 
 Plutarch are intimately associated with his forensic activity, 
 such as the trial of Verres, the attack upon the agrarian 
 legislation of Rullus, the affairs of Manilius and Milo, also 
 received adequate treatment at the hands of Suetonius goes 
 without saying. Now, as the Greek author in all these 
 instances did not, as we have shown, draw from the original 
 fountain, the inference, that he here too had recourse to the 
 same authority whom he followed so extensively elsewhere, will 
 not be rejected as intrinsically improbable. 
 
 1 That a few of these may have reached Plutarch through oral channels or 
 may represent the gleanings of his own casual reading, whether reproduced 
 from memory or from his notebook, is all but certain (cp. e.g. c. 6. 49, 3 TrvvBd- 
 voixai etc.), especially in the case of anecdotal topics. But the material collected 
 from such quarters could not have been sufficiently extensive to invalidate the 
 above contention. See p. 4. 
 
62 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 For the strictly historical events, in particular the Catilinian 
 conspiracy, I am rather inclined to postulate some post- 
 Augustan authority whose attitude was distinctly favorable to 
 Cicero and who was in possession of all the contemporary 
 sources on the subject, but who made no attempt to reconcile 
 the manifold differences or traditions which had arisen in 
 the lapse of time. The Clodian episode on the other hand, 
 though also of one piece and hence not to be distributed 
 among several sources, may well have been treated in Sueto- 
 nius ; at least, the story of the origin of the feud and the r61e 
 assigned to Terentia (c. 29), as well as the account of the exile 
 and the return of Cicero, are quite in his manner, not to 
 mention that Plutarch quite fails to grasp the deeper political 
 significance of events, but merely chronicles, again mo7'e 
 Suetoniano, the bald facts. 
 
 On the basis of two passages of Aulus Gellius ^ and Ser- 
 vius,^ Reifferscheid has with considerable ingenuity attempted 
 to vindicate to Suetonius a work, entitled Historia belloruin 
 civilium, which comprised the events from Pompey's defeat 
 of the pirates {67 B.C.) to the battle of Actium (31 b.c). 
 This history, which, according to the same scholar, was also 
 consulted by Dio Cassius and St. Jerome, would thus prac- 
 tically have included the entire career of Cicero, and as such 
 might have been Plutarch's source for the historical portions 
 just discussed, as well as for those relating to the Civil War 
 proper (49-31), in which case Suetonius would have been 
 relieved of the necessity of treating the same occurrences at 
 length in his Life of Cicero. This enticing theory, however, 
 stands and falls with the initial hypothesis of Reifferscheid. 
 But, as he has unfortunately utterly failed to establish its 
 
 ^ A''. A. XVI. 4, 4, Eundem Bassum Suetonius Tranquillus praepositum esse 
 a M. Antonio . . . Parthos tribus ab eo proeliis fuses scribit, eumque primum 
 omnium de Parthis triumphasse et, morte obita, publico funere sepultum esse. 
 
 ^ ad Verg. Georg. IV. 127, per transitum tangit historiam a Suetonio memo- 
 ratam. Pompeius enim victis piratis Cilicibus partim ibidem, partim in 
 Giaecia, partim in Calabria agros dedit. 
 
SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 63 
 
 verisimilitude,* no inferences of any value can be drawn from 
 it for the solution of the problem before us. 
 
 There is no reason to believe that Suetonius treated of 
 these events at any greater length in his Life of Cicero, they 
 being more or less incidental to it, than Plutarch felt called 
 upon to do, particularly as historical narrative was not Sueto- 
 nius' s forte. There would, therefore, be no obstacle to the 
 assumption that Plutarch here too was content to follow in 
 the footsteps of the Roman biographer, were it not for the 
 fact that the other Lives alluded to above (p. 41 . 46) prove that 
 he had secured and utihzed an exhaustive account of the Civil 
 Wars, it being unlikely that this was as yet unknown to him 
 when he composed his Cicero which preceded them in time.^ 
 
 But be this as it may, we shall at any rate be justified in 
 contending on the strength of the foregoing analysis that 
 Plutarch did not consult at first hand any of the works of 
 Cicero or any pre-Augustan authorities, such as Sallust, Tiro, 
 or Nepos, but that the vita Ciceronis of Suetonius constituted 
 "^V!, principal source. In fact, I feel convinced that if the last 
 named were extant we should discover that their interdepend- 
 ence was essentially similar to that which obtains between 
 Plutarch's Coriolanus and the corresponding narrative of 
 Dionysius, whom the biographer followed even in those cases 
 where an eVtoi' ^aaiv would naturally suggest some other 
 sources of information. 
 
 * The entire question has been fully dealt with by Mace, Essai sur Suetom 
 
 PP- 346-354- 
 
 ^ On the chronological sequence of Plutarch's Lives, see Michaelis, de ordine 
 vitarum parall. Pliitarchi, Berlin 1875. The vita Ciceronis is later than that 
 of Sulla ; but as this, according to c. 21, cannot have been published before 
 115 A.D., we have a terminus post quern for the Life of Cicero. Now Plin. 
 Epist. V. 10 (105 A.D.), as is generally admitted, alludes to the de viris illus- 
 tribus of Suetonius, and asks him not to withhold them any longer from the 
 public. There will, therefore, be no chronological difficulty in the way of 
 Plutarch's indebtedness to this work, even if we agree with Mace I.e. p. 66-72 
 on so late a date as 113 a.d. for its appearance, particularly as all of its five 
 parts were not necessarily issued together. 
 
APPENDIX I 
 
 EXPLANATORY NOTE 
 
 The division of the Greek text into paragraphs and sub-paragraphs is 
 designed to distinguish more clearly than is done by the traditional chapter- 
 numbers the constituent parts into which the biography may be resolved. 
 
 The foot-notes do not aim to give an even adequately complete Source 
 Commentary, but are chiefly intended to refute by an accumulation of 
 examples the opinion now generally held, and discussed in the preceding 
 pages, that Plutarch directly consulted the works of Cicero or any other 
 contemporary authority, such as Sallust, for biographical purposes. 
 
 The more important passages are cited under two rubrics. Those 
 under (A) designate substantial agreement with Plutarch, those under 
 (D) disagreement in whole or in part. 
 
 All source-references in the text are spaced. 
 
 The text is that of Sintenis, with the following exceptions : 
 
 c. 2, 5 S. vf'^pq- ■ ■ Ka.\avdCip exhibits a hopeless confusion, primarily caused 
 by Plutarch's misreading novas for nanus. Ka^anddv is probably an 
 explanatory gloss due to a misunderstanding of an(e die-m III. Nonas^ 
 the month having been omitted. Seec. 2 note 4. The soundness of 
 the text can ' be vindicated only on the supposition that PI. followed 
 the Greek method of reckoning and that novae Kalendae was used 
 for the Kalends of January, but for this I can find no evidence. 
 
 c. 4, 17. fcai TroKk-f) is bracketed because the words contradict c. 3, 29, 
 T) tpufTi TToWi) liiv Koi dyad^. The double iroWd (11. 18, 19) is probably 
 responsible for the addition. 
 
 c. 5, 23. The absurd cotr^o-as has been changed to vo-ficas. See my note, 
 Class. Rev. XIV (1900) p. 62. 
 
 c. 7, 25. 'Bipprjv yap . . . KaXoOtrii' clearly belongs after ei^i) 6 Kunipuv. 
 
 c. 23, 22. IkcIvwv with some MSS. for ixehov, for the i^ovala of thepraeior 
 Caesar and the tribune Cato was not la-q. 
 
 c. 29, 16. I have introduced my emendation iia, KoriJWoi; for 5ia TiJXXou. 
 Compare Amer. Jour, of Phil, XI pp. 316 ff. 
 
 2u7/cp. 1, 4. I write KaiXfou for KexiXfou, but retain the latter reading, 
 though equally erroneous, in c. 36, for the reasons given on p. 44. 
 My thanks are due to my friend and colleague Prof. Wm. N. Bates for 
 his kindness in reading the proof of these pages. 
 
 Feb. igo2. A. G. 
 
 6S 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 1. I. KtKcpoJvos Si TTjv jj-iv fjLYjTipa' A.e'yoi)trtv EA./3iai/ Kai yeyovevai 
 KaXSs Kai /SijiiuiKei'ai. Htpl Si Tov irar/DOS ovSiv r)V TrvdtcrOai /xiTpiov. 
 O I fiiv yap Iv Ki/a<^eta) ^ nvl Kal yevitrOai koI Tpa.(f>rivai tov avSpa 
 Xiyovcriv, ol 8' eis TvXXov "Attlov avdyovai. ttjv apx/jv tov yevovi, 
 /iaaiXevcravTa Xa/Airpcus iv OuoAovctkois ' Kai TroXe/XTJa'avTa Pu)/xatoi5 ovk 
 dSvvaTfos. 
 
 2. O fxivTOi TTptaTO^ Ik tov ywov^ KtKepwv €7rovo/xao"pets agt05 Xoyou 
 SoKEi yevio'Oai, 8t6 t^v iTTLKX-rjcnv ovk aweppiipav ol /x£T aiiTOV, dAA' 
 ^(TTTacravro, Kaiwep vtto ttoAAcuv xkeva^o/jLivrjV. H-iKepa yap oi Aarivoi tov 
 ipcjSivOou KaXovct, KaKctvos €v roJ TripaTi r^s ptvos otaoroXT^v, a>s cotKcv, 
 d/x^Xeiav «X'V, uxnrtp ipe/iCvdov Siacjiw^v, a<f> ^s CKTi^craro r^i/ €7r(uvu/xtav. 
 Autos ye /x^v KiKepiuv, VTrcp ov TaSe ydypaTTTai, twv ^iXiav avrov 
 olofjiivw Sciv, OTE irptoTov ap^Tjv /u.£T7j« Kai iroXtTtuxs ^TTTtro, <j>vyeiv tov- 
 vo/ia Kai p-eraOiaOai, XcyeTai veavtcvo'd/xei/os eiTreiv, As dyojvteiTat tov 
 KiKcpwva tuv "SiKavpuiV Koi tG)v KdrXcuv evSo^oTepov awoSel^ai. Tap-LEvtov 
 8 €v ^tKcXt'a Kai Tots pcoLS avdOrjpAi -Trotov/Acvos apyvpovv to. pkv irpSiTa ovo 
 tC>v ovo/xdrojv CTreypai/^c, tov t€ MctyaKov Kai tov TrXXtov, dvTi 8i tov TpiTov 
 CTKMTrTcov ipijiivOov eKeXevcre irapa to. yp6.p,paTa tov TtyyCTTjV IvTOptvo'ai. 
 TaiJTa piv ovv mpl tov ovopaTos IcTToprjTai. 
 
 Jan. 3, 3. II. Te^^vat oi KtKepoJva Xeyovo"tv dvwovvtos Kai (ZTTOvtos Xo^ev- 
 
 106 B.C. ,„„ v</ / - , IT \ S- ± i ' ■^ - 
 
 feto'T^s avTOv tt/s /at^TjOos ^//.epa TpiT'q Toiv v€o>v JVaAavoajvjj ev t) vijv ot 
 ap^ovTes eii;!(0VTat Kai ^vouo'tv VTrep toC ^y£;u,ovos. 
 
 TiJ 8e TiTdrj (fxj.o'pxi. SoK€i yaivjQai Kal irpoetirctv ois 6<j)cXoi p,eya Trao"! 
 'Poj/Aatots iKTp€<j)ova'rj. 
 
 TaiJTa 0€ dXXcos oveipaTa Kal (j>Xvapov ilvai SoKovvTa Ta^c'ojs a^Tos 
 dniSeiie. pavTiuiv aXrjBivqv ev ■qXiKia. tov pavddvuv ytvop.tvo'S, 8i' cvcfivtav 
 iKXdpij/a'; Kal XaySwv ovopja koX So^av £v Tots TrataCv, wctt€ tovs TraTtpas 
 avTMv Ittk^oitSlv TOT'S SiSao-KaXtibis oi/'« t€ ^ovXopevovs iSetv tov KtKtpwva 
 Kai T^v vpvovpevrjv avTov wepl Tas paOrjcra'S 6$VTr]Ta Kal <jvvt(nv laTopqaat, 
 
 Passages quoted verbatim or discussed in the foregoing analysis are marked 
 •with an asterisk (*). 
 
 1 (A) * Hieron. in Euseb. Chron. Olymp. i68, 3(2). 
 
 2 (A) * Calenus apud Dio Cass. XLVI. 4, 2. 5, 3. 
 
 3 (A) * Hieron. I.e. ; de vir. illustr. 8i (Appendix II). (D) pro Mur. 8, 17. 
 * (D) Cic. ad Att. XIII. 42, 2, diem meum scis esse III. Nonas lanuarias; 
 
 VII. 5, 3, III. Nonas, natali meo ; Gell. N. A. XV. 28, 3. 
 
 66 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 6"] 
 
 Tovs 8 aypoiKoripovi opyL^io-Qai toTs vuo-lv opuivTaq iv rah oSois tov 
 Ki/cep(Dva IJ.€(T0V avTWv iirl Ti.p.fj Xap.(iavovTa^. 
 
 4. rtvd/x.ei'os 8', Za-Trep 6 TlXdrtov^ di lo i Trjv (jjiXofiuidrj Kal </>iXo- 
 ao<j>ov 4>v<nv, oios dcnrd^eo-Oai irav p-dO-qp-a koI p,rj&iv \6yov pr]8i ■jraiSetas 
 aTLpAQav eiSos, eppvrj tms Trpodvponpov iirl TroLifnKrjv. Kat' ri Kai iroirjpA- 
 TLOv €Ti. Traioos avToB Stao-uJ^CTai, IldvTtos rAavKOS, Iv TeTpapirpw Treiroirjp.i- 
 vov. Ilpo'ia)!/ 0€ T<3 X/"'*''!' '"^' '"'Oi^i^i^X'^Ttpov dTTTO/iei/os T^s Trepi TaBra 
 pova-rjs eoo^ev ov povov prJTtop, d\Xd Kal non/jTrji dpixrTOi uvai 'Ftapatav. 
 
 H p£v ovv iwL TTJ pTjTopLKy So^a pixpi vvv 8uxpivu, Kaiwtp ov piKpd'S 
 yeytvrjpevrji irtpi tovs Xoyov; KaxvoTopla.%^ tyjv Sk TroirjTtK-ijv avTov, woXXoiv 
 cv<j)voiv iiriyevopaiwv, Travrdwacnv d/cXe^ Kal dripov ^ Ippuv a-vp.l3c/3rjK(.v. 
 
 5. IIL ATToXXayel^ Si tmv iv iraicrl SuxTpt/8(uv $i Awvos ^kov(T€ tov 88 B.o. 
 i^ AKaST^/ietas,'' ov pdXicrra 'FaipMoi twv KAeiro/xdi^ov (ruv^^oJv kol Sm tov 
 Xoyov idavp/xo'av Kal 8td tov Tpcnrov rjydirvjcravj "Kpa 8e tois -rrtpl Mowtov 
 dv8pd(rt OTJi/wv* ttoXitikoi^ kol irpuiTCvovcn t^s /SovA^s eis epTrupoxv twv ^'^' 
 vopwv uiffieXeiTO • 
 
 6. Kat rtva ^ovov Kai (TTpaTeta^ peTeo')(ev vtto ^vAAa ircpi tov M-apatKov 89 B.C. 
 TToXepov.'' 
 
 7. Ei6 optuv CIS (TTao'iv, Ik 8e rijs (TTacrecos eis aKpaTov ip-iriiTTOvTa to. 
 TTpdypxLTO. piovap^WLV,'^ eiri tov c^oXao'Trjv Kal uetoprfTiKov iXOiov ^tov 
 'EAA?;o"t crvvriv ^lAoAdyots Kal 7rpo(reL)(t tois pjaBripucunv,^ "XP' °^ %vXXa,s 82 B.C. 
 iKpdTrj(T£ Kai KaToaTao'LV Tiva Xap^dvav tSo^ei/ ij ttoAis- 
 
 8 . 'Ev 8e T<o XP°^V ■'■ovTcu Xpvo'dyovos dfeAeu^epos SwAAa irpocrayyeiXa^ 
 TWO'S ovtriav ws £k Trpoypatjirjs dvaxptOivTO^ ^ avTos iwvyo'aTO 8«rx'At<ov 8i B.C. 
 Spa)(/jiwv. 'En-C6 8c PultTKios 6 vios Kat KXr/povopo's tov TtOvrjKOTO^ Vy"-' 80 B.C. 
 vdKTU Kal TYjv ovtriav aTrcSeiKwe 7revTj;K0VTa Kat 8taKOo't<oi' raAdvTwv ovcrav 
 d^tav,^" o re SwAAas iXey^fopevoi i^aXtTraive Kal Slktjv TraTpOKTOv!a<s iir^ye toj 
 
 1 (A) Plato d£ rep. V. 466. 2 (a) Cp. Tac. Dial. 19-23. 
 
 8 (A) Cp. Tac. Dial. 21, fecerunt enim et carmina . . . non melius quam 
 Cicero sed felicius quia Ulos fecisse pauciores sciunt, to which passage I have 
 collected the numerous corroborative criticisms (p. 235). 
 
 * (D) * Cic. adfam. XIII. 1,2. ^ (A) Cic. de amic. 1,1. 
 
 ^ (D) Cic. Phil. XII. II, 27, Cn. Pompeius, S. F., consul, me praesente 
 cum essem tiro in eius exercitu cum . . . duce Marsorum . . . coUocutus est. 
 
 ' (A) These events had been related at length in the earlier Life of Sulla. 
 
 8 (A) To this period belong the de inventione and the translation of Xeno- 
 phon's Oeconomicus. Cp. also Bi-tit. go, 308 ff. ; de off. II. 24, 87. 
 
 ^ (A) Cic. pro Rose. Am. 11, 32, occisum in proscriptorum numerum rettu- 
 listis; I, 1-4. 2, 5; Quint. XII. 6, 3, summis audientium clamoribus dixerit ; 
 Cell. N. A. XV. 28, 3, ilorentissimam orationem. 
 
 1" (D) Cic. I.e. 2, 6, duobus milibus nummum (=$75, not ty]°)'< 8, 21, 
 imprudente L. Sulla facta esse certe scio etc.; 9, 25. 38, no. 45, 130 f. 
 
68 APPENDIX I 
 
 ' PuKTKiu},^ Tov X.pvcroy6vov KaTacTKevdcravTO'S, i/SoyjOei 8' ovSeii, dk\ d?r£Tpc- 
 TTOVTO TOV SvAAa TTjv )(a.)i.eTr6TrjTa BeSoiKores, ovtw Stj St' iprjixlav tov 
 /jLeipaKiov Tw KiKCjOMVi ■7rpo(r<^uyovTOS ot <^tXoi (TVfX,Trap<i>pfi(x>v, ois ovk av 
 avT<S XajXTTporepixv aii^is a/j^V ""po^ Sd^ai/ eripav ovSe KaWio) y€vri(TOfH€vr]v. 
 'AvaSe^d/xevos ovv ttjv irvvqyoplav Koi KaTopdiixra's idavp.a.(T6rj '^ 
 
 9. SeSicus 8e rov SvAAav a.TrtSrjfj.r](rev eh ttjv 'EAAdSa,^ huunrupwi \6yov, 
 0)9 TOV (TM/xaTos aiT<3 OtpaTTtia^ Seop,ivov. Kai yap rjv ovtws ia^^voi Kai 
 dtrapKos, appacTTia (ttoim)^ov fJUKpa Koi y\i(T)(pa p.6yv; oi/'t t^s (opas Trpoa- 
 <j)ep6jjievo^ ■* yj 8e <f>uivrj ttoAA^ /tev Kat dyaOy, (7K\r)pa 8e Kat airXacTTOs, vtto 
 8e ToD Xoyov a<j>oSp6Tr)Ta. Kai ird^os €;)(Ovros del Sict rwv avo) tovoiv iXavvo- 
 l^-ivT) cfio^ov TTapiiyftv vtrkp tov crajyu.aros.'' 
 79-18 10. IV. 'Ae^tKOjaevos 8' £ts A^i^i/as 'AvTid;^ov tov ' K<TKa\ii>viTov Sirj- 
 Kovcre,^ Trj p,ev evpoia t£v Adycov avrov kol ^dpiTi KrjX.ovp.evo^, a. S' iv tois 
 Sdy/Aacrtv evecorepi^er ovk eTrati/oir. 
 
 11. "HSi; yap i^CiTTaTO t^s veas Xeyop.^vrj's ' AKaSrjp.iia's 6 AvTio^os kol 
 TTjV Kapv€d8ov ardcnv iyKaTfXuirtv, aTt Kap-TTTO/jLevos vwo t^s Ivapytlxvi koi 
 Twv aiaOrjaewv, sItc, oSs 4>acrLV ivioi, (piXorip-ux Ttvl kol Siac^opa Trpos 
 Tovs }i.X.eLTopA^ov Kai $i'Xa>vos crvvi^OeK tov ^Tw'iKov " €k yu.£Ta/3oX^s ^tpa- 
 Trevmv Adyov €v Tois irA.et'o'TOts. 
 
 12. O 8e KtKepwv exeiva yjydim KdKuvoL<s irpoaii^e. jxaXKov, Biavoov/xevo^, 
 et TravTaTraatv €/C7r€O"0t tov to. Kotva 7rpdo"0"ctv, 8evpo pi€T€veyKdp.evos tov /Biov 
 €K t^5 dyopas Kat r^s TroXtTcta? cv yjav^ia p.era <^i\ocro<\>ias KaTat,yjv.^ 
 
 7S B.C. 13. 'Ettci 8' avTO) SvAAas Te wpoa-qyyiXdr) TedvrjKuis, Kai to crmpa TOts 
 yu/Livatridts dvappojvvv/ievov tk i^iv 6/8dSi^e veai/iKT^v, ^ t£ tjnavrj Xap-fidvovcra 
 TrAdo'iv ijSeid jU.ei' Trpos aKoijv crc'^paTrro [xai iroXA.7^], p.tTpito'i 8c irpos T^v 
 €^tv rjpP'OO'TO TOV o"a>ji«XT09, TToAAct p.€v ToJi/ aTTo Pto/Aiys <^t Awv y pa<fi6vTil3V 
 Kai Seop-evoiv, TroXXa 8' 'AvTid^^ov 7rapaK£Xcvo;U,£i'0v tois koivois im^aXtiv 
 TTpdy/JLacTLV, avOn Sxnrcp opyavov i^i^pTve tov prjTopiKov Xdyor xat dvexiva 
 Tiyv ttoXltiktjv ovvap-tv, avTov tc rat^ p-eXeTat? 8ta7roi''.jv Kat T0V5 eiratvovpe- 
 vovs perimv p-qTopa'i. 
 
 1 See note lo, p. 67. 
 
 2 See note 9, p. 67 ; pro Rose. Am. i, i. 21, 59 ; Brut. 90, 312. 
 
 2 (A) * Hieron. in Euseb. Chron. (= Sueton.) Olymp. 175, i; de vir. ill. c. 81. 
 (D) * Brut. 91, 314. 
 
 * (A) Brut. 91, 313, erat eo tempore in nobis summa gracilitas et infirmitas 
 corporis, procerum et tenue collum qui habitus et quae figura non procul abesse 
 putatur a vitae periculo si accedit labor et laterum magna contentio. 
 (D) Brut. 1. c. 
 
 ^ (A) Cic. de leg I. 21, 54; Acad. I. 4, 13. 
 
 ^ (A) Acad. II. 43, 132, erat quidem . . . germanissimus Stoicus. 
 
 ' (D) These designs belong to a later period in Cicero's life. Cp. c. 40 
 and ad Att. II. 5, 2. 12, 4. 16, 3; IV. 16, to; IX. 4, 2. 9. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 69 
 
 14. Ooev £is 'Ao-iav Koi PoSov £7rXev(7£, /cat ruiv fiiv 'A(rtai/cuv priTopoiv 7S B.o. 
 HevoKXet T(3 ASpafJiVTTriv(S Koi Atonjo-t'o) tu Mayi/Tyri Kai Mcvra-irco T(o Kapt 
 (n/v£<T;i(dAncrev, iv Si 'Pd8<u prjTopi pkv 'AiroAAtovio) Tu) MdXuvos,' <l>i\o(j-6^<i) 
 
 8e IIoCTetStovto).'' 
 
 A€-yeTat' 8e tov ' KiroXXutviov ov avvih/ra ttjv 'PwimCiajv SidXeKTOv 
 8ei]6^vaL Tov KtKcpcDvos 'EWt^vio-ti iJt.€\€Trja-ai ■ tov S' V7raKo5)(rai. ttjoo^w/ikos, 
 oiofjLevov ovT(DS ?o-£crfet ^eXxLova r^v eTravopOuxriv • £7r£t 8' ip,fXiT7)(rt, tous 
 /x,£v aAAous £K7r£7rX^;(fei Kai Si.ap.iW3.a-0ai irpoi aXX-qXav? tois CTratVots, toi' 
 8 AiroAAoivtoi' oijt' aKpoil>p,(vov avTov SLa)(y6rjvat koI iravaafxivov (tvwovv 
 KaOe^ecrBai. iroXw ^(povov, a)(dop.evov Sk tov KiK£po)vos £i7r£iv "2£ /U.ei', S 
 KiKEpcov, Eiratvw Kai Oavp.a.^0}, t^s Se 'EXAa8os oiKTEi/so) r^v tv;;^7;v, opmv, a 
 fxova T(3v KoXdJv ij/xiv V7r£X£t7r£TO, Kai TavTa P<0(UnK)is 8ia coS Trpoaye.vop.a'a, 
 TraiSEtav Kat Xdyov." 
 
 15. V. O "yow KtKEjocuv £XirtS(ov p.ecrTo'; cvrt T^r iroXtreiav <^£pd/A£vos 
 VTTo )(prjCTpx)v Tivoi aTrrjiJ,/3Xvv6rj ttjv opp,i^v. Epo/xeiKo yap avT(S tov iv 
 AeXi^ois 0£dv, oTTtos av ev8o^dTaros ■yfi'oiro, Trpotrera^tv rj Tlvdla Tqv kavTov 
 (j>vcnv, dXXo. p,r] tyjv t<j>v ttoXXiuv Sd^av r/yefjiova ■noLuo'Oai tov /3lov.* 
 
 16. Kat TOV ye. TrpwTov iv Fw/xyj -f^povov evX.afiu)'; SiTJye Koi rats dp^^ats 77 B.o. 
 dKvr/p(us 7rpo(77j£i Kat TraprjfieXetTO,^ TavTa 8rj to, ' Ptoixamv Tots jiavavaoTaTov; 
 Trpo^eipa koI avvrjOi] prjpaTa, VpaiKo^^ Kai crp^oXacrTtKos aKovuiv. 
 
 'EiTEt 8e (j>v(T€i (fnXoTifiOi &v Kai Trapo^vvop.evo'i wb tov Trarpbs Kat tCiv 
 <j>i\<av iirihwKtv £is to (rvvrjyopciv iavrov, ovk y)pipa t<u irpwrreiio irpotrqya', 
 aXX' e.v&v's i^i\afx.\fie. Trj So^rj Kat Si,e<f>£p£ ttoXv tCsv ay<jivi^o/Ji,ev(iiv iir' 
 dyopas. 
 
 17. Ae'ycTat Se Kat avros ov8iv rjTTOv voiycras tov Arjp.oa^Oevav; Trpbs 
 
 TtjV VWOKpUTLV,^ TOVTO p,iv PoJO'Ktio T<3 KCOyLtCpStU, TOVTO 8' Al(T>l>TrW T<S 
 
 Tpayio8(S TTjOOO'rj^Etv £7rt/x£X<us.' 
 
 18. Tov 8' AtVtOirOV TOVTOV L<TTOpOV<TLV VWOKpiVO/JievOV iv dtaTpXO TOV 
 
 Trepl T^s Tip-wpux.^ TOV @vi<jTov /SovXevo/xevov ATpea, twv VTnqptTiav Ttvos 
 
 1 (D) * Cic. Brut. 91, 317. 2 p) * cic. Brut. I.e. 
 
 3 (A) * <ie vir. ill. 81. Cp. also Tusc. Disp. II. 2, 5. 
 (D)*Cic. Brut, gi, 316. 
 
 4 (D) *Cic. (/^ (/ro. II. 56, 115 ff. (attack on the Delphic oracle). 
 
 5 (D)* Cic. ^ra^. 92, 318. 
 
 ^ (A) Calenus ap. Dion. Cass. XLVI. 18, i, w KiK^ptov tj Kt/c^p/couXe 7j 
 KiKepdKie ^ rpoi/couXe ^ S t 1. trori Kai xa'pf" ivOjitofA/xej/os a4 Att. I. 15, i. 
 
 " (A) Cic. de orat. III. 56, 213; Brut. 38, 142; Orat. 17, 56, ut iam non sine 
 causa Demosthenes tribuerit et primas et secundas et tertias actioni. 
 
 8 (A) Macrob. Satur. II. 10, Roscio et Aesopo histrionibus tarn familiariter 
 usum ut res rationesque eorum sua soUertia tueretur. 
 
 (D) Cicero's friendship for these actors is attested by many passages, but 
 he nowhere confirms the above statement. 
 
76 APPENDIX I 
 
 a<^v(i) 7rapaSpaudvro9, c^o) twv eauroG XoytcT/xtov ota to ttolOo? ovra to) 
 CTK-^wTpui 7raTa$ai kol aveXetv. 
 
 19. Oi /jLLKpa Sk TT/Dos TO Tre.i6e.LV virrjp^O' Ik tov VTroKpivtaOai poirq t(3 
 KtK£/3<uvt. Kat TOWS y€ T(5 ySoSi/ yu,£yaA.av;(ov/x£VoDS prjTopa^ eTna-Ktiyn-Tuiv 
 eXeye St' aaOkveiav im rrjv Kpavyrjv Sxrirtp ^^tuXoiis £^ tirTrov w-qoav. 
 
 20. 'II 8e Trept to, (TKu>jj./w.Ta Kal rrjv TratStav Tavrrjv evrpaTreXm. oiKavi- 
 Kov /x£v cSoKEi Kot yXa<j>vp6v, )(pii>p.evos 8' aurij KaraKopuis ttoAAou? eXvjra 
 Kai KaKorrj6e{a<s iXd/j-^ave So^av. 
 
 21. VI. 'AiroS£i;)(6£is Sc Tap.uK Iv cnToSeia Koi Xa;)(U)v StKeAiav ^vco- 
 p^Ajytre^ rots avOpiairoK £V apX!7 o'ltov eis 'Tw/xrjV d-TrocTTeXXeLV^ dvayKa- 
 ^o/AtVots. "Yo'TEpov Se r^s iinfieXeia'; Kal BiKaioavvrj'; Kai TrpaoTrjTO? avrov 
 7r£tpav Xa/AjSavovr£s a)s o^Sfva rcov TrioiroO riye/xovwv ert/xTytrav.^ 
 
 22. 'Ettei Se TToAAoi Toiv ctTTo 'Pm(U.7js v£u)v EvSofot Kat yEyOVOTES Ka\(US 
 atrtav £;(0vt£s dra^uis /cat /iaXaKias Trept tov 7rdA£p,ov averrep-ifiOyja'av (ttl 
 
 TOV (TTpaTTfjyoV T^S 5tK£AtaS, 0-Vl'£t7r£l' aVTOlS O KlK£p(UV £7rt<^aV(0S Kttl 
 
 7r£pt€7row^O"ei/. 
 
 23. 'Eirt Tourots oiv p,£'ya <f>povi2v^ eis Pwixrjv ^aSt^cov yEAoidv ti 
 Tradelv tpTjo'i.^ ^vvTV)((Jiv yap dvopt TtGv £7rt<^ai/oJv <f>L\oj ookovvtl Trept 
 Ka^Travuiv, ipeaOat, tlvo. 8^ Tajv 7r£7rpay/xcvo)v i-Tr' avToi) Adyov c^ovo't 
 'Pa)p,atot Kal Tt <f>povovcnv, i>s ovdjaaTos Kat 8d^7;s tcuv Tr£7rpayp,6v(ov 
 airo) T^v ToAtv ctTracrav ep.TreTrXrjKin'; ■ tov 8' e'nre'iv " IIov yap i^s, S 
 KtK£pwv, TOV ^dvov TOiJTO^',' " TdT£ //€j/ ovv i^aOvp.rjo'ai TravTOLiraatv, 
 el Ka.6a.TTep £is TrfAayos d;(av£s t^v ttoXw ifXTreaiav 6 7r£pt auToC Adyos 
 oiSev ei% 8dfav eivih-qXov TreTToirjKev ■ vo'repov 8£ Aoytcr/iov £avT(o 8;8ov)s ttoAii 
 T^s </)tAortp,tas v<^etAev, a»s Trpos ddpto'Toj' TrpdyfjLa ttjv o6$av afXiXXtafievo^ 
 Kal TTcpas oix i(f>i,KTov e)(OV(rav. Oi fjirjv dAAa rd y£ ')(aipei.v eTraivov/Jievov 
 Bia(j>ep6vT(m Kal Trpos Sdfav ifJiTra6e(TTepov e^eiv a.)(pL TravTos avT<S Trape/jteive 
 Kal TToAAovs TToAAaKts T(ur 6p6mv eTreTapo^e Aoyto'/xw. 
 
 24. VII. ATTTd/xevos Sfi r^s 7roAtT£tas Trpo6vp.6Tepov ato"^dv -^yeiTO 
 TOiis jaEi/ jSavavCTOvs dpyai/ots ;(pco/x£Vous Kat crKeveo'LV di/'up^ots /u,7y8evds 
 
 ^ (A) Cic. (/<? n'/z'. 37, 8o, in te saepe vidi et . . . in Aesopo, familiari tuo, 
 tantum ardorem vultuum atque motuum ut eum vis quaedam abstraxisse a 
 sensu mentis videretur. 
 
 (D) * Cic. Tusc. Disp. IV. 25, 55. 
 
 2 (D) Cic. j« Verr. II. 3, 78, 182 ; pro Platte. 26, 63. 
 
 ^ (A) Cic./rt; Plane. 26, 64, frumenti in summa caritate maximum numerum 
 miseram (sc. Romam). 
 
 * (A) Cic. pro Plane. I.e. excogitati quidam erant a Siculis lionores in me 
 inauditi. 
 
 ^ (A) Cic. I.e. liac spe decedebam ut mihi populiim Romanum ultro omnia 
 delaturum putarem. 
 
 6 (D)*Cic. l.c. Seep. 14 f. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 71 
 
 ayvotiv ovoftn. jUr^Se ^lopav ^ Swa/iiv avriuv, tov 8e ttoXltikov, & hi avOpumaiv 
 al Koival Trpo^eis irepatvovrai, paOv/jLta^ koI ap-eXuis «X'"' ""'P' ''^'' '■'"'•' 
 TToAtToIv yvMCTiv.^ O0£v ou )«.dvov Tiuv ovopaTiov tWi^e p,vrjp,ovtvav avTov,^ 
 aXKa. Koi TOTTOv, iv &) rmv yvii>pip.wv CKacrros oi/ctt, xai ^wpiov, ov K€KTr]Tai, 
 Kal </>tXou5, oto'Tto't ^7]Tat, Kol yetVovas eyiVo)o"/ce ■ Kal Tracrav ooov IraXtas 
 Biavopevop.ivio TLiKfpnivi irpo-f^upov r/v tiTreiv Kai CTriSet^at tows T(3v ^iXwv 
 dypoiJS Kat ras exavAeis. 
 
 25. Oio-uxv 8c p,LKpa.v /jlcv, iKavrjv &i koI Tais SaTravais CTrap/ciJ KCKTrjp.ivo'i 
 Idavpd^tTO jUi/TC p.LfrOov'; p-riTt Stupa irpoaiip.tvo^ mro t^s onivr/yopias, 
 /xaXicTTa 8' ore t^v Kara Beppov hiK-rp/ dve\a/3e. 
 
 26. ToBtov yctp crrparr/yov yeyovdra t^s StKeAtas Kai TroXXa ireKOinqptv- 
 fxivov Twv 2tKeAta)Tojv otoJKOvTojv etXfv, ov/c etTTtuv, dXA. e^ a^rov rpoTrov 70 B.c 
 riva TOV /<.^ eiireiv.^ T<uv yap (XTpaTryy^v T(S "Bkpprj ^apiZ,op,evti>v Kat ttjv 
 hiKyfv v7rep6i(T€(Ti Kat BiaKpovcrecn TroAAais eh Tr/v iaTOLTrjV^ Ik/BoXXovtuiv, 
 
 <i)S ^v irpoSTjXov, OTi TOts Adyois o tiJs ^p.epas^ ouk i^apKicra )(p6vo<i oiSi 
 Xri<j/€TaL Trepas 17 Kpiai<i,'' dvacTTas 6 KiKepouv c<^r; p.^ Seio'^at Xdyojv, aXk 
 €7rayaya)v tovs fxdprvpas Kat iinKptvas eKeXeuce c^epctv tt^v xj/rjifiov tov^ 
 SiKacrrds-^ 
 
 27. "Opojs Se iroXXa ^apLCvra 8iapvr;poi/£veTai Kat ircpi iKtivrjV aiirov 
 Tr)v hiKrjv. 'fls ovv aTreXeu^eptKos aydpunroi evo^O'; t(S tovSat^etv ovofjui 
 KtKt'Xtos i/SovXtTO irapcoo-apevos Toiis StKcXiuiTas Kar-qyopuv tov Beppov 
 " Tt 'Ioi;8at<p irpos )(Otpov ; " ec^j; 6 KtKfpoJV.* 'Bipp'qv yap ot 'P(op.atot tov 
 eKTtTpLrjp.evov ;^otpov KaXoCo'tv- 'Hi/ St tuJ ^ipprj dvTtTrats vtos oiik eXcv- 
 6epLu)i 80KCOV TrpoidTaaQai tiJs (Spas. A.oihop-qdti^ ow b KiKepcov ets 
 im.Xa.Kiav vwo tov Beppov "Tots iitots," ewrev " evtos ^wptuv Set Xot- 
 Sopeto'Sat." 
 
 Tov Se pTjTopoi 'OprrjO'Lov tyjv piv evdeiav Tto Bippr/ (Twi/etTretv pij 
 ToXp,);(ravTos,^ ev Se Tw Tip.ripxi.Ti. iracrdivTOi irapayetiicrdai koI Xa/36vTOs 
 
 1 (A) [Q. Cicevo] de fet. cons. 11, 41, petitio desiderat nomenclationem, 
 blanditiam, assiduitatem, benignitatem. 
 
 (D) Cic. ad AH. IV. i, 5, ad urbem ita veni, ut nemo uUius ordinis homo 
 nomenclatori notus fuerit qui mihi obviam non venerit. 
 
 (A) Cic. pro Mur. 36, 77, quid.' quod habes nomenclatorem , in eo quidem 
 fallis . . . nam si nomine appellari abs te cives tuos honestiim est, turfe est 
 eos notiores esse servo tuo quam tibi etc. 
 
 2 (A) in Verr. I. 10, 31 ff.; Ps. Ascon. in Verr. I p. 126 f. ; Quint. VI. 6, 4. 
 
 3 (D) in Verr. I.e. 
 
 * = Quid ludaeus cum Verre? For other Ciceronian puns on Verres, cp. 
 my note to Tac. Dial. c. 23 (p. 249). 
 
 6 (A) Cic. in Verr. II. I, 7- 20; Orat. 37, 129; Ps. Ascon. in Verr. 
 pp. 126, 153, adeo stupef actus Hortensius dicitur ut rationem defensionis 
 omitteret. 
 
72 APPENDIX I 
 
 iXc<pavTivr]V ^ ^cjiLyya fucrOov, uvi Ti wXayiui^ 6 K.iK£pwv Trpo's avrov • tov 
 8e <^»y(ravTos aiviy/xdrtDV Xwews aireipw^ 'X'"' ' " ^''^ t^V^ ^'''' ''^^ oi/cuxs t^v 
 2<^tyya «x'is." 
 
 28. VIII. OvTO) §€ ToC Beppov (caTaSiKao-^ei/Tos ^ i^SofJirjKOVTa irevre 
 /AiiptaSwv TiiJLrjcra.fi.tv(K^ ttjv SiKrjv 6 KiKcpojv SLafioXr/v tc^ev, <5)S eir' apyvpii^ 
 TO Tifx-rjixa Kadv(j>eLiJ,evo'S.* 
 
 '■ Oi /i^v dAA' ot SiKeAicoTai X'^P"' eiSores dyopavo/ioCvros airoi)* iroXAa 
 /xev dyovT£s aTro T^s vrjcrcw, woXXa Se (^cpoi/res ^kov, ajv oiSe)/ eTronjcraTO 
 KepSos, dAA. ocrov eTrevrnviVai T^r dyopav a.Tr£)(pif](raTO rfj <^iAort/iia toV 
 di/^jouirtov. 
 
 29. EKCKTrjTO 8e ^lapiov koXov ev'ApTrois,^ /cat ircpi NaivTroAii' lyv dypos 
 Koi Trtpl IIo/u.injioi)s erepo^, ov p.€yd\oi- (l>epv>j t€ TepevTuis t^s yvvaiKoi 
 TrpocTtyiviTO /xvpidSoiv 8lKa, xai KX.r]povop,La Ti'i eh ivvea Srjvaptuiv crvv- 
 a)(ducTa (UVpidSas. 
 
 30. Atto toutojv iXevOcpiw; d/xa /cat crax^pdvws ot^ye /xera toiv (rvfjif^i- 
 ovvTuiv EXXrjvoiv^ Kol "PwjLiat'oDv c^tAoAdywv, o-jraviov, el ttotc, irpo Sutr^uwi/ 
 TjAioi; KaTaKkLv6p,€vos, ovp( ovTft) 8t' dtrp^oAiav, a)s 8ta to (rapa. t<S (rTopA)(io 
 fw^OrfptJi'; ota/cet/xcvov. Hv oe Kat rrjv oAAt^i' ^ept to o"<3/xa OepaTreuxv aKpi- 
 yS^S Kat TrcpiTTOs, (ScrTe Kat Tpixp€(Ti, KOL TrtpazaTOis' api6p.(S TCTay/icVots 
 )(prj(TdaL. ToBtov tov Tpowov SiairaiSaycDywv t^v e^iv dvocrov" Kat Siapiaj 
 Trpos TToAAoiis Kat jU-eydAous dytuvas Kat wovov; (rvvtlx^^- 
 
 31. OIkuiv Se T^v piv waTptoav Tip d8eA0<3 Trapc^wprjcrev, avros 8' coKa 
 Trept TO IlaAdTtoi'^ virkp tov pLr/ paKpav fiaSi^ovra^ ivo^XclcrOaL Tovi Oepa- 
 TTCWOVTaS avTov. 
 
 1 (D) Plin. JV. H. XXXIV. 48, 8 speaks of Corinthian bronze, in Quint. VI. 
 3, 98 it is a Sphinx aenea, and accorciing to Plut. ' XirotfiB. 1 1 it was of silver. 
 Otherwise the stories are identical. 
 
 2 (D) Ps. Ascon. ll.cc. adeo perculsus Verres ut abiret in exilium sua sponte. 
 8 (D) Ps. Ascon. p. 152 ; Cic. Div. in Caec. 5, 19, abs te sestertium milies ex 
 
 lege repeto. 
 
 * (A) in Verr. I. iS, 56 and Ps. Ascon. p. 106 frustra calumniantur Cice- 
 ronem quidam homines et modo eum sestertium mihes dicunt repetere, modo 
 quadringenties. But cp. Plut. c. 7 ju^Te 5t5pa dviXa^e. 
 
 6 (A)* Mart. IV. 55, 3. 
 
 ^ (A) * Cic. de nat. dear. I. 3, 5, doctissimorum hpminum familiaritates quibus 
 semper domus nostra floruit. 
 
 ' (A) Cic. ad Quint, frat. III. ^, i ; ad Att. II. 23, i. 
 
 8 (A) * Asin. Poll. ap. Sen. Suas. VI. 24. 
 
 ^ (D) This house was purchased after his consulship. Cp. Cic. adfam. V. 
 6, 2; ad Att. I. 16, 10; Cell. N. A. XII. 12, i. The topics 29 ff. are disjointed 
 and accumulated without reference to chronology. Plutarch had nothing to 
 say about the aedileship, and these items are put in to fill the gap, as it were. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 73 
 
 EdepaTrevov oe k%9 Tjixipav iwl dvpai <j)OiTiavm ovk iXaTTOvK rj K^pdacrov 
 i-m TrXovTO) Kai IIo/XTr^'tov 8ia rrjv iv TOis <TTpaTf.vim.(n Svva/jLiv, 6av/*a^0;U.£- 
 vous juaXiCTTa Pa)/Aai(i)v koI jaeytcTTous ovTas. 
 
 IIo//.7n;tos oe Kal KiKcptova idtparrevt, kol /xiydXa. Trpo'S Svvaixiv airal Kat 
 Socav ^ KiK£p(ovos (rvvarpa^e TroXtrcta. 
 
 32. IX. ST/DaTijytav 8e fx.(.Ti6vTmv a/xa crvi/ airu 7roA.\<3v Kai /jLtyaXuiv 66 B.C. 
 TrpwTos aTravTtuv avriyop€v6rj • ^ koI tois KpLcrws «8o^e KaOapH's Kal KaXm 
 PpaPevaai. 
 
 AeycTai Se Kai Ai/ciWios Maxep, dv^p Kai Ka^' avTov i(T)(y<i>v iv Trj 
 TToku fjiiya Kal Kpdcr(r<u ^w/jxvo's Por/Oif, Kpiv6p^vo% KXcmrj^ iw' avrov, ry 
 8wd/xei Kai (nrovSfj TreTroi^tos, en t^k ij/^cJ30v TcJv KpiTwv Sia<f>ep6liT(ov (XTraX- 
 Xayeis oiKa8E KupacrOai re ttjv K€(f>aXrjv Kara to,)(os Kal Kadapov iixdriov <!)S 
 vtviKrjKui^ Xa/3<<)v a^^is cis ayopav Trpdiivai- tov Sc Kpdcrcrov Trcpi t^v 
 avXtiov aTravTiycrai/TOs avr(3 Kai <f>pd(ravTO'S, on Trdcrais edXa)K£ rais ^■qt^oi';, 
 dvatTTphj/a's Kal KaraKXiveis aTroSai/eiv.^ To 8£ ■Trpdy/xa t<S KiKcpwvi Sd^av 
 ^vcyKcv o>s e-TTip-eXoJS fipa^eviravTi to oiKao'TTjptov.^ 
 
 ETTci 8e Owartvt09, dv^p e^a)v ri rpa^u Kai Trpos toijs ap^ovras oXiycopov 
 ev Tais crwr^yopiais, )(oipd&(i>v Si tov Tpd-)(7)\ov TrepOTXetos, rjTUTo n Kara- 
 (TTas Trapa toU KiKepu)vos, Kai p.i) 8i8dvTos, dXXa ^ovXevo/xivov ttoXvv 
 ypovov, eiTTev, a)s ovk av a^Tos oicrdcrete Trepi tovtov (TTpaTTjyoiv, eTricTpat^ei? 
 6 KiKcptov "'AXX' iyu>," ctirev, "ovk ep^a) tjjXikoBtov Tpdp^ijXov." ■* 
 
 "Eti S' ■fifj.ipa.'s Svo y] Tpu'i e^ovn Trji dpX'j'S avTcu Trpoarjyayi tis Mai/t'Xiov 
 eiOvvuiv kXoiitJs.^ 'O 8e Mavi'Xios oEtos tvi'oiai' cij^e Kai cnrov&rjv iiro tov 
 8)jp.ou, 8oK<uv iXavvf.a'dai 8ia IIop,7r7;'iov ■ iKeivov yap t]v <^iXos. Airov/ieVov 
 8' ij|U£pas airoB jixiav 6 KiKepwv p.6vrjv ttjv imova'av iSwKe' koI 6 8^p,os ^ya- 
 vdKTrjo'tv eWiO'fxivuiv tCsv fjTpaTrfyCyv 0£Ka TovXa^icTov lyp-epa? Oioovai toi? 
 KivSuv€ijoiio-i. T(3v Se 8r)fJ.dp)((iiv airov Siayaydiriov E7ri to Pfjpa Kai Karrj- 
 yopovvTtov, a.KOvo'diivai SetjOw eiTrev, on tois kivSwcvouo'iv dci, Kad' ocrov ol 
 vofjioi 7rapetKouo"t, Ke^7yp.evos eTrieiKoJ? Kai <f>iXavOptii7r(o^ Seivov T^yeiTO tw 
 MaviXi'o) TavTa fjoj Trapao-p^eiv ■ ^s ovv eri p.ovrj's KvpLOs rjv ij/iepas o-rpaTrjyav, 
 
 1 (A) Cic, Brut. 93, 321 ; /ro /ege Man. I. 2, ter praetor primus centuriis 
 cunctis renuntiatus sum. 
 
 2 (D) * Cic. ad Att. I. 4, 2 ; Val. Max. IX. 12, 7 (suicide before conviction). 
 2 (A) * Cic. I.e. nos incredibili ac singulari populi voluntati de C. Macro 
 
 transegimus. Cui cum aequi fuissemus, tamen multo maiorem fructum ex 
 populi existimatione, illo damnato, quam ex ipsius si absolutus esset, gratia 
 cepissemus. 
 
 ^ (A) Cic. /;-o Sest. 65, 135 strumam civitatis (cp. Schol. Bob. p. 310); iti 
 Vat. 4, 10 (cp. Schol. Bob. p. 316) ; itt Vatin. 2, 4, inflato colic, tumidis cervici- 
 bus intulisti. This particular retort is, however, not found elsewhere. Cp. 
 Kurtz, Philol. 36, p. 569. 
 
 6 (D) * Dio Cass. XXXVI. 44. 
 
74 APPENDIX I 
 
 TavTrjV Ittlttj&k bpiirai,- to yap tis aAAov ap^ovra t^i' i<pi(nv iKJSakuv ovk 
 ayai fiovXafiivov fiorjOuv. Tavra Xe^divra davfuxcTT-qv iTTOLrjcre tov Sijfiov 
 fierafioXi^v • koI ttoXXo. KaTeu<^»;/xowT£s avTov iBiovro ttjv virip tov MavtAiou 
 crvvrfyoplav avaXajitiv- '0 8' viriarq ■n-po6vp.u)<;, ov)^ ^Kto-ra Sia IIojUTrTj'tov 
 awovTa- Kal KaracTTas TraXtv ii uTrap^s ISrjp.rjyoprjO'e, veavtKojs r<2v oAiyap- 
 yiKtov Kol Tt2 UofjiTTTjifo cjiOovovvTwv KaOaTTTop^evo^, 
 
 33. X. 'Etti Se T^v iiTraTctav oi;^ rjTTOv vtto tu>v apidTOKpariKuiv f/ 
 Toiv TToWoiV 7rporj-)(6'q Ota ttjv ttoXlv ec octrtas avTiS rotavTTj^ cnjvayojvt- 
 o'ayLtevcuv. 
 
 T^s ^TTo 2vA.Aa yevopivrj'; p-era^oXyji irepl ttjv TroXiTuav iv a.p)(r] /xev 
 droTTOV <^aveiV7;s, totc 8e rots ttoAAois vtto xpovov kol avvrjOeia's ■^Syj riva 
 KardfTTacrLV ^X^v ov (j)avXr)V SoKovcrrj^,^ rjcrav ol ra irapovTa ^Lacrutrai, 
 lieu pcTaOetvai ^rjToBvres tS/iov eVexa TrXeove^toiv,^ ou tt/jos to /HXtl- 
 
 (TTOV, HopTTTjiOV p€V €Tt TOtS jiaKTiXeVCiV iv TloVT(0 KOLi AppCVta TToAc- 
 
 povvTOi, iv 8e TTj 'Pu>prj /XT^Se/xtSs iK^etrTtiJo-?;? Trpos toijs feiorejot^ovTas 
 dfto/xciT^ov 8vi'd;aecos. Ourot Kopw^oXov u^pv avSpa ToXprjTrjV Kal peyaXo- 
 TrpdyP'Ova Kat TroiKtXov to yjOo^, A.€vKiov KartXtVav, o? alTiav ttotc 
 Trpos oAXots aSLKi^pacri peyaXois tXa/ie Trapdevw cvyyeyovlvai, Ovyarpi,* 
 Kreivai o ao£X<fiov avTov • Kat oiktjv Itti tovtw <j>o^ovpevoii eTreto'e 
 ^vXXav (si's €Tt ^oiVTa tov dvOpuiTrov iv rots a7roOavovp.^vot^ TTpoypdij/ai.^ 
 ToiJTOV ovv TTpoaTdTrjv ol TTOvqpoi Xaj3ovT€<; dXXa's re TrtVrct? dAXiyXots 
 
 The chief extant narratives of the Conspiracy (c. 10-23) ^^^ ■ Cic. m Cat.; 
 Sallust; Appian B. C. II. 2-7; Die Cass. XXXVII. 24-42; Florus IV. i i5E. 
 Cp. also the special treatises cited in the Bibliography and Sibinga I.e. pp. 48- 
 143. In the following those passages will be preferably cited which show that 
 neither Sallust nor Cicero was directly consulted by Plutarch, noteworthy 
 divergences from Cicero's statements in the Speeches proving by implication 
 that the lost virbixvrnxa. was also not otie of his sources. 
 
 1 (A) Cic. Brut. 90, 311, leges et indicia constituta, recuperata res publica; 
 de proscript. fil. fragm. : ita legibus SuUae cohaerebat status civitatis ut his 
 solutis, stare ipsa non posset. 
 
 ^ (D) Plutarch ignores the so-called first Catilinian conspiracy, so frequently 
 referred to in Cicero's speeches, and narrated by Sail. 18; Dio XXV. 44. 
 
 ' (A) Sail. c. 5 animus audax, subdolus, varius ; in Cat. II. 5; III. 17 tarn 
 acer quam paratus, tam audax quam callidus etc. 
 
 (D) Cat. I. 10, 26; II. 4, 7 ff . ; esp. Sail. c. 15 necatoyf/;;?. 
 
 * (A) Cic. in toga cand. fragm. : cum deprehendebare in adulteriis . . . cum ex 
 eodem stupro tibi et uxorem et filiam invenisti ; [Q. Cicero] de pet. cons. 2, 9, 
 educatus est in stupro sororis. 
 
 * (D) Cic. in Cat. I. 16, 13 ft., cum morte superioris uxoris . . . domum 
 vacuefecisses, nonne etiam alio incredibili sceleri hoc scelus cumulasti ; III. 17. 
 
 ^ Plut. Sull 32, ?5ofe etc. Not elsewhere mentioned. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 75 
 
 coocrav Kai KaTa6v<TavT€<; avOpcoTrov eyfwavro rijjv crapKiov. Aiicf^OapTO 
 
 8 VTT avTOV TToXv jJ.ipO'S T^S £V Trj TToXei VeOTTJTOS,^ l^SovaS KCtt irOTODS 
 
 Kai yuvatKuii/ IptoTa? del Trpofevovi'Tos €Ka(rTa) xat t^v £is ravra Sairavrju 
 d<^ei8u)s irapacrKtud^ovTOs. 'Ettij/dto 8' ^ re T^vpprjvLa Trpos aTrocracrti/ 
 oAt; Kai TO, TToXAa rijs cvtos "AXttemv raXartas. 'ETrttr^aXt'oTaTa 8' rj 
 VuifjLr] Trpos fJLeTafSoXrjv eip^e 8ia t^v €>' rats oio-tais dvoj/AaXtav, roil' /nev 
 €v oo$r) /xdXtcrra Kat (fipovi^puiTt KaTe7rTOJ^evjU.€V(ov ets Oearpa /cat 8£T7rva 
 Kat (j)iX.ap)(^Lai Kal otKo8o|U.tas, Tcov 8e ■ttAowtidj' «is dyeweis Kai TaTretvois 
 (TvveppvriKOTdiV avOpuiTTOv;, mare /utKpas pOTri}? 8et(T6at rd irpayfiara koI 
 TravTos etvat roi) roAjaT^travro? eKcrr^crat r^i' iroAtretav avT7]v vcfy avrrj^ 
 vouovcrav.^ 
 
 XI. Oi ju^v dAAd /SouXd/Aevo? o KariAivas t(r;:^upc)v Tt TrpOKaraXapciv 
 op/jLfjTTQpLOV VTrareiav fj.eTyci, ■ Kai Aa/nirpos ^v rais eAirtcriv ^ (os Faio) 
 'AvTwvt'o) crwvv7raTevo"(DV, dvSpt Ka^ avTov fxiv oute irpos to (HXtlov ovt€ 
 Trpos ro p^eTpov rjytfX.oviK£, TTpoaOrjKr] 8 dyovTos kripov ^vvap-ewi 
 €0"o/xeVaj. Tavra 0^ Tojv KaAwv Kat dya^tiJv ot TrAettrroi TrpoaiuOop.evoi 
 Tov KtKepcova Trporjyov iirl TrjV VTraT€MV • /cat toC 8i^p,ov Se^a/xivov irpo- 
 dvixw; 6 fjikv KartAtvas e^eTrecrc, KtKcpoJv 8e Kai rdio? 'AvTcovtos sp^" 
 Oyjcrav. KaiTot twv p,eTtdvTO)v o KtKeptov /iovos i;v e^ tTTTrtKoC Trarpds, 
 oi ^ovXevTov, yeyoi/(us.^ 
 
 XII. Kai rd p.ev Trepi KaTtAtVav l/xcAAev In, rows ttoAAoiis Aav^d- 
 vovTa, irpodywvK Sc p,eydAot t^v KtKcpwvos viraTuav i^eSi^avTO.^ 
 ToBto /xei/ ydp ot KEKuAu/ixeVoi Kara rovs 2vAAa vofxav; ap^eiv/ ovt 
 acrOtyw dvTcs ovt oXiyoi, jtieTtovres dp^^ds i8r]fji.ayii>yovv, iroAAd Trjs 
 SvAAa Tvpavvt8os aXrjd^ p-iv Kai 8tKaia KaTijyopovvTK, ov pjqv iv SiovTi 
 
 1 (D) * Sail. Cat 22 ; (A) Dio XXXVII. 30. 
 
 2 (A) in Cat. I. 6, 13; II. 9, 20; Sail. Cat. 14, 5. 
 
 3 (D) Sail. Cat. 28, 40 ; Cic. Cat. I. 2, 5 ; II. 8 ff. ; /to Cair/. I.e. App. 
 B. C. II. 2. Agreement in substance, but not in details. 
 
 * (D) Sail. 14, Antonium quem sibi coUegam speraret, has nothing in com- 
 mon with the Greek except the verb ; nor is the epigrammatic characterization 
 of Antonius suggested by anything in the Latin. 
 
 5 Ascon. Fed. in toga cand. p. 88 ff. solus Cicero ex competitoribus eques- 
 tri erat loco natus. Cicero attaches no importance to this, e.g. de leg. agr. 
 I. 9, 27, equestri ortum loco consulem videt quae vitae via facillime viros 
 bonos ad honorem . . . perducat, but boasts that he was elected as a homo 
 novus. Cp. esp. de leg. agr. II. i, 3, me perlongo intervallo prope memoriae 
 temporum riostrorum primum hominem novum consulem fecistis etc. ; pro 
 Mur. 8, 17; pro Platic. 27, 67. 
 
 ^ de off. II. 23 ff. ; in Pis. 2,4; de leg. agr. II. 3, 8. 
 
 ' The speech de proscriptorum filiis (Cic. in Pis. 2) followed the de lege 
 agraria and the /to Rabirio, here omitted. Cp. Cic. ad Att. II. i, 3. 
 
76 APPENDIX I 
 
 TYjv TToXiTCtav ov&i crvv KaLp<S KivovvTC'S,^ TovTO Sc vofjiovs €l(njyov ol 
 ^■qiJi,ap)(Oi Trpos Ttjv avTTjv virodtfTiv, SeKaSap^iav Ka6i(rTa.vTt's avTO- 
 Kparopwv avSpSiv, ois i^UTO TTaa-q^ fxkv iTaXt'as, irda-rji hi Svpi'as Koi 
 ocra 8ia TiojXTrrjCov vetaari irpouiiipKTTO KVpiovs ovra's TruiXelv to. Srjfji,6cna, 
 KpLViiv ovi SoKoir], <l>vyd.Sas £K/3aXA.£iv, (tvvoiki^civ irdAtts, i(p^/iaTa 
 \afx,Pave.LV Ik tov Tajxiuov, trTpaTtouTas Tpi<j>tLv /cat KaraXeyeiv ' OTrocrwv 
 SioivTO. Aio KaL T<S vofjiio Trpo(ruy(pv oXXoi re Tiav i7rL(j)avu)v kol irpSiTO'; 
 
 'AvTMVtOS ■* 6 TOV KtK€pa)VOS (Twdp^UlV (DS TU>V SiKa yivq(T6p,(.vo%. 
 
 'E 8 o K £ t 8e Kai tov KaTtA.iVa * vemTtpicr/jLov etSios o v Svcrp^e/oatvetv VTro 
 irX^^ovs SaretftJV o p,aX.i<TTa tok d/DicTTOts <f>6Pov Trapet^c. 
 
 Kat toBtov TrpSiTov Oepanevuiv 6 Ki/ceptuv eKCivio fj.£v i{jjri<t>ia'aTO tC>v 
 eTrap^iuiv MaKe8ovtav,^ aiira? Sc t^v raXaTtai/ hihop.£vqv TraprjTrjtra.TO, 
 Kai KaTCipydaaTO Trj )(apiTL Tavrrj tov Avtwvlov (ocnrep viroKpiTrjv tp-p.!,- 
 crOov avTiS to. SevTipa Xeyeiv virip Trjs iraTpt8os. Os 8 ovto'; eaX(OK€i Koi 
 ■)(tLporj6r]^ iyeyovei, paXXov rjSrj 6appu>v 6 KtKt'pui' ivLO'TaTO irpos roiis 
 KaLVOTOpyOvvTai. Ev p,€v ovv Trj ^ovXrj KaTr/yoptav Tiva tov vopov 8taTi- 
 Oipcvoi ouTws i^fTrXrj^ev avTov'S tovs eio'^epovras, <o(rTe p.rj&iv avTiXiyciv. 
 'Ettci 8' av^is eirex'ipow Kai TrapecrK€va<Tpcvot, TrpoeKaXovvTO roiis VTrarous 
 CTTt TOV 8^/iov/ oi8£v moSeccTa'; 6 K-iKepoiv, aXXa ttjv fiovXrjv €Trtcr6ai 
 KeXev<Tas Kai TrpoeXOiov ov p,6vov i^i^aXe tov vopov, dXXa Kai tu>v oXXwv 
 aTTOyvutvai Tovi 8rjpdp)(ov'; eitohjcte, Trapd toctovtov tco Xoyu KpaTrjdivTas 
 VTT avTOv. 
 
 34. XIII. MaXwrTa yap outos o dv^p £7re'8et^£ 'P(iip,aioii ocrov ijSov^s 
 Xoyos T(3 KaXtp Trpo<TTL07j(ri, koi. ort, to SiKaLOv di^TTrjTov itTTtv, av opdZs 
 XeyrjTai, Kai 8et tov ip,p.£XS>i iroXiTevop.evov dei t<S pkv Ipyo) to KaXov 
 dvTL TOV KoXaKfivovTos aip£t(Tpat, r(p 8e Xoyoi ro Xv^rovv d<^atp€tv rov 
 (rvp<j>€povTO'i. Aelyp-a Se avTOv t^s Tr£pt tov Xdyov ;^dpiTOs Kai to 
 
 iCf. §331, p. 74- 
 
 2 oratt. Ill in Rullum de leg. agr. ; Die Cass. XXXVII. 25 f. I note the 
 items which do not correspond with statements in these speeches. 
 
 ^ These provisions of the law are not found in the extant speeches. Cp. 
 esp. de leg. agr. II. 7, 16 ff. 13, 33 ff. 
 
 * Neither of these is mentioned by Cicero. 
 
 ' Slightly inaccurate. Gaul had fallen to the lot of Antonius, Macedonia 
 to Cicero. The latter remained in Rome, and secured his province for Anto- 
 nius, Gaul for Q. Metellus Celer. Cp. e.g. in Pis. 1, \i.\ ad/am. VI. 2, 3 ; Dio 
 Cass. XXXVII. 33. 
 
 6 Refuted by de leg. agr. III. i, i, commodius fecissent tribuni plebis, si 
 quae apud vos de me deferunt, ea coram potius me praesente dixissent . . . 
 sed quoniam adhuc praesens certamen . . . fugerunt, nunc ... in meam con- 
 tionem prodeant et quo provocati a me venire noluerunt, revocati saltern 
 revertantur. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO -j-j 
 
 Trepi Tai Oeai iv Trj VTraret'ti ■yevo/xevov. TSiv yap tTTTrtKWv irporepov iv 
 TOis dia.Tpoi'i dva^e/Aty/ieV(ov rots ttoXXoTs Kal /iCTo. rov Si^/nou 6e.<0fx.iva>v 
 (OS €Tvx£, irpaJTOs SteKpivev eirt ti/xij tows iTTTreas ctTro tSi/ aXX(uv ttoXitcoi/ 
 MapKos *0^«)v <TTpaTr)yS)v, Kal SLevup-iv iSiav iKuvois Oiav, rjv en Kai 
 vvv i^aiperov cloven. ToCto irpos dri/Atas o S^/tos eXajSe, Kai ^ai/evTos 
 cv Oearpio tov 'OOoivoi i^v/3pi^u>v icrvpiTTtv, oi 8' tTTTreis viriXafiov 
 KpOTia TOV dvSpa Xa/X'TrpSs. Av9l^ 8e 6 8^p,os CTreVeive tov <jvptyp.6v, 
 etra ckcivoi toi/ Kporov. "Ek 8e tovtov Tpairopi.tvoi irpos dXXi^Xovs 
 i-)(fiwvTO XoiSopiais, Kal to Oiarpov aKoa-p,ia Karetxtv. "Enrd 8' o Kckc- 
 p<ov i;k£ TTvOo/xcvoi KOI TOV Srjp,ov eKKaXecTas irpos To T^s 'EvuoCs tepoi' 
 €ireTtp.rj(re Kai irap-QVtcrfv, aircKOovT^i av6i<; tis to OiaTpov iKpoTovv tov 
 O^cova Xap.7rp(i)s Kai irpos TOtis tTTTreas djUtXXav Ittoiovvto irepl TLp,Siv 
 Kal Sofrjs TOV avSpos.^ 
 
 35. XIV. H 8c Trepi tov KaTtXtWv (7vv<i>p.oa-ia irTri^aa-a koX KaTa- 
 oet(racra ttjv ap)(r]v av$is dveOappa,, Kal (rvvrjyov aXX?;Xous Kal irape/cd- 
 Xovv cvTo\p,OT£pov aiTTta^Bai tcov ■Trpayp.a.Toiv Trplv liravtXQuv Xlop-Trri'Lov 
 rj8rj Xeyop-evov vttoo-t pi^tiv p.era. t^s Sump.eios.^ MdXio-Ta Z\ tov 
 KaTiXtVoi/ i^Tjpidi^ov oi SuXXa TrdXat o-TpaTtoJTai, 8ia7r£^VKOT£s p.iv 
 o\rj<i Trjs iTttXias, TrXeTo-TOt 8£ Kal p.a^tp,(OTaToi Tais Typpr/VLKal's cy/caTc- 
 <nrapp,evoi ttoXcctiv, dpTrayas irdXiv Kal 8ta<^opi;o-as ttXovtiov £Totp,<ov 
 dveipoiroXoSi'TCs. OvTot ydp ■^yep.ova MaXXtoi/ li^ovTcs, avSpa tSiv 
 eTTti^avcus VTTO SvXXa a^TpaTtva■a|Jl,ivoiv, (TvviO'TaVTO tiS KaTiXtVa Kai 
 Trap^o-av eis Poip-T/v (nji'ap;^aip£o-idcrovTes. 'YTraTctav yap av^ts jJiCTijei 
 ISe^ovXevp.evo'S dveXeiv tov KiKepiova irepl avrbv tS)v ap-)(aipt(TLuiv tov 
 dopv^ov.* 
 
 36. 'ESoKet Se Kai to Sai/xoviov 7rpo<Trjp,aivciv to, Trpa<T<r6p,tva 
 crtL(Tp,oZs KOL Kcpavvois Kai (jxio'paa'iv. At 8 aw avOpioTruiv p.rjvvcra,'; 
 aXrjOeK pev r/aav, ovtto) 8 eis tXeyp^ov airoxpSta'ai KaT dv8pos €v8o^ov Kai 
 hvvap,ivov peya tov KaTtXtVa.^ 
 
 1 Plutarch's authority, knowing that Cicero delivered a speech pro Othone 
 in this year, erroneously connected it with the promulgation of Otho's lex 
 theatralis, four years previous (67 B.C.). See p. 37 2*. 
 
 2 It has been supposed that this motive, not elsewhere attributed to the 
 conspirators, was devised by Cicero, who in his Memoirs desired to compliment 
 Pompey. But this view is refuted by his cold reception of the long account of 
 the Conspiracy which Cicero sent to him (see p. 88), for Cicero would hardly 
 have been more complimentary to Pompey in a treatise intended for the 
 general public than in a personal letter addressed to him. Cp. adfam. V. 7, 3. 
 
 3 (A) Sail. c. 26 ; Cic. in Cat. II. 8, 20; Appian B. C. II. 2; Dio XXXVII. 30,4. 
 
 4 (A) Sail. c. 26; Dio XXXVII. 29, 2. 
 
 ^ (A) in Cat. III. 8, 18 f . ; de div. I. II, 17; II. 21, 47; Dio Cass. 
 XXXVII. 9, I. 
 
■J?, APPENDIX I 
 
 37. Aio rr)V ri/jLepav rtav ap^aipetnCtv vtrcpOiixtvo^ 6 Ki/cepwv eKtiXcL 
 Tov KaTiXiVav £is rrjv crvyKXrjTov Kai Trepi reov Xeyofjievwv dv€Kpivev. O 
 8c TToAAoiis otdjLievos elvai Toiis TrpayfiaTov Kaivutv icfti^p.ivov; ' iv rrj 
 jiovXrj, Kol a/xa TOis (ruvco/iOTais ivh(.LKVvp.tvo<s, arrcKpivaTO rcu K.iKepuivi 
 /xaviKr/v aTTOKpuTiv. " Tt yap," i4'V> '' "'/aaTTa) Setvdv, ci, SveTi' (rmfjia.T<i)v 
 dvTOJv, Tou /x€v to"^voi) Kttt KaT^f^OivqKOTO^, e^ovTos ok Ke(l>a\r]Vf tov o 
 OiKt<fia.\ov jxiv, Id'xvpov Se koX fx.tyaXov, ToijTa) KecftaXrjv airos eTnTtdyj/Xi; " ^ 
 TovT-Mv as T£ T-^v fiovXrjV Kal TOV hrjfLOV yvLyp,ev(DV vtt' avTov, ij.aX.Xov o 
 KiKepcuv eSewre, Kat TeOiopaKio'p.cvov avTov oX tc Svvarot Trdvres ciTrd t^s 
 otKtas Kat TtiJr veto]/ ttoAAoi KaTi^yayov ets to Treot'ov. ToS oe 0(s>paKO? 
 iiriTTjSe^ viritfyaivi Ti TrapaXucras ek twv (o/j,<i)v tov ;;^ituvos, ev8etKi/v/xevos 
 Tots opoio-t. TOV Kivovvov. Ot o '^yava/CTOvv Kat crvvcaTpecfyovTO irtpl 
 avTOV • Kal TeXos ev TaTs ipri<j>oi'; tov jxiv JS-aTiXivav avOi's l^i^aXov, 
 €iXovTO 8e 2iA.av6v virarov Kai Moupr;vav.' 
 
 38. XV. Oi TToXAo) 8' vo'Tepov totjtmv ^'St; tw KaTtXiVa twv ef 
 TvpprjVM a'vvep)(op.€v(t>v Kal KaTaXo)(i^ofi(V(i)v Kal rrji wpLcr/xivrj^ tt/dos 
 Tr]v €7nt7e<nv ijixepa's eyyvs ovo"i]<Sj rjKOv CTrt r^i/ JVtKCyDtovos otKiav irepi 
 yU.cVas VVKTas avSpes ot irpSiroi Kal SvvaTWTaTOi 'P(DjU.ai(uv, MdpKOs T£ 
 Kjodo-Q-os Kai MdpKos MdpKcXXos Kai Skt^tticov MeVcAXos • KOi/'ai/Tts 8e 
 Tas 6vpas Kal KaXeVavTCS tov Ovpwpov iKsXevov erreyetpai Kai (fipa.O'ai 
 KiKcpwvt T^v Trapovcrtav aiToJv. Hv St TOtdvSe.* T(3 Kpdo-o-<D /x,6Ta 
 8ct7rvov cTTto'ToAas d7roSt8o)crtv 6 Ovpoipos, viro orj Ttvos avOpiLirov Kop.i- 
 (T6u(Ta% ayviixTTOv, aAAas aXXots tirfyeypa^jLie'vas, aiTiu 8^ Kpdo-o'a) fniav 
 ahimroTov. 'Hv ix.ovqv dvayvoijs 6 Kpdo'o-os, cos t<f>pa^€ to. ypa.p.p.aTa 
 <t>6vov yevYjcrofjLevov ttoXvv 8ia KaTiXt'va Kal Tra/Dijvet t^s irdAetDS vire^- 
 cXdiiv, Tas dXAas o4k (.Xvaev, aXX riKtv tv6v<; Trpds tov KtKepcova TrXj/ycis 
 uTrd Tou ^uvov Kai tl t^s atTias aTroXvo/iievos, rjv i(y")(e. Sta t^iXiav tov 
 KaTtXtva. BovXcuo'd/xevos oiv o KtKcptov d/A yjplpa ^ovXrjv (Tvvrjyay^, 
 Kal Tas cTTto'ToXds KO/AiVas d7r€8<DK£v ots ^o-av e7r£(TTaX/Ae'vai, KeXeuaas 
 (pavepu)? avayvS>vai. Ilaorat 8' ^o'av o/xoiw; i-m/SovXijv <j>pai,ov(TaL. 
 
 1 = novarum rerura cupidi. See p. 37. 
 
 ^ (A) Cic. /ro Af«?-. 25, 51 ff. duo corpora esse rei publicae: unum debile 
 infirmo capite, alterum firmum sine capite; huic si ita de se meritum esset, 
 caput se vivo non defuturum. 
 
 3 (A) Cic. I.e.; pro Sull. 18, 51 ; Sail. c. 26 (very brief); Dio XXXVII, 29, 
 3, ToiJs re kiviT'qSeiovs crvveirriya-ye 7rapeaKevatr/j.4vovs dfiuvai ot . . , Kai 6wpaKa 
 . . . iitrd fi^v TT}v 4ff6riTa, wapatpaLvwP S^ avThv i^€wiTT]d€S, ivedOaaTO . . . fi re 
 Sijfios 5eti/a)s '^avd.KTTjire . . . Kal o'vtus viraTol re ^repot -i^pddrjffav. 
 
 ■* (D) Sail. c. 48 knows nothing of this nocturnal visit, but mentions the 
 name of the informer (Tarquinius), and is at pains to exculpate Crassus of any 
 complicity in the plot. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 79 
 
 Ettci oe Kttt KotvTOs Appios,^ dv^p crTpaTriyiKOi, aTTT^yyeAAe tovs ei' 
 Tuppr;vta KaTa\o;^io-jU,ovs, Kat MaAAtos dTrr/'yyc'AA.eTO (tvv X^'P' t'-^y'^^V 
 TTipi ras TToAeis cxeivas aiMpov/xevos det Tt irpodhoKov Kaivov airo t^s 
 Puip.rj'i, ytVerat Soyjua t^s /SovX^s TrapaKaTaTidea-OaL toTs iirdrois to, 
 Trpdy/j-aTa, Se^a/xivovi 8' ckeiVous tos iiricrTavTai SiotKCtv /cai crd^tiv T'^v 
 TToKiv. TovTO o ov TToXXaKts, dW OTav Tt jiieya Setarj, iroLiLV eiwdev rj 
 <TvyK\rjTOi.^ 
 
 XVI. 'Ettci 8e TavTYjV Xajiiov T-qv i^ovcriav 6 KtKEpwv to, /atv e^(i> 
 ■irpa.yfj.ara KoivTO) MeTc'XXo) SieiricrTeiKre, t^v 8c ttoXiv iL}(£ 8ta ^"pos * 
 Koi Kaff rfpcipav Trpoyei 8opu<^opOTj/A£vos vtt avSpwv toctovtuiv to ttX^^os, 
 a)0"T£ T^s dyopas ttoXu /tepos KaTe^etv €p,j8dXA.ovTos auTov toiis TrapaTrep,- 
 TTOVTas, ovKiTi, KapTiputv Trjv p-iXX-qfriv o KaTiAiVas avTos /u-ev CKTriySai/ 
 lyro) ir/Dos tov MdXXiov eiri to a-TpaTCV/xa, MapKiov Sk Kal K.eOrjyov ^ e/ce- 
 Xeutre ^i^tj Xa/SovTai iXOetv iirl tcis dvpa's (.(oOtv cus d(77rao"Oju,€Voiis tov 
 KiKepmi/a Kal SLa^'^cracrOai TrpocnrecrovTai. ToSto ^ovXjila,^ yvvrj tS>v 
 CTTi^avoiv, e^ayyeXXet T<o KtKcpojvt, wktos eX^oucra /cat 8taKeXevo*ajttei/7y 
 <^ijXaTTe<jpat tovs Trept tov Ke^Tyyov. Ot 8 lyKOV d/x ly/iepa, Kat ko>Xv- 
 divTt's elcreXOciv ■^yavd.KTOvv Kal Kare/Sowv im 6vpai<;, uxttc VTroiTTOTepoi 
 ytvicrOai. 
 
 Ti.poe.X6u>v 8' o KtKeptoi' IkoXcl tyjv crvyKXrjTov th to tov "SiTTqcriov 
 Atos lepdv, ov %TaTopa Po)jU.atoi KaXovo-tv, ihpvp,ivov iv dp^^ T^s tepds 
 oSot) Trpos TO IlaXaTtov dviovToiv. 'EvravOa kol rov KaTtXtVa jUeTa 
 Tolv dXXoJV eX^dvTos cos a.TroXoyrj(Top,ivov, crvyKaOicraL p.iv ou8£ts ii7re/LtEti'£ 
 Twv o'vyKXijTtKolv," dXXa TrdvTcs dTro tov /3d6pov /jitTrjXOov. Apfd/ievos 
 8e Xeyetv e^opvySetTO, Kai TtXos dvao-Tas o KtKepwv wpocreTa^ev avTwinOat.i 
 T^s irdXctos dTraXXaTTecT^at •' 8eTv yap aiiTo5 p,ev Xdyots, Ikuvov 8 
 
 1 According to * Sail. c. 30 L. Saenius, a senator, gave this information. 
 The chronological sequence of events in Sallust and Plutarch is also different. 
 Cp. Sibinga I.e. 97-112. 
 
 . 2 (A) Cic. in Cat. I. 2, 4; Sail. c. 29; Dio XXXVII. 31, 2 ; Liv. Periogh. 
 109; Caes. B. C. I. 5. 
 
 ^ (A) Cic. ad fam. V. 2, i, mihi tecum ita dispertitum oiBcium fuisse in rei 
 publicae salute retinenda, ut ego urbem a domesticis insidiis . . . tu Italiam 
 et ab armatis hostibus et ab occulta coniuratione defenderes. 
 (D) » Sail. c. 30 ; App. B. C. II. 3. 
 
 * (D) *Cic. in Cat. I. 4, 9; pro Suit. 6, 18. 19, 53; Sail. c. 28 ; App. B. C. 
 II. 3; Dio XXXVII. 32. 
 
 5 (D) * Cic. in Cat. I.e. ; Sail. I.e. ; App. I.e. 
 
 ^ (A) in Cat. I. 7, 16; II. 6, 12 ; Sail. c. 31 C. dissimulandi causa aut sui 
 expurgandi ... in senatum venit etc. 
 
 "> {A.) in Cat. I. 5, 10. 9,- 23; ,11. i, i; III. i, 3; in Pis. 2, 5; but Dio 
 XXXVII. 33 71 yepova-la rhv K. /MeTaa-Tijpai i\p-q<plcTa.To. 
 
8o APPENDIX I 
 
 ottAois TToXLTevofiivov ixicrov dvai TO rcLXp'S.^ 'O /xiv ovv KaTtXt'vas 
 evdii? i$e\6o}v fj,€Ta. rpiaKoaitDV ottXoc^o/dcov koI 7repicrTri(T6,jJ,cvos avT<S 
 Nov. 9 pa/3SoDi(;'as ojs apyfOVTi koI iriKiK^i'; kcll cr-qp.aia'i iirapafitvo^ Trpos Tov 
 MaXXtov i-)^il>pu ■ Kol ^KTp.vpimv 6p.ov Tt (TVVT)6pOl<Tp.iv<DV iTTrjti Tas 
 TToXets avaireLdiDv Kal d</)i<rr<is, touTe tov TroKcfX-ov ipavepov yeyovoTOs rbv 
 ' AvTuivLOv aTrocTTaXrjvaL Bia/j.axo'uiJitvov. 
 
 XVII. Tov; 8' VTro\eicf)6iVTas iv Trj ttoXci twv 8iecj}6app.€v<i)v vtto 
 TOV KartXtva crvvrjye Kal TrapcOappwe. Ko/DVTjXtos AevTXos Sovpas eTrt- 
 K\r)tTLV, avTjp ycvov; /xev cvSdfov, /JeySicoKibs Se <^auX(i)s Kat 8t' dcreXyeiav 
 t^cXT^Xa/uevos t^s jSovX^s irportpov, tote Se crTpaTrjyuiv to Sevrepov, cus 
 l^os €0"Tt rots eg Virap^^ dvaKTW/xevot? to /^ovXevTiKov agtoifjia. 
 
 39. Aeyerat Se xal t^v iiriKXtjaLV avTiS yfyifrOat tov ^ovpav i^ 
 aiTLa's TOiavTrj'S. 'Ev rots Kara SvXXav f^povoi'i ra/AteuMi' o'u^va Tcov 
 SrjfjLOo'Luiv -)(fi-qfi.a,T<i>v a.Trii>\t(je. koX Sie<f>6eipev. ' AyavaKTOvvTo^ 8i tov 
 SwXXa KOI Xoyov aTratToBvTos iv Trj o'vyKXrJTw, wpoe\6u>v okiyiLpaii; 
 Trdvv Kal KaTa<j}povrjTLKSii Xoyov p.\v ovk (.t^yj 8tSovat, iraply^uv Se Tr)v 
 Kvi^iJirjV, ujcnrcp cim^eicrav ol TraiSes, orav Iv tiS (T<j)aipi^eiv d/J-dpTiocTLv. 
 'Ek tovtov SovjOas Trapoivopdo'Oyj • aovpav yap ol Poj/xatot t^v KvijfXTjv 
 Xiyovdi. 
 
 ndXiv 8e SiKrjv exoiv kol Stac^^eipas iviovi Tuiv 8iKao"Tu)v, kirei Sueri 
 jxovai'i awecjivye \j/rj<f>OLS, iff'V '"'apavdXwjxa ■yeyoi'ei/ai to OaTepw KpiTrj 
 Sodev • dpK€iv yap el Kal p.ia \j/T^4'V l'-°vov a.ireXv6rj. 
 
 ' Tovtov ovTa Trj (f>v(r€L tolovtov KCKivrjp,ivov vno tov KaTiXiVa irpod- 
 Siet}>0€ipav IXwLCTi Kevats \j/tvhop.dvT(.i% xat yor/TCs iirrj ireTrXao-yu.ei'a Kal 
 ■)(^prja'iJ.ov'; aSovTes, cos ck tS>v St^vXXet'wv *" irpoSrjXovvTa^ et^ap^tVovs 
 tlvai Trj Pwpr) KopvTjXtous Tpets p.ovdp)^ovs, wv Svo /xiv ijSr] TreTrXripw- 
 Kivai TO xpedv, K.LVvav re koI SvXXav, TptVcj) 8e Xoittco K.opvrjXiw cKetVio 
 <f>ipovTa Trjv p.ovap^iav t/k^lv tov Sa.Lp.ova, Kal SeTi/ iravTius hi^ecrdai Kal 
 p,rj Si,a<j>d€LpeLV fJiiXXovTa tovs xaipovs mcnnp KaTiXtvas.' 
 
 ^ /« Ca^. I. 5, 10, magno me metu liberabis, dummodo inter me atque te 
 murus intersit (and similarly /'« Cat I. 7, 16); but the antithesis (\6yois . . . SttXois) 
 is not found in the Ciceronian passages. 
 
 2 * (D) in Cat. II. 2, 4, parum comitatus; 12, 27 ; Sail. c. 32, cum paucis. 
 Plutarch throughout identifies the first and second Catilinian speeches ! 
 
 8 (A) App. B. C. II. 3; Dio XXXVII. 33. 
 
 * (A) Cic. pro Mur. 39, 84 ; in Cat. II. 5,11; Sail. c. 36 ; Dio XXXVII. 33, 3. 
 
 5 The apocryphal character of the story is made evident by the fact that 
 the name Sura occurs much earlier, e.g. Liv. XXII. 31 (217 B.C.). 
 
 ^ The same oracle is recorded in Cic. in Cat. III. 4, 9; Sail. c. 47 ; Liv. 
 Perioch. 102; Veil. Pat. II. 34; App. .5. C. II. 2; Florus IV. 1,8, and alluded 
 to by Dio XXXVII. 34. 
 
 ' Perhaps a reference to the first Catilinian conspiracy. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 8 1 
 
 40. XVIIL OiiSci/ ovv e-rrevoEL /xiKpov 6 AivrXos ^ aa-rjfiov, dW 
 eotOoKTO Trjv PovXrjv airaa-av avaipetv twv t aWwv ttoXltwv ocrous 
 owatro, Trjv ttoXlv S' avrrjv KaTa7rt/x,irpavai, (jieLSea-OaC re /xiySevos ^ tu>v 
 TlojXTrrjCov reKvoiv ■ ravra 8' iiapTracraixivov; ex'"' ^"^' ii'TOis Kai (jjvXdr- 
 Tuv ofiYjpa tSv wpos IIo/XTriJiov SiaXvtretuv ■ rj8rj yap €(f>oiTa ttoXv's Xoyos 
 /cat ^€/3atos wircp airoC /caTtdvTos d?ro TJjs fjLeydXrjS (TTpariias-^ Kai 
 vu^ ^ci/ uptcTTO Trpos T^v iiri6(.cnv p-La tuiv KpovidSwv,^ ^t^»7 Se KatDec.i9ff. 
 o-TUTTTeia Kat fletov eis t^v Ke^T/you (pepovre^ oIkuiv dircKpui/'ai'.' 
 Avdpas oe rafavTE? eKarov Koi piprj roa-avra t^s 'P<u/iijs eKacrrov £<^' 
 cKdcTTci) SitKXiJpcucrav/ cus St' oAt'you 7roA.Xtov dt/'dvTa)v 4'XiyoLTO iravra- 
 x69ev 7) TToXts. "AXAot hi toiis oxeroiis 1/u.eAXov €p.^pa.^a.vTK dvo- 
 (T<f>a,TTeiv Toiis iSpevo/AeVovs.' 
 
 npaTTOjU,£v(DV 8e TovTcov £Tv;^ov eTTtSr^/ioCvTcs 'AXXo/3pLyu>v ^ Svo ' 
 Trpeo-^ets, ISvovs judAto-ra 8^ tote Trovrfpa. irpa.TTOVTO'; koI fiapvvop,ivov 
 TTjv riyep.ovtav. Tovtous ot Trtpt Aei/rAov (u<^eXt/u,ous rfyovptvoi, wpo's to 
 Ktv^o-at Kat /AcTa/SaXetv t^i/ FaAaTtav iiroirjaavTO o-vvio/iOTas.' Kat 
 ypap-p-ara /jLev airots irpos t-^v ckci PovX-qv, ypap-para Sc irpos KartAtvav 
 tSoo-av, Tg /i£v V7ri(rp(vov;ao/ot t^v eAeTJ^tptdv,^" tov Se KartAtVai' TrapaKa- 
 AoCvTes eAev^epajcravra roiis 8oijAovs €7rt t^i/ 'Vutfjiijv iXavvuv.^^ 2vv- 
 aTreVreAAoi' Se /act' aurSv Trpos tov KaTiAtVai/ Tirov Ttvd KpoTtovtaTTjv 
 
 ^ Of. § 35 2. This statement is also found only here. Both passages point 
 to an authority very friendly to Pompey as the ultimate source of the narra- 
 tive, possibly Livy. 
 
 2 * (D) Cic. hi Cat, III; 4, 10, Lentulo et aliis Saturnalibus caedem fieri 
 atque urbem incendi placeret, Cethego nimiura id longum videretur; 7, 17. 
 
 ^ * (D) in Cat. III. 5, 10, Cethegus qui paulo ante aliquid tamen de gladiis et 
 sicis quae apud ipsum erant deprehensa, respondisset . . . se semper bonorum 
 ferramentorum studiosum fuisse ; 3, 8. There is nothing corresponding to 
 this in Sail. 
 
 * (D) * in Cat. I. 4, 9 ; III. 4, 8. 6, 14; /re Sull. 18, 52 f. ; Sail. 43; App. B. C. 
 II. 3 ; Dio XXXVII. 34, 1, Karairp^ffai re t& Slstv (a corrupt passage). 
 
 ^ This detail is found only here. 
 
 s The Allobrogian incident is related by Cic. in Cat. III. 2, 4-5, 13; Sail, 
 c. 40-47 ; App. B. C. II. 4. The coincidences are mostly quite unavoidable, 
 and, in any case, completely neutralized by divergences in details. 
 
 ' Their number is not elsewhere recorded. 
 
 8 (A) Cic. Cat. III. 2, 4 ; Sail. c. 40 is very circumstantial, but the revolt of 
 Gaul is not a part of the plan. 
 
 ' Cic. I.e., but not iri Sallust. 
 
 1" (D) No such promise is mentioned by Cic. or Sail., but perhaps implied 
 in Cat. III. 9, 22. 
 
 11 (D) Cic. I.e. III. 4, 8, se habere ad Catilinam mandata et litteras, ut 
 servorum praesidio uteretur, ut ad urbem . . . cum exercitu accederet. This 
 
82 APPENDIX I 
 
 KOfJLC^ovra ras cTrtcrroXds.^ Ota S" OLvOpuiwoiv acrTaOjXT^Tuiv /cat //.er 
 otvou TO. TToXXa Koi yvvaiKuiv aX.\iqX.ois ivTvy)(av6vTu>v PovXevfiaTa irovio 
 Kol Xoyicrixio v^^jiOvTi Kal crvvecet TreptTrrj ota)/ca>v 6 KtKeptov, koli ttoXXovs 
 fj.iv t)(ti>v (.^uiOev ein<TKOwovvTa<; to. irpaTTO/xivoL Kol crvv€^i.)(y€vovTa<; avTw, 
 TToAAots Bi Tuiv /ACTe;)^£tv 8oKOvvTu>v T^s crvvii)/u.ocrtas otaXeyo/xtvos Kpv<\>a 
 Kol TTia-Ttvav, lyvu) rrjv Trpos Tois ^eVovs KotvoXoyt'av^ Kat vvktoj eve- 
 Speucras IXa/3e toi' Ji.poTwvLa.TrjV Koi to. ypd/xp^ara crvvepyovvrav do7jXo)s 
 
 TOIV AXXoyS/DtycUV. 
 
 Dec. 3 XIX. "A/xa 8' rip,ipa. jiovXrjV adpoLO-a^ eh to ttJ's O/iOi/otas tepov 
 
 e^aviyvd) to. ypafip^aTa /cat Toir fjiTjvvTCiv oiT^Kovo'ev. Et^iy oe Kat 
 
 StXavos 'lovvtos d/C7;K0£vat Ttvas Ke^ijyov XiyovTOs, cos ^JTrarot re TpcTs 
 /cat (TTpaTrjyol T€TTap€^ avo.ipeio'OaL p.eWovcri.'^ TotaBra 8' ertpa Kal 
 net(7(uv, avrjp vwaTiKO'i, utTrjyyuXe.* rdtos Sc SovXiriKtos, ets tcoi/ 
 (TTpaTrjymv, iirl ttjv olklclv 7re/A^6ets roC Ke^ijyov ttoXXo. yaei' ev avrg' 
 fieXrj KOL OTrXa, TrXetcrra 8e ^i'c^t; /cat yiia^atpas £upe veo^iyKTOvs ciTrdcras. 
 TeXos 8e rm KpoTcoi/ttiTr; i/fr^c^tcra/xevT^s a8£tav ETrt /xrjVvcreL t^s /3ot)X^s 
 eC^Xey^^cW 6 Aei/rXos d7ra)/xo(raTO T^i' ap^r/v (o'TpaTrjyoiV yap ervyT^ave), 
 Kat T^v Trepi,Tr6p<ftvpov Iv Trj /SovXj KaTadip.e.vo<; hirjXXa^ev IcrOrjTa Trj 
 (Tvp.<^opa. irpiirova'av.^ Ovtos ;U.£v o5i/ Kat ot cruv avTw irapeSoOrjcrav £is 
 dSccr/AOv cj>vXaK7jv rots o'TpaTTjyo'is. 
 In Cat. 41. 'HStj 8 ecTTTcpas ouctt/s Kat tov S-qp,ov Trtpifj,ivovTO% aOpoov, 
 
 (Dec. 3) TrpoeXpwv KtKepojv, Kat <f>pdo'as to Trpa.yp.a rots TroXtVats Kat Trpoirep,- 
 (^6ti%, iraprjXOev ets ot/ct.av (j>iXov yetrvtuvTos,* 
 
 is foUoweci by details which Plut. had given earlier (§ 39 oracle, § 40 burning 
 of the city), Lentulus being there represented as acting independently. In 
 Cic. and Sail. c. 44 these facts are stated as the confession of Volturcius, in 
 Plut. the latter's evidence is associated only with the exposure of Lentulus. 
 
 1 * (D) Cic. I.e. T. Volturcius ; Sallust: T. Volturcium quendam Crotoniensem ; 
 Appian : BouXroiJp/ciop &vdpa KpoTojvLdrTiv ; Florus : Volturcius. The name 
 given by Plut. is, therefore, not based upon Cic. or Sallust. 
 
 2 * (D) xhis is also completely at variance with Cic. I.e. and Sail. c. 41 (and 
 Appian). According to the latter, moreover, the ambassadors reveal the plot 
 to Q. Fabius Sanga, who in turn informs Cicero, but Sanga is not mentioned 
 either in Cic. or in Plutarch. 
 
 ^ (D) According to Cic. Cat. III. 3, 7, he opened the letters in the presence 
 of witnesses before submitting them to the Senate. 
 
 ^ These details are not mentioned elsewhere. 
 
 ^ * Agrees with Cic. Cat. III. 3, 6. 5, 10 except as to the peofl^icTous dTrd<ras. 
 
 6 (D) See p. 22. 
 
 ' (D) * Sail. c. 47 Lentulus itemque ceteri in liberis custodiis habeantur. 
 Five custodians are mentioned, but there is no praetor among them ! 
 
 ^ This fact is not elsewhere mentioned. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 83 
 
 42. ETTti Tijv Ikuvov yuvatKe? KaT£i}(ov tepois a.TropprJTOi'; opyia^ovcrat 
 ^eov, Tjv 'Pw/iaTot luci/ dya6»;v, "EXAiyvcs 8e rui/atKetai/ ovo/nd^ov(7i. ©verat ' 
 o avTTj Kar iviavrov Iv Trj oIkio. tov VTraTOv 81a ytii/aiKos ^ fJ-riTpo? 
 avTov, TU)v EaTtaSwi/ TrapOeviav Trapovawv. EtcreA^tuv ovv o KiKepwv 
 KaO avTov, oXiyuiv wavTaimaiv avT(S TrapovTuiv, l<f>p6vTit,e.v ottcos ;^p);(raiTO 
 rots di/Spacrt. Tt^i/ te yap aKpav koI Trpoa-rJKOvcrav d.StK-^p,a.aL ttjXl- 
 KovTOii TLj/.iopiav i^evXa^uTO Koi KaTWKi/ei Si' i-miLKuav i7^ovs S.fj.a Kal 
 U)S i^rj SoKoirj T^s iiovcTia'S ayav efji<jiop€LaOaL koi Trt/cpuls iTrtiijiaCvuv 
 avopacn yevti t£ ■rrpuiTOL'S kol <j)iXov<s BwnTovi iv Trj ttoXcl KeKTrjp.ivoi'i ■ 
 p.aXaKU}T€pov Te )^prja-diJL€VO<; coppooSet to)' aTr' avTwv klvSvvov. Ov yap 
 ayaTTYjaeiv fi.iTpiioT€p6v tl Oavarov TraOovra^, aXX' eis dirav avappa- 
 yrj(7e(7dai ToXp.r)'; Trj -n-aXaul xaxta viav opyrjv -irpoo-Aa/JovTa? • airos re 
 Sofetv dvavSpos koi /iaXaKos, ofiS' dWws SoKoJv evToXp.oTaTO'i elvai toTs 
 iroXXois. 
 
 XX. TavTtt TOV KiKcp<i)vos SiaTTopoCi'Tos yiVeTttt' Tt Tats ywai^l 
 crrjp.iLov Ovovcrai^. 'O yap /3<u/ids, •^8?; tou Trupos KaTaKeKoifirja-dai 
 OOKoCj/TOS, ex T^s TEi^pas Kat Tcov KeKavf/,iviov (J>XolS}v (ftXoya iroXXrjV 
 dvtJKe Kai Xafjiirpdv. Y<^' 7;s ai /i€v dXAat Si€TrTorj6rja-av, al 8' tepat 
 TrapOfvoi. Trjv tov KiKcp<oi/os ywaiKa TepevTiav cKcAeuo-av g Tap^os 
 ;^a)p£tv irpos Tor avSpa Kal KeXevetv ots lyvtoKcv ly)(ei,puv vwip tiJs 
 7raTpt8os, CDS /is'ya irpd; Te (rwTrjpuxv Koi 8d^av avT<S Trjs 6eov (^ws 
 St8ovcnys. 
 
 43. H Se TepevTta (xat yap ouS' dAAius ^v npaud Tts oiS' aToA/xos 
 T^v (j>v(Tiv, dAAci (^tAoTi/iios yuK^ /cat //.SAAoi/, (us avTos (f>ricriv 6 
 }i.LKcpu>v,^ tS>v TToXiTiKuiv peTaXap,j3a,vovcra Trap' cKeivov <j>povTiBuiv ^ 
 /j,eTaSt8ovo-a tu>v oiKiaKuiv e/cetvo)) TawTa re irpos awrdv Ic^pacre /cat irapw- 
 ^vvev CTTi Toiis dvSpas ' ^ 
 
 1 On this prodigy and the deliberations of Cicero, see p. 18. The latter 
 are attributed to him by Sail. c. 46 on the eve of the exposure, and he ignores 
 the alleged portent : anxius erat, dubitans, in maxumo scelere tantis civibus 
 deprehensis, quid facto opus esset; poenam illorum sibi oneri, impunitatem 
 perdundae rei publicae fore credebat. Igiiur confirmato animo vocari ad sese 
 iubet Lentulum etc. Sallust does not state the reason for this ' confirmatio 
 animi.' Did he perhaps have in mind the alleged omen.? If so, his well- 
 known radical views on the subject of prodigia might have been the cause for 
 not mentioning it. 
 
 2 Wherever this remark may have been made, it cannot have occurred in 
 the inrbij.vriixa t^s wrareias for the reasons given on p. 19 f. Hence the eniire 
 story cannot have been taken by Plut. from this source. 
 
 3 (D) On the other hand, Cicero {in Cat. IV. 2, 3) says she was exani- 
 mata. 
 
84 APPENDIX I 
 
 44. 6/u.ot'(DS 8e Kol KoiVros 6 d8eA<^6s Kal tuiv aTTO <^iAocro^tas 
 €Tatpu)v IIc)7rA.tos Ntyt'Sio?," o) Ta TrAcTcrra Kol fjiiyKTTa wapa to? TroXtTt- 
 Ka.'S l)(j>r)TO Trpa^eis. 
 
 45. Tij 8' vcrT€paLa yevo/teVmi' ei/ crvyKAT^ro) Aoyujv Trept ri/naiptas 
 Toil' dvSpiov,^ o TTpwTos ip<j)Trj6(.\s yvii)fji.r]v 2tAavo9 etTre t^v ia)(a.TrjV 
 81KJ/V SoDvai TrpocTT^KCtv d^^cVras ck to Sea/xwrT^piov. Kat TrpocreTiSevTO 
 TovTo) TTCirres e</>€ci75 p-^XP'' ratou KatVapos roi) /actol ravra 0tKTdT0po<; 
 yevo/xivov. 
 
 46. Tote 8e ve'os (uv In Kai rets irpdtTas e)(iDv t^s avi-qcnwi a.p)(a.<;, 
 tjBtj 8e T^ TToXtreta /cat rat? eATTttrtv cts iKetvrjv rrjv ooov ifi^^^rjKoySy fj 
 TO. 'V(ap.aLU}v €is p,ovap^iav ix^TiuT-qcn Trpdy/jbara, roils /A£i' oAAovs 
 tAdyfeve,^ TO) 86 K-iKepoivL TroAAds /i£V VTroif/ia'S,^ XafSrjV 8' ov%tp,iav eis 
 e\ey)(ov TrapeSuiKev, dAAd Kai Aey dvrwv ^v cvt'coi' axovetv, a>s cyyis iXOmv 
 aXZvai 8t£K<^vyot tov avSpa. Ttves 8e' <j}acri' TrapiStiv eKOvra Kai 
 TrapaXtTT^Xv ttjv Kar' CKetvou pirjvv(Tiv <fi0^io raiv t^tAtov auroi) Kat t^s 
 8wvdju,e(os • TravTt ydp elvai TrpoSrjXov, on ^dAAov av e/ccTvoi ytvotvTO 
 TTpoo'OT^KT] Kat'orapt (ToiTTjpias 7} Kattrap CKCtVots KoAdo"etus. 
 
 47. XXI. 'Eiret 8' ovv ^ yvw/jLirj Trcpi^kdcv eh avTov, di/acTTa? 
 dTr€<l>-^vaTO p,rj Oavarovv 7011% dvSpa?, dAAd rds ovo'tds etvat h'qp.ocrl.a'i, 
 aiiTov^ 8' aTra^^evTas €ts TrdAeis t^s 'IraAtas, as dv Soktj H-iKepoivL., 
 TrjpuaOai. SeSe/xeVovs, d;^i dv ov KaTavoXep.tjOfj KanAiVas. OJcrr^s 8£ 
 
 ^ This is not confirmed by any extant utterances of Cicero and may have 
 been based upon the d^ petitione consulatus. 
 
 2 Cp. Plut. Ati sent sit ger. 27 ^iK^pojv avrbs oj fioXdyei rot KdXKtara Kal 
 fjL^yiCTTa Twv ffVfi§ov'Kev^aro3v oh dpdQ? ivv-jrareOwp tt}v irarpioa dUo-iii^e fj£Ta 
 HottXIov ^lyidlov tov 0iXoir60ou avvBeivai. This exaggerated eulogy of one of 
 Cicero's collaborators in crushing the conspiracy is quite un-Ciceronian. Cp. ad 
 fam. (ad Nigidium) IV. 13, 2, per me quondam te socio defensa res publica. 
 The second-hand character of the passage seems indicated by the imperfect. 
 
 3 Cp. Cic. in Cat. IV; Sail. c. 50-52; Veil. Pat. II. 35, I; Plut. Cat. 
 Min. 22; App. B. C. II. 5f.; Dio XXXVII. 35 f . ; Florus IV. I, 10. 
 
 * Cp. p. 23. 
 
 ^ Cp. Suet. Caes. 9, Cicero in quadam ad Axium epistola referens, Cae- 
 sarem in consulatu confirmasse regnum de quo aedilis cogitarat. 
 
 ^ Sail. c. 49 defends Caesar against the charge. It is repeated by Plut. 
 Crass. 15; and Suet. Caes. 9 (the first conspiracy). 14. ' (A) Plut. Caes. 7. 
 
 s This is not expressly mentioned in Cic. or Sail, but in App. B. C. II. 6. 
 On the other hand, they record some parts of Cassar's motion not found in 
 Plutarch. 
 
 ^ (A) App. B. C. II. 6 P'^XP^ KaTtKiva KaraTroKeji-qdivTOs. 
 (D) Cic. Cat. IV vincula . . . et ea sempiterna etc.; Sail. c. 51 in vinculis 
 habendos per municipia quae maxime opibus valent, neu quis de his postea 
 ad senatum referat etc. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 85 
 
 T^s yi/iu/Aijs iTTtuKovs KOL Tov XtyovTos ciTTCiv SvvaT (OT a.T ov , po-rrrjv 6 
 KiKcptDV TTpocriOrjKtv ov /xiKpdv. Air OS te yap dvacrTas ivc-)^(.iprjcr€v eh in Cat. 
 €Ka.T€pov, ra /x€v rrj Trporipa., to. 8e t^ yvuil^-rj Katcjapos avveiTrwv, ot re (leoB) 
 <j>iXoL TravTc; olojxtvoi rco KiKep(ovt (Tvp.cj)epe.i.v Trjv Kat'crapos yviLixrjv 
 (rjTTOv yap iv aiTiais Icrecr^at jU,^ OavaruxravTa tov'; ai/Spas) ypovvTO rrjv 
 Stvripav p-aXXov yvuifjL-qv,^ usa-re. Kal tov StA.avoi' a^^is p,eTa/3aX}i.6p.evov 
 TrapaiTeiO'Oai Kai Xeyuv, lus o48' airos e'/irot ^avartK^v yvwfjL-nv • i(j\a.TrjV 
 yap avhpl /SovXevry 'Pa)p,ai(ov etvat Si'kt^v to S£(ryU,coT?;piov.^ 'Elprjp.tvrji 
 oe T^s yvwp.Tq'; TrpSros di/Tc'/cpovo-ev aurij KdrAos Aovrdrtos '^ etra 
 Se^dynei/Qs KaTwv, Kai roi Aoyo) o-<^o8p5s o-weircpet'o-as ctti tov Kaurapa 
 T1JV iiTTOVoiav, ev£irX7;o-e 6up,oi} Kat (j>povrjjj.aTO<; rrjv crvyKXrjTov, cocrre 
 ^dj/aTOV KaTa{j/ri(l>icra<T6ai twv av&pu>v.^ 
 
 48. Ilept Se hrjixeva-cwi )(prjiJ.a.Tu>v evLO-Taro KaTo-ap, oiik diiCiv ra 
 <l>iXdv6p<j>7ra T^s Eauroi) yvu>iJ.rj<i eK^aXovrai ivi xprja-acrOai. t(S <tkv- 
 vpiiyjroTaTW. Bta^o/xcvojv oe ttoAXcuv €7r€/caA.etro tov^; 87^p,dpYOTJ9. Ot 8' 
 ovp^ iTnJxovov, dXAa KiKepwi/ avros ev8ovs di^Ke r^i/ irept h-qp,€v(Te.w; 
 yvis>p.rjv. 
 
 49. XXII. 'E;)^(i)pei Se p.cTd r^s (iovXrj's im toijs avSpas. Oix cV 
 Ta^To) Se Trdi/res fjo'aVj dXXos o dXXoi/ icjivXarTe rtov crrpaTrjyiitvJ Kat 
 7rpu)T0V Ik TiaXaTLOv TrapaXa/Siav tov A&tXov r/ye^ 8ta T^s lepds 080B 
 Kat T^s d.yop3.<; fiecrrj';, tZv p.iv ■^yep.oviKUiTo.Twv dvBpu>v kvkXi^ Trepteo'Tret- 
 pafx.ivu>v Kat Sopv(j}opovvTo)v, tov 8e Si^fji,ov <j>pLTTOVTOi TO. Spwpeva kou 
 TraptovTos o'Linwrj, p.dXi(TTa 8i twv vioiv, Sia"mp tepots Ttfft iraTpioLi 
 apLaTOKpaTiicq% Ttvos e^ouo'tas reXeto-^oit p,£Td (jto/iov Kal 6ap,j3ovi 
 ^OKOvvTinv. i^ieXOtiiv ok ttjv dyopav Kat yei/op.evos Trpos tw oe<Tp.o3TrjpLtji 
 
 ^ (D) This passage shows that Plut, never read the 4th CatiUnian. 
 
 2 As the original could have left no doubt as to his meaning (cp. Sail, 
 c. 51), this quibble cannot be authentic. It is again mentioned in Plut. Cai. 
 Min. 22 and in Suet. Caes. 14, tantum metum iniecit asperiora suadentibus . . . 
 ut Decimum Silanuin . . . non piguerit sententiam suam . . . interpretatione 
 lenire velut gravius atque ipse sensisset exceptam. Here, as in § 46 ^, Plutarch 
 and Suetonius are the only authorities for these details. According to Sail. 
 c. 50, Silanus merely changed his vote permotus oratione C. Caesaris. 
 
 3 He is mentioned at the head of a long list of men who advocated the 
 death penalty before Cato. Cp. Cic. ad Att. XII. 21, i. 
 
 * So App. B. C. I.e. iratpCii avaKaKiwruv ttjv fs rdv Kalcrapa VTro'f/laii. 
 
 6 Cp. ad Att. I.e.; Sail. c. 53; Suet. Caes. 14. 
 
 ^ This incident is related only in Plutarch. 
 
 ' The same error as in § 40 ', p. S2. Sail. c. 55 says that the condemned 
 conspirators, with the exception of Lentulus, were taken to prison fer prae- 
 tores, but App. B. C. II. 6 iKucrov airSiv 6 KiKipav is rb S^a ixoiriiptov /lerayaydv. 
 
 8 Sail. I.e. ipse, praesidiis dispositis, in carcerem deducit. 
 
86 APPENDIX I 
 
 7rape'8(i)Ke tov AcVtAov r<o hr)jJ.Cm koI vrpocreraiev aveXtlv etO cfijs tov 
 Ke'^Tyyov, Kal oijtu) tuiv aWuiv eKacrrov Karayayiov a.TriKT€.iva>. 
 
 'OpSiv Se TToXAois tri t^s (Tvvwfji.ocria'; iv ayopS crvvtcrTWTa^ aOpoovi 
 Kal rijv pkv ivpa^iv ayvoovvTCLi, T-qv §£ vvkto. Trpoap-evovTa^, cus in ^lovTwv 
 T<t>v avBpwv Kal 8wa/xeVo)v i^apTracrd^vaL, (jiOey^a.p.evo'; jxiya irpo^ avTov^ 
 ""E^jycrav" eiTrev.^ Outo 8e 'Pwftat'iuv ot Sv(T(f>rifi€iv p.r] /8ovAo/xevot to 
 Ttdvavai o'Tfp.aivovcrLV. 
 
 "HSi; 8' ^v emripa, Kal 8t' dyopas avi/Saivcv eh ttjv olkiov, ovKeri crLUiTrfj 
 TUIV ttoXltwv ov8e ra^ei Trpoirep.TTOVToiv avTOv, aWa <^(oi/aTs Kal KpoTOii 
 he^ojxiviav, Kad' ous yivoiTO, amr^pa Kal ktictttjv avaKakovvrmv t^s 
 TraTptSos." To. Se <^u>Ta iroWa, KariXafjiTre rows trrcvtoTroiJS, Xa/XTrdSia 
 Kal oaoas IcTijiVToiv lirl Tats Ovpais, At 8e yvvatKes e/c Twv Tcyoiv 
 wpov^aivov eTTt Tt/x^ Kat ^ea ToB dvSpos vtto irop.Trfj rS)v a.pL(TTU>v /tidAa 
 aefivSi'S dvtoi/Tos • oiv ot 7rA.£to-Tot TroXe/iovs Te KareipyacTfJLevoi. /xeyaXov; 
 Kal 8ta 6pia.p.jiu>v e'KreXrjXaKOTK Kai irpocTKtKTrifi.ivoi yyjv Kal OdXarrav 
 ovK oXiyrjV ifSaSi^ov dvo/jLoXoyov/jLevoi, irpos aXX'^Xov;, ttoXXol's /xev tS>v 
 Tore Tjyejxoviav Kat (TTpaTTjySiv ttXovtov koI Xatjyvpmv Kal 8Dva/xeo)s ^dptv 
 0</>€tAetv TOV Pajp,ata)v 817 /xov, do'^aAetas Se Kat (XiOT-yjptas ivl p.6viO KtKC- 
 ptovt, ti^XikoCtov dc^eXovTt Kat too-oStov avTov Ktv8i;voj'.^ Ov yap to 
 KuiXvtrai TO. TrpaTTO/xcva Kat KoXdcrai tovi irpaTTOVTa^ iSoKei OavfiatrTov, 
 6.XX oTi fJi,eyL(TT0V tS)v TrioiroTe v£<DTepi(7fjiu>v oijtos cAai^tcrTOts KaKots 
 avev (TTaaewi Kal rapay^TJi KaTccrjiecre} 
 
 1 This graphic description is unquestionably of one piece and hence neces- 
 sarily talien from one and the same authority, highly favorable to Cicero. But 
 that this source was the virb^v-q^a, as is universally assumed, is refuted by 
 ft^ri<rav, which clearly proves that Plutarch read the word vixerunt in a Latin 
 narrative, in which he must also have found the explanation of the euphemism. 
 That Appian, though he exhibits many noteworthy coincidences with Plutarch 
 in these particular chapters, did not consult this biography or a common third 
 source, is made evident by the words: roi^ iv dyopg, -jrapohevwv ^cr^yHTjcev, i^ri 
 re6va<rLV. 
 
 ^ ad Att. IX. 10, 3, me quem nonnuUi conservatorem istius urbis, quern 
 parentem esse dixerunt ; luv. VIII. 243 Roma parentem, Roma patrem patriae 
 Ciceronem libera dixit; App. B. C. II. 7 iirl epyif Sid arS/xaTos fjv Kal a-oirrjp 
 ^56/cet Tept(f>avw^ aTroWvfji.^vj} rrj TraTpiSt yeviffdai^ x^P^"^^^ t€ ^aav aiiTt^ wapa r^v 
 iKKKriclav Kal eixpTjpiiat iroiKikai. 
 
 ^ Esp. in Cat. IV. lo, 21, sit Scipio ille clarus . . . Paullus . . . Marius . . . 
 Pompeius . . . erit inter horum laudes aliquid loci nostrae gloriae etc. 
 
 * E.g. Cic. in Cat. III. 10, 23, erepti estis ex crudelissimo . . . interitu, 
 erepti sine caede, sine sanguine, sine exercitu, sine dimicatione, togati me 
 uno togato duce et imperatore vicistis. 6, 15; pro Flacco 40, 102; Phil. XIV. 
 8, 24. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 87 
 
 50. Kat yap tov KariAtvav 01 TrXeicTTOt, tG>v (TvveppvrjKOTMV Tvpo% 
 avTov a/j.a tiS wvOifrdai to. Trtpl AcVtAov koi Ji-eOrjyov eyKaraXiTrovTcs 
 ^)(ovTO • Kal fjLtTa. TMv crvp.p.ep.a'riKOTWv avrm Stayojvtcrd/itvos ir/Dos 
 
 AvTO)viov airds re hitf^ddp-r) koX to trTpaTOTreSov.^ 
 
 51. XXIII. Ou /A^v oXA TjO'av ol tov K-iKeptova irape.UK^vao'p.ivoi 
 Kai Acyeiv €7ri TOiJTOts Kat Troietv KaKUiq, i)(OVTcs ijyejudi/as tSiv els to 
 fxiXXov ap-^6vT(ov KaiVapa jxlv (TTparrj-yovvTa, MereXA.ov 8e Kal Bi^trTtW 
 &r]p,ap^ovvTas-^ Ot t^v ap^rjv wa/DaXaySdvTcs, ert ToS KiKtpwvos rjixipa^ Dec. 
 dXtyas apj(OvTos, ovk £t(OV 8rjp,rjyopeLV aiiTov, dXX iircp Tuiv kiifBoXiov 
 PiOpa OivT€'; ov irapU<7av ou8 iiriTpeirov Xeyetv, dA.\' ckcXcuov, ei /8ov- 
 XoiTO, fiovov TTcpt T^s o,p)(rjs a.Trofioo'avTa KaTaySatVeiv. KaKcivos £7rt 
 TOVTOts (US o/iocriov irporjXOe. • kol ye.voft,ivr]S avT<S cnunrrj'S a);Uvv£i' oi tov 
 TTOLTpiov, aXX I'Sidv Tiva Kat Katvdi/ opKov, r/ p,r]v o-eo"(OKe'vat T^v TraTptSa 
 
 Kai SLaTCTrjprjKevai Trjv riye/jLOViav. EiruJiUvve 8e tov opKov avT<S crv/jLTras 
 6 8^/u.os.^ 'E<^' ois cTt /AaXXov o T£ Kat(rap ot t£ 8?^/itap^oi ;)(aX£7rai- 
 vovT£s dXXas te t<u KtKepwvt rapa^a.'; €ix,r])(a.vu>VTO, Kat vop.O'i vir airwv 
 £io-i^y£TO KaXftv Uo/XTrTjtov p.£Ta. t^s cTTpaTtas, M 8^ KaTaXvo"oVTa t^v 
 KtKepoJvos 8vvao'T£tav.'' 
 
 ^ (A) Sail. c. 57 postquam in castra nuntius pervenit . . . de Lentulo et 
 Cethego ceterisque . . . suppliciutn sumptum, plerique quos ad bellum spes 
 rapinarum aut novarum rerum studium illexerat, dilabuatur. Dio Cass. 
 XXXVII. 39 iirel 8^ iKeTv6v re &iroKw\6Ta ^Tr^dero Kal tO>v avvbvTiov ol avxvoif^ 
 p£6iiTTa}jAvovs 5ta toOt ^(r6eTo etc. 
 
 2 Sail. c. 57-61 ; App. B. C. II. 7 ; Dio Cass. XXXVII. 39. 
 
 ^ (K)pro Sestio 5, 11, tribunorum plebis novorum, qui turn extremis 
 diebus consulatus mei res eas quas gesseram vexare cupiebant, and Schol. 
 Bob. ad loc. 
 
 (D) Sail. c. 43 correctly speaks of the oppostion of Bestia at an earlier 
 period : L. Bestia, tribunus plebis, contione habita,. quereretur de actionibus 
 Ciceronis etc. The two tribunes for 62 were Metellus and Cato (see below). 
 Bestia was tribune in 63, and had nothing to do with the incident of the oath. 
 (A) ad fain. V. 2, 6, quem (sc. Metellum) ego cum comperissem omnem sui 
 tribunatus conatum in meam perniciem parare atque meditari. 
 
 ^ ad fam. V. 2, 7, cum ille (Metellus) mihi nihil, nisi ut iurarem, permit- 
 teret, magna voce iuravi verissimum pulcherrimumque iusiurandum quod 
 populus item magna voce me vere iurasse iuravit ; in Pis. 3, 6, cum in contione 
 abiens magistratu dicere a tribune fl. prohiberer quae constitueram, cumque 
 is mihi tantum modo ut iurarem permitteret, sine ulla dubitatione iuravi rem 
 publicam atque hanc urbem mea unius opera esse salvam, populus Romanus . . . 
 meum iusiurandum . . . approbavit; de rep. I. 4, 7 ; Dio XXXVII. 38, i. 
 
 s Plut. Cat. Min. 26 f. This law is not mentioned elsewhere, nor do we 
 hear of Cesar's opposition to Cicero at this time (cf. Dio XXXVII. 11), but cp. 
 pro Sull. 7, 21, hie ait se ille regnum meum ferre non posse . . . consulatus. 
 
88 APPENDIX I 
 
 'AX\' rjv 6<jie.\o'; /ue'ya tiS KiKcpouvi (cat Trdcry rfj ttoAci Sij/xapj^cov Tore 
 KaTwv Kttt rois iKuvtav iroXiTtvixacnv av icrrj^ /xiv i^ovcria';, fiti^ovo'; 8c 
 So^Tjs dvrtTacro-o/u.€vos. Ta t£ yap aXXa p-iSiws iXvtre, kol tyjv Kikc- 
 pcovos iirareiav ovTu>i rjpi Tw Aoyip iJL€ydX.rjV hr)iJ.rjyopria-a%, uxttc Tt/x,as 
 auTco Tuiv TrtoTTOTe ficyiara^ il/rj4>i(Taa0aL Kal Trpoa-ayop^vaai Trarepa 
 Trarpt'Sos. Upwrm yap EKctVo) Sokei toCto KaOvirdp^at, Kcitmvos avTov 
 ouTa)9 ev rcu orjfjLw irpocrayopeva'avTO'S' 
 
 52. XXIV. Kai /xeyicTTOv p.€v icr;^u(r£v ev tt; TrdAei totc, ttoXXoTs 
 8' Ittl^Bovov iavTov iTrOLrjirev Att oiSevos epyov nrovrjpov, t<S 8 cTratveTv 
 det Koi /xeyaXweLv avToi iavTov vtto ttoXXuiv 8vo'}(£paii'op.Evos. Oure yap 
 /SovXrjv ovTe 8rjij.ov ovtc StKatm/ptoi/ ^v avviXOetv, iv w /jltj KariXivav 
 ISet 6pvXovix€vov OLKOvaai Kal AeVrXoi/. 
 
 'AAAa Koi TO. /StySXta TeAeDTuv Kar eTrXrjcrc Kac ra avy- 
 ypd/ijuara rcuv € y k co /x I'to v ** Kai rov Aoyov ij8t(rT0V ovra Kat X'*P"' 
 e^oi'Ta TrXuaTrjV iira^Orj Kal <f>opTLKOV iTroiijcre ToTs aKpow/aevots, cocTTrep 
 Ttvos det KYjpoi avTiS t^s ciT^Sias raiJTjjs Trpoerovcrr;?. 
 
 Op,t05 8e, KatVep oi^TO>s aKparw <f>iXoTifXt(x (rvvoiv, aTrrjXXaKTO rov 
 <f>Oove'iv erepots, d<^^ovcoraro9 cuv €i/ t<u tous Trpo avToS Kat rov5 Ka^ 
 
 credo, mei etc. ; ;'« f-a;^. 9, 23, qui nos . . . tyrannos vocas ; ad Ait. I. 16, 10, 
 quousque, inquit (so. Clodius), hunc regem feremus ? in Cat. I. 9, 22. 11, 28. 
 
 1 adfam. (ad Catonem) XV. 4, 11. 
 
 2 Cp. § 49 ^; Plin. /V. A'". VII. 30, 31, Salve (M. Tulli) primus omnium parens 
 patriae appellate. App. B. C. II. 7, K^twpos 5 aOrii' Ka.1 Trardpa ttJs Trarplhos 
 7rpo{rayope6(ra,VTOS, ^Tre^dTjaev 6 dyj^-os. Kal SoKeT tktlv 7]de i] evtptjfxla dird KiK^poj- 
 vos ap^afxivij. According to Cic. pro Sest. 57, 121 ; in Pis. 3, 6, Q. Catulus 
 bestowed the title upon him in the senate. He nowhere mentions Cato in con- 
 nection with it, nor does he say that he was the first who was so honored, \npro 
 Rab. 10, 27 it is applied to Marius, by Liv. I. 16 to Romulus, V. 49 to Camillus. 
 
 3 (A) Brut, ad Att. I. 17, i, non omnibus horis iactamus Idus Martias, 
 similiter atque ille Nonas Decembres suas in ore habet ; * Sen. de brev. vit. 5, i ; 
 Dio Cass. XXXVII. 38; XXXVIII. 12. 
 
 * (A) See p. 39 and e.g. pro Sull. 9, 26. 11, 33. 29, 82 ; in Pis. I, 3. 3, 7 ; 
 P/iii. II. 5, II; pro Flacco 40, 102; in Cat. III. 11, 26; IV. 10, 20 fl. ; ad 
 Att. I. 19, 6; de dom. 35, 93. 
 
 5 (A) Schol. Bob. pro Plane, p. 270 epistolam non mediocrem ad instar 
 voluminis scriptam quam Pompeio in Asiam de rebus suis in consulatu gestis 
 miserat Cicero, aliquanto, ut videbatur, insolentius scriptam ut Pompei stoma- 
 chum non mediocriter commoveret quod quadam superbiore iactantia omnibus 
 se gloriosis ducibus anteponeret. 
 
 ^ (A) Cic. Phil. X. I, I, declarasti . . . quod ego semper sensi neminem 
 alterius qui suae confideret, virtuti invidere. 
 
 (D) Tac. Dial. 25 et ipsum Ciceronem credo solitos et invidere et livore 
 . . . adfici. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 89 
 
 avTov avSpas lyKu>ixiiit,eiv, cus ek tcov truy-ypa/x/xaTcov Xaj3etv ccttl. 
 lioWa 8 avTov Kal anroixvr]ii.ovcvov(TLV Oiov Trepl ApicTTOTtAous, 
 oTi )^vcrLov 7roTa/x,os etr/ p€OVTOs/ Koi Trepc t&v IIAaTfovos SiaAoytoi', ws 
 To£i Aids, ei Adyo) j^p^crfct Trii^vKtv, ovtu> SiaAeyoyneVo v. " Tov 8e ©ed- 
 (jypaiTTOv tltitdii Tpv<j>rjV tSiav diroKaXciv. Ilepi 8e tS;/ i^-qfuofrdivovi 
 Adycov IpdiT-qQcU, Tiva Sokoitj KaXXiO-TOv ctvai, tov /xcytcrrov eiire.* 
 KatVot Tiv€S ToJv wpofTTTOiovp.iviav Srjfji,o(Tdevi^etv iTri<j>vovr aL tftiavfj 
 TOV KtKcpwvos, 17V irpds Tiva Tuiv eraCpiov i6r)K^v Iv eTZKTToXfj 
 ypai/fas, £vta;^o{) twv Xoyuiv aTrovwcrra^etv tov ii^tqjxocrOivr)'^ Tuiv 8e 
 fxeyaXoiv Kal da.vp.a.(rTSiv iiraivuiv, oTs TroAAaj^oB^ j^p^Tat Trepl 
 TOV dvSpds, Kal oTt irept oij's p.dAi(rTa tSv iSt'wv e(r?roijSa(7€ Adycov, 
 Tovs KaT 'AvTutviOV, ^lAtTririKovs cTreypat/zcv, d/;iV7j/iovoi)(Ti. 
 
 TuJv Se KaT' avTov ev8d^<ov diro Aoyoi; Kai cro</>tas ovk 
 e<TTLV ovSeii, ov ovk eTroCrjcrev iv8oioT£pov rj AeyoDV r/ 
 yparjxjiv evp,£vSs Trepl iKa(TTOv. 
 
 KpaTtTTTra) Se T<o nepiTraTr/TiKo) Stevrpd^aTO /xev 'Ptoyiiatu) ytvicrOai 
 Trapa KatVapos apxovTO^ rjSr), StcTrpd^aTO 8e t^v e^ Apctov Trayou 45.44 
 BovXyjV ij/r](t>i(ra(r6ai Kal herjOrjvai jxiveiv avTOV ev AOrjvaLS Kai otaAe- 
 ye<r6ai Tois veots (us Koir/iovvTa T^v ttoAiv. 
 
 'ETTiCTToAat Se Trapa tov KiKepwvos cla-l Trpos 'HpciST/v, 
 erepai Se Trpos tov vidv,' eyKeAevo/AtVou <Tvix<^iXoao<l>eiv KpaTnrTro). 
 
 Fopyt'av 8e tov prjTopa atTiciftevos eis ijSovas Kat iroTous Trpodyeiv 
 TO /JieLpaLKLOv aTreXavvet, T-ijs crvvoijcnas aiToC. 
 
 Kat o-veSdv avTr] re Ttav 'EAAr/vtKuiv p.ta Kat 8euT€pa Trpos 
 IIcAoira TOV Bv^dvTtov ev opyrj Tivt ye'ypaTrrat, tov /i.€V Topytav 
 aiiToU Trpoo-iyKOvTtDS cTTtKOTTTOVTOS, EtVep tJv c^aBAos Kat aKoAao-Tos, ^TTep 
 eSoKet, Trpos Se tov HeXoTra fi.iKpoXoyovp.evov Kal p-Cytti/^t/AOtpoCvTos 
 
 1 (A) Cic. Acai/. Prior II. 38, 119, veniet flumen orationis aureum fundens 
 Aristoteles. 
 
 2 (A) Cic. Brut. 31, 121, lovem sic, aiunt philosophi, si Graece loquatur, loqui. 
 
 3 Not found among the extant references to Theophrastus in Cicero. 
 
 * (D) Plin. Epist. I. 20 applies tliis to Cicero himself : cuius oratio optima 
 Jertur esse quae maxima. 
 
 5 Cp. p. 40 and Quint. XII. i, ^2, neque ipsi Ciceroni D. videtur satis esse 
 perfectus quern dormitare interdum dicit; Cic. Orat. 29, 104, ut usque eo . . . 
 morosi simus ut nobis non satisfaciat ipse Demosthenes. 
 
 6 E.g. Bnct. 9, 36. 37. 84 ; Orat. 2. 7. 26. 31. 70 ; de opt. gen. 2. 5 ; Tusc. Disf. 
 V. 36 ; ad Ait. XV. i b. 
 
 ' (A) Not extant, but cp. ad/am. XII. 16 (Trebonius ad Cic.) ; XVI. 21, 3 ff. 
 (Cic. M. F. ad Tironem). 
 
 ^(h)adfam. XVI. 21, 6, omnia postposui, dummodo praeceptis patris 
 parerem, dLapp-qSriv enim scripserat, ut eum dimitterem statim. 
 
go APPENDIX I 
 
 iMTTTip d;U.£Xj;(ravTa Ti/ixds Tivas avTcu Kal i/'iye^tV/LiaTa Trapd Bv^avTtaJV 
 
 XXV. TavTa Tt 8^ (juXoTi/xa, Kal to ttoXAciki? iiraipofjievov tov 
 Xoyov T7J SetvoTT/Tt TO TrpeVov TrpoUcrOai. 
 
 53. MovvaTto) /Atv -ydp ttotc auvryyopTycras, U)S dTroc^vycov t^v SiKrjv 
 iKctvo'; fSiuiKev eralpov avTOv Sa^vov, outo) AeycTai TrpoTrecretv vtt 
 6pyrj% 6 K-iKepoiv, <u(tt ctTreii' • " 2iJ yap iKeLvrjv, to Movi/aTte, Tiji/ Siktjv 
 aTre(j>vyK 8id o-avTOv, ovk £jU.o{) ttoAv o'kotos ev <f>uiTl t<S hiKauTTqpiio 
 7rEpt;^aivT0S ; " ^ 
 
 MapKov Sc Kpdo^crov lyKuifJud^oiv dwo Tov jirjjj.aTO^ evrjixip-qcTe, Kal 
 /xeO' ij/xcpas ati^is oAtyas XoiSopoJi/ avTov, tos ckcivos cItt-cv, " Oi yap 
 cvraw^a Trpior)v avTos '7/ias Ittjjvcis.'" " Nai," <j>rj(Ti, " p-eXiTrji eVexev 
 yv/iivd^tt)v Toi' Xdyov eh (f>av\r)v VTrodecnv." 
 
 EtjrdvTos Be ttotc tov K.pa.(j(Tov p.r;8cva K-pdaaov iv Pm/aij /Se/ScoiKevai 
 jxaKpoTtpov li-qKOVTaCTia's, eW varepov apvovfiivov Kal XeyovTO'S, " Tt 8 
 av cyo) Traditiv tovt elirov;" " Ht8ets," e<jirj, " Pu)p,atovs lySeus aKoiKTO- 
 fjievov; Kal Sua tovt ihrj/JLayiayeis." 
 
 Ape<TK€cr6ai 8e ToS Kpdo"<70v ToTs STcu'tKoTs t^T^o-ai/TOs, OTt TrXovo'tov 
 eivat TOV dya^ov a.TTOtfiaLvova'iv, " Opa, p.^ /ttaXXov," eiTrti', " OTt irdvTa tov 
 (Toijjov Xc'yovtriv etvai." AtejSdXXeTO 8 eis (f>i\apyvpiav 6 K-pdaao^. 
 
 Ettci Se TOV Ji.pdo'O'ov twv 7rat8(ov 6 eTepo'; Actto Ttvt 8ok<i>i/ o/Aoto? 
 ctva6 Kat Sia toDto Tg fii.-qTp\ TrpocrTpifSofj.evo's ai<X)(pav IttI tiS 'Aftii) 
 Sia^oXr/v cv8oKifj,rjiT£ Xdyov ei/ ySouXjj SteX^iiv, ipoyTrjdel'S 6 }i.i.K€pmv, tl 
 <t>aiviTaL [a^Tcp,] ""A|^tos," eiTre, "Kpdcro'ov. " 
 
 XXVI. MeXXtov 8e Kpdo"0"os ets Svptav aTratpetv efiovXeTO tov Kckc- 
 pu)Va /xSXXov avT<S <j>i\ov rj i)(6p6v elvai • Ka\ ^i\o^povovp.tvoi €<j>r] 
 jiovXcfrOai BuTrvrjcrai, Trap' avriS • KaKelvoi VTreSe^aTO Trpo6vp,(m. 'OXtyats 
 8' vtTTepov rip,epaii Trepl BaTtvibu (f>iXmv Tivuiv ivTvy)^av6vTuiv <us 
 p-vui/xevov SiaXvcreL's koI <f>iXiav (rjv yap l-)(6p6'-i), " Ov BrJTrov Kal BaTt- 
 VLOi," ciTre, " 8et7n/^(rat Trap ep.ot /SovXcTat ; " IIpos p.ei' ovv Kpdo-o-oi/ 
 
 TOtOlJTO?. 
 
 AiiTov Sc TOV BaTiViov c}(OVTa p^oipaSas ev T<S Tpa^rjXia Kal XcyovTa 
 SiKrjV oi8ovvTa prjTopa irpoo-eiTrev.^ 'AKOuo"as 8' oTt TiQvrjKtv, eiTa 
 
 ' (D) Quint. II. 17, Cicero se tenebras offudisse in causa Cluentii gloriatus 
 est. Such divergences (see below p. 91^), the vagueness of iv rivi. dU-Q (three 
 times), the censorious object which these witticisms are made to subserve (§ 54), 
 and the fact that not one of them is found in Cicero's extant writings, seem to 
 me to preclude Tiro's iie iocis Ciceronis as Plutarch's source for c. 25-27. 
 Cp. p. 3521. 
 
 2 On Cicero's relations to Crassus and Vatinius see ad /am. I. 9, 19 f. V. 19 f. 
 
 3 (A) See above § 32. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 91 
 
 /jiiTa. /jLLKpov irvOo/xivo^ crat^ujs, on ^-q ■ " Ka/cos ToiVuv dirdXoiTO KaKuJs 
 6 i/'evcrd/iiEvos." 
 
 Ettci Se Katcrapt i/'r;<^t(7ajU.evo) t^v ev KajU,7ravia )^<opav Karave/tTy^^vai 
 Tots orTpaTtcoTais iroA\ot ju,£v cSucrxcpatvov ev rg ISovXrj, AeijKios Sc 
 TeXXtos 6;U,oi) Ti irp€cr;8iJTaTOs (uv eiTTCV, cos oi •yci/i^crcTat toBto ^Gvto9 
 avroJ, " nepiju.etvo)/A€v, " eittcv 6 KiKepmv, "//.aKpav yap ovK aiTeirat 
 FeAAios vTrepOecriv." ^ 
 
 'Hv 8e Tis 'OKTaoiJios alriav l^mv ex AijSvrjs ycyovevai • Trpos tovtov 
 €v Ttvt StKTj Ac'yovTa TO? KiKt/awvos fXT] i^aKovciv, "Kat /jirjv ovk Ij^eis," 
 ttwe, "to ovs aTpvTrrjTov." 
 
 McTtXAov 8e NeTTWTOS cittovtos, oti TrXetovas KarajxapTvpSiv avr)pr]K€v 
 rj crvvrjyopSiv crtautK^v, " OynoXoyui ydp," «</»i7, " TtO'Teci)? ev c/ioi ttXeoi/ rj 
 &€iv6TrjT0<; etvai." 
 
 NeavicTKOX) 8e tivos airtav Ij^ovTO? £v TrXaKOvvTt (fxippuiKOv t<S irarpt 
 3eSci>Kevai Opaa^vvofievov koj. Xeyoi'TOs, on Xoi8op7;o-£i tov KiKcpwva, 
 " ToSto," €<^j;, " Trapa o'ow j8ovXo;u.at juaXXov ^ TrXaKovvra." 
 
 IIoTrXiou 8e Sr;crriou (Tvvriyopov fiiv avTov tv tlvl Slktj irapaXa- 
 P6vT(K p.tO' erepwv, avTOv 8e iravTa l3ov\op.a>av Xe'yetv Kat ;U,ij8evt irapit'vros 
 etTreiv, u)s S^Xos ^v dc^tc/icvos iiro tSv 8tKacrTU)v ijSt; t^s i/'7;<^ov (j>€pOfJi£vrj'; ■ 
 " Xpoi (Trjp.i.pov" , ^(firj, " T(5 Kaip(5, SiycrTte ■ /xs'XXeisyap avpiov iSkotjjs €tvai." 
 
 UoTrXtov 8e KalvoTav vofUKov tlvai ^ovX.6fj,evov, ovra 8 apadr} Kal a<f>vrj, 
 TTpos TWO. SiKr]v eKaXecTt pAprvpa. ToB 8e /xi78ei' ei8evat (jJc.crKOVTO';, ""lo-uis." 
 €<^jj, " 8o/c£ts Trepi tSv vo/xikwv ipwraa-dai." 
 
 Mere'XXoi) 8e Nettcotos €V Stac^opa Tivt ttoXXoikis Xc'yovros, " Tt's o-ov irarnp 
 ioTLV ; " 6 KiKepuiv, " Sot ravTijv," e<j>ri, " T^v aTrdxpto-tv 17 p-rjTrjp yaXerriii- 
 T€pav iwoirjcrcv-" 'ESoxet 8' dKoXaoros r/ /"■'/I'Typ tivat tov NcVmtos, avros 
 8€ Tts evp.£Td/8oXos. 
 
 Kat TTOTC T^v &r]pap^uiv a.iroXnru>v a<j)vo) Trpos IXo/HTri^toi/ efcirXevaev eh 
 ^vpiav, UT £K£t0£v ETTai/^Xfei/ dXoya)T£pov. ©di/zas 8£ <E>t'Xaypov ^ tov Kadr]- 
 yrrrrju iinp.e\ecrTepov iiritTTiqcTa' avrov tio rdc/xp KopaKa Xlolvov. Kat o 
 KtK£p(ov " Tovt'," £<^r;, " (rocfxiTepov £7rotr)0-as • werta-Oai yap o-£ ^aXXov r; 
 Xiytw iSiSaiev-" 
 
 'Ettei 8£ MdpK05 'Aminos £v rtvt St'/cj; irpootp.ta^dp.Evos eFtte <^tXov avrov 
 8e8£)5o-^at irapifix^w imp.iXtLav kia. Xoytdr^ra Kat Trt'o-Tti/, " EtS' ovrtos," 
 £(^17, "o-iSjjpovs ys'yovas avOpunro^, uxrre p.ri^h U too-ovtwv £v rJT-q<TaTO 
 <^t'Xos Trapao-^Etv ; " 
 
 54. XXVII. To p,£v ow irpos ix^pom rj avTi^Uovi (TKwp.p.aui xp^o-^at 
 viKporepoK 8oK£t prjTopiKov E^at- to 8' ots etvxe irpotTKpovuv £V£Ka ToE 
 
 1 For two similar jests of Cicero, cp. Quint. VI. 3, 68. 84. 
 
 2 (A) Macrob. Satur. VII. 3, 7 ; Hut. Symp. 2, 4. 
 
 3 In Plut. Apofhth. 7, Diodotus talies the place of Philagrus. 
 
92 APPENDIX I 
 
 yeAotbu ttoXv crw^ye ijuaos aurw. Tpdij/oi oe Kai Tovroyv oAtya.-' 
 MapKov 'Akvlvlov t)(OVTa 8vo ya/j./Spov'; <^vya8as "A8pa.aTov cKctAet. 
 
 AevKiou 8e KoTTa Tip,-qTLKr)v cp^ovros ap)(rjv, (J^iXolvotoltov S' oi/tos, ti?ra- 
 reotv pLtTiiiiv 6 KtKc/DOJv eSti/'Tyo'c, /cat Toii' ^tAtuv /cvkAo) Trepto'TavTwi/j o)? 
 (TTivev, " 'O/D^tos <j>ojiii(T6t," eiTTC, " ju,!^ ;itoi ycVoiTO ^aAcTos 6 Tip-yfrji on 
 vSoip mv(i>." 
 
 Bft)K(ui'«[) 8' d7ravT7;(ras ayovrt yue^' taurot) rpas aixopt^orara^ Ovyaripa's 
 ave(j)0tyiaTO, 
 
 " $otj3ow ttot' ouk ecovTos icnrtipiv TtKva." 
 
 yiapKov SI TeXXicw Sokovvto'; ovk i^ IXtvBipuiv yvyovevai, Aa/i7rpa Se ti^ 
 ifxovrj Kal /jLeydXy ypd/xp-ara irpoi rrjv crvy/cAjyTov e^avayrwros, " M^ 6a.vpA- 
 ^€r€," Eure, " xat airos ets eort roiv dvaTrecfxovrjKOTOiv." 
 
 'ETTtt Se 'I'avo'Tos 6 SvAAa tov povap^T^aavros iv 'Fwfjirj Kal ttoAAoijs im 
 Oava.T<o TTpoypdij/avTO^ iv oavecots yevd/xevos Kat ttoAAol ttJ^ ovcrias 8ta(T7ra- 
 6iQ(Tai dirdpTtov Trpoiypaij/e, ravrrjv €(f'r] pdXXov ai™ rrjv Trpoypa(l)rjv dpecTKUv 
 Tj Trjv Trarptaav* 
 
 55. XXVIII. 'Ek TovTOiv iyivcTO TToXXoT'; i7ra)(6y's • 
 
 Kal ol p^rd KAwStow (Tvv^(TTrj(Tav ett avrov dp)(r]v TOLavrrjv XajiovTK-^ 
 'Hv KAoiiStos dvr)p ciiyevtjs, rfj piv rjXiKia v£os, t<S Sk <f>poiiypaTL Opacrv^ Kal 
 62 B.C. avOdSrj^. Ovtos ' epSiv XIo/XTTTjias Trj<; Kaicrapos ywaiKos cis t^j/ OLKiav 
 avTov TtapuayjXde. Kpv<f>a, Aa/3a)i/ iadrjTa koX crKevrjv ij/aXTpLa^.* tOvov yap 
 ai yvvaiKts TTjv dwopprp-ov iKeivrjv koI admrov dvBpdcTL Ovcriav iv ri] tov 
 Katirapos OLKia, koI Traprjv dvrjp ouSei's' aAAa pupaKiov &iv tn Kal /xi^ttw 
 ycveiCiv 6 KAolStos ^Xin^e XrifTtfTdai SiaSiis Trpos t^v Uopirrftav perd tS)v 
 yvvaLK&v- 'Os &' eiayjXOe vvktos cis OLKiav peydXrjV, rjiropuTO tS>v SioSwv ■ 
 Kal irXavwptvov avVov iSovaa AvprjXun depaTrawa Trji Katijapos pr/rpo's 
 rjTrjcra' ovopa. ^diyiaadai 8' dvay/cao-^evTos iKCivov Kal ^iqaavTO^ aKo- 
 XjovBov Ti.opTTrjia's ^rjTeiv A/Jpav TOvvopjx., crvveura rrjv <j><iivrjv ov yvvaiKtCav 
 owcrav dviKpaye Kai (TwtKdXu ras yvvoXKa^. At 8' aTroKAeicraCT-at ras Ovpa^ 
 Kal irdvTa 8t£p£W(op,evat XapfBdvavdi^ tov KAulSiov eis OLKrjpa TratSi'crKris, 
 
 1 Some of these jests were probably spurious. Cp. Cic. ad/am. "VII. 32, 2 ; 
 IX. 3 f£. 
 
 2 On the Clodian Episode (ch. 28-35) ^^ general, cp. Cic. ad Att. I. II ; ad 
 Quint. I. II ; pro Mil., pro Sestio, pro Caelio, de domo, orat. cimi pop. grat. ; 
 Dio Cass. XXXVII. 45 f. 51; XXXVIII. 12-30; XXXIX. 6-12. 19-23. 29-40. 
 44-57. I note only important divergences or such passages as are peculiar to 
 Plutarch or significant. 
 
 ^ ad Att. I. I 2 f. ; de dom. 40, 105 ; dc hartcsp. 5, 8 ; Ascon. in Mil. p. 52 ; 
 Dio XXXVII. 45. For the details Plut. is our only authority. 
 
 * pro Sest. 54, 116, qui in mulierum coetum pro psaltria adducitur. 
 
 5 (D) Contradicted by Cic. ad Att. I. 12, 4, per manus servulae servatum et 
 eductum ; de harusp. 21, 44. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 93 
 
 jj (TvvturrjXOe, KaTair£</)£vydTa. ToC Se irpay/MiTOs Trepi/SorjTov y£vofji,ivov 
 Kxdcrap re rr/v Ilo/xm^iav atftTJKC ^ Koi . . . hiKxiv aatjicia's omeypaxpaTO t<S 
 KXojSio). 
 
 56. XXIX. KtKsptov 8' TJv yu.€v avVoC c^iAos /cat rmv ircpt KariXiVav 
 TcpaTTOft.ev<iiv i)(priTO TrpoQvit.ca-a.Ta (Tvvcpyw koL <f>vXaKL toi! (TwpariK,^ 
 i<TXvpi^Ofji.ivov oe irpbi to eyicAiy/Aa t<5 ju,?j8e yeyovtVat Kar' exeivov ev 'Viafxy 
 
 TOV ^pOVOV, dAA CV TOtS ■KOppWTO.TUi ^WpLOii huxTpifiuv, KaT€papTVpr)<J(.V (US 
 
 acf>iyp.(.vov Trpos avTov oiKaSe Kat SieiXey/icVow Trept' tlv(jiv • ovep tjv dXrySc's. 
 On ytiryv eooKei fjiapTvpeiv o Kt/cep<ov Sta r^v dXj;^etav, dXXa Trpos t^v auToB 61 B.C. 
 yvvaiKa Tcpevrtav aTroAoyovp.ei'Os.^ Hv yap auTij irpos tov KXwStov dire- 
 )(6€La oia r^v dStAi^^v riyv Ikuvov KAwStav, ws t<3 KiKepwvt Pov\op.ivqv 
 yafji,rjdrjvaL xat towto 81a. KariJXAov ^ Ttvos TrpdrTovcrav, os eraipos p.ei/ ^y Kat 
 trvvyjOr)? ev rot? ^dXto"Ta Kt/ceptovos, det 8e 7rpo5 T'^i/ KXwStav t^onuiv koX 
 6epaTr€v<i)v eyyiis oiKOvcrav VTro\j)iav rrj TepevTt'a Trapcop^c* XaXcTr^ 8^ tov 
 Tpowov ovaa Koi tov Kt/ccpwi/os ap^ovcra iraputiwe T(S KX<u8t'<{) crvvtTnOlo'dai, 
 Kol KaTapapTVprjaai. ' KjiTepapTvpovv Si tov KXtoStov ttoXXoi toJv KaXoiiv 
 Kayadu)v avSpuiv CTnopKuxs, pa8toupytas, o-)(\<iiv Sexacr/xovs, <f>6opa'; yvvaLKUiv. 
 
 AeijKovXXos Se Kat dtpairaiviSa'; iraptt^ev, tus o'vyyeVotTO t^ vewTCLTrj Ttov 
 dStXc^ulv o KXtiiStos, ore Aetj/couXXu (tvvioku. IloXXij 8' ^v 8d^a Kat rats 
 aXXats 8vo'iv d8eX<^ats 7rXr;o'ia^«v rdv KXwStov, mv Teprtav p.iv MdpKtos 6 
 'Pr^^, KXcoStav 8€ MereXXos o Ke'Xtp etp^ev, ^v KovaSpavratv ' exaXovv, ort 
 rwv epaaTwv rts au'r^ p^aX/coBs ifi/iaXoiv ets ySaXdvrioi/ <!)s apyvpiov tlcri- 
 TTt/ujjt • rd 8€ Xeirrdraroj' rov ^aXKo5 vop,tcr/u.aTos Kova8pdvriyv tKaXow. ^ 
 'Em ravrj; /xdXio-ra Tciiv aSeXffimv icaKcos jji^oiJO-ev o KXmStos. 
 
 Ow p,^v dXXa Tore roC Sn^/xov Trpds roiis KarayuaprvpoSvras au'rov xat 
 o-urecrrmras avrtrarro/xeVov (l>oj3-rj6ivTv; ot Stxaarat cj)v\aKrjv TTipittTTrjcravTO, 
 Kol ros SeXrovs ot TrXeto-rot o-uyKCX'^/u.eVots rots ypap-paa-iv ^veyKav-' O/xws 
 8e TrXetbves €8o^av ot dTroXiJOVTCS ya/erOai ■ Kai rts l\l)(Q-q /cat SeKatrp.o'i 
 SieX^etv. 
 
 'O^ev o /i£i' KdrXos aTravrj^cras rots Kpiral's " 'Y/xeis " etTrev " ws aX.-q6tii<s 
 vTrep do-<^aXeias yTrfdaade. Trjv (^vXaKiyv, ^oliovp.e.voi. fjirj rts u;ii(ov a.<j>iX-qTai 
 
 1 See below § 56 ext. 
 
 2 This version is not found elsewhere and probably belongs to the same 
 source as § 43. 86. ^ Cp. Am. Jour, of Phil. XI. 316 ff. 
 
 * pro Gael. 20, 50, obliviscor iam iniurias tuas, Clodia, depono memoriam 
 doloris mei, quae abs te crudeliter in meos me absente facta sunt, negligo. 
 
 = pro Gael. 26, 62, mulier potens quadrantaria. 
 
 s This chapter from the chronique scandaleuse of the day is quite in the 
 manner of Suetonius. The details, as here given, are not found elsewhere, 
 but the charge is confirmed in a general way in many passages, e.g. Cv:. pro 
 Sest. 7, IS ; pro Caelio 13, 32 H. ; de dom. t,A< 92 ;/>-o AT//. 27, 73 ; Veil. II. 45, i. 
 
 ' This fact is also given In Plut. Caes. 10. 
 
94 APPENDIX I 
 
 TO OLpyvpmv" ^ Kixepojv 8£ tov KA<u8ioi) Trpos avTov Xt'yovTos, oTt fjuiprvpSiv 
 <yvK i(7)(e TTLCTTiv Trapa rots StKacrTais, " AAA' €/itoi /ieV," eiTrev, " ot Trevre /cat 
 £iKO(rt Toiv SiKaoTwv l-iTL(TTf.v(Tav ' too'oCtoi ydp (TOV KaTaj/rj<f>L(TavTO • trot 
 8e TpiaKOvTa ovk iiricrTevcrav ■ ou yap wporepov direXvcrav 1/ e Xa/3ov to 
 apyvpiov." ^ 
 
 'O p.evT0i Kaicrap ov KaTepsipTvprjcrt KXrjdeli; £7rt tov KAcuOioi/, ovo' ecftr) 
 p-oi^etav KaTeyvoiKcvai t^9 yvvatKos, dc^etKcVat 0' ovttjv otl tov Katcrapos 
 cSei ydpoi/ ov 7rpd^£<os aio'^as p.6vov, dAAo. Kat <j>rip,rf5 Kauapov e.Lvai.^ 
 59 B.C. 57. XXX. Atae^vycov Sc tov kiVSwov 6 KXwSios /cat hrjpap^o^ aiptOw 
 cudv'S ti)(eTO TOV KtKepwvos, Trdv^' opov Trpdypara Kat TrdvTas avdpiitTrovs 
 cTwdywv Kat Tapdrrtuv ctt' avrdv. Tov r£ yap S^pov mKuuttraTO vo/wls 
 <f>LXav9pu)TroL';,* Kat Tuiv maTiav eKarepo) peyoiXas €7rap;(tas ixj/rj^irraTO, 
 IIet'<Ta»/t pev MaKeSovtdv, TajSiviio Be Svptav, iroAAovs Se twv airopwv truvi- 
 Tacrcrev eh to TroXiTevpa kox SovAovs (UirAtcrpevovs Trept avrov £tX^' 
 
 Toiv Se TrAeto'Tor Bwa/jLtvoyv Tore Tpimv avSpSiv, }i.pa.(T(Tov p,ev avTiKpv; 
 KtKcpwvt TToAcpowTos, IIopTrT^ibv Sc ^pvTTTopeVov irpos dpc^orepovs, KatWpos 
 Se pt'AAovTOS 615 roAartav e^iivai fxeTO. o-TparevpaTos, viro tovtov iirroSvs 6 
 KtKepwv, Kanrep ovk ovra <f>tXov., dAA' VTrOTrrov €k twv Trept KariAtVav,"^ 
 ri^LWdt Trpeo'/SevT^s avToJ o'VcrrpaTevetv." 
 
 AcfapeVov Se Tov Katirapos o KAwStos opuiv eK(j>evyovTa tyjv BripjapyioLV 
 avTov TOV KtKtptova wpoaeTroietTO o'vpySariKcis e)(eiv, koI ttJ TepevTia ttjv 
 
 1 This bon mot of Catulus is also recorded by Cic. ad Att. I. 16, 5, quid 
 vos, inquit, praesidium a nobis postulabatis ? an ne nummi vobis eriperentur, 
 timebatis ? Sen. Efist. 97, 5 ; Dio Cass. XXXVII. 46, 3, tt\v (/luXaKT/K ^Trjffav 
 ovx 'Iv d(r0aXws tov KXwSfou Ko.To.-^'qcpltTuivTixi, dXX' iV' auroi ra xP'^^^Ta a dedu- 
 podoK^Ketrav^ 5tacr(j!)a(i>VTat. 
 
 2 Cic. ad Att. I. 16, 10, iuranti, inquit, tibi non credidenint. Mihi vero, 
 inquam, XXV indices crediderunt, XXXI, quoniam nummos ante acceperant, 
 tibi niliil crediderunt. 
 
 ^ Plut. Caes. 10; Dio Cass. XXXVII. 45; Suet. Caes. 74 testis citatus 
 negavit se quidquam comperisse . . . interrogatusque cur igitur repudiasset 
 uxorem, "Quoniam," inquit, "meos tam suspicione quam crimine iudico carere 
 oportere." 
 
 * Cic. pro Sest. 25, 55 ; in Pis. 4, 9 and Ascon. ad loc. ; Dio XXXVIII. 13. 
 
 ^ Esp. pro Sest. 12, 27. 17, 39 and schol. Bob. ad loc; Veil. Pat. II. 
 45, 2, non caruerunt suspicione oppressi Ciceronis Caesar et Pompeius ; Dio 
 XXXVIII. 16 f. 
 
 ^ (D) Clodius's sudden change and Terentia's alleged influence (cp. § 43) 
 are not confirmed by extant sources. Regarding the position of legatus, Plut. 
 is also at variance with the facts, as the offer was made by Caesar : cp. ad Att. 
 II. 18, 3, a Caesare valde liberaliter invitor in legationem illam. II. 19, 4, esp. 
 de prov. cons. 17, 42, postea me, ut sibi essem legatus, non solum suasit, verum 
 etiam rogavit. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 95 
 
 irXeicrrjji/ di/aTipet? alriav, Ikuvov Se fjLt/jLvrnJLeviys eirtetkcos del kol Koycwi 
 evyvuifiovas cvoioows, ws av rts 01; /jucrZv ovSk ^aXaraivtav, aXK iyKa\u>v 
 fxerpux. KOL <j>iXiKa., Travrdiracriv avrmj rov (fto^ov dv^/cev, Smtt aTruTretv tm 
 Kat(rapt ttjv Trpecr^elav /cat Trdkiv i)(ead(u^ t^s TroXtTcias. 'E</> <u Trapo- 
 cwoeis 6 Kaio-ap ^ rdv re KA(u8tov iirippwdi. Kai IIo/A7nyiov dTricrTpeij/e 
 KOfuorj Tov , KiKCjOiovos, avTos re KarepapTvp-qcrev Iv riu 8);;U.a) /u.-^ Sokclv avrw ^ 
 KoXtos yiHySt vop-ipuy; dvSpas aKptVovs avrjprjcrOaL Toy's Trept AeVrXov Kat 
 Ke'^Tyyov. 
 
 58. Avrr^ yap ^1/ i^ KaT-qyopia koI IttI tovO' 6 K.LKep<Dv exaXeiro. Kiv- 
 owevtov ow Kai SiuiKop.evo'S - ItrOrJTa p,erijXXa^£ '^ Kai K6p,r)s dvaTrXetus iripumv 
 iKereue rov 8^p,ov. navrap^ov 8' o KXtoStos aTTT^i/ra Kara rovs (rrevtuTrovs, 
 avdpuiwowi t)((iiv i/8pi(TTas Trepi avrov Kat dpacreli, dl TroXXa p,iv ^(Xevoi^oKres 
 dKoXdtrrws eis rrjv /xeraySoX^v Kat to cr)^pa tov KiKeptoi/os, iroXXap(oii 8e 
 TTTjXw Kat Xi'^ots /StiXXovres tvitrrai/ro rats tKeertats-^ 
 
 XXXI. Ou ^-^v dXXa ro) KtKepojrt irptiiTov pXv oXCyov otiv uvpjrav to 
 tS>v tTTTTtKuv TrXrjOoi (Tvp,fj.€Te^a\€ Trjv ia-drjra, Kat 8t(Tp,vptwv owk ika.TTov<; 
 V€U)v TraprjKoXovdovv ko/liSi/tes Kat crwtKereijovres • eirctra r^s /SovXrji avveX- 
 Oovo'if;, OTTws i//7y<^t<ratro rov S^/xov ois eTrt 7rcvpeo"t p^Ta^aXelv ra tp.drta, Kat 
 rtov VTraTuiv ivavritoQevTuiv, KXtuSt'ov Se (T&ripot\>opovp.ivov Tre.pL to /3m>- 
 XevTrjpiov, e^eBpapov ovk oXiyoi tG>v /iovXevTiKwv KaTappr/yvvpevoi rov9 
 )(iTS>vai Kat ySocuvres.' 
 
 59. 'Os 8' ■qv oijr' otKros oiire rts al&w Trpos r^v oi/ftv, dXX' eSet rov 
 ^iKepmva (jievyeiv ^ /8ta Kat friSrrjpto Kpid^vai, Trpos rov KX(u8tov, e8etro 
 XIo/iTTTytov PorjQeiv en-trT/Ses CKTroSuiv yeyovoTos koI SvaTpi/SovTO^ iv dypois 
 Trept rov 'AXySavov. Kat TrpSiTOV pev eirepxpe Iletcrojva tov yap/3p6v Serjo-o- 
 pevov eireiTa Kat avros dvefi-q. XIv^d/Atvos 8' o nop,7r?;tos ov;^ vwepeivev eh 
 
 1 (A) ai/ ^«. IX. 2 b, I, repudiari se totum, magis etiam quam olim in 
 XXviratu putabit. Ac solet, cum se purgat, in me conferre omnem illorum 
 temporum culpam, ita me sibi fuisse inimicum, ut ne honorem quidem a se 
 accipere vellem ; but from de prov. cons. I.e. it would seem that Caesar's anger 
 was occasioned by the previous refusal. 
 
 2 (D) This Clodian law did not mention Cicero's name, though it was 
 directed especially against him, nor was Cicero indicted in consequence as 
 would appear from Plut. Cp. e.g. Veil. Pat. II. 45, i, cuius verbis etsi non 
 nominabatur Cicero, tamen solas petebatur; Dio Cass. XXXVIII. 14, 3, ovhk 
 yap Tb 6voim airoS eJxe" (sc. 6 v6jj,o!), epyiji Se i-w avrbv Sti fioKurra ffweypAcpeTo. 
 
 ' Esp. pro Sest. 10 ff. ; post red. 3, 8, pro me praesente senatus hominum- 
 que praeterea viginti milia vestem mutaverunt etc. de domo 21, 55 ff. ; but 
 certain details in Plut. {viav, i^iSpafuiv etc.) are not given in Cicero or else- 
 where. App. B. C. II. 15, though agreeing so often with Plut., must have fol- 
 lowed another and rather unfriendly authority : ri ipyov, Sia. tt)ii i.irp4irei.av, dwb 
 oIktov fieTairlTrreiv 4s yi\ii>Ta etc. 
 
96 APPENDIX I 
 
 oipLv iXdeiv, 8eivri yap avTov alBioi elxi tt/dos tov dvSpa jneyoAovs ^■yoJVKT/u.ci'oi/ 
 dyolvas inrep avTov /cat TroAAa irpos X'^P'" ^x^^vo) TreTroXtTevixivov, aXXa 
 KaicrapL -ya/i/Jpos wv 8eO(U.ci/(i) TrpovSioxe ras TraXaias ^dpLTai koI Kara dvpcK 
 aAAas VTr€^i\6u)v dTrcSiSpacrxf t^v evrev^iv. Ovtui 8rj Trpooodeli 6 KtKtpwv 
 VTT avTOV Kol yeyovms eprj/JUK iwl toijs VTrdrows Kare'(^vye.' 
 
 Kai Ta/Simos phi rjv ^(aXi-iro? a€t, TIclctiov^ Se SieXe^drj Trpaorepov avTw 
 TTdpaivuiv eKO-r^vai Koi VTro)(<oprja-ai rfj tov KAoiSt'ov pvp-r] Kal ttjv /xera/SoA^v 
 ™v Kaipwv iveyKuv Koi ytvecrOai ttoXlv crwT^pa t^s Trarpi'Sos ev CTTatreo-i xat 
 (caKois 8i' c/ceivov ov<t»js. 
 
 ToiavTT^s Tv^W awoKpiatui^ 6 KtKcpwv ipovXevero crvv Toh <^t Aots " xai 
 AevKOvAAos pjkv cKcXeve p.ivav u)s Trepiea-op.evov, dXAot ^ 8e (j>evy€Lv, <j)S ra^v 
 Tou 8-^p.ov TTodritTOVTOi ovTov, OTav iiJ,TrX.rjcr6fi rrjs KAooi'ov pavux.^ koL 
 a.TrovOM.';.^ TavT iSo^e Kixepeovf 
 
 Kai TO ftci/ ayaXpa. t^s 'AOr/vas, o ttoXw )(p6vov t^wv eiri T17S oiKids tSpi)- 
 pevov irLpja Sia^epdvTuis, ets KairtTolXioi' Kop.iaas avWrjKtv ciriypdi/'as 
 "'Adrjva. 'Fu>p.rji cj>vXaKi," ^ to/xttoiis Se Trapa t5v <j)iXu>v Xa^iav Trepi /itcras 
 vuKTas VTrc^A^e njs iroA.€<os xai ire^i^ 81a AevKai/tas e7ro/oeu£TO Xa/3e<x6ai, 
 S'KeXias /SovAo/xevos. 
 
 60. XXXII. "lis 8' ^v <^av£/30s 1787^ Tr€<j>€vy<i>s, iTrrjyayev avVuI (f>vyrjs 
 ij/!](j>ov KAuiStos, Kai Sidypappa TrpovdrjKtv etpyeiv itv/dos Kai vSaros ^ tov 
 avBpa Kal pi) irapi^uv (TT(.yr)V ivTO'i piXmv TrevTaKoo'tW ' 'IraAias. 
 
 61. Tots /itv ow dAAois cAdxto-TOs ^v tov BuiypdppxiTO'; tovtov Aoyos 
 aiSov/xevois tov Ktxeptoi/a, Kai TrScrav ivSuKvupevoi. <f>i,Xo(j>po(TvvrjV wapeTrtpwov 
 avTov iv 8' ' iTTTrcovMj), TToAct t^s AeuKavids, rjv OvL^wva vvv KoXovcriv, 
 Ov'ijSios, StKtAos avrip,^ oAAa T£ iroAAd T17S KtKcpcovos <j>iX(a<s aTToAeAav/cms 
 Kai yEyovus iwaTcijovTOs avTOv tcktovuiv tirap^oi, oIklo. piv ovk iSi^aro, to 
 y(ti)piov 8e KaTaypcuj/€LV iirrjyyeXXeTO, Kal Tdtos Ouepyi'Aios 6 t^s S'KeAtds 
 
 ^ (D) These details are not based upon extant utterances in Cicero, or else- 
 where, but cp. ad Att. II. 20. 21. 24 ; III. f),2 ; ad Q.fr. I. 4, 4 ; II. 3, 3 ; fro Sest. 
 
 17. 39- 
 
 2 (D) This contradicts Cicero's statements. Cp. in Pis., e.g. 5, 12. 
 
 3 Cato and Hortensius. Cp. Dio XXXVIII. 17. 
 
 * Concerning Cicero's reasons for yielding without a struggle, cp. e.g. pro 
 Plane. 35, 86 ff. ; pro Sest. 20, 45 ff., servavi igitur rem publicam discessu meo . . . 
 unus bis rem publicam servavi etc. ; de domo 36, 96. 
 
 ^ Cp. Dio Cass. XLV. 17, Th fiyaX/ta t6 tt\% ' AStivcLs ttjs fpv\a.Kidos, irpb 
 TTJs ipvyijs KiK^puv is t6 KairtTdiKtov dveriOei. It was struck by lightning and 
 was restored by a decree of the senate. Cp. Cic. ad /am. XII. 25, i. 
 
 ^ Veil. Pat. II. 45, I, legem in tribunatu tulit : qui civem Romanum indem- 
 natum interemisset, ei aqua et igni interdiceretur. ' (D) * ad Att. III. 4, i. 
 
 * (D) Cp. p. 43 ; ad Att. III. 2, i. Biichsenschiitz imagines that Plutarch 
 changed Sica Viboniensis, which he found in his Cicero, to Oit^ios S ikcXJs dvfip ! 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 97 
 
 'E<^' ois d^VjUr/tras wp^-qaev ctti Bpevreo-iov, KaKadev £is Avppdxi-ov dvt/AO) 
 (f)opw irepaioujuei/os, di/riTrveiJcravTos TreXayiOu yiie^' ^fiepav iiraXiv8p6iJi.ria€v, 
 £it' au^ts mrq^Orj. 
 
 62. Ae'ycTai 0€ Kat KaraTrXewavTos tis Avppd^iov auVou Kat /u.eAA.ovTos 
 aTTO^aiveiv duap-ov re Trjs y^s Kat cnra<Tp.6v dfw. yevia&ai rrjs daXdrrr]?. 
 'Acfi' <Dv crwc/SaXov ot pavTiKoi jxr] noviixov avT<S rrjv <f>vyr]v icrccrdcu • //.era- 
 ySoAi^s -yap CLvaL Tavra arjp.tia..'^ 
 
 IIoAAciJv Se <jiOLT<ovTu>v dvSpS>v VTT evVouis Km tS>v 'EXXijvtStuv Tr6\e<i>v 
 Siap.iXXu)p,€vu)v irpos avrd's rats 7rpeo-/8eiais, o^ws d^vftcov Kai TreptXinros 
 Siijye Ta iroAAd,' Trpos t^v 'iTaXtW, Sxrirep ol SvcreputTK, acjJOpSiv koI 
 TO) <j>pov^fJuxTL fJiiKpo^ ayov Kai TaTreivos vwo r^s (rup.<l>opa.<s yeyovws 
 Kat (Tweo'TaXjU.cVos, u)S ovk av Tts dvSpa TraiBua. avix^e^iiiiKOTa Toaavr-q 
 irpoa^ihoK-qcTi. 
 
 63. KatVot TToAAaKis avros ^^toi; Tom <^iXov% p,r] prJTOpa KaXeiv avTOv, 
 dAAct </)tA.dcro<^ov • <l>i\o(rocj>iav yap i><s tpyov rjprjirdai, prfropiKrj 8' 6pydv(o 
 )(prj(rdai, TroXj.Tevo/J.evo's iwi ras i^petas- 'AAA' rj Soia 8a.vrj tov \6yov S>(nr€p 
 jSacjjYjV diroKXixTaL T^s '/'I'X^s Kat Ta tSv ttoAASv lvojX,6p^a<rdoLi Trddrj Si 
 o/xiXiav Koi (rwrjOtiav Toii -TroXtrevoyae'vots, av p,rj Tts en pAXa c^vXaTTO/ievos 
 ovTo) (Tvix(l>€prjTai TOK «KTOs, COS Ttov TrpayfmTu)v avTuiv, ov rSiv iirl Tots 
 TTpdy/jLaai iradStv <Tvp,p.e.6i^u>v.* 
 
 64. XXXIII. 'O Se KXwStos e^eXdo-as tov KiKepiova KaTeirprjcrc p.ev 
 avTov Tas eirauXets, KaTeTrp-qiTt 8e tt^v otKtdv Kat t(3 totto) vaov 'EXcu^epias 
 eTrtDKoSo/xrytre ■ T^v S' oXkTjv avcruxv eTruiXet Kat huKrjpvTTt Ka6' rjp.ipav, 
 
 fJLTlSeV WVOVfJieVOV p,ry8eVOS.^ 'Ek 8c TOVTOV <^Oy8epOS WV TOtS dpUTTOKpaTLKot'S 
 KOL TOV SqfJLOV dv€ip.€VOV EtS vjipiV TToXXrjV Kttt dpatTvTrfTa (Tvvt<l>iXK6ixevo^, 
 i-Trevupa Tco Tlofnrrj'iia, tu>v SmKrjfJiivdv mr avTov Kara tijv (TTpaTetav li/ta 
 (TirapaTTfov. 'E<^' ots o no/iTn^tos dSo^oiv eKdKi^ev avTos auroi/ irpocjaei/os 
 TOV KiK6pu)va' Kat TrdXiv ck /ttTajSoXijs Trai/Totos cytvcTO TrpaTTtov Kd5o8ov 
 avTo) jU,€Ta Ttov <^tXu)v. 'Ei/to-Ttt/iei/ou Se tov KX(i)8ibv o-uv£'8o|e t^ ^ovXfj 
 /j.rjSiv 8ta ixidov vpaypa Kvpovv /xrjSk TrpaTTUv Syj/j-oo-wv, el /j,rj KiKtpwvt 
 Kd^o8os yci'otTO.'' 
 
 1 (A)pri> Plane. 40, 95 ff.; Dio Cass. XXXVIII. 17. 
 
 ^ Cp. p. 43- 
 
 ^ ad Att. 1X1. 8-21. 22, 4. 
 
 4 Cp. the discussion between Cic. and Philiscus in Dio Cass. XXXVIII. 
 18-29. 
 
 5 E.g. Cic. de dom. 24, 62. 41, 108 ; ad Att. IV. 2. 
 
 6/ro i'^J-/. 31, 67 f. ; /» /"". 13. 29; de dom. 10, 25 ff. ; /?■<; A/i7. 14, 37 and 
 Ascon. ad loc. ; Dio Cass. XXXVIII. 30; Pint. Pomp. 49. 
 
98 APPENDIX I 
 
 TaJv oe Trepl AcvtXov V7raT€v6vT(i)v kcu rrjs trrao'cajs Trpoaoi ^aot^ovcTT^?, 
 (StTTC Tpti>6rjvtu jjiv iv ayopa Srjfidpxov^, KoiVrov 8e tov JS.iKipwvo's dSeXc^oi/ 
 iv rot's vcKpoLi (US TiOvrjKOTa Ketfjievov 8iaX.a9etv,^ 
 
 T£ 8)j/i05 rjpytTO TpewtaOcLi rfj yvw/JLy, koI tmv ^rj/idp^uiv ''Ai/vios 
 MiAcov TrpSros iToXp-rjae tov KXcoSiov eis Slktjv airayuv /3i.aiu>v, Koi 
 
 Tlo/J-TTTJiiO TToXXol (TVVyjX.OoV (K TE ToB &TjfJ,OV Koi TUiV Tripl^ iroXctOV. 
 
 Me6' (uv TTpoeXOiov Kal tov KXulStov dvacrri^cras iK t^s dyopas eTrt t^v 
 ij/^(j>ov tKoAet Toil? TToXiVas. Kai XeycTai fjLrjBeTroTe p,rjSiv e/c Toaav- 
 T7;s bjxo<f>poa'Vvq'i iin\l/T]<^i(TauBai, Tov Srj/Jiov. 
 
 B7 B.C. 'H 8e (TwyKAijTos aixiXXwixevri Trpos tw S^/xov eypai/'ev iTraiveOrjvai ^ 
 Tots iroAeis, oVai rov KiKcpcova irapa Tr/v (jjvyrjv iOepaTrcvcrav, Kal Trjv 
 OiKtav avT(2 Kai Tas CTrauXetSj ds KX<oStos oie^BdpKei, reXeo't 8'qp,oa'[oi<s ^ 
 avacTTadrjvaL. 
 
 bt'^c'' Karijei 8e KiKepoiv e/ocaiSeKaTU) (U,?ji/t /iera t^v <f)vy7Jv Kal TocravTyj 
 ras irdXets X^P"' '"'•' o'TrovSr] tovs dvOputTTOvs Trepl tyjv diravTiqaLV ^X^v, 
 wrrre to prjOev virb KtKepoJvos varepov ivoeeo'Tepov elvat ttJ'S dXrjOeta^. 
 "Ec^i^ yap avTov etti tcov wfxwv ttjv IraXiav cf>€pova'av eh Tr)v 'Pw/xijv 
 uaeveyKeiv.^ 
 
 Sept. 8, Ottov Kai Kpacrtros, e^Opo's cov avTw Trpo r^s <^vy^5, Tore TrpoOvfjLws 
 dTTYjVTa Kol oteXijerOj ro) Tratot IIo7rXta> x*^|0t^d^ei/05, to? eXeye, ^tjXoitt) 
 TOV KiKepmvos ovTi. 
 
 65. XXXIV. Xpwov 8' ov TToXvv SiaXtTriuv Kat irapatfivXd^a'i 
 d7roSrjiJi.ovvTa tov KXcuStov ett^XSe /acto. ttoXXSiv rm KaTrtrtoXico, Kai ras 
 orjfJiap)(iKd<i ocXtov^, iv als dvaypatftai rujv onaKr)p.ivistv ^crav, a.TrecrTrao'e 
 KOI oi€cf>0£ipev. Ey/caXoTJVTOs 8e Trept rovrou tov KXcoStoij, toS 8c 
 KiKepMvos Xe'yoi/Tos, ws irapavop-w; ck TrarpiKLwv £is 8rjjJiap-)(iav TrapeXOoL, 
 Kal Kvpt,ov ovoev eti/at Twv TreirpayfJievuiv vtt avTOVj Kdra>v 7fyavdKT7j(jc 
 Kal dvTelTre, rbv p-ev K.X(i>otov ovk CTratvoii/, dXXa /cat Bvcrxepaivoiv Tot's 
 ■TreTroXtrev/Aevots, 8etvov 8€ Kat jSiaiov d7ro<f>atvo)v dvaipeaiv ij/7f<jyLO'acrOai 
 
 ^ pro Sest. 34, 74 ff. occidunt nonnullos, vuliierant multos . . . caedem in 
 foro viaximam faciunt . . . fratrem meum . . . poscebant . . . seque servo- 
 rum . . . corporibus obtexit . . . turn . . . corporibus civium Tiberim com- 
 pleri. Buchsenschiitz ad loc, citing only a part of this passage, asserts that 
 ^v Tofs veKpots is a mistranslation of corpora in the sense of cadavera ! Plutarch's 
 statement, however, proves that he did not consult this speech, in spite of 
 numerous coincidences. 
 
 "^ pro Sest. 62, 129 ft. 
 
 3 ad Att. IV. 2, 2 ; Dio XXXIX. 11. 1 in Pis. 22, 52. 
 
 ^ post red, 15, 39, Italia cuncta paene suis humeris reportavit. [Sail.] m 
 Cic. 4, 7. ^ ad/am. V. 8, 4. 
 
 ' Plut. Cat. Min. 40; Dio XXXIX. 21-23. 
 
 ' de dom. 29, 77, in ilia adoptione legitime factum est nihil. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 
 
 99 
 
 SoyfiaTtav Kai irpageo)!/ toctovtoiv ttjv crvyKXr/Tov, iv ais eivat Koi tt/v 
 eavTov Toiv wepL Kvjrpov /cat Hv^dvTiov StotKTycTtv. Ek tovtov wpofri- 
 Kpovcriv o KiKCiObiv avTiS TrpotTKpovcnv €ts oiuSev e/i<^avcs 7r/DoeA.6o5crav, 
 aAA. locTTe Tij <j>iKo<^po<Tvvri ■^^pricrda.i Trpo's d\A.j;Aous a.p.avpQTe.pov. 
 
 66. XXXV. Mera ravTa KXulSiov ;ia€v d7roKTtWv(rt MtA.(DV Kai^*''g^J'' 
 OKOKO/iei/os (povov KiK£p(ova irapidrrjcraro (rvvrjyopov.^ 'H Se jSovXr] 
 <j>o/3r]6eLa-a, p,r] KivSvveuovTOi dvSjoos £vSo|^ov Kat ^v;u.o£t8oSs rov MtXojvos 
 Tapa)(r] yevrjTai, irtpi rrjv ttoXiv, CTrcVpei^e IIo/ATrrjio) TawTijv re /cat ras 
 aXXas Kpto-£is /Spa^evaai, irapi^ovTo. ry ttoXu /cat toTs ^iKa.<TTrjpiOL<s 
 d<r<f>aX.€iav. Ekuvov Se t^v dyopav £Tt ioj/ctos otto twv aKptuv TvepiXa- 
 /SovTOs Tols (TTpaTLioTai^, 6 Mt'Aouv Tov Ki/c£(0(ova Sft'cras, /U^ wpos Tr;v 
 oi/'ti' drjOeia StaTapa^^ets }(£tpov Staytovtcriyrai, cnji/£7r£t(T£v ev <f>op€i<a 
 KO/jLicrOevTa Trpos T^v dyopa;' ijeru^ci^Eti/, a^^pt ou cruvtacrtv ot xptrat Kat 
 TrXrjpovTai to SiKacTypiov. 
 
 67. 'O S' ov pLOVov Tjv, ojs loi/cer, £V oTrXots d^apcri^s,^ dXXa /cat 
 T<3 XfyEiv p.£Ta <l>6/3ov Trpoarjei, /cat p,dXts firaijcraTO 7raXXop,£vos /cat 
 Tpipuiv £Trt TToXXtSv dycivcov aKprjV tov \6yov /cat KardiXTacnv Xa/Jovros.^ 
 AtKtvvt'u) 8e Moupijva <j>€vyovTi SCktiv iiro Kdrcuvos ftorj&Siv, /cat c^tXoTt- ■ 
 p.oijp,£vos 'OpTi/o-tov iTTEp/SaXeiv evrjpep-qcravTa, pepos ovBiv avcTraviTaTO 63 B.C. 
 T^s VVKTOS, (US ^TTO TOTJ cr<j>6Spa ^povTiCTat Kat Staypuirv^crat KaKW^Ets 
 £v8££(rTepos auTOv <f>avyvaL. 
 
 68. Tote S' ovf £7rt t^v tov Mt Xtovos Slktjv Ik tov c\>opuov irpoeXOiov 
 Kol Oeaaapevoi tov TlopTryjiov dvw KaOe^opevov uxnr^p iv aTpaToirioia, 
 Kol kvkXw to, oirXa ' irepiXdpTrovTa ttjv ayopav, a-vve^vOrj koi poXi's 
 ivrjp^aTO tov Xdyov xpaSatvop-evos to awpa Kai ttjv t^mvrfv ivL<T)^opevo?, 
 avTov TOV MtXwvos £v^apcrcos Kat dvSpEtcos TrapiCTTapevov T(S dySvt /cat 
 KopTjv Opiij/aL Kat p£Ta/3aXtiv icrOrJTa (Jjclmv OTra^iwcravTos ■ OTrep ov)(^ 
 ■^Kicrra SoK£t o-vvatVtov avTu y€vi(r6ai t^s KaraStKiys.* 'AXX o y£ KtKc- 
 p<av 8ta TavTa <^tX£Tatpos p.aXXov rj SEtXos ISo^ev ttvat. 
 
 69. XXXVI. FtVeTat 8e Kat tSiv lepioiv, ovs Avyovpai Pto/xatot Ka- 63 b.o. 
 Xovcrtv, dvTt Kpdcro-ov tov viov ptTo. T-qv iv Ildp^ots avTov teXevt^i'. 
 
 1 (A) Cp. on the Milonian affair : pro Mil. with Ascon. ; Dio XL. 48 ff. 
 
 2 Liv. Perioch. 1 1 1 vir nihil minus quam ad bella natus. 
 
 8 (A) E.g. Cic. de oral. I. 26, 121 ; pro Deiot. i, i ; pro Chtent. 18, 57; 
 Div. in Caec. 13, 41 ; /icfli/. II. 20, 64. 
 
 * (A) Ascon. in Mil. p. 31 exercitum in fore . . . non tantum ex oratione 
 et annalibus sed etiam ex libro apparet qui Ciceionis nomine inscribitur de 
 opt. "en. orat. (= c. 4, 10) ; p. 42 itaque non ea, qua solitus erat, constantia 
 dixit ■ Schol. Bob. in Mil. p. 276 circumpositi iudicio milites . . . metu con- 
 sternatus et ipse TuUius pedem rettulit; Dio Cass. XL. 54, i. 
 
 5 (A) Cic. Phil. II. 2, 4; Brut. 1,1. 
 
lOO APPENDIX I 
 
 EtTa K\rjpiii \ia.)(u>v TU)v iirapxi-'^v KiXiKiar koX crrpaTov ottXltuiv [xvpioiv 
 Kal Si<T}(i.Xl(i>v, iiTTrecov Be hii7)(i.X.L<iiv e^a*co(rta>v,^ €7rXev(re, Trpo(TTa^6iv avTW 
 Kal TO. Tre.pl KaTriraSoKtav 'ApLo^ap^dvr) T(S /JacriXci ^iXa Kai TreiOrjvia 
 Tra.pa.(Ty(eLV .^ TaiJTa re 8^ TrapecTTT^craTO Kat crvvr]pfji.o(Tev ap.ep.TrTw; arep 
 
 TToXefJLOV, TOV? T£ Kt'XtKaS OpWV TrpOS TO Ilap^lKOl' TTTOUT/la P<U/U.at<DI/ (cat 
 
 Tov £V 'SiVpia veoiTepia-p-ov eTnqpp.evov<s KaTeirpavvev ^/xepcus ap;;^(oi'. 
 
 70. Kat BS>pa pkv ovSe Tcov /iacriXeoiv 8i86vToiv eXa^e, SeLTrvmv Se roiis 
 ewap^iKov'; av^Kev • avTos 8e KaS Tjp.epav rmjs p^aptevras a.veXa,fji.^avev icTTtd- 
 (reaiv ov TroXvTeXui^, aXX' eXevOeptui';. 'H 8' otKi'a dvpwpov ovk eT^ev, ov8' 
 auVos lli<f)6ri Ka.TaKet/j.evo's vtt ou'Sevos, dXA' eoj^ev lo-rws ■^ TreptTraraJv Trpo TOi; 
 hiUfiaTLOV Toil? a.cnTai,op.evcn}i IBe^iovro. 
 
 AeycTat 8e ftr/re pay88ots alKLcracrOaL Ttva ;«.»^t' icrdyJTa Trepia^^icraL /tti^re 
 PXaj(T<^-qp.lav vtt' opy^s ^ ^yj/xui^ TTpoafiaXeXv p,e9' v^petov. 'Avevpiov Se 
 rroXXa. tu>v Stj/jloctluiv KeKXe/x/xeVa ras tc TroXeis euirdpovs ewoi-qfre, Kat toijs 
 aTTOTtvoi'Tas ou'Sev tovtov irXetov TraOovra^ ewiTifiov^ 8ie(j)vXa^ev-^ 
 
 "Jiij/aTO 8e Kat TroXep,ov, ArjCTTas tSv irept tov 'Afjuavov oIkovvtwv Tpe\pd- 
 yaevos ■ e<^' & Kat avTOKparuyp iiro Tuiv (TTpaTioiTdv dvrjyopevdrj* 
 
 71. KcKtXtov 8e ToB p^TopOi Seojxevav TrapSdXei'i avT<S Trpos Ttva 6eav ets 
 'Vu>ii,-qv en KiAtKtas aTroo'TetAai, KaXXtoTrt^O/itevos ewi. Tots weir pay jxevous ypd- 
 <\>ei Trpos avTov ou'k etvat 7rap8ctX£ts ev TLiXiKia • ■7re<f>evyevaL yap eh Kaptav 
 dyavaKTOvaai, oTt povai TroXe/xovvTai, TrdvTtov eip-qvqv e-^avTuiv.^ 
 
 72. nXeojv 8' aTTo T^s iirap^tds tovto piv 'PoStu Trpodeu^e,'' tovto S' 
 'AdrjvaLS ' evSierpLipev " acrpevo'i Trodw tS>v irdXai StaTpt/3(uv. 'AvBpdai Se 
 Tots TrpuJTOts aTTo TratSeias (Tvyyevd/ttEvos Kat tows tot£ tftiXov; Kal (rvv^deis 
 do'Tratrd/Aevos Kat Tct TrpewovTa Oavp/ixrOet^ vtto tjJs EXXdSos ets Tiyv TrdXtv 
 ETray^X^cv, ^Syj tS>v wpaypAriov (utrirep inro <j>Xeyp,ov^i d(f)L(TTafj.€v<i>v inl tov 
 ep,i^vXLOv ■woXep.ov.^ 
 
 73. XXXVII. Ev pev ovv rrj fiovXfj il/rj(j)i^opev(i>v avTw Opiapjiov 
 rj^Lov av e(j)y] TrapaKoXovOrjcrai Kai'crapt QpiapPevovTi trvpjidaemv yevopevuiv^" 
 
 1 (D) E.g. ad Att. VI. i ; ad fam. XV. i ff. The number is incompatible 
 with the statements of Cicero. ^ (A) ad Att. V. 20, i. 
 
 ^ On Cicero's administration of the province, cp. e.g. ad Att, V. 21; VI. 2; 
 ad Quint, frat. I. i, 2 : but Plutarch, as usual, gives details notiownd. in Cicero. 
 
 * (A) ad fam. II. 10, 2 f., victoria iusta imperator appellatus sum; ad Att. 
 V. 20, 3. ^ (D) * ad/am. (ad Caelium) II. 10, 2. 
 
 « (A) Cic. ^ra/-. I, I. 
 
 ' (A) ad fam. XIV. 5, I, pridie Id. Oct. Athenas venimus . . . cognovi ex 
 multorum amicorum litteris ... ad arma rem spectare. 
 
 ^ (D) ad fam. I.e. circiter Id. Nov. in Italia speramus fore. 
 
 ^* ad fam. XVI. 11, 2; ad Att. IX. 4. 
 
 10 (D) ad fam. XVI. 11, 3; ad Att. VI. 3, 3. 6, 4; VII. i. 2. The decree 
 was never passed. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO lOI 
 
 ISlo. 8c crwi^ovXeve^ ttoAAo. fjiv Kat'crapt ypdcjxiiv, ■jroXXa. 8' avTov TioixTrrjiov 
 oeo/^ei/os, irpauvcDv kKa.T(.pov Kai irapafjLvOov/ji.a'O';.^ 'Os 8' ^v dvi?K£o-ra Kat 
 Kato-apos iTr€p)(Oixevov Tiofjun^'Coq ovk efjiavcv, dAAa ;U,£Ta TroXAuii/ xat dya^uiv 
 avopiDv TTjv TToXxv i^iXiTTC, TavTijs piv a.Tre.\u<f>drj riys <^vy^s o KiKtpwv, 
 cSo^e §£ KaLcrapL TrpocrTiOecrdai. 
 
 74. Kai cnjAos ecrrt t^ yvii>p.ri ttoXKo. ptTTTacrdw Itt d.p,<^6Tepa kcu Svcr- 
 iraO^cras. Fpae^ei V'^P ^V rats CTrioToXats' Stairoptiv, iroTlpuicri y(prj 
 TpcTreo-pat, no/Airiytou /*£v IvSo^ov Koi KaXrjv inrodecTLV wpos tov irdXc/ixov 
 fij^oiTOs, Katcrapos 8' ap.uvov rots trpdyp/KTi ■)(pwp,ivov kcu, p,aX\ov iavTov 
 KOL rovs <^iA.ovs croil^ovTos, ujctt' £X£"' /*£" ov </>vy7j) /u.'^ ^X"" ^^ wpos ov 
 <^'jy5-* Tp€J3aTLOv 8i, Tivos tSv Katirapos iraLpiav, ypa.xjjavTO's Itti- 
 CTToXrjv, OTL Kaicrap oi£Tat Seii/ /tdAwrra ju.£v avrov £^£Td^£(r6ai jU£^' airov 
 Kat Tuiv eXTrt'Stov p.eTiy(tiv, et 8' dva8u£Tat 8ia y^pas, £is T^v "EXXdSa jSaSt'^ai' 
 KciKet KaOr]p.evov "^(Tv^tav ayetv €K7ro8a>v d/x<^OT€pots yEvo/xci/oVj pavp.d(7"as o 
 KtKEpMi/, on Kaio-ap avTos ov*c iypmjjtv, aTreKpivaro irpos dpyy\v, is oiSfv 
 dm^iov Tzpa^ex. tS>v TmroXiTevp.ivuiv. Ta p,ev ovv £v rats ETrtcrToXais 
 ytypap.p,iva ToiavTo. icm.^ 
 
 75. XXXVIII. ToC 8e Kat'crapos cts l^ripuxv aTrdpavros EiiSxis <us 49 B.C. 
 
 Il0/A7r?^i0V ETtXeVCTE*^ koi TOII piv OtXXoiS dcT/tEVOtS U>CJ>07j, K.a.T01V 8' avTov 
 
 tSu)!' i8t'a woXXa KaT€p,€p<l>eTO Jlop,Trrjiu> irpocrOip.tvov avTw p,iv yap ov^6 
 KoXtls E^Etv iyKaToXurtiv 7jV aTr a.p)(rjs eiXeto t^s TroXiTEtas rd^iv, ekeivov 
 8£ ■f^yqaip.wTipov ovra rfj ircLTpiZi Kcd Toti <^iXois, ei p,ivt>>v IVos ekei vrpos ro 
 a.Tro/3aXvov 'qpp.o^tTo, KaT cri&iva Xoywp.hv ov8' £^ dvdyKr/s TroXlp.ix>v yeyo- 
 vivai KaiVapt Kai rocrovrcyu p.idi^ovTa KLvhvvov Stvp' ^Kav. OvToi re 8^ 
 rov KtK£p<Dvos a.vi(TToc<l)OV ol Xoyoi ttjv yvu)p.7)V, koL to p,iya, p.'qhh' avrio 
 ^(prjcrdat, Tlop,Trrj'iov. 
 
 76. Amos 8 rjv avTO'S ovk apvovpevos perap,iXe.CTdai, <^Xavpt^a)v ' 8e 
 Tov Tlop.7rrfCov rrjv Tra.pao'Ke.vrjv^ Kai irpos to, /SovX^vpnTa Sva^KoXaLV<DV 
 
 1 (A) ad Att. VII. 3, 4 ; IX. 5 ; Phil. II. 9, 32 ff. 
 
 2 (A) E.g. adfam. XVI. 12, I, ut veni ad urbem non destiti omnia et sentire 
 et dicere et facere quae ad concordiam pertinerent etc.; Plut. Cues. 31; 
 Pomp. 59 ; App. B.C. II. 36. 3 (A) E.g. ad Att. VIT. I £f. 
 
 * (A) ad Att. VIII. 7, 2, ego vero quem fugiam habeo, quern sequar non 
 habeo. 5 a^^^/. VII. 17; X. 8f. Cp. p. lof. 
 
 6 (A) ad Att. VIII. 3 ff.; IX. 2 ff. ; Dio Cass. XLI. 4 ff.; App. B. C. II. 
 35 ff. ; Plut. Pomp. 60 f. ; Caes. 32 ff. ; Suet. Caes. 31. 
 
 ' (A) ad f ant. VI. 6, 10, causae, quam Pompeius animatus melius quam 
 paratus susceperat ; VII. 3, 2, cuius me mei facti poenituit . . . propter vitia 
 multa quae ibi offendi quo veneram. 
 
 8 (A) Macrob. Satur. II. 3, 7, cum ad Pompeium venisset dicentibus sero eum 
 venisse, respondit : Minime Sero veni, nam nihil hie paratum video ; Cic. Phil. 
 II. 1 6, 40, ne de iocis quidem respondebo, quibus me in castris usum esse dixisti. 
 
I02 APPENDIX I 
 
 XmovXoi's, Kal To5 TrapacrKunrreiv ti, kol Aeyav )(a.pLev €is tovs o-Dyu,ju.a^ovs o^k 
 aTre^d^evos, dXX' airos /i€v dycAacrTos del TTtpiluyv iv tw (TTpaTOTriSio koI 
 CTKvdpmiro^, IrtpoK &i 7rapi)(<Dv yeXwra fx-rj^v 8eo/ieVois. 
 
 77. BeArtov Se Kai Tovrmi' oAt'ya irapaBiadai. Aofj.i.Tiov tolvvv 
 avOpoiirov £ts rctfiv ■^yep.oviKrjv ayovTos ou TroXe/XLKov Koi Aeyovros, a)s iiriu- 
 
 KTji TOV TpOTTOV CCTTt KOt (Tli)<f)pU)V, " Ti OHV," UTTtV, " OUK imTpOTTOV aVTOV TOIS 
 
 TCKi/ots c^uA.do'cret? ; " 
 
 ETratvowrtuv oe nvtav ®eo<l>dv7jv tov A-eaf^iov, os "Jyv ei' tw CT^aroTreoo) 
 TeKTOi/Mv e7rapp(OS, ws £d TrapafxyOrjaaiTO PoStbvs rov crrdAov aTTOySaAdcTas, 
 " HXtKov," eiTTCi/, " ayaOov Icttl to VpatKov ^X^'" «i'apx°'''" 
 
 Kato'apos oe Karo^^owros ra TrAetfrra Kat TpoTTOv Tiva. TroXtopKovvro'S 
 avToik, AotAo) /xev throvTi irvvOa.veo'da.i (rrvyvovs eivai tovs Kai'trapos 
 <^tAovs, (iTreKpiVaro, "Aeyas awrows Sixrvoeiv KatVapt." 
 
 Ma^Ktou oe Ttvos ^koi/to5 e^ IraAta? vewcrrt Kat Aeyovros ev ^(sip-rj ^7Jp.rjv 
 iwiKpaTiiv, (OS TToXiopKolro IIo/iTri/ios, " Etr' e^eirAeuo-as," uwiv, " "va toJto 
 Tn<TT€va-r]'i airds dei.fTa.ptvo's ; " 
 
 Merci Se rrjv rjTTav Novvibi) /xev eiTrdvTos, otl Sei )(pr](TTa.'; eAmSas exetv, 
 eTTTa yap derous cv t(3 (jTpaToire'S(u toB IIo/u,7rr;tot) AeAeic^&t, " KaAuis dv," 
 £(^7y, " iraprjVWSi u KoXoidti eTroAe/ioS/xev." 
 
 A.aj3iy]V0v oe ^vretats Tto'tv IcT^vpi^opei/ov kol Aeyovros, ms Set irept- 
 yevitrdai Ho/ATn^tov, *' Oukow," e^iy? ^^ UTpaTrjyrjpjxTi Tovrm ^atpevoi vvv 
 a.wojitli\riKap(.v to crTpaTOTreSov." ^ 
 48"^' o' '^' XXXIX. AAAa yap yevopiviqi T^S Kara $dp(raAov p.d^rj';, rj'S ov 
 periapt St' appwaTiav,^ Kat TlopTrrjiov (j>vy6vT0i, 6 piv Kdrtov^ Kat o-rpd- 
 Tcvpa (TV^vdv ev Avppa^iw koI o'TdXov excuv p.e'yav eKeivov ^^t'ou (TTpaTr/yeiv 
 Kara vdp.oi' Kat to t^s VTraretas diimpa. Trpov^ovTa. 
 
 AKoOovpevo^ Se T'^v d.p-)^v o KtKepwi' Kat oAws <j>evy(tiv to (Tvo'TpaTeveaBai^ 
 Trap' miBiv ^A^ev dvatpe^^vat, nop,7r7;toi; toi) veov Kat tSv <^t'A(ov ■rrpoBoTrjv 
 CLTTOKaXovvToiv Kat TO. ^C<f>r] (nrauapivuiv, £i p^ Kdrtov evo'Tcis pdAts acjieikeTO 
 Kal BvrJKev airov Ik tov crTpaTOTriSov .^ 
 48-47 79. KaTao'xu'v S' ets Bpevreo-tov evraS^a SitTpL^e,'^ KatVapa vreptpeVtov 
 fipaovvovTa Stct rets ev Ao-ta Kat Trept AtyuTrrov dcrxoAta?. 'ETret S ets 
 Tdpavra KaOtappicrpivo'; onTrjyyeXXeTO Kal irety irept'tmv Iku6(.v ets BpcvTOTiov, 
 
 1 (D) This retort furnishes the irrefutable proof that it, and along with it 
 this enti7'e batch of witticisms^ was not taken from Tiro's de iocis Ciceronis^ 
 for Labienus fell at Pharsalus while Cicero was at Dyrrhachium. 
 
 2 (A) ad fam. IX. i6, 7, in acie non fui; Liv. Perioch. ill Cicero in castris 
 remansit. 
 
 3 (A) E.g. Dio Cass. XLII. 10 6 Kiruv ev rifi Avppax^V ■ ■ • KaTaKei(pBels. 
 * ad/am. VII. 3. 
 
 5 Pint. Cat.Min. 55. 
 
 " (A) E.g. ad fam. XL 27; XIV. 11 ; ad Att. XI. 15. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 103 
 
 (apfj.rjcrc irpos aiTw, oi irdvv piv wv SvctcXttk, aiSovfji^vcK 8e ttoAAwv 
 TrapovTwv dvSpos i)(6pov koI Kparowros Xa.p.fid.vav irupav. Ov p,r]v iSiyjcrev 
 avTu) irpatat jt Trap' a^uxv ^ ctirEtv. 'O yap Kai^ap, <us eiSev avVov ttoXv 
 Trpo Tiiiv aXA.o)v OTravToivra, KareySij Kai ^0"7rd(raT0 Kat StaXcydjuevos jU.ovcu 
 (rv)(yS>v cTTa&ioiv oBov Trpo^XOev. 
 
 Ek 6e TOVTOV otETcXet TLp.wv Koi (l>iX.otf>povovp.€vos,^ oxTTi Kol ypaijjavTi 16 B.C. 
 Aoyov eyKu)p.iov Kdrtovos avnypacfxnv ^ t6v re Aoyov avVou Koi tov /3iov ws 
 p^AtcTTa T(a Ti€pLK\iovi ioLKoTa /cat ®r/pa/ie'vovs tiraiveiv. ' O p,£i/ oSi/ K.iKep(a- 
 I'os Aoyo5 KaTcov, 6 8e Kat'crapos 'Ai/rtKaTft)!/ eiriyeypoTrTat. 
 
 80. Acyerat 8e xat KdiVrov Atyapi'ov SiKrjv <j(>evyovTos, OTt ™i'^H>':|p' 
 Kaicrapos iroXf.p.iuyv ets eyeydvet, Kai KtKeptovos auVai /SorjOovvTOi;, eiTreiv tov 
 Kat'crapa Trpos Tovs </)i'Aovs' "Tt K(oAv£t 8ia )(p6vov KiKcptovos aKoCo-at Aeyov- 
 
 Tos, en-ei TrdAat KeKptTai ■Kovqpo'i dvrjp Kat iroXip.io^ ; " iirtl 8' ap^dp.evo'; 
 Aeyetr 6 KtKepwv V7rep<f>viii<i e/ctVet Kat irpovjBaivtv avrtu Trct^et re TrotKtAo? 
 Kat yapiTi 6a.vpMTTo<s 6 Adyos, TroAAas /Aev teVat p^pdas eirt roO TrpocrioTrov 
 TOV Katixapa, ird(ras 8e r^s i/'^x^s Tptwofiaiov rpoTras Kard8r/Aov eivat, rcAos 
 Se r(uv Kara $dp(7aAov aipap,ivov row prjTopoi dytuvwv iKTraOrj yevd/xevov 
 rtvap^^vat T(3 (rdp/XTi Kat r^s ;(etpds £Kj8aAetv evta ruiv ypapfiaTetwv ■ Tov 
 yovv avOpuiTTOv a.TriXv(Tt r^s atrtds Pe^vaafiivos.^ 
 
 81. XL. Ek rovTov KtKeptDV, ets pxivap^iav rrj's iroAtreias p.tdtcrTii>(Trj^, 45 B.C. 
 d<j>ifJi€VOi TOV TO, Koiva Trpdrretv * ^"'X'' ^^^ '''O'S /SovXofte'vots <^tXoo'o<^etv ^ 
 
 Tiuv ve'cov,' Kai cri^eSdv £k r^s irpos rovrovs <yvvqdeia.% ewyeveo'rdrovs Kat 
 Trpuirous ovras, av^ts tVp^vev ev ri^ TrdXei p,iyujTov. 
 
 82. Air(5 8' epyov pev ^v ro rovs <^tAocrdi^ov5 crwreXeiv 8iaXdyous *|'J* 
 Kat p,CTa<j>pd^eivJ Kat ruiv StaAeKrtKwv r? <f)V(TLKS>v ovopjxTiov eVao'Tov ek 
 'Viap/uKrjV peraySotAAetv 8t(LXeKT0v • " CKeTvos ydp OTriv, a)S cf>a<TLV, 6 Kai 
 
 1 (A) E.g. «</>»«. IV. 13, 2 ; IX. 16. 
 
 2 (A) E.g. flfl' ^«. XII. 40; To/zVa 25, 94; Tac. Ann. IV. 34; Schol. ad 
 luv. VI. 338; Plut. Caes. 54, 3; App. .ff. C. II. 99; Dio Cass. XLIII. 13, 4; 
 Suet. >42<f. 85. 
 
 3 (D) * Cic. ad /am. VI. 14, 2. 
 
 *(A)E.g. ad fam. V. 16; VI. 12, 5; IX. 1, 2. 2, 5. 20, i; XII. 23; 
 </^ off. II. I, 2 ; III. 1,2; </<? <i?ro. II. 2, 6 ; y4<r«(/. /"oj-A I. 3, 11. 
 
 ^ {K)ad fam.yW. 33, 2; IX. 16, 7. 18, i. 20, 3; /'/zz/. II. 8, 20; Sen. 
 Cotitr. \. prooem. 11 ; Suet, rfi? rifA i. 
 
 (A) E.g. Hirtius, Pansa, Dolabella, Cassius. 
 
 ' (A) ad Att. XII. 52, 3, &ir6ypa.ipa. sunt, minore labore fiunt, verba tantum 
 affero, quibus abundo. 
 
 8 (^aprao-ia = visum {Acad. I. 11, 40); cruy/caTdSecris = assensio, appro- 
 batio (Acad. II. 12, 37) ; lirox'fl = retentio assensionis (Acad. II. 18, 59) ; /card- 
 \,ji//is = comprehensio, cognitio, perceptio (Acad. I. 11, 41; II. 10, 31. 47, 
 I4i; • de fin. III. 5, 17) ; iroimv = individuum (de fin. I. 6, 17) ; Kevbv = vacuus 
 
I04 APPENDIX I 
 
 Trjv <j>cLVTa<TLav koI ttjv crvyKaTaOtuLV koX ttjv ino^v xai ttjv KaraXifl/LV, crt 
 8e TO arojiiov, to d/J.epes, to kcvov, aXISa. re TroAAa ^ ruiv TOLOvriav l^ovojxAxra.^ 
 irpmTO's r) jjAkicTTo, ' Pwfia.LOL's, to. /xiv ixeratjiOpaX'i, to. 8 oiKaoTrjdiv oAAais 
 yviapiixa koI Trpou-qyopa fx.rjx'iv'ijcrdijxvos ' 
 
 83. Trj St Trpos ttjv Troirjinv evKoXia. Trait^inv ixprJTO. A.iytTai yo-p, 
 OTT-qviKa pveirj Trpbs to tolovtov, Trjq wkto'S twr) irmuv irevTaKocrw..^ 
 
 84. To /u.£V ovv wXtiaTov tov ypovov tovtov ivtpi Tow/cAov ev )^iapiOK 
 avTOv Suxy(DV iypa<j>e. wpo's toiis <^tA,ovs AaepTOv yStov l,rjv, eiTe TT-ai^wv, 
 a)S tdoi ^'X^' '"^' ^° <^iAoTt/j,(as (TTrapyuiv irpoi T-qv iroXiTtlav Koi a^rffno- 
 vCiv Tots Ka^ecTtocrt. 
 
 ^Tai/i'ms 8 CIS acTTV ^e/oaireurs eve/ca tov Kaurapos KaTrju, /cat irpajTos ^v 
 ToSi' OTjj/ayopeuovTwv Tats Tt/xats Kat Xcyetv ctet Tt /catvov ets tw avopa koI to. 
 TrpaTTo/j.eva <^tAoTt/iOv/iev(oi'. ^ 
 
 Otov eo'Tt Kat TO wtpi T(uv IIo/x7r»ytow Xty^div (.Woviov, as a.vrjp-qiJ.eva<; Koi 
 KaTaj3e/3XriiJi,€vas o KaTcrap e/ccXevo'ev dvao"Ta^vat • Kat awTToB-qtrav. 'E<f>r) 
 yap 6 KiKcptuj', oTt TavTrj Trj t^LXjavOpwirux Kato-ap roiis /uev IIoju.Tnyiov tcTTT^ert, 
 Toiis 8' aviTOv TTT^yvutrtv di/SptdvTas. 
 
 85. XLI. Aiavoov/itvos 8', a)s Xc'yeTai, ttjv iraTpLov IcTopiav ypa<j>rj 
 TrepiXa^elv * /cat ttoAAol (rvp,fu$ai twv EAAv^vt/coIv /cat oAcos Tovs o'vvrfyp.ivov^ 
 Xoyov; avT<5 /cat p-vOov; Ivravda Tpitj/ai, TroXXoli /i£V ^ixxxrioi^, ttoXXok 8' 
 t8tots KaTiXri<j>B-q irpa.yiJja.aiv a/SovX^TOi^ /cat Trd^tcrtv, 0)V avdalpera 8o/cet 
 TrAeto-Ta <rv/u,/8^vat. 
 
 *B0° ^^' Upd/Tov /nei/ yap a.7r€irifUJ/aT0 rrjv yvvoLKO. TepcvTtotv ^ d/ueATy^ets vtt 
 auT^s irapa tov TrdAe/xoi/, mare koI tCsv a.va.yKo.lu>v e(^o8i'ft)v evSe^s aTroo-Ta- 
 A^vai Kat p.i;8' art Kar^pev aS^ts £ts iTaAtav TV)(eiv eiyvw^iovos. Avrrj p.ev 
 yap ovK ■^XOtv, iv Sp€VT€(ri(o StaTptySovTos avToO ttoXw )(p6vov, ip^Ofievrj 8e 
 Trj dvyaTpL, TraiSio'Krj vea, Too'avTrjv 68ov ov tto/htt-^v irpewova'av, oh )(oprjyuiv 
 7rape(rp(cv, dAAa Kat ttjv oIkmv tiu KiKcpioi/t iravTiov ipy)ix.ov Kat Korqv aTrc'Set^ev 
 
 (ad Att. IX. i), but some of these had already been Latinized, e.g. by Lucretius. 
 dfiep^s, with its Latin equivalent, does not occur in the extant works of Cicero. 
 See also Acad. I. 5. 14. 24 ff. ; de fin. III. 2, 5. 15 ; Tusc. III. 8, 16; de orat. 
 I- 34> 154- 
 
 1 E.g. essentia = oiala, cp. Sen. Epist. 58, 6 ; quantitas, qualitas {iro(r6TT;s, 
 TToiiTTjs) ; evidentia (^Kdpyeta) ; pronuntiatum (ci|iaj;tta) ; appetitio animi {dpi/.Ti). 
 
 2 Cp. § 5 and p. 31. 3 (A) E.g. ad/am. IV. 4. 13 ; VI. 12 ; IX. 16. 
 * (A) Com. Nep. fragm. (Peter, Fragm. hist. Rom. p. 223) ; Cic. de leg. 
 
 I. 5; Calen. ap. Die Cass. XLVI. 21 irpoB^p^vo^ yap iravTa to. t^ ir6X€t 7re- 
 Trpayp.iva (Tvyypdrf/ai, eiretr ouk dirb ttjs Kriffeois a^ijs . . . ciKKa. dirb rrjs inraTeias 
 Trjs eauTOv Tjp^aTo ad Att. XIV. 14, ^. 
 
 5 Divorce 46 B.C. : adfam. IV. 14; XIV. \\ ; ad Att. XL 16. 17; XII. 22; 
 Dio Cass. XLVI. 18, 3. Cp. Tyrrell and Purser, Corresp. of Cic. I p. 37 ff., 
 IV p. XLV ff., and above pp. 19 f. 42. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO lOS 
 
 €7rt iroAAoTs 64>\rjfiacrL koL /xcyoAois. AvraL yap tiariv at Xeydfievat 
 ■nji 8iao-Ta(T£0)s ewrptireo-TaTat Trpo^acras. Tg 8e TepevTia kol rauVas dpvov- 
 ficvjy Xa/XTrpav iiroirjtrc rrjv airoXoylav avTo's e/ceivos /ier' oi ttoXvv xpovov 
 yrj/Mi Trapdtvov, ws fikv rj Tepevrta KaT€<jy^fu^ei', tpayn t^s <5pas, ws 8e 
 Ttpajv o Tov KtKepcovos direXeuSepos y€ypa(j)€v, anropux.^ evcKcv Trpos 8td- 
 Av(rtv davetojv. Hj/ yap rj irais a-(j>68pa TrXovfria, Koi Tr]v ovfrlav avr^s o 
 KiKcpdij/ €v iricTTet K\r]pov6p.oi a.Tro\a<j>du's SiccjivXaTTtu. '0(f>€ik(iiv Se ttoX- 
 Aas /ivpiaSa^ vtto tu>v <^i\u>v Kal oiKciwv iireiadr) rrjv TraiSa yrjiuu Trap 
 rj\i,Kuiv Kai Tovs Savao-Tas diraAAo^ai Tots iKeLvr]<; xprjo-dfievov.^ 
 
 AvTODvios Se ToB yafi,ov fu/rjirOels «v Tais tt/dos tovs 'I'tXtTnrtKoiis 
 avTtypa<^ats eK/SaXciv avrov <l>r](Ti ywaiKa, Trap' r; iyi^pa<7C' ^aptevTios 
 apa Trjv o'lKovpuxv is airpoLKTOv Kal a(TTpaT€vTcn> TrapauKurrrTuiV tov Ji.LKcpuivo';- 
 
 TrjpavTi o' aiT(S p,tT' ov noXvv Xpovov 17 OvyaTrjp (XTrt^avE TtKTovcra irapct 46 B.C. 
 AevrXcp • '^ toSto) yap lyxjX-qOt] fxtTO. Tr/v Ilet'crajvos ToC irporipov dvSpos 
 TcXevTi^v. Kat (rw^X^ov /i£v eiri t^v 7rapap,vOuxv T(S KiKepwn iravTa^^o^ev 
 ot (^iXdcrot^ot ■ ^ /Sapcois 8' ayav Tji/eyxe to (TV/j.Pe/irjKO';, m(TT€ koj, Tr)v yapij- 
 delcrav aTroirep.i/'ao'fct 8d^aa'av ■^uBrjvai rfj T€\€VTrj rrji TvXXux's* id B.C. 
 
 XLIL To. /xev ovv Kar oIkov ovtixh eip^e tco KtKeptovt. 
 
 87. T^s 8' 67rt Kaurapa crvvKTTap.ivrj'S Trpa^etos oi /ACTCcr^e, Kamtp uiv 
 tTaipos €v Tois paXuTTa Bpovrov /cat /8apw£(T^at to. irapovra Kat to. TrdXat 
 TToOttv TTpaypara Sok<Sv, iis fTepov ov8et's. AXX €8et(Tav ot av8p€'s avTov ttjv 
 re i^\XTiv <us evSea Tokprj's tov re p^dvov, ev <i Kat rats ippiopevtuTaTai'i 
 ct>v<Tecriv eTrtXetVet to Bappuv.^ 
 
 'Os 8' ow liriwpaKTO rots Trept BpoUroi/ /cat Kao"o'tov to epyov Kal roiv 44 B.o. 
 KatVapos c^t'XoJV cwuTTapeviav im Tois avSpas aS^is ^v Seos ejOK^wXt'ois 
 iroXep,ots TrepnreTrj ya/LaQai rrjv ttoXlv, 'AvToui'tos p.ei' iirarevojv r^v PovXrjv 
 (TDViyyaye Kat jSpa^ea. ^ Bi€Xi)(dr] irept op,ovotas, KtKeptov 86 iroXXa irpos 
 TOV Kaipov oiKuui<s hieXdrnv eireicre rijv (TvyKXyfov ' AdrjvaLov; pipyja'a'pevrjv 
 ap.vrjo'TLa.v ^ Tusv hn, Kaitrapt {j/rj'f'ia'acrOaL, vupai 8e rots Trept Kdo'ctoy Kat 
 
 1 ad/am. IV. 14; ad Att. XII. 22, i. 32, i. 
 
 2 E.g. <z</ ^«. XII. 15. iSaff. ; ad fam. IV. 6; VI. 18, 5; Ascon. z« Pis. i 
 filiam post mortem Pisonis generi, P. Lentulo collocavit, apud quern ilia ex 
 partu decessit. 
 
 3 (A) Caesar {ad Att. XIII. 20), Brutus {ad Att. XII. 13), Lucceius (ad fam. 
 V. 13), Sulpicius (ad fam. IV. 5. 6). * (h.) ad Att. XII. 32. 
 
 s (D) /'/;//. II. II ff.; Die Cass. XLIV. 20; XLVI. 22 ; ad fam. XII. 2. 
 
 6 (D) /'/«7. I. I, 2. 13, 32. 
 
 '' (A) Phil. II. 35, 88; I. i, i, ieci fundamenta pads Atheniensiumque 
 renovavi vetus exemplum Graecum etiam verbum (sc. afLvriuTLa) usurpari etc. ; 
 Veil. Pat. II. 58, 2; App. S. C. II. 126 ff. 142; Die XLIV. 22. esp. 26. 33. 
 •34 I KiK^poiv fiiv raOra elirCiv cTreure ttjv yepovcrlav ^rrfSlva iiriSevl fjivn<Ti.KaKTj<raL 
 ^7i^l<raiT8ai Zonaras X. 12; Plut. Brut. 19. 
 
Io6 APPENDIX I 
 
 BpovTov iirap^^uK. "Ectt^c Se tovtwv rc'Aos oiiSc'v. O yap 8^/iOS auVos //.tv 
 d^' eavToij Trpos oTktov c^a^Set's,' u)S «& tov veKpov iKKOix.dfifi.evov Si ayopas, 
 ^AvTOivtov Se /cat Trjv icrOrjra oet$avTO<; avTots at/wiTos KaraTrXewv /cat KeKOfi- 
 p-evT/jV iravTrj TOts iicjiccnv, CKpavevres vtt opyrj% iv dyopa ^rJTija-LV iwoLovvTO 
 Twv dvSpHiv, /cat TTVp i^ovTe's im ras ot/ctas c^eov <I)S v<^a.\jjovTt<s. Oi Se toC- 
 Toi/ /x£v T(3 Trpo7rt<f>v\a.)(daL SU<f>vyov tov kivSvvov, iripovi Se iroAAovs Kat 
 /ufyoXous 7rpo(r8o/c(ui/Tes l^iXurov ttjv ttoXiv- 
 
 XLIII. Euflus OVV 6 'AvTWVlO'i iTTtjpTO, Kol TrdcTl piv rjV <j>o/3ipO^ (US 
 
 povapyrjcriov, t(S St KiKtptDvt (^OySepwraros- 
 
 88. Avappu)vwp.evrjv re yap airw TrctXtv optuv t^v Syvap-iv iv rrj ■KoXntia 
 Kat rots Tvept Bjooijrov CTTtTTySetov ctoo/s rj'^Oero irapovTi. Kat ttov Tt /cat irpo- 
 vwyjp^tv VTTOi/'ias aiiTOts Trpos oAAtjAows Kara Tijv Taji/ ySto/v dvop-oiorrrfa Kat 
 ota<f)opdv. Tavra SetVas 6 KtKejocov irpwrov fxkv wpp.i^o'e TT/accr^euT^s AoXo- 
 /SeAAa crw£K7rA.ei)(rat £is ^vpuxv • ^ firet 8' ot /iieAAoi/Tts w?rarei)€iv /ifr' 'AvrtiJ- 
 viov, I/3Ttos Kat Ilavcras, avSpes dya^ot Kat ^rjXoiTOL tov RtKeprnvos, cSt'ovro /i^ 
 (r<jyds KaTaXiTTUv, iiTroSe^o/xevot KaraXvcretv 'AvTwvtov cKetVou Trapdiros, o o 
 44 B.C. OUT d;rtCTT<3v TravTciTracrtv oi!it€ irioreiJajv AoXo/ieXXav jAv etacrt ^aiptiv, 6p.o- 
 Xoyrjcra'; Se Tots T£pt Tov'lpTiov to dipos iv 'A^T/vats Std^etv, orav 8 eKetvoi 
 7rapaXd/3wa't Trjv dpyr^v., d<^ite<Tdai irdXiv., avros Kap kavTov i^iirXevae. 
 V(.vop,€vr)<; Sc Trepi tov ttAoCv ZvaTpifiri^ koI Xoymv dyro Vu>p.rfs, ota c^tAet, 
 Katrcov TTpocTTreo'ovTdiv, p^Ta/Se^XTJcOat fxev 'Avtwvlov Oavpao'Tyjv p.£Ta/3oXr]V 
 Kat Trdvra TrpciTTttv Kat TroAtreweo'^ai Trpos ttjv (TvyKXr/Tov, iv&eiv Be r^s 
 iKeivov Trapovo'tas ra Trpdy/xara ^tt-^ r^v dpicTTrjV e^eiv Siddecnv, KaTap.ep,ij/d- 
 p.evo'S auTos aiiToB T^v ttoAA^i/ eiXd/Betav dve(TTpe<j)ev avOii eh ' Fu>p.rjv.^ Kat 
 Twv 7rp(iiTwv ov oirjp.dpTa.vev eXTriowv • too'ovtov ttXtjOo^ dvOpwiroiv vtto p(apds 
 Kat TTodov Trpos TTjv dwdvTTqO'LV iie)(ydrj, kol o'^eSov ■^p.ep-qiriov dvyjXuicrav 
 ■)(p6vov at Trept ras TruAas Kat T-qv eto-oSov avrov Se^talcrets Kat ^iXot^poayvai. 
 Ty S' va'Tepaia /SovXrjV crvvayayovTOi AvTwvCav Kat KaXovvTOi aiiTov ouk 
 TjXOeVj^ dAAa KaTeKeiTO /AaXaKojs ^X^^'' ^'^ "^^^ kottov (TKyprTOfJievos. 'ESoKet 
 8e ToXrjde'; CTrt/SovX^s £tvat i^ofio^ €k Ttvos vvoyjilw; koI p.rp/vcreui'; Ka6' oScv 
 avT(5 ■7rpocr7re<Tov(Trj';. Avrcuvtos 8e ^aXeTriSs p-ev et^ev im rfj Sta^SoAjj Kat 
 orparttoTas enepupev ayctv avTov rj KaTaizprjKTat ttjv oikuxv KfiAeutras, evcrrdv- 
 To/v oe TToAAtuv Kat oeyjdevTtjiv ive^pa Aa/3a)v p^vov iTravcraTO. Kat to 
 
 1 Cic. ad Att. XIV. lo laudatus miserabiliter ; servique et egentes in tecta 
 nostra cum facil^us inmissi ; Phil. If. ■^^(i^ 90, tua ilia pulchra laudatio etc.; 
 III. 12, 30, caedis et incendiorum causam quaesierit ex funere ? These seem 
 to be the only direct allusions to the famous funei'al speech in Cicero. 
 
 2 (A) E.g. />/;«■/. 1.2, 6; III; V; XI ; -aa'^/A XIV. 7 ff.; XV. 8; XVI. 3f. 
 
 3 (A) E.g. ad Att. XVI. 7 ; adfam. XII. 25 ; esp. Phil. I. 3, 7 ff. 
 
 * {A) Phil. I. 5, II, solusne aberam ... at ille, audiente senatu, cum fabris 
 se domum meam venturum esse dixit. Nimis iracunde hoc quidem ; V. 7, 19 f. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 107 
 
 kom-ov ovrtos avrnrapi^rnvTcs arpefjux kol (^vAaTTO/ievot StereXouv, dxpi ov 
 iSMurap o veoi e^ AttoWwvui'S 7rapayevd/u.evos tov t€ KXrjpov aveSe^aro tov 
 Jvattrapos iKuvov km trtpi nSv Si<t)(l\iwv irevraKoaimv fnvpidSoiv, as 'AvTui- 
 vios £K T-^s oio-c'as KarcTp^ej/, eis Siafjiopav KariaT-q irpo'S avrov.^ 
 
 89. XLIV. Ek oe TOUTOu 4>jA«riros o t^v p.rjTipa. tov viov Kaiirapos 
 €;j(cov Kai MapKcAXos 6 tyjv aStXcfiijv a^^Kop^voi puera. tov vcavicrKorv irpo^ tov 
 KiKepwva O'WwevTO, K.LKepu)va p,ev e/ceiVfti ttjv aTro tov Xoyov Koi ttjv avro 
 TTj? TToAiTtias 8vvap.iv €v T£ Ty ^ovXrj /cat TO) St^/xo) irapextw^^ Ikuvov Sc 
 K(K6p(ovi Ti^v a-Ko Twv ')(prjpa.T<Dv Kox Tmv oir\u>v d(r<^aXetav. "HSt; yap ovk 
 oAtyous T(3v iiiro KatVapt (TTpa.T£vcrapivu>v wcp\ avTov e9(£ to pupaKiov. 
 
 90. EooKct 8e /cat put^iav tk abrla yeyovevai tov tov KiKfpouva Sc^a- 
 <rpat TTpodvpw^ T7)v Kawrapos t^iXlav. "Ert yap, As 'ioiKC, HopTrr/tov 
 ^(avTos Koi Ka«rapos eSo^e Kara toiis ^ttvovs ^ 6 Ki/C£pa)v KaXeii/ Ttva tows 
 Twv ovyKXrfTLKmv TraiSas eis to KairtTwAtoi/, a)s p.eWovTO'i i$ avTiLv iva tov 
 Aids aTroSetKvuetv T^s'P<<)p,r;s r/yepova- Toil's Se TroAiras oto o'ttovS^s diovrai 
 KTTaadaL Trepl tov vetav kxI toiis TraiSas iv Tais irepnrop^'vpoi'S KaOi^ecrdai 
 aKDTnjV t^ovTai. 'E^ai^vjjs Be tSsv Qvpuw dvoi^daawv Kad' eVa tcuv TratScoi/ 
 dwo'TajU.eviov kijkXo) wapa tov 6eov 7rapa.7ropevecr$ai, tov 8e irdvTas iirio'KOTrttv 
 Kol dTroTripwav a)(9opevovi. "lis 8' ovTOS rjv irpocniov Kar avTov, tKTUvai, 
 TTjv Se^tav Koi eiTreti/, "'O 'Pu/xaioi, ircpas vp.tv ep<f)vXi<i>v TroXepiav owtos 
 ■^yepiov yevo/icvos-" TotovTOi' <^acriv ei/wi/iov t8ovTa tov KiK€p(Oi/a t^v juei/ 
 iSaxv ToC TratSos iKpepd^Oai Koi KaTt^uv eva.pyw%, avTov 8' ovk iiTLO'Taodai. 
 MeS' ripepav 8e KaTafiaivovTO^ eis to TrcSibj/ to 'Apeiov avroB Toiis TraiSas ^8?^ 
 ycyvpyturpivovi ajripy^ea^diu, KaKtivov 6(j>dr]vai T(3 KiK£pu)v( irpuiTOV otos w(j)9r] 
 Kad' VTTVOV CKTrXayevTa hi Trvvdawrdoj., tivwv ti-q yovemv- 'Hi/ Se iraTpos 
 
 OKTaoviiov Twv OVK dyav iirL<f>avu)V, 'Attuxs 8e prfp6<i, d8£X<^t8^s Katcrapos. 
 'O^ev Kaio'ap auT<u irar8as ovk €)(u>v iStbvs T^v oiucriav kavrov koi tov oIkov 
 iv Tais 8ia6^Kats £8(ok£v. 'Ek toijtou <f>acrl tov KiK£pu)va tcI! 7rai8t KaTa 
 Tas aTravTT^o'cts £>'Tvyi^av£ti' iiTLpLtXCti, KaKtivov otK£t'a)S 8c)(£0'^at Tas (jiiXotfipo- 
 o-was ■ Koi yap ek Tu^j^iys auTo) yEyovfVac crvp/Se/Si^Kei KcKfpcovos waTEvoi/ros.'' 
 91. XLV. AvTttt p,ev ovv ■n-po(f>da-€K ^a-av Xeyopevai- to Se n-pos 
 'AvTwviov piaro'i KtKfpojva wpSiTOv, £(Ta ij (^wis ^tt<uv ovtra Tiprj's irpocre- 
 Tro«;cr£ KataapL vopl^ovTa vpoa-Xap/Sdveiv rfj TroXiTtia ttjv Ikuvov SvvapLV.^ 
 OvToy yap vir^u to papaKiov avTov, wctte Kat TraTepa irpoaayopeveiv. 
 
 ^(K)Pkil. III. 2, 3; IV. I, 3; V. 8, 23; floT Att. XVL 8; App. .ff. C. 
 III. 12; Die XLIV. 12; Veil. Pat. II. 61, I ; Liv. Perioch. 117. 
 
 2 (A) «</ /i«. XV. 12, 2 ; XVI. 1 1, 6 ; ad fam. XII. 23, 2 ; /'/;//. V. 16, 45 ; 
 Die Cass. XLV. 15, 4. 
 
 3 (D) * Suet. Aug. 94 ; Die Cass. XLV. 2 ; Tertull. de anima 46. See p. 55 ff. 
 * (A) «Suet. and Die 11. cc. ^ (A) Dio Cass. XLV. 15, 4; Phil. V. 16. 
 
 s (A) Cp. Brut, ad Att. 1. 17, 5, licet ergo patrem appellet Octavius Ciceronem. 
 
Io8 APPEiNDIX I 
 
 43 B.C. 'E<^' (S (T(j>6ipa. BpoiJTOs ayavaKTuiv ev rats irpos 'Attikov iiriUTo- 
 Aais KaOrjipaTO^ rov KiKepwvoS) on 8ia cfto^ov 'AvT(i>VLcm Otparrtiwv Tov 
 KatVapa S^Xds ccrrtv ouk IXtvdepiav rrj waTpiSi wpaTTWv, aXka SicrrroTrjv 
 (f>L\av6pwTrov avrS /xva)/x£vos. 
 
 Ov /jirjv dAAa tov ye TraiSa Kt/ccptuvos 6 BpoCros 6V 'A^T^vats SiaTpi^ovra 
 Trapa Tois <f)iXocr6<l>OLi avaXa(3iav icr)^ev i<j>' ij-ye/xovias Kai iroAAa y^mp.tvo'; 
 avTio KaTU>p6ov.^ 
 
 92. Tou 8e Kt/cepo)vos aKix-qv €(T)(a' ij Swap,is^ €v T^ TroXct Tore fieyicTTrjv, 
 Koi KpaToiv o(Tov i^ovXeTO TOV p,ev 'AvrmvLov i^eKpovae kolI KaTe<TTa<TUW€ Kal 
 TroXejxyjcrovTai avTm Toy's Bvo VTraTov;, " IpTiov Kal Udva'av, e^eire/u.i/'e, KatVapt 
 Se papSov)(Ov's Kal orTpaTriyiKov Koo'fj.ov,* i>s Srj TrpoTroXe/j-ovvTi Trjs irarpi'Sos, 
 iTTUfTt ^Tq(l>La'aa6ai ttjv nvyKXyfOv. 
 
 'Eirei 8' 'Avrwytos /xev yJTTrjTO, tSiv 8' vTrdroiv dp.(j>OTip<Dv dwoBavovTwv 
 Ik ttJs fJid^s ^ Trpos KatVapa o'w€0"T7^(7av at 8um/AetSj Sctcracra 8 ' ly /SovXrj 
 viov avSpa^ Kal Tv)(rj Xa/xirpa Ke)(pr]iJ.evov iireipaTO Tipxa^ Kal 8mpeais aTro- 
 KaXelv avTOv ra trTpaTivpjiTa Kal Trepurwav ttjv Syva/jLLv, <us p.^ Seop,€vrj tCiv 
 TrpoTToXefjLovvTOiv 'AvTOiviov 7re<l>£vy6TO<;, O'urajs o Kattrap ^o/3>7Pets VTr€7refjt/7re 
 to! Kt/ceptovi Tous SeojueVows Kat irctl^ovTa? vTraretav pev dp,<^OT£pois 6/ioC 
 irpa.TTe.LV,'' yjyfjo'dai 8e Tois irpdypaaLV oTrtos avros lyvwfce, ■n-apaXap./SdvovTa 
 TTJV dp^rfv Kal to p^eipdKiov Stot/cetv ovo/Aaros /cat oo^rji yXi^Ofievov. 
 
 93. 'Op.oXdy£t 8e Katcrap au'rds, o)s StStws KaTaXixrtv Kat kii/Sv- 
 vevuiv cpiypos yaiiaBai ^(prjaaiTO Trj KtKtpcovos ev 8£'ovTt (j>i.Xap)(La., 
 ■TrporpEi/'a/xe'OS avVdv VTrartiav p.tTiivaj, CTvp.7rpaTTOVTOs avVoC /cat <rw- 
 ap)((up€(Tia£,ovTos. 
 
 XLVI. 'EvraJ^a fx,ivTOL p,d\i(TTa Kt/CEpcov eirapSets* ^tto v£Ov yepwv 
 Kal (j>evaKLcr6els Kal crvvap^aipeo'ida'a's koi Trapacr^mv avriS ttjv (Tvy kX-qtov 
 ev6v^ fxiv VTTo tS)v (j)iX(i)v alrCav ei^ev, oXiyio 8 varepov avTov diroXoiXe- 
 /cios y^crOtTO /cat tov Si^fxov irpoefjievoi ttjv iXevOepiav. 
 
 1 In the one extant letter (Brut, ad Att. I. 17, 2) some such censure is 
 implied, but it is not so expressed. Cp. also Brut, ad Cic. I. 16; Cic. ad 
 Brut. I. 15, 3. 
 
 2 Cic. ad Brut. I. 5, 3; II. 7, 6; Brut, aa? Cic. II. 3 ; Plut. Brut. 24. 
 
 ' Cp. the passages cited § 88 1 and Plut. Ant. 17; Cic. ad Brut. I. 3, i. 
 10, 3. 15, 6; App. B. C. IV. ig KiK^puv Si /isri Paioj' 'Kaia-apa la-xv<rei>, ocrrj 
 •y^voLTo cLv dTjfiayoyyov fxovapx^o.. 
 
 * Phil. Ill ; V ; VIII ; adfam. X. 28, i ; App. B. C. III. 50 f£. ; Dio XLVI. 
 29 ff. — Cic. ad Brut. I. 15, 7, quis honos ei fuit non decernendus . . . decrevi 
 etiam imperium . . . quid enim est sine imperio exercitus. 
 
 6 (A) Phil. XIV ; App, B. C. III. 69 ff. ; Dio XLVI. 36 ff. ; Plut. Ant. 17. 
 
 6 (A) Dio Cass. XLVI. 41. 
 
 7 (A) id. XLVI. 42 f. (D) Cic. ad Brut. I. 10. 
 
 8 (A) This was foreseen by Brutus. Cp. ad Cic. I. 4, 4 f. 16, 7 f. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO log 
 
 94. Avirj$€U yap 6 veavt'as xat ttjv vTrcLTelav Xaftiav KiKtpmva /J.iv^^^*^''^' 
 eiao-e -xaiptiv,^ 'AvtwvCw Sk koll AtTrtSui <^tAos yevd/Aevos Kai T'^v 8vva/iiv 
 
 €is ravro cruveveyKui/ laa-wtp aX\o tl KTrjfji.a ttjv ■fiye/j.oviav iveLfjiaTO irpm 
 auTOvs. Kpti KaT£ypd.<f>yja-av avSpes ous eSei ^vijerKciv, wtp StaKOo-iovs. 
 
 nXctcTTiji' 0£ Tti)i' dp.<f>i,a-j3r]TrjiJLdTwv avTots tptj/ ij KtKcptuvos 7rpoypa(l>rj 
 Trap€a-)(£V, Avtwvlov p,iv da-v/x.^aTui'S i^ovroi, d p,rj ttjomtos e/cetvos 
 aTro6v^(TKOi, AcTTtSou 8' 'AvTMviu) Trpo(TTLdtp,ivov, Kattrapos 8e irpos 
 djU.<^OTepoi)s di'T€;i(OVTOs. EyivovTO 8' at (njvo8ot ;u,dvoi5 airopprjTOL Trepl 
 TToXtv Bovwvtav e<^ 7jfi,epa^ rpeis, Kat crvvjjeo'av eis tottov tlvo. irpocrw Twv 
 
 <TTpaTOirf8<OV TTOTa/JLtS Triplppf.6fl,iV0V. 
 
 AeycTat 8e ras TrpcoTas ■^p.epas Si,ay<iiVt(Td.p.£vos virip tov KLKepaivo^ 
 6 KaTcrap ev8oi)vat Tg rpiTrj koL irpoicrOat, tov avSpa. 
 
 Ta 8e T^s avTiSdcreo)? ovtoj? e'X^''- *E8et KtKc'pwvos e/co-T^vat Kai- 
 crapa, IlaijAov 8c Td8eX<^oii A«ri8ov, Acvklov 8c Katcrapos 'AvTwviov, 09 
 ^v 6eios aircp Trpos /XT/Tpds.* 
 
 GiJTCDS cfcTrecrov viro Ovp,ov koI Avctctt^s tiov dvOptawivuiv Xoyicrp-Stv, 
 jxaXXov &' aireSei^av <ds oiSev dvflpoJTrou Orjpiov ia-Tiv dyptooTepov i^ovcrcav 
 irddei 7rpo(7A.a/3ovTOS. 
 
 95. XLVII.* npaTTOjiicVcov 8e tovtmv 6 KiKcpwv ^v ;U£V ei/ dypois 
 (Siois irepi Toi)crKA.ov e^wv tov dS€\<j)6v p.t6 avTov ■ irvBop.cvoi, 8e ras 
 Trpoypacfia.'s tyvuxrav ets 'Acrrvpa /xeTa^^vai, )(<j}pLOv irapaXiov tov Ktxe- 
 ptovoi • eKetOev Se TrXeiv eis MaKe8oviav irpos BpoCTOV • ■^8?; yap WTrep 
 avTOv Xdyos iffyoiTa xpaTOvvTOs. Eko/hi^ovto 8 ev c^opetois dwaprfKO- 
 Tes iiro Xi;ff7j9 • Kai Kara t^v 68ov i<^i(TTdp,a'oi Kai to, <j>optia TrapajSdX- 
 AovTcs dX/Vj^Xots 7rpocro)Xo<^i5povTO. MdXXov 8 6 KoiVtos ■^Ovp.ei, Kai 
 Xoyicrp.os avTov eicrrjet T^s aTropias " ov8ev yap 1(^7/ Xa/Seiv oiKodcv, dXXa 
 Kai ToS ^iKipuivL yXicr^ov rjv e^d8tov Afieivov ovv tivai tov piv Kikc- 
 ptDva ■jrpoXap.fidveiv Trj <i>vyrj, avTov 8c p.cTa6tiv oiKoOev crv(rK€vaa-dp.€Vov. 
 Tavr' c8o^e • Kat TrcptXa/JdvTcs dXXiJXovs Kai dvaKXavcrdp.ei'ot SieXvdrjaav. 
 'O ftcv ovv KdtVTOs oi TToXXais vo-repov ij/Acpais iiro tSv oiKiT&v wpo- 
 hoOti'; TOis ^TjToScrtv dvypid-q p,€Ta tov TratSds. 'O 8e KiKcpwv cts 
 
 1 Cp. Brut, ad Cic. I. 4, 6, te consulem factum audivimus ; App. B. C. III. 
 92 aireKoyeiTo koX rrji' eiff^ytjtrii' t^s virardas {nrep^VTJpev, tjv airbi iv ry jSouXi; 
 Trpdrcpov eUrriyiiffaTo. '0 5^ Ta<rovTov direKpLvnTo, iTUTKibirrav on tuv ipCKwv airip 
 TeXevToios ivrvyxifoi. 
 
 2 (A) Liv. Perioch. 119. 120; Veil. Pat. II. 65 ff. ; Plut. Ant. 19; Brut. 26; 
 App. B. C. IV. 2 ff. ; Dio Cass. XLVI. 54 ff. 
 
 3 (A) * Veil. Pat. II. 66, i ; Suet. Aug. 27 ; de vir. ill. c. 8i ; Plut. Ant. 19, i. 
 
 4 (A) See §94'^- 
 
 5 Flight and death of Cicero : * Liv. ap. Sen. Suas.Yl. 17, 22; Asin. Poll. 
 ap. eund. 15. 24 ; Val. Max. V. 3, 4 ; App. B. C. IV. 7 ff. esp. 19 f . ; Dio Cass. 
 XLVII. i-io. II; rhetoresap. Sen. 5'«aj-. VI. VII. Contr.VW.ij. Exc.Vll.2. 
 
no APPENDIX I 
 
 ' Kcrrvpa KOfJuaOel^ koI ttXolov evpiov evOv'S ivijBy] koI wapeTrXevcrev a.^i 
 KtpKat'ov TTVCu/iart ;(p<ijju,£vos. ^KtiOiv St /iovXofjLivmv tv6v9 aipeiv rCtv 
 KvpepvrjTmv, cltc Set'tras ttjv OaXaacrav eiT ovwo) wavTaTraai rrjv Katcra- 
 /Dos aTrcyvtoKtos ■n'tcrrtv, OLire^rj Kot TraprjXdi Trc^rj oraotovs cKarov ws ets 
 'PcojUiji' TTopcvop.evo'i. AvOl's 8 dAijmi/ Kat /xeTa/3aA.A.o/i£vos KarrjeL Trpos 
 ^oXaCTcrav ets Acrrvpa, 
 
 KaKci St£vuKTef)eu(rcv etti Setvuv Kat dTropoJi/ XoyLap-Stv, (ucrre Kai 
 TrapeX^etv eis t^v K.aLuapo^ oiKiav Buvoi^Orj Kpv<^a Kal (r<^afas eavrov eirt 
 T^s £(7Tias aXdcTTopa Trpocr^aXuv} 
 
 'AAAa Kat TavTT^s avTov aTreKpovcrc T^s 6801) 8€os fiacrdvwv • /cat TaAAa 
 Tapa^(i>Sij Kal iraXivr poira /SouAeti/xara t^s yviop-rji (jLeTaXafjifidvuiv irapc- 
 8(DK£ Tots oiK€Taii iavTov CIS KaTTtVas Kara TrAovj/ KOfjLi^eiv, €)^<nv iKel 
 )(wpia Kal KaTa<j}vyrjv u>pa. 6epov% <f>iXdvOpu)Trov, oTav tjBkttov ol irrjcrLai 
 KaraTTvioicnv. 
 
 "Ei^et 8' 6 TOTTOS Kat vaov 'AiroXXmvoi fxiKpov VTrep t^s OaXdrrrj';. 
 EvTCvOev dpOevTe^ dOpooi KopaKes vtto KAayy^5 7rpocr€<l>epovTO rw wXoita 
 ^ov KtK£(0(ovos €7rt yrjv ipei7croiJi.€v<f • Kal Ka^tcravrcs irrl rrjv Kcpatav 
 €KaT€pU)d€V Ot /iEV cySoMV, Ot 8' tKOTTTOV To.'s tS>v ixr)pvp.dTu)v dp)(ds, Kal 
 ■ira.(TW IhoKti TO a-qp,Sov elvai TrovTfjpov. 'ATri/Srj 8' ovv o KtKepwv, Kat 
 -TrapeXpwv ets t^v €7ravAtv <09 dvaTrainjo/Aevo? KaTeKXWrj. Tojv 8e KopdKwv 
 ot TToAAot jttev €7rt Tiys uvptoo^ oieKddyjvTO (fiOeyyofji^voi Oopvf3oi^€?j €ts Se 
 Kara/Sas €7rt to kXivlBiov iyK£KaXvp.p,ivov tov KtK€p<DVOs aTnyye t<3 
 CTTop/XTL Kara p.LKpov diro tov wpocrunrov to IfxaTiov. Ot 8' otKCTai 
 TaC^' optivTes Kat KaKt'travTes lavTows, £t Trepip.evovcri tov SecnroTOV 
 ijiovevofxivov OtaTal yevio'Oai, Orjpia 8' avT<S jBoiqOu Kat TrpoKt^ScTai irap' 
 o^tav TrpdrTOVTOi, avTol 8' ovk d/;tvvoi;(rt, ra /i£v 8eo/xevot, ra 5e ySta 
 Xa^ovTC'; €KOjU.t^ov ev t<u <j>op€iw Trpos t-^v ^dAacrcrav. 
 
 96. XL VIII. 'Ev TouTtt) 8' ot o-<^ayets tTriyA^ov, eKaTOVTap^rj? 'EpcV- 
 vtos^ Kat IIoTrtAAto? p^tAt'app^os,' w TrarpoKTOvtas ttotc StKrjv <j>evyovTi 
 Kjvv&Koi 6 KtKeptuv, l;)(0VTes VTrr]piTa%. 
 
 Ettci Se Tas Ovpa^ KCKAEtcr/AEvas eiipovres efcKoi/'av, oi <j>aivop,ivov tov 
 KtKEpMVO? ovSe ToJi' I1/80V ciSe'vat c^acTKOvrtov,* Acycra t veaviaKoi/ Ttva 
 Tt6pap.fi.ivov p.iv vtto tov KtKcpmi/os ei' ypdp.pa(riv iXtvBeptOL'i Kal 
 
 1 See p. 29. 
 
 2 Val. Max. I. 4, 5 ; App. .ff. C. IV. 19; de vir. ill. c. 81. 
 
 3 * Hieronymus (i.e. Suetonius) is the only other writer who mentions Heren- 
 nius as an assassin of Cicero : in Formiano suo ab Herennio Pompilio (sic !) 
 occiditur. See p. 27 ff. 
 
 ^ (D) App. B. C. IV. ig ol iih &Wol . . . ttXciv airbv i^a.vaxSivTa cKeyov rjSrt ■ 
 (rKvrbrofio^ S^, TreXdrr/s KXujSioVf iriKpordTov Tcp Klk^pojvi. ix^pov yeyovdros, Aaivg. 
 T£^ Xoxo.yv ^'^^ 6\iyot.^ 6vTt ttjv drpairdv edei^ev. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO in 
 
 fxaQri^amv, aweXivdepov 8e Kolvtov tov dSeXt^oB, ^iXoXoyov rovvo/ia, 
 <t>pda-aL TiS )(L\idpxf to ^opeiov KO/tt^d|U.ei/oi/ 8ia twv KaiTa<t>vTti}v Kal 
 (TVCTKLOiv ■mpnra.riiiv eiri Trjv OaXa<T<Tav. 
 
 /X6V ovv xiXLap-xp<i oXiyovs dvaA.a/8cuv /Acfl' iavTOv rrepUOu Trpos t^v 
 efo8ov, TOV S" "Epcvvtov 8p6fj.w <^£po/u,e'vov 8ta T<iv irepiiraTcov 6 KtKeptov 
 rjO-OeTO, Kol rovs oiKtras e/ceXcuo-ev cvraB^a KaradicrOat to (jiOptXov. 
 Autos o , (utrirep eiio&ei, Tg apidTtpa xeipl tZv yeveiwv aTTTO/Aevos aTeves 
 EVEiupa ToTs o-<^ayei)o-iv, oi;)(jU,o5 /cat ko/jl-/]? dra-jrXea's Kat o-wi'Teti/ku)! iitto 
 <l>povTi.o<ov TO irpoaiDtrov, utiTTf. TOtis irXeto'Tous iyKaK-ixj/afrOat tov 'Epev- 
 vtov o'f^d^ovTOs avTOv. %<T<j>a.yq 8e tov TpdxrjXov €k toS ^opei'ov Trpo- 
 TEtVas, ETOS EKEivo yEyovus i^r/Koa-Tov Kal TerapTov. Tijv Se Ke<t>a\.rjv "s'bo 
 diTEKOi/'EV avToC Kat Tas p(Eipas, Ai/T(ovtoii KEXEwavTOs, ats Tovis <t>iXt7r7ri- 
 Kovs typaxj/tv.^ A£tos te yap 6 Kt/cEpcuv toiis KaT* 'AvTMvtow Adyovs 
 $t\tir7rtK0us iweypaij/e koli, /jii^pi vvv to. ^tjSXta ^iXnrTriKOt 
 KaXoIvTat. 
 
 XLIX. TSv 8' aKpuiTTipLuiv Eis P(i)p.»/v Kop,icr6ivTU)v eTV)(e /xiv ap-)(ai- 
 pi<TLa.<s TcXSiv 6 'AvTcuvtos, aKOWttS 8£ Kat iSwv dvEySoTjo'Ev, COS vBv at 
 TTpoypatftaX teXos Ep^otEV.' 
 
 T^v 8e K£<f>aXr]v KOL Tas x^tpas ekeAevo-ev WEp Ttui' ip./36\<jiv Eirt toC 
 firifXja.TO's detvai, Oiana Pwp.aioi'; (jjpiKTOv,* ov to KtKEptuvos opav Trpocr- 
 wirov oio/jLevoii, dXXa tijs Ai/TO)vtov ij/v)(rj^ EiKova. 
 
 ECA^v eV yE' Tt i^povijcras /xerpiov iv TovTots IIop.Trttfi'ta tjJ Koivtoi) 
 yui/aiKt TOV $tAdAoyov TrapsScoKEV. H 8£ Kvpia ycvofjiivrj tov o^ui/jiaTos 
 dAAais TC SfitvaTs iy^rjcraTO Ttftwptats, xat Tas crapKo.^ aTTOTi/xvovTa Tas 
 avTOV KaTOL p-iKpov OTTTav, eit' icrdUiv rjvdyKatrtvJ' OvTta yap Evtot 
 Tuiv (TvyypaK^iiav 'KTToprjKacTiv 6 8' auToi) tov KtKEpcovos aTTEAEv- 
 Sepos tiptov TO Trapdirav ovSi ft.ip.vr]Tai ttJ's tov 4>iAoAdyov 
 7rpo8oo'tas. 
 
 97. nuv^avojixat Se Katcrapa p^pdvots ■TroAAots vcrrepov elo'eXOelv 
 Trpds Efa Toiv 6vyaTpt8aiv • tov Se /8t/3Atov t)(0VTa KtKEpcovos £V Tats 
 YEpcrtv EKirAayEVTa T<5 tp.aTta) TrEpt/caAvirTEtv i8dvTa Be Katcrapa Xa/Seiv 
 KOLi SieXdetv iaroiTa /jLtpoi ttoXv tov /3l/3Xlov, irdXiv 8' diroSiSovTa t<S 
 /jisipaKLW </)dvat, "Adytos dvijp, w Trat, Adyios Kai ^tAoVaTpts." 
 
 1 (D) See above § 95 ^ 
 
 2 This agrees with Liv. ap. Sen. I.e. ; the traditional account is given by 
 Plutarch in Ani. c. 20, I, iK^Xevrev ' AvTiivios tt]v Ke(f>aK'>]v a7ro/co7r^»ai xal tt]v 
 XCipa TT/v Se^iav, y rois Kar airoS X67oi/s iyp^j/e. 
 
 ^ (A) Crerautius Cordus ap. Sen. Suas. I.e. 19 quibus visis laetus Antonius 
 cum peractam proscriptionem suam dixisset esse. 
 
 4 Cp. § 95 ^ ; Floras IV. 6, 5. 
 
 5 (D) Die Cass. XLVII. 8, 3. 
 
112 APPENDIX I 
 
 30 BO. 98. Ettci jxivTOi Taj^tCTTa KaTeTroXifxiqcrtv Kvtioviov viraTivwv avTos 
 . ciXtTO (TvvdpxovTa Tov K-iKepuivos Tov vidi// 6<^ ov Tas r etKOvas 17 fiovXrj 
 KaditXiv 'AvTdiviov Kol Tcls otWas rjKvp(i)(T€ Tt/xas Kal Tfpoo-ei/'r/^tVaTO /Ar^Sevi ' 
 Toil/ 'AvTiovttov ovofia. MapKov ttvat. Ouru) to haifx,6vLov el's tov Kikc- 
 pcDVOs otKOv eiravijveyKe to TeXos t^s 'AvTwvtou KoXao'ctos.^ 
 
 COMPARISON OF DEMOSTHENES AND 
 CICERO 
 
 99. I. "A /jikv ovv a^ia jCti/r/^i^s tS)v irepl Arj/J.oo'Oevov'; Kal 
 KtKt'ptuvos i<TTopovp,€v<iiv £ts TYjV rffitTtpav a<f>iKTai yvCxTiv, 
 
 TaVT* i(TTiV. 
 
 'A<j>tiKui's 8e TO (TvyKpLvtiv TYjV iv Tots Xoyoi's e^iv avTuiv eKeivo ynot Soku) 
 p.r) iraprjCTUv apprjTOv, otl A-rj/jLOcrdevrji pkv ek to prfropiKov ivirtivt wav, ocrov 
 fl-f^tv (K cj}va€u>i ^ a.o'K-^creiiii Xoyiov, iirepPaXX6p.€vo^ Ivapytla pkv Kal Stivo- 
 TT^Tt Tov^ cTTt Toiv dywvwv Kttt TWv StKCOv (Twc^eTa^o/AcVovs, oyKit) oe Kat 
 /jLtyaXoTrpareux tovs eTrtSeiKTiKOiJS, aKpi^cux 8e Kal riyvrj rovi croc^icTTas ■ 
 
 100. K.iK€p(i)v Si Kal TToXvfjiaOTji Kal ttoikiXos Tg Trept tovs Xdyous 
 cnrovSr] yei/d/tevos crvvra^cts /i€v iStas <^tA.ocrd(^ovs aTro A.e'Aoi7re v 
 ouK oAt'yas CIS tov 'AKaSrip-aiKov Tpoirov, ov /x^v aAXa 
 Kai Sta tSv ■irpos Tas StKas xat tovs dyuivas ypac^oftevcDi/ 
 Adymv S^Ads to-Ttv iixTrevpiav Tiva. ypafj^ixdrmv TrapcTrtSet- 
 Kvvo-^at (SovA-d/AEj/os.' 
 
 Eo'Ti Se Tts Kai tov rjOovi iv TOT'S Aoyots cxarepov St'oi/'is. 
 'O jLitv yap AtifiocrOeviKo^ e$u) iravTos tupaiV/xov Kat TratSias eis Seti/dTTyTa 
 Kat o"7rovS^v (TVV7]yfJ.€vos ovk eWv^vcwv 6o(i>o€v, oi<T7r€p 6 Ilv^eas eaKO)- 
 TTCv, dAA' vSpoTTOO'tas Kal cfypovTiSoiv Kal t^s Acyo/xevTys TrtKpiiis tov 
 
 TpdTTOV Kai CTTVyVOTT^TOS, 
 
 101. KtKcpoii/ Se iroAAa;(Ov to! o-kcotttikm Trpos to ^lop^oXof^ov 
 iK<l)ep6fji,€vos Kal Trpdy/xaTa crirovSrj^ d^io yeAtoTi Kai TraiSta KaTCLpto- 
 vevop.ivoi iv Tats St'Kais ets to p^cttoSes rjcfyetSei tov wpeTrovTOs, (oo-irep € i/ 
 Tg KatAtov o'vvTjyopia /xT^Sev aTOTrov ttoiciv avTov ev Tocravry 
 
 1 (A) Sen. (/^ few^'. IV. 30, i ; App. B. C. IV. 51 ; Dio LI. 19, 3. 
 
 ^ (A) Dio I.e. Tb, TOV 'AvTdjviou KO(r/j.-^/j.aTa to. fi^v KaBetXov, to. S' airiiKei.ypav 
 . . . t6 tov Mdp/fou irpbffp'qfxa dTreiTrov p^TjSevl twv avy^evQtv airov eivai . . . 
 Tovrb t4 tlv£s ws oiiK ddeel St; (rvfi^dv 4\djj.^avov etc. 
 
 ^ This statement is unjustand must be attributed to some post-Augustan 
 Ciceromastix. For Plutarch it would, moreover, imply too exhaustive a knowl- 
 edge of the works of Cicero. Cp. p. 39 f. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 113 
 
 TpvKprj (cai TToXvTcXet'a TaTs ijSovaTs xputfuevov to yap (Sv t^ttrTL prj 
 /t£Te^€tv, /iaviKov eivai, kul ravra iv -^Sovrj to evSxLjXov tuIv i7ri<f>ave<TTa- 
 roiv <^i\o<j6<j}uiv TiO^ixivuiv} 
 
 102. Aeyerat oe Kartuvos Movp^yav StooKOVTOs i7raT£ija)i' airoXo- 
 yucrOai /cat iroXXa oto, toi' KaTwra K<o;u.co8eTv T-qv ^Tw'iKrjv aipecriv ejrt 
 Tats aTon-tais Toii' irapaSd^MV Xeyo/xei/aiv Soy/xaTuiv • ytXtoTOS Se Xa/jiTrpov 
 KaTiovTOi £K Ttuv TTCpiccrTutTiav Trpos Tois SiKttcrras, ^(TV^^ 8ta/iei8ia(Tas 
 Lo KaTojv j irpos tovis KaOrj/jievov^ cnreiv "'Os ■yeXoioi/, lu avSpes, £X°" 
 p,€V viraTov. Aokci 8c Kai ■ye'XtoTOs otKtTos 6 JS.iK€po>v yeyovei/ai xai 
 ttx-Xoa-KilnrTr/i, to te irpocrtaTTOv aiiTov /xiiSiapa Kai yaXrjvrjV Trapu^e." 
 
 T<S oe AryjixocrfleVovs det Tts eTriJv ctttovSi;, Kat to •Tret^poi'TiKos toBto 
 Kai o'wvoviv oi pa8icus aTreXiirev o^ei' /cat SbctkoXov aiiTov ot i^^pol Kal 
 ovcTTpoTTOv, US avTOs <l>T](Tiv, aTTt/caXow. 
 
 II. Ert TotVw iv Tois tn/yypa/x/nao-t /caTt8etv iarTL Tov fxiv 
 ip.fneXG)'; Kai dveira^^Ss ToJv eis avTov airToixevov iyKinp-imv, ot€ tovtov 
 oefjirai Trpos erepov Tt pei^ov, TaXXa 8' ivXa^rj Kai ptTpiov • 
 
 103. ij 8€ Kt/ceptovos ev Tots Xoyois dpeTpia Trji TreptavToXoytas 
 d/cpacrtW Ttva KaTrjyopu irpos So^av fioSivTOi, cos Ta OTrXa ISci Tjj 
 TTj^ivvta Kai Trj y\u>TTrj rr/v Opiap^iKrjv iiiret/cetv od(jivrjV. 
 
 TeXevTuiv 8' oi to, epya Kat Tas irpdieii povov, dXXa /cat tous Xoyovs 
 eTraivet toxis ilpripevov; vir avTov /cat yeypappivovi, iZarrep 'IcroKpaTti 
 Kal 'Ava^Lpevu Tots cro<f>L(TTats SiapeipaKievopevoi, ov tov 'Poj/iat'cov 
 8^pov ayetv a^iuiv Kal opdovv, 
 
 jSpiOvv, OTrXtTOTTCtXav, Sat'oi' dvTtTrdXots. 
 
 'la~)(vuv piv yap 8ia Xoyovi tov iroXtTeuop.evov dvay/catov, dyaTrav 8' 
 dyevves Kat Xtp^vti/etv rrjv diro tov \6yov So^av. "Odcv ip/SpiOicrTepo's 
 TavTrj Kat /teyaXoirpcTTOTTaTos 6 Arjpocrdevrj^, Trjv piv awToS 8i;i'ap.tv 
 ipTTEipiav Tiva ttoXX^s 8eopevrjV T^s irapa tS>v aKpompivoiv evvoias dii-o- 
 (jiaiv6p,€vo^, aveXevOepov; 8e Kai ^avavcrovs, (ixnnp (.'utl, tows e^ri toiJtco 
 (l>v(T<i>p€vovi ■^yovpevoi. 
 
 1 Probably refers to 12, 28 ff.,but 17, 39 f.' is sufficient to show tliat PI. 
 never read this speech. See also p. 65. 
 
 2 (A) Cp. also Plut. Cat. Min. 21, 2. 
 
 3 (A) PoUio ap. Sen. Suas. VI. 24 facies decora. 
 
 * = Cedant arma togae, concedat laurea linguae (Cicero : laudi). This 
 line, ridiculed by contemporaries and later writers, is energetically defended by 
 Cicero himself {in Pis. 29, 72-30, 75; Phil. II. 8, 20; de off. I. 22, 77). Plu- 
 tarch cannot, therefore, have read these works. It is, moreover, the only 
 quotation of a Latin verse in his writings. See also p. 18^. The reading lin- 
 guae (Quint. IX. 4, 41 ; Ps. Sail. Invect. in Cic. 3, 6) seems to be the emendation 
 of a rhetorician. If so, it would furnish another proof against a pre-Augustan 
 origin of Plutarch's information. 
 
114 APPENDIX I 
 
 III. 'H ij,iv ovv iv riS Sij/HT/yopEiv icai TroX.iTevco'daL Swaftis 6/xa\(os 
 d/A<^OT£pots vTnjp^ev, wcttc Kai tov^ tu)v ottXwv Kai (TTpaToiriSwv Kvpiovi 
 Set<TOaL, i^ijixotrd ivovi fiiiv XdprjTa Kai AwTreWr/v Kai Ae(o(T$€vrjV, K.lk€- 
 poivo's 8e Tio/jLTTi^'iov Kai KatVapa Tov veov, us avTos 6 KaTo-ap ev 
 Tot's Trpos Ay piTTirav Kai MatKT^i/av V'TTOfjLvrjiJiaiTLV eiprjKCv. 
 "O Si BoKcX fi.aXi(TTa Kai Xeycrai Tpowov avSpoi iiriStiKvvvai, Kai 
 ySatravt'^eiv, i^ovcria /cat ap)(rj ttSlv irdOo's KivoStra Kai TrStrav avroKa- 
 XwTOvcra KaKiav, Arj/JLoaOivei fjikv ov)^ VTrrjpitv, ov8' ISwKe TOiavrrjV 
 SiaTreipav iavTOv /u.r/Seyut'ai' dp)(rjv tSv iiritjiavwv ap^as, os oiSe t^s vi^' 
 auToB (TvvTtTayp.ivt)'; iirl ^iXnnrov i(TTpaTi^yrj<T€ Swva/iie(os ' 
 
 104. K.iK€p(ov Si Ta/jiMS €ts StKcXtai/ koI dvdvTraTOS cis KiXiKtav Kai 
 K.aTnraSoKiav diro(rTa\ets, cv co Kaipw t^s (^iXottAovtuxs aKjxat^ova-q^, kox 
 Tu)v TT^p.TTOp.eviav (TTpaT-qyS>v KaX ■^yep.ovwv, cos tov /cXeTTTtiv dytvvoiis 
 ovTos, CTTi TO d/DTrd^etv Tpi7rop,ivoiv, oi to Xap-fSdvuv iSoKei Ssivov, dW 
 6 /x€Tpta)s TovTO TTOiSiv ijyaTTaTO, TToXA^v p.iv eTTtSeiftv VTrepoi/'tas )(pr]fjid- 
 ruiv iTTOi-qaaTO, iroWrjv Si '^iXavdpunria's Kai ^rjaroTrjTO^. 
 
 105. 'Ev avT^ 8e Trf 'Pu)fji,rj Xoym fi,iv diroSci^^^ets VTraros, iiovdiav 
 Si XaySojv avTOKpdropo^ Kai StxraTopos eiri tows Trept KaTtAtvav, i/xaprv- 
 prjo'ev dfia Toy HXdroivt p.avT€vopi€V(o TraOAav egeti/ KaKuiv Tas TroAets, OTav 
 CIS ra^TO Svva/j.Ls t£ fJieydXrj Kai ^p6vr)Ui% ck Ttvos Tij;(r;s ')(p-qcrTr)s 
 dwavTri<Tri p,eTa SiKatoCTvi/j^s. 
 
 XprjfjuxTio'aaOai, tolvvv dwo tov Xoyov Arjp.ocrOivri'; jxiv iiruf/oyias 
 Xiyerai, Xoyoypa(f)S>v Kpv<j)a Toii irtpl 4>opjU,tmva koX AiroXXoSiopov dvTi- 
 StKOis, KOJ. SiapXrjdfls p.iv im Tots fiao'iXiKOK )(piQp,a(Tiv, 6<f>Xlav Si tu>v 
 'ApTraXeiu>v. Et Si TavTa tous ypdc^ovTai (oiiK oXlyoi S' clcrlv ovtol) 
 xjitvSttrdai <j>ai-qp.tv, dXX otl ye Trpos Stopeas ftaaiXioiv a-vv X'^-P''"'''- '^"' 
 Ttp,i7 StSo/xcVas dvTt, (SXiij/ai Arjp.0(T6iv7js ovk av iToXfJiyj&ev, ovS rjv tovto 
 TO Ipyov dvOpu)7rov Savei^ovTos im vavTiKoXi, afxrixavov avTUiruv • Trept 
 Se KtKEpwi/os, OTt KoX SiKcXtoJTtiJv dyopttvo/iotivTi Kai jSaaiXiwi tov KaTr- 
 TraSoKulv dv^vTraTEijovTt Kai tuiv iv 'Fio/jltj fjtiXwv, OT c^CTriirTe t^s 
 iroAeois, SwpovfjLevitiv TroAAa Kat 8eop,eV(i)v Xa^elv dvTOTX^v, upTjTai. 
 
 IV. Kai pu-qv rj ye <j)vyrj t(S piv alo'xpd kAott^s dAoiri (TvveTreae, tiS 
 Si KdXXicTTOv ipyov dvOpiinrov; dXiTrjpLOv; iKKOij/avTi Trjs iraTpiSos. Ato 
 TOV piv ovSeis Adyos €K7riVTOVTOs, i<j>' <o 8' 17 o-ijyKAr/Tos ifrdrjTd TC 8H7A- 
 Aa{e Kai irivOo'; icr^e Kai yvu>p,-qv virip oi8£v6s eiTreiv iirSLcrdrj irpOTCpov 
 7] K-iKeprnvL KdOoSov ij/yj(l>icracrdai. 
 
 106. T^v p.ivTOi (j>vyrjv dpyCis 6 KiKepmv Sir/vtyKcv iv M.aKeSovLa 
 Ka6rip.(.vos, 
 
 TiS Si Afjp.oo'Oivu Kai if <^vyr) p,eya p,ipo% t^s TToAiTcias yeyove. 
 '^vvaywvi^op.ivoi ydp, wa-mp ei'pijTai, toTs "EAAj/cti Kai tovs M.aKtS6viov 
 
 1 See §§ 25. 28. 70. 
 
PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 115 
 
 7rpeo-/3£(.s efeXawoJv £ir»;p;^£TO ras iroXets, ttoXv /SeXrioiv ®£/ito-TOKX€ous 
 Kai AAKipiaoov Trapci Tas awTas Tu^as i^ai/Ets -KoXiTrj^ • KoX jxevTot 
 KareAOwv ai/c'ts £avTov iTreSiDKtv £is t^v avrr/v ravTr/v TroXiTCiav Kal 
 St£TeX£i noXt/j.lov Trpos 'AvTtVarpov Kat MaK£Sovas. 
 
 107. KtK£pa)va 8 (ov£i8to-£v ev Trj ^ovXrj AatXios alTovfj,ivov Kat'o-a- 
 pos U7rar£6av //.ETUvat vapa vo/xov, ovttu) yeveiuivTOi, cnuiTrfj Kadi^fnevov. 
 
 Eypa<J3€ oe Kal Bpovros^ iyKaXCiv ws ficL^ova koI ^apvripav 
 TTETraidoTpi/SijKOTi TvpawiSa ttjs v<f>' airov KaTaXvOucTTji. 
 
 108. V . EttI Tracrt Se tijs teXevt^s tov /xev o'lKTapaL Tts av, avSpa 
 TrpicrpvTrjv ot dyEvi/Eiav vtto oiketujv aviu Kat kcito) TrepKJjepo/xcvov kol 
 TTEpK^EvyovTa TOV OdvaTov Kal aTroKpvTrTOjxevov tovs ov ttoAv irpo T^s 
 <^vcr£(os i^KOVTa? ett' avTOv, £?t' a.Tro<T<j>ay€vTa • ^ tov 8', £t /cat /jLiKpa Trpos 
 T»;i/ iKETEtav EveSco/cEv, dyao'T'^ /Xiv r) TrapaaKevrj tov (jjapp-aKov Kat 
 Tr/prjCTLi, ayacTTrj 8' r/ ^rj(Tis, on tov Ocov p.T] irapacr^dvTos avTiS 
 TTjV acTvXiav, cSo'Trep etti /UEi^ova |8<i)p.ov Ka.Tacf>vyu)v, ek tSv ottXcdv /cai 
 T<i)v Sopv(f)6p<jDV Xa/8a)v eavTov m^eto, t^s 'AvTiTraTpoi; KUTayEXao-as 
 
 (Op.OT7;TOS. 
 
 1 Brut. 3i/ Cj<r. I. 16; o^ ^;^. I. 17. 
 
 ^ Cp. luv. X. 118 ff.; Ps. Quint. Dec/. 268 ; Tac. Dial. c. 40 ext. (see my note 
 P- 374). 
 
APPENDIX II 
 
 M. TULLIUS CICERO 
 
 (Anon, de viris illustribus c. 8 1 ) 
 
 M. Tullius Cicero, genere Arpinas, patre equite Romano natus, 
 genus a Tullo Attio rege duxit.^ Adolescens ^ Rosciano iudicio ^ 
 eloquentiam et libertatem suam adversus Sullanos ostendit,* ex 
 quo veritus invidiam ^ Athenas studiorum gratia petivit,^ ubi 
 Antiochum ' Academicum philosophum studiose audivit.' Inde 
 eloquentiae gratia' Asiam,'" post Rhodum petiit,^^ ubi Molonem, 
 Graecum rhetorem, turn disertissimum, magistrum habuit ^^ qui 
 flesse dicitur quod per hunc Graecia eloquentiae laude privare- 
 tur.-^' Quaestor Siciliam habuit." Aedilis C. Verrem repetunda- 
 rum damnavit.^^ Praetor^^ Ciliciam lafrodniis liberavity Consul 
 coniuratos capita punivit.^* Mox invidia P. Clodii^' instinctuque 
 Caesaris et Pompei ™ quos dominationis suspectos eadem qua 
 quondam Sullanos libertate perstrinxerat, sollicitatis Pisone et 
 Gabinio consulibus qui Macedoniam Asiamque provincias in sti- 
 pendium opera huius acceperant,^^ in exsilium actus ; ^^ mox ipso 
 referente Pompeio ^^ rediit ^* eumque civili bello secutus est.^^ 
 Quovicto^^ veniam a Caesare ultro accepit ; ^' quo interfecto^' 
 Augustum fovit/' Antonium hostem iudicavit.^" Et cum trium- 
 viros se fecissent Caesar, Lepidus Antoniusque,^^ concordia non 
 aliter visa est inter eos iungi posse, nisi Tullius necaretur,^^ qui 
 immissis ab Antonio percussoribus,^ cum forte Formiis quiesceret, 
 imminens exitium corvi auspicio^* didicit et fugiens occisus est.'^ 
 Caput ad Antonium relatum.^* 
 
 1 Plut. 
 
 Cic. c. I 
 
 10 c.4 
 
 
 
 19 C. 28 f. 
 
 2 c. 3 
 
 
 "c. 4 
 
 
 
 20 C. 30 
 
 ^c.3 
 
 
 12 c. 4 
 
 
 
 21 C. 30 
 
 *c.3 
 
 
 13 c. 4 
 
 
 
 22 C. 30 f. 
 
 5 c. 3 
 
 
 i*c. 6 
 
 
 
 23 c. 33 
 
 "c. 4 
 
 
 15 c. 7 f. 
 
 
 
 2* c. 33 
 
 'c.4 
 
 
 16 c. 9 
 
 
 
 25 c. 37 f. 
 
 8C.4 
 
 
 17 See p. 
 
 54I5 
 
 
 26 c. 39 
 
 ='c.4 
 
 
 18 C. 10- 
 
 23 
 11 
 
 [6 
 
 2' C. 39 
 
 29 
 
 ' c. 42 
 c. 44 
 
 31 C. 46 
 
 32 C. 46 f. 
 
 33 C. 47 f. 
 
 34 C. 47 
 86 c. 48 
 36 C. 48 f. 
 
APPENDIX III 
 
 PLUT. DEM. 2. 3 
 (See p. 4.) 
 
 Tu /xevTOt avvToiiv vffO/Sc/SXij/icVo) koL la-ropiav ef ov vpo\£ip(av 
 ovo otK£t(i)v, dWa iev<i>v T£ Ttlv ttoXXoIv /cat Stecrirap/Aevuv 
 €v erepots (rvj/toScrai/ avayvuKTixdroiv tco ovTt p^^ ■7rpS>Tov 
 vwapx^i-v Kat. /AciXtCTTa T^v ttoAiv eiSoKt/Aov Kat <^tXoKaXov Kat iroXuav- 
 upunrov, <os ^t/3Xto)v tc iravToSairiv a,<j>9oviav €X"''j '"''' ""''^ 
 ToiJS ypa<l>ovTa'S Si.a<f>evyovTa. (TiDT-qpCa. fji.vrjp.rjs im.(j)avc- 
 cmpav €tXrj<l>£ iria-Tiv VTroXaix^dvmv aKorj Kal Sia-TrvvOavo- 
 p,€Vos, p.ri woXXCiv p.rj8 avayKaiuiv evSecs atroSiSoLrj to epyov. 'H/nets 
 0£ p.LKpav oiKovvTCs TToXtv, Koi tva ju.^ p,iKpoT£pa yevrjTai ipiXoyoipovvTe';, 
 iv Se "Pu>p.r] /cat Tats Trepi t^v 'IraXtav 8tarpt/3ats ov 
 cr;)(oX^s ouo-iys yv/iAva^Etr^at jrepi rr/v 'Pa/jU.at/c^i' StaXe/cTov 
 VTTO )^p€iuiv woXitlkCiv /Cat T<Jiv Sto. <^ t Xo (TO <^ tav ■TrXrjaia^ov- 
 T<i)v, 01/fe TTOTE /cat TTopptii T^s ■^XiKLas -^pidpLcOa 'Po)/«.a't/cots 
 ypap.p,a<Tiv evrvyxdveiv. Kat rrpaypa GavfjuuTTov p,iv, dXX' 
 dXi;a€s iird(T-)(op,i.v. Ov yap outcos €k toiv ovoftartDV ra irpdyp-dTa 
 (Twiivai Kai yvu>pCt,tiv (Tvve/3aivev rjpXv, tos e/c tmv irpaypdrtov d/ntiis ye 
 TTcos ay(op,iv ip.Tr£tpias irraKoXovdetv Sta Tavra /cat rots 6v6p,acn. KdX- 
 XoDS o£ P<D//ta'tK^s aTrayyeXias /cat tci;^ows aKrOdv^trdai koI p,eTa<popa.<; 
 ovopjxToiv Kat dpp.ovia'S /cat tSv oXXcdv, ots 6 Xoyos dydXXcTat, )(apiev 
 p.ev ■^yovp.eOa /cat ovk drepTrc's' 17 8e ■n-po'S tovto p.eXiT-q /cat 
 a(TKr]<Tii OVK €v)^eprj's, dXX' otcmcrt irXctMi/ tc crj^oX^ /cat ra 
 rr]s (opas CTt Trpos ras rotavras e7rt;(<upet <^iXoTt/u,tas- 
 
 Ato /cat ypd<f>civT€'S iv f<S /3i/3Xlui tovtw, tS)v '7rapaXXr]Xa>v /Stcov oi/rt 
 TrifiTTTta, TTCpi Arjp,o<Td€vovs /cat Kt/cepo/vos, dTro toIv rrpd^eoiv /cat tuv 
 TToXtTeiuij' Tas (fivcrei'i avTwv /cat ras Sta^e'crets Trpos dXXi^Xas Ima-Ktij/o- 
 p.eda, TO Bi Tov'i Xoyov; avTeierd^eiv Kal dTro^aCvefrdai, 
 TTOTepos rjhLoiv r) Beivorepos etireti/, id(TO/j,€v. Kd/c« ydp, cos 
 <f>rjcnv o I(DV, " SeXe^ti/os iv -^iptTia /8ta," 17V 6 Treptrros £v arraai 
 Ke/ctXtos dyvoiycras eveai/tfi/craTO O'l/y/cpicrtv toC ArffjiocrOevovs kol KtKepu)- 
 vos iitveyKelv. AXXa ydp tcrcos, ct iravros ^v to " Pvfi^t eravTov " £X^"' 
 Trp6\e.ipov, OVK av iSoKei Trpdo'Tayp.a Oeiov €Tvai. 
 
 117