Chapter 8

ENTITLED _LUCULLUS_.

§§1--12. Summary. Lucullus, though an able and cultivated man, was absent from Rome on public service too long during his earlier years to attain to glory in the forum (1). He unexpectedly proved a great general. This was due to his untiring study and his marvellous memory (2). He had to wait long for the reward of his merits as a commander and civil administrator, and was allowed no triumph till just before my consulship. What I owed to him in those troublous times I cannot now tell (3). He was not merely a general; he was also a philosopher, having learned much from Antiochus and read much for himself (4). Those enemies of Greek culture who think a Roman noble ought not to know philosophy, must be referred to the examples of Cato and Africanus (5). Others think that famous men should not be introduced into dialogues of the kind. Are they then, when they meet, to be silent or to talk about trifles? I, in applying myself to philosophy, have neglected no public duty, nor do I think the fame of illustrious citizens diminished, but enriched, by a reputation for philosophical knowledge (6). Those who hold that the interlocutors in these dialogues had no such knowledge show that they can make their envy reach beyond the grave. Some critics do not approve the particular philosophy which I follow--the Academic. This is natural, but they must know that Academicism puts no stop to inquiry (7). My school is free from the fetters of dogma; other schools are enslaved to authority (8). The dogmatists say they bow to the authority of the wise man. How can they find out the wise man without hearing all opinions? This subject was discussed by myself, Catulus, Lucullus, and Hortensius, the day after the discussion reported in the _Catulus_ (9). Catulus called on Lucullus to defend the doctrines of Antiochus. This Lucullus believed himself able to do, although the doctrines had suffered in the discussion of the day before (10). He spoke thus: At Alexandria I heard discussions between Heraclitus Tyrius the pupil of Clitomachus and Philo, and Antiochus. At that very time the books mentioned by Catulus yesterday came into the hands of Antiochus, who was so angry that he wrote a book against his old teacher (11 and 12). I will now give the substance of the disputes between Heraclitus and Antiochus, omitting the remarks made by the latter against Philo (12).

§1. _Luculli_: see Introd. p. 58, and _Dict. Biog._ _Digna homini nobili_: a good deal of learning would have been considered _unworthy_ of a man like Lucullus, see Introd. p. 30. _Percepta_: "gained," "won;" cf. _percipere fruges_, "to reap," _Cat. Mai._ 24. _Caruit_: "was cut off from;" _carere_ comes from a root _skar_ meaning to divide, see Corss. I. 403. For the three nouns with a singular verb see Madv. _Gram._ 213 A, who confines the usage to nouns denoting things and impersonal ideas. If the common reading _dissensit_ in _De Or._ III. 68 is right, the restriction does not hold. _Admodum_: "to a degree." _Fratre_: this brother was adopted by a M. Terentius Varro, and was a man of distinction also; see _Dict. Biog._ _Magna cum gloria_: a ref. to _Dict. Biog._ will show that the whole affair was discreditable to the father; to our notions, the sons would have gained greater glory by letting it drop. _Quaestor_: to Sulla, who employed him chiefly in the civil administration of Asia. _Continuo_: without any interval. _Legis praemio_: this seems to mean "by the favour of a special law," passed of course by Sulla, who had restored the old _lex annalis_ in all its rigour, and yet excepted his own officers from its operation. _Prooemio_, which has been proposed, would not be Latin, see _De Leg._ II. 16. _Consulatum_: he seems to have been absent during the years 84--74, in the East. _Superiorum_: scarcely that of Sulla.

§2. _Laus_: "merit," as often, so _praemium_, Virg. _Aen._ XII. 437, means a deed worthy of reward. _Non admodum exspectabatur_: Cic. forgets that Luc. had served with distinction in the Social War and the first Mithridatic war. _In Asia pace_: three good MSS. have _Asiae_; Baiter ejects _Asia_; Guilelmus read _in Asia in pace_ (which Davies conjectures, though he prints _Asiae_). _Consumere_ followed by an ablative without _in_ is excessively rare in Cic. Madv. _D.F._ V. 53 denies the use altogether. In addition, however, to our passage, I note _hoc loco consumitur_ in _T.D._ IV. 23, where Baiter's two texts (1861 and 1863) give no variants. _Pace_ here perhaps ought to be taken adverbially, like _tranqullo_. _Indocilem_: this is simply passive, = "untaught," as in Prop. I. 2, 12, Ov. _Fast._ III. 119 (the last qu. by Dav.). Forc. s.v. is wrong in making it active. _Factus_: = _perfectus_; cf. Hor. _Sat._ I. 5, 33 _homo factus ad unguem_, Cic. _De Or._ III. 184, _In Verr._ IV. 126. So _effectus_ in silver Latin. _Rebus gestis_: military history, so often. _Divinam quandam memoriam_: the same phrase in _De Or._ II. 360. _Rerum, verborum_: same distinction in _De Or._ II. 359. _Oblivisci se malle_: the same story is told _D.F._ II. 104, _De Or._ II. 299. The ancient art of memory was begun by Simonides (who is the person denoted here by _cuidam_) and completed by Metrodorus of Scepsis, for whom see _De Or._ II. 360. _Consignamus_: cf. _consignatae in animis notiones_ in _T.D._ I. 57. _litteris_ must be an ablative of the instrument. _Mandare monum._: cf. I. 3. _Insculptas_: rare in the metaphorical use, cf. _N.D._ I. 45.

§3. _Genere_: "department" cf. I. 3. _Navalibus pugnis_: ναυμαχιαις. _Instrumento et adparatu_: κατασκευη και παρασκευη. _Rex_: Mithridates. _Quos legisset_: = _de quibus l._; cf. the use of the passive verb so common in Ovid, e.g. _Trist._ IV. 4, 14. I take of course _rex_ to be nom. to _legisset_, the suggestion of a friend that Lucullus is nom. and that _quos legisset_ = _quorum commentarios legisset_ I think improbable. _Hodie_: Drakenborch on Livy V. 27 wants to read _hodieque_, which however, is not Ciceronian. In passages like _De Or._ I. 103 and _Verr._ V. 64, the _que_ connects clauses and does not modify _hodie_. On this subject see Madv. _Opuscula_ I. 390. _Etsi_: _M.D.F._ V. 68, shows that in Cic. a parenthetic clause with _etsi_ always has a common verb with its principal clause; a rule not observed by the silver writers. The same holds of _quamquam_, see n. on I. 5. _Calumnia_: properly a fraudulent use of litigation, συκοφαντια. The chief enemy was the infamous Memmius who prosecuted him. _In urbem_: until his triumph Luc. would remain outside the city. _Profuisset_: this ought properly to be _profuerit_, but the conditional _dicerem_ changes it. _Potius ... quam ... communicem_: n. on 23.

§4. _Sunt ... celebrata_: cf. I. 11, 17 for the collocation of the words. _Externa ... interiora_: cf. _De Div._ II. 124 _sed haec quoque in promptu, nunc interiora videamus_. _Pro quaestore_: for this Faber wrote _quaestor_, arguing that as Luc. was Sulla's _quaestor_ and Sulla sent him to Egypt, he could not be _pro quaestor_. But surely after the first year he would be _pro quaestor_. Dav. reads _quaestor_ here and 11, saying "_veterem lectionem iugulavit Faber_". _Ea memoria ... quam_: Bentl., Halm, Baiter give _qua_, Halm refers to Bentl. on Hor. _Sat._ I. 6, 15. A passage like ours is _D.F._ I. 29, _ista sis aequitate, quam ostendis_, where one MS. has _qua_. Read Madvig's lucid note there. _De quibus audiebat_: Madv. _Em._ 121 makes this equivalent to _de eis rebus de quibus_, the necessity of which explanation, though approved by Halm, I fail to see. The form of expression is very common in Cic., and the relative always refers to an actually expressed antecedent, cf. e.g. _Cat. Mai._ 83. I take _quibus_ as simply = _libris_.

§5. _Ac_: strong, as often, = και μην. _Personarum_: public characters, προσωπων πολεως (_Ad. Fam._ XV. 17, 2), so _personas_ 6. _Multi ... plures_: cf. Introd. p. 30. _Reliqui_: many MSS. insert _qui_ by _dittographia_, as I think, though Halm, as well as Bait., retains it. On the retention or omission of this _qui_ will depend the choice of _putant_ or _putent_ below. _Earum rerum disputationem_: for _disp._ followed by genitive see n. on I. 33. _Non ita decoram_: for this feeling see Introd. p. 30. For _non ita_ cf. the Lowland Scottish "no just sae". _Historiae loquantur_: _hist._ means in Cic. rather "memoirs" than "history," which is better expressed by _res gestae_. Note that the verb _loqui_ not _dicere_ is used, and cf. n. on 101. _Legatione_: to the kings in Egypt and the East in alliance with Rome. The censorship was in 199 B.C. About the embassy see _Dict. Biogr._ art. 'Panactius'. _Auctorem_: one would think this simple and sound enough, Bentl. however read _fautorem_, Dav. _auditorem_.

§6. _Illigari_: "entangled" as though in something bad. For this use Forc. qu. Liv. XXXIII. 21, Tac. _Ann._ XIII. 40. _Aut ludicros sermones_: = _aut clar. vir. serm. ludic. esse oporteat_. _Rerum leviorum_: a similar argument in _D.F._ I. 12. _Quodam in libro_: the _Hortensius_. _Gradu_: so the word "degree" was once used, e.g. "a squire of low degree" in the ballad. _De opera publica detrahamus_: the dative often follows this verb, as in _D.F._ III. 7 _nihil operae reipublicae detrahens_, a passage often wrongly taken. _Operae_ is the dat. after the verb, not the gen. after _nihil_, _reip._ the gen. after _operae_, like _opera publica_ here, not the dat. after _detrahens_. _Nisi forensem_: the early oratorical works may fairly be said to have this character; scarcely, however, the _De Republica_ or the _De Leg._ both of which fall within the period spoken of. _Ut plurimis prosimus_: cf. Introd. p. 29. _Non modo non minui, sed_: notice _non modo ... sed_ thrice over in two sentences.

§7. _Sunt ... qui negent_: and truly, see Introd. p. 38. In _Cat. Mai._ §3 Cic. actually apologises for making Cato more learned than he really was. _Mortuis_: Catulus died in 60, Lucullus about 57, Hortensius 50. _Contra omnis dicere quae videntur_: MSS. mostly insert _qui_ between _dicere_ and _quae_, one of the best however has _dicere quae aliis_ as a correction, while another has the marginal reading _qui scire sibi videntur_. The omission of _qui_, which I conjectured, but now see occurs in a MS. (Pal. 2) referred to by Halm, gives admirable sense. _Verum invenire_: cf. 60. _Contentione_: = φιλονεικια as usual. _In ... rebus obscuritas_: cf. I. 44 _rerum obscuritate_. _Infirmitas_: cf. I. 44 _imbecillos animos_. _Antiquissimi et doctissimi_: on the other hand _recentissima quaeque sunt correcta et emendata maxime_ I. 13. _Diffisi_: one of the best MSS. has _diffissi_, which reminds one of the spelling _divisssiones_, asserted to be Ciceronian in Quint. _Inst. Or_. I. 7, 20. _In utramque partem_: επ' αμφοτερα, cf. I. 45. _Exprimant_: "embody," cf. n. on I. 19.

§8. _Probabilia_: πιθανα, for which see 33. _Sequi_: "act upon," cf. 99-101. _Liberiores et solutiores_: these two words frequently occur together in Cic. and illustrate his love for petty variations; see 105, also _T.D._ V. 43, _De Div._ I. 4, _De Rep._ IV. 4, _N.D._ I. 56, _Orat._ 64. _Integra_: "untrammelled," cf. the phrase "_non mihi integrum est_"--"I have committed my self." _Et quasi_: MSS. have _et quibus et quasi_. _Cogimur_: for this Academic freedom see Introd. p. 18. _Amico cuidam_: Orelli after Lamb. _cuipiam;_ for the difference see Madv. _Gram._ 493 _b_, c.

§9. _Ut potuerint, potuerunt_: thus Lamb. corrected the MSS. reading which was simply _ut potuerunt_, "granting that they had the ability, they gained it by hearing all things, now as a matter of fact they _did_ decide on a single hearing," etc. _Iudicaverunt autem_: so Lamb. for MSS. _aut_. Muretus, by what Dav. calls an "_arguta hariolatio_," read _an_ for _aut_ and put a note of interrogation at _contulerunt_. C.F. Hermann (Schneidewin's _Philologus_ VII. 466) introduces by conj. a sad confusion into the text, but no other good critic since Madvig's remarks in _Em._ 125 has impugned Lambinus' reading. Goerenz indeed, followed by the faithful Schutz, kept the MSS. reading with the insertion of _aut_ between _sed_ and _ut_ at the beginning; of this Madv. says "_non solum Latina non est, sed sanae menti repugnat_." For the proceeding which Cic. deprecates, cf. _N.D._ I. 10, _De Leg._ I. 36. _Quam adamaverunt_: "which they have learned to love;" the _ad_ has the same force as προ in προμανθανειν, which means "to learn _on and on_, to learn by degrees" (cf. προυμαθον στεργειν κακοις), not, as the lexica absurdly say, "to learn beforehand, i.e. to learn thoroughly." _Constantissime_: "most consistently". _Quae est ad Baulos_: cf. Introd. p. 57. _In spatio_: this _xystus_ was a colonnade with one side open to the sea, called ξυστος from its polished floor and pillars. _Consedimus_: n. on I. 14.

§10. _Servatam oportuit_: a construction very characteristic of Terence, found, but rarely, in Cic. and Livy. _In promptu ... reconditiora_: cf. _in promptu ... interiora_ in _De Div._ II. 124, also _Ac._ I. 4. _Quae dico_: Goer. is exceedingly troubled by the pres. tense and wishes to read _dixero_. But the substitution of the pres. for the future is common enough in all languages cf. Iuv. IV. 130 with Mayor's copious note. _Si non fuerint_: so all Halm's best MSS. Two, however, of Davies' have _si vera_ etc. In support of the text, see I. 9 (_sunt ista_) and note. _Labefactata_: this is only found as an alteration in the best MSS. and in _Ed. Rom._ (1471); the others have _labefacta_. Orelli's statement (note to his separate text of the _Academica_ 1827) that Cic. commonly uses the perfect _labefeci_ and the part, _labefactus_ is quite wrong. The former is indeed the vulg. reading in _Pro Sestio_ 101, the latter in _De Haruspicum Responsis_ 60, but the last of these two passages is doubtful. Cic. as a rule prefers long forms like _sustentatus_, which occurs with _labefactatus_ in _Cat. Mai._ 20. For the perfect _labefactavit_ cf. I. 33. _Agam igitur_: Cic. rather overdoes the attempt to force on his readers a belief in the learning of Lucullus.

§11. _Pro quaestore_: cf. 4. _Essem_: MSS. _issem_, whence Goer. conj. _Alexandriam issem_. _Heraclitus Tyrius_: scarcely known except from this passage. _Clitomachum_: for this philosopher see Zeller 532. _Quae nunc prope dimissa revocatur_: sc. _a Cicerone_. Philo's only notable pupils had combined to form the so called "Old Academy," and when Cic. wrote the _Academica_ the New Academic dialectic had been without a representative for many years. Cf. Introd. p. 21. _Libri duo_: cf. I. 13. _Heri_ for this indication of the contents of the lost _Catulus_, see Introd. p. 50. _Implorans_: "appealing to," the true meaning being "to appeal to with tears," see Corss. I. 361. _Philonis_: sc. _esse_. _Scriptum agnoscebat_: i.e. it was an actual work of Ph. _Tetrilius_: some MSS. are said to have Tetrinius, and the name _Tertinius_ is found on Inscr. One good MS. has _Tretilius_, which may be a mistake for _Tertilius_, a name formed like _Pompilius_, _Quintilius_, _Sextilius_. Qy, should _Petrilius_, a derivative from the word for four, be read? _Petrilius_ and _Pompilius_ would then agree like _Petronius_ and _Pomponius_, _Petreius_ and _Pompeius_. For the formation of these names see Corss. I. 116. _Rogus_: an ill omened and unknown name. _Rocus_, as Ursinus pointed out, occurs on _denarii_ of the _gens Creperia_. _De Philone ... ab eo ipso_: note the change of prep. "from Philo's lips," "from his copy." _De_ and _ex_ are common in Cic. after _audire_, while _ab_ is rather rarer. See _M.D.F._ I. 39, and for _describere ab aliquo_ cf. _a te_ in _Ad Att._ XIII. 22, 3.

§12. _Dicta Philoni_: for this see Introd. p. 50. It cannot mean what Goer. makes it mean, "_coram Philone_." I think it probable that _Philoni_ is a marginal explanation foisted on the text. As to the statements of Catulus the elder, they are made clear by 18. _Academicos_: i.e. _novos_, who are here treated as the true Academics, though Antiochus himself claimed the title. _Aristo_: see Introd. p. 11. _Aristone_: Diog. VII. 164 mentions an Aristo of Alexandria, a Peripatetic, who may be the same. Dio seems unknown. _Negat_: see n. on 18. _Lenior_: some MSS. _levior_, as is usual with these two words. In 11 one of the earliest editions has _leviter_ for _leniter_.

§§13--18. Summary. Cicero seems to me to have acted like a seditious tribune, in appealing to famous old philosophers as supporters of scepticism (13), Those very philosophers, with the exception of Empedocles, seem to me, if anything, too dogmatic (14). Even if they were often in doubt, do you suppose that no advance has been made during so many centuries by the investigations of so many men of ability? Arcesilas was a rebel against a good philosophy, just as Ti. Gracchus was a rebel against a good government (15). Has nothing really been learned since the time of Arcesilas? His opinions have had scanty, though brilliant support (16). Now many dogmatists think that no argument ought to be held with a sceptic, since argument can add nothing to the innate clearness of true sensations (17). Most however do allow of discussion with sceptics. Philo in his innovations was induced to state falsehoods, and incurred all the evils he wished to avoid, his rejection of Zeno's definition of the καταληπτικη φαντασια really led him back to that utter scepticism from which he was fleeing. We then must either maintain Zeno's definition or give in to the sceptics (18).

§13. _Rursus exorsus est_: cf. _exorsus_ in 10. _Popularis_: δημοτικους. _Ii a_: so Dav. for MSS. _iam_. _Tum ad hos_: so MSS., Dav. _aut hos_. The omission of the verb _venire_ is very common in Cic.'s letters. _C. Flaminium_: the general at lake Trasimene. _Aliquot annis_: one good MS. has _annos_, cf. _T.D._ I. 4, where all the best MSS. have _annos_. The ablative is always used to express point of time, and indeed it may be doubted whether the best writers _ever_ use any accusative in that sense, though they do occasionally use the ablative to express duration (cf. Prop. I. 6, 7 and Madv. _Gram._ 235, 2). _L. Cassium_: this is L. Cassius Longinus Ravilla, a man of good family, who carried a ballot bill (_De Leg._ III. 35), he was the author of the _cui bono_ principle and so severe a judge as to be called _scopulus reorum_. Pompeium: apparently the man who made the disgraceful treaty with Numantia repudiated by home in 139 B.C. _P. Africanum_: i.e. the younger, who supported the ballot bill of Cassius, but seems to have done nothing else for the democrats. _Fratres_: Lamb. _viros_, but cf. _Brut._ 98. _P. Scaevolam_: the pontifex, consul in the year Tib. Gracchus was killed, when he refused to use violence against the tribunes. The only connection these brothers had with the schemes of Gracchus seems to be that they were consulted by him as lawyers, about the legal effect the bills would have. _Ut videmus ... ut suspicantur_: Halm with Gruter brackets these words on the ground that the statement about Marius implies that the demagogues lie about all but him. Those words need not imply so much, and if they did, Cic. may be allowed the inconsistency.

§14. _Similiter_: it is noticeable that five MSS. of Halm have _simile_. _Xenophanem_: so Victorius for the MSS. _Xenoplatonem_. _Ed. Rom._ (1471) has _Cenonem_, which would point to _Zenonem_, but Cic. does not often name Zeno of Elea. _Saturninus_: of the question why he was an enemy of Lucullus, Goer. says _frustra quaeritur_. Saturninus was the persistent enemy of Metellus Numidicus, who was the uncle of Lucullus by marriage. _Arcesilae calumnia_: this was a common charge, cf. _Academicorum calumnia_ in _N.D._ II. 20 and _calumnia_ in 18 and 65 of this book. So August. _Contra Acad._ II. 1 speaks of _Academicorum vel calumnia vel pertinacia vel pericacia_. _Democriti verecundia_: Cic. always has a kind of tenderness for Democritus, as Madv. on _D.F._ I. 20 remarks, cf. _De Div._ II. 30 where Democr. is made an exception to the general _arrogantia_ of the _physici_. _Empedocles quidem ... videatur_: cf. 74. The exordium of his poem is meant, though there is nothing in it so strong as the words of the text, see R. and P. 108. _Quale sit_: the emphasis is on _sit_, the sceptic regards only phenomenal, not essential existence. _Quasi modo nascentes_: Ciacconus thought this spurious, cf. however _T.D._ II. 5 _ut oratorum laus ... senescat ... , philosophia nascatur_.

§15. _haesitaverunt_: Goer. cf. _De Or._ I. 40. _Constitutam_: so in 14. _Delitisceret_: this is the right spelling, not _delitesceret_, which one good MS. has here, see Corssen II. 285. _Negavissent_: "had denied, as they said." _Tollendus est_: a statement which is criticised in 74. _Nominibus differentis ... dissenserunt_: genuine Antiochean opinions, see the _Academica Posteriora_ 17, 43. _De se ipse_: very frequent in Cic. (cf. Madv. _Gram._ 487 _b_). _Diceret_: this is omitted by the MSS., but one has _agnosceret_ on the margin; see n. on 88. _Fannius_: in his "Annals." The same statement is quoted in _De Or._ II. 270, _Brutus_ 299. Brutus had written an epitome of this work of Fannius (_Ad Att._ XII. 5, 3).

§16. _Veteribus_: Bentley's em. of MSS. _vetera_: C.F. Hermann (Schneid _Philol._ VII. 457), thinking the departure from the MSS. too great, keeps _vetera_ and changes _incognita_ into _incondita_, comparing _De Or._ I. 197, III. 173. A glance, however, at the exx. in Forc. will show that the word always means merely "disordered, confused" in Cic. The difference here is not one between order and no order, but between knowledge and no knowledge, so that _incognita_ is far better. I am not at all certain that the MSS. reading needs alteration. If kept the sense would be: "but let us suppose, for sake of argument, that the doctrines of the ancients were not _knowledge_, but mere _opinion_." The conj. of Kayser _veri nota_ for _vetera_ (cf. 76) and _investigatum_ below, is fanciful and improbable. _Quod investigata sunt_: "in that an investigation was made." Herm. again disturbs the text which since Madv. _Em._ 127 supported it (quoting _T.D._ V. 15, Liv. XXXV. 16) had been settled. Holding that _illa_ in the former sentence cannot be the subj. of the verb, he rashly ejects _nihilne est igitur actum_ as a dittographia (!) from 15 _nihilne explicatum_, and reads _quot_ for _quod_ with Bentl. For the meaning cf. _T.D._ III. 69 and Arist. on the progress of philosophy as there quoted. _Arcesilas Zenoni ... obtrectans_: see n. on I. 34. These charges were brought by each school against the other. In Plutarch _Adv. Colotem_ p. 1121 F, want of novelty is charged against Arcesilas, and the charge is at once joyfully accepted by Plut. The scepticism of Arcesilas was often excused by the provocation Zeno gave, see Aug. _Contra Acad._ II. 14, 15 and notes on fragm. 2 and 35 of the _Academica Posteriora_. _Immutatione verborum_: n. on I. 33. This phrase has also technical meanings; it translates the Greek τροποι (_Brut._ 69) and αλληγορια in _De Or._ II. 261, where an ex. is given. _Definitiones_: n. on 18. _Tenebras obducere_: such expressions abound in Cic. where the New Academy is mentioned, cf. 30 (_lucem eripere_), _N.D._ I. 6 (_noctem obfundere_) Aug. _Contra Ac._ III. 14 (_quasdam nebulas obfundere_), also the joke of Aug. II. 29 _tenebrae quae patronae Academicorum solent esse_. _Non admodum probata_: cf. the passage of Polybius qu. by Zeller 533. _Lacyde_: the most important passages in ancient authorities concerning him are quoted by Zeller 506. It is important to note that Arcesilas left no writings so that Lacydes became the source of information about his teacher's doctrines. _Tenuit_: cf. the use of _obtinere_ in _De Or._ I. 45. _In Aeschine_: so Dav. for the confused MSS. reading. For this philosopher see Zeller 533. As two MSS. have _hac nonne_ Christ conj. _Hagnone_ which Halm, as well as Baiter takes; Zeller 533 seems to adopt this and at once confuses the supposed philosopher with one Agnon just mentioned in Quint. II. 17, 15. There is not the slightest reason for this, Agnon and Hagnon being known, if known at all, from these two passages only.

§17. _Patrocinium_: for the word cf. _N.D._ I. 6. _Non defuit_: such patronage _was_ wanting in the time of Arcesilas (16). _Faciendum omnino non putabant_: "Epictetus (Arrian, _Diss._ I. 27, 15) quietly suppresses a sceptic by saying ουκ αγω σχολην προς ταυτα" (Zeller 85, n.). In another passage (Arrian, I. 5) Epict. says it is no more use arguing with a sceptic than with a corpse. _Ullam rationem disputare_: the same constr. occurs in 74 and _Pro Caecina_ 15, _Verr. Act._ I. 24. _Antipatrum_: cf. fragm. 1 of