The Memoirs of Rutilius Rufus

Author(s): G. L. Hendrickson
Source: Classical Philology, Vol. 28, No. 3 (Jul., 1933), pp. 153-175
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Stable URL: .
Accessed: 17/06/2011 12:21
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . .
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Classical Philology.


JULY 1933

Number 3

BY G. L.


THE following pages it is my purpose to put together some

passages which in a small way may serve to illustrate the life and
opinions of Rutilius Rufus, the character of his Memoirs, and the
nature of his fame. Wholly new material is not of course available,
but I venture to assign to his autobiography1-which for the present
I call his Memoirs-some material having to do with his judgments
on oratory or rhetoric which has not hitherto been assigned to it. Some
slight substance and color it will add to a single topic of a work which
has otherwise been transmitted so meagerly. The two considerable
passages which I draw from Cicero are not assigned to any written
work of Rutilius, but appear as oral communications known or narrated to speakers in the dialogue. The point of view, upon which my
procedure in assigning them to a written work depends, was set forth
a good many years ago in a paper published in the American Journal
of Philology.2 I there pointed out that the habit of representing liter1 The fragments are collected by Peter with severe restriction in two groups distributed between a Greek Historia and the Latin De vita sua. Pais, "L'autobiografia ed
il processo di P. Rutilio Rufo," with greater freedom of selection has included much
not found in Peter in his valuable study, in Ricerche sulla storia, etc. (Rome, 1918),
pp. 35 ff. F. Muinzerhas contributed to P.-W. (II, 1, col. 1269) a very able account of
Rutilius with a careful muster of fragments. It is a duty toward such a scholar to
pause for a moment to make recognition of the self-sacrificing work which he has bestowed upon the prosopographia of the Roman republic in the Realencyclopddie, and
which we users are prone to plunder without profession of gratitude and not always with
decent acknowledgment.
2 XXVII (1906), 186 ff.: "Literary Sources in Cicero's BrutuS and the Technique
of Citation in Dialogue."

63. p. On Aulus Gellius cf. It is therefore with more confidence that I venture by this means to recover something from the lost autobiography of Rutilius. He stood for the consulship in 116. L. AdelMfamilien. We encounter him first as an adulescentulus performing a service for Laelius and Galba in the year 138.... HENDRICKSON ary sources as transmitted by oral communication was a fiction peculiarly common to dialogue. Phil.pp. and (I should have added) not alien to any form of literature in which specific citation of sources would seem pedantic. Phil. Although he attained to the consulship as a novus homo. with other observations on fictional acknowledgments and settings in Chaucer. and Kittredge in Harv. but was defeated by Aemilius Scaurus. 1927. I drew attention to the method of introducing as if from memory long passages transcribed from books by such pedantic dialogists as Athenaeus and Macrobius. Hosius in Schanz-Hosius (6th ed. 396).. 464). 298-99 (and Index). yet from his association from boyhood with the most distinguished men of the senatorial aristocracy and from his marriage to a Livia it may be inferred confidently that he was of a patrician family. IV (1906). Metellus in the Jugurthine war. In every capacity of public service he seems to have earned distinction for energy and efficiency. . and attained to that office only in the year 105. apart from the special work which was the object of study. prope perfectus in Stoicis. 677. 4 See the careful account of Rutilius by Muinzer.. see my discussion in Mod. and later as legatus of Q. he is designated by Cicero as a pupil (auditor) of Panaetius. 1916. Phil. Stud. III. Suppl. and the same scholar in RBrm.. Kroll in Jahn's Brutus 89 (5th ed. and some other investigations in related fields have made use of the same principle. (6th ed. a few points in the life and career of Rutilius4 may be recalled to memory. On Chaucer's avowal of oral transmission of the Clerk's Tale. 1 ff. XXVIII (1917). in Jhbb. 1908) and as revising editor of Teuffel... Lit. in Class. and I should have added similar examples from Gellius. In the intervening time I note that my study has been referred to with apparent approval in the new editions of Teuffel and Schanz. he is named by Lucilius as one of the friendly audience for his earliest satires. Mercklin. Rnm.154 G. In that paper. He served with Scipio at Numantia as a youthful tribunus militum. f. at an age above fifty. 3 Cf. p.3 To make clear the setting of the matter which I shall present. and characterized as one thoroughly versed in Greek letters.

5). For his later reputation see below. 1274 (top). the vindictive abuse of the equestrian privilege in the accusation and conviction of Rutilius in 92. . 2. and upon leaving the province delegated to Rutilius the duties of his office. 175.8 That it should lead to conflict with the equestrian publicani and their agents was inevitable. In the year 947 Rutilius attended his friend Q. 9). With reckless malignity Gracchus declared that with this measure he had hurled a knife into the forum which would be used by both sides for their own destruction. 27 and xxxvii. 8 In Cicero's Verrines (Div. Diodorus xxxiv. In Diodorus' account also Rutilius appears only as the adviser of Scaevola's administration (xxxvii. and the account of Diodorus furnishes some examples. which had but recently been constituted from the legacy of Attalus. iii. 20 (cf. Mucius Scaevola (consul of the preceding year) into the province of Asia. For the old aristocracy the sorest spot was the allotment to the equitesof the constitution of the courts. cit. op. 57 and Verr. The victim of such a frivolous accusation was Rutilius himself. The fullest account in ancient sources of the significance of this measure is to be found in Appian Bell. Scaevola did not serve out the whole year as proconsul. 27 and 34) it is the administration of Scaevola that is contrasted with Verres. 6 7 On the chronology see Miinzer. as well as the fact that as a man of sixty he had gone out in a capacity subordinate to a much younger man. p. might lead one to surmise that some deliberate plan of political reform had been made between them.6 The violent passions which attended the effort of Servilius Caepio to restore the courts to the senatorial order in 106.5 The political situation following the Gracchan constitution was very tense. De legg. Plut. The customary charges of corruption and extortion 6 Cf. i. Later sources (for Diodorus draws from Posidonius) would have mentioned Rutilius in this connection. 22. xxxvii. civ. but his choice by Scaevola as an adviser (Diod. ii. xxxvii. and the final effort of Drusus in the following year to restore the senatorial position are only the better-recorded evidences of the truth of Gaius' prophecy. It was a consequence of the bitter animosities between equites and senators that both sides were ready to prefer charges of maladministration upon slight pretexts. 3..THE MEMOIRS OF RUTILIuS RUFUS 155 His reputation for unswerving uprightness became from an early time almost a dogma. Pomp. 5). At all events the proconsulship of Scaevola in Asia became at an early time an example of incorruptible rectitude. col. He went apparently as a regularly designated legatus proconsulis. against which no challenge could maintain itself.

HENDRICKSON awaited the provincial government upon its return.-W. made it safer to prosecute the legatus rather than the proconsul. and the Historia in the Greek tongue. . Our knowledge of this measure and of the heat of party strife which was developed about it we owe chiefly to the fact that it was advocated in behalf of the senatorial party by Marcus Crassus. 10P. In spirit and intention the indictment was probably directed as much at Scaevola as at Rutilius. but we have seen enough already to realize that any measure which looked toward the restitution of the courts to the senate was a matter of vital interest to him. whose speech in its support was one of the classics of early Roman oratory. The conviction of Rutilius (quo iudicio convulsampenitus scimus esse rem publicam)9 was followed at once by new efforts either to restore the courts to the senate or to establish an equitable division of this function. XXV.10 The defeat of these proposals and the assassination of Drusus are an index of the passions which raged about these measures. The penalty imposed was a fine for restitution so large as to leave him nothing.. His exile was apparently voluntary. 11Brutus 164: mihi a pueritia quasi magistra fuit illa in legem Caepionis oratio. which resulted in conviction." 9 Brutus 115. and here (or at Mytilene) were written the two works which are recorded: the De vita sua. and they give point to the discussion of the lex Servilia of the year 106 by Rutilius. and professes to have heard the story of Galba which we shall consider below. litterarum studiis intentus consenuit. and perhaps the office of pontifex. where Cicero as a young man visited him. In what connection Rutilius found occasion to speak of this measure we do not know. Apart from the customary accusation of extortion (repetundarum). 867 (Muinzer on Livius Drusus). he was resolved to live no longer in a state so unjust.156 G. to live first at Mytilene and afterward at Smyrna. in the words of Orosius. At Smyrna. L. in the following year. kinsman of Rutilius. but the high family prestige of the Scaevolae. and retired to the very province which he had been accused of plundering. and this measure was the cornerstone of the program of legislation proposed by the tribune Livius Drusus. other charges of a preposterous nature-the usual stupra et libidines-serve to suggest the character of the prosecution.

These criticisms Cicero (through the mouth of Antonius) by slight additions and suggestions turns into mock-seriousness and mild persiflage of the uncompromising Stoic position. Cicero is most specificin implyingits defeat(Verr. III. but from his point of view as a Stoic we may imagine that he found some satisfaction in pointing out the inefficacy of the oratory with which it had been urged. with comment interspersed. The failure of the measure itself had subsequently brought disaster to Rutilius. and yet it had failed. The law had been urged with all the force of persuasion which Crassus.THE MEMOIRS OF RUTILIUs RUFUS 157 But in spite of the brilliancy and renown of Crassus' effort. At all events he used the occasion for a considerable digression in criticism of the unworthy and illiberal resources which rhetoric habitually employed.'2 The defeat of the lex Servilia of the year 106 was therefore a circumstance of some moment in Rutilius' life. from evidence which will appear. 38): cum equesterordoiudicaret annos prope quinquaginta continuos. no certain record of the fate of the measure is thought to have survived. Mommsen. in criticism of Crassus' claim that the orator must also be a complete philosopher. One may scarcely go so far as to suppose that Rutilius actually cited passages of the epilogue as Cicero does. But one slight though decisive piece of evidence in this matter has apparently been overlooked. a procedure which is more in the manner of a technical rhetorical critic like Cicero himself. II. Cf. The record of the matter is preserved for us in Cicero De oratorei. yet the essential criticism of Rutilius and the Stoic principles which they incorporate it seems most reasonable to refer to Rutilius himself. when in after years in exile he came to narrate the events of his life. 531. . he paused at this point to comment on the character of the advocacy which the measure of Servilius had received. could bring to bear upon it. the greatest of Roman orators. 225 ff. Lange. 65. There follows then a citation from the peroration of Crassus for the Servilian law.. where Antonius.Staatsrecht. act. II. i. 221. dissents and urges that if that were true Crassus himself must repudiate some of his own most effective oratory. These additions are suggested by the bracketed words: 12 On the question of the fate of the lex Servilia ancient sources are divided. Accordingly. from which it will appear that even Crassus' advocacy of the law of Servilius did not avail to carry it through. Madvig. which it is most natural to refer to Rutilius.

to carry through the proposal of Servilius. Lat. But the antithesis is much stronger. vir fortis esse non potest. ausus es dicere? Potestne virtus. quibus. cui populusipse moderandiet regendisui potestatem quasi quasdamhabenastradidisset? That Rutilius in some such way subjected the utterance of Crassus to criticism may be inferred from the words which follow immediately: Itaquehaeccuma te divinitusego dictaarbitrarer. sed universumsenatum. I presume. etc.tam omnia ad voluptatemcorporisdoloremquereferens]probareposset. but in English and German translations I find only renderings like "not only improper (unseasonable). etc. These words furthermore contain the evidence to which I have alluded above of the failure of Crassus.tam languidus. quaeque. an arraignment of the popular oratory of emo13 That this passage has not been used in evidence for the fate of the lex Servilia must. HENDRICKSON "Eripitenos ex miseriis. [ut illi aiunt]. sondern sogar schimpflich.sed etiamturpiter et flagitiosedicta esse dicebat. nisi vobis universis. "nicht nur wenig passend. with all his eloquence.quibuset possumuset debemus." This makes of parum commode only a less emphatic sed turpiter.eripiteex faucibuseorum. servire [istis auctoribus.P. For while the main point of Rutilius' argument is that the spirit and character of his appeal were humiliating and shameful. omitto faucis.v.158 G.". yet this condemnation carries full force only in view of the fact that his plea was not efficacious-non modo parum commode. VII.'3 sed etiam turpiter. But the condemnation of Crassus' oratory did not stand alone. [quod sapienti negant accidere posse]: servirevero non modote. Examples are too numerous to make citation necessary (TLL. sed etiam debere. non modo senaturnservire posse populo. s. but base (scandalous). ex quibuste eripi vis. RutiliusRufus. that if the speech had been efficacious one might have pardoned its humiliating servility. be due to a careless interpretation of the words parum commode.etiam si corporacapta sint armisaut constrictavinculis. but one from Varro is especially apt: cum res maior erat oratores elegebantur potissimum qui causam commodissime orare poterant (L.tam enervatus.quis hoc [philosophustam mollis. and it would seem that at this point Rutilius digressed into a favorite topic of Stoic doctrine. ne iudicio iniquo exsorbeatursanguis tuus. col.non modoparumcommode."Oruittomiserias. quorumtu praeceptaoratorisfacultatecomplecteris]?Quaeet semperet sola liberaest. 1925). . Quae vero addidisti. The meaning of commode here is best seen in the Greek glosses XvaLreXos Xp-qoAs 6OeXlqAdZs. tamen suum ius atque omniumrerumimpunitamlibertatemtenere debeat. nolite sinere nos cuiquamservire.cuiustum causam agebas.homo doctuset philosophiaededitus.quorumcrudelitasnisi nostro sanguinenon potest expleri. senatum servire populo. for the meaning is clearly rather. 41). L. No edition available to me comments on the passage.

et duos filios suos parvos tutelae populi commendassetac se.quemhominemprobecommeminissese aiebat. IdemqueServiumGalbam. Cato.TH:E MEMOIRS OF RuTILIUS RUFUS 159 tional appeal. Itaque. and of the special Stoic deprecation of play upon human passions.hisce eum tragoediis liberatumferebat. 172).14 But though Rutilius was too young to have personal memory of that famous encounter. 3). The archaists of the second century had ferreted them out perhaps from family archives. For. quod is C. He called to mind one of the most famous historical instances of the viciousness of such oratory. p. He then continues in a kind of postscript: Cato quid dicat de Galba absoluto tu melius sci8: ego memini propter fratris filios eum absolutum. 57]. populimisericordiamconcitasset. For this example Rutilius could not appeal to his own memoryfor he was a child of only six or seven at the time-but to the record of it which Cato had preserved in his Origines. quod is. It is perhaps worth noting that the Stoic Marcus recalls best (melius) Cato's sharp censure of Galba's self-defense. His attitude is that of the usual hostility of philosophy to rhetoric. Haines. 175. . In confirmation of this assurance he then narrated the circumstances of 14 There is a curious observation on this case in a letter of Fronto to Marcus Aurelius. nisi pueriset lacrimisusus esset. cum et invidia et odio populitum Galbapremeretur. Scribonioquaestionemin eum ferente. The speeches of Galba had almost faded out in Cicero's time (itaque exaruerunt vix iam ut appareant). tamquamin procinctutestamentumfaceret sine libra atque tabulis.populumRomanumtutoreminstitueredixissetillorumorbitati. 20 [p. Reprehendebatigitur Galbam Rutilius. qui patris clarissimi recordationeet memoria fletum populo moveret. he nevertheless could use his own recollections of Galba. Sulpici Gali propinquisui Q. to confirm the verdict of Cato.cum M. poenaseum daturumfuisse. I. the self-defense of Servius Galba against the charge of perfidy to the Lusitanians (of the year 149). L. the rhetorician Fronto remembers the success of his pathetic appeal (Naber iii. On similar preservation of Rutilius De vita sua see below. Fronto asks his pupil to be sure to bring the copy of Galba to Centumcellae. which in the case of the Sulpicii were doubtless among the most elaborate and systematic of all (Suet.aspereapud populumRomanumet vehementeresset locutus. together with the speech which Cato had then directed against Galba.quod item apud Catonemscriptumesse video. he nevertheless had a clear memory and impression of the man: quem hominem probe commeminisse se aiebat. Haec Rutiliusvalde vituperabatet huic humilitati dicebat vel exsiliumfuisse vel mortemanteponendam. pergraviterreprehenderesolebat. Galbaegravisatque acer inimicus. pupillumfilium ipse paene in umeros suos extulisset. who survived into the years of his young manhood. though from a later time than Galba's notorious self-defense. quam orationem in Originibus suis exposuit ipse.

is given in full in Brutus 85 if.usqueillum. Rutilio Rufo audivisse. Mummiocensoribusredemisset. HENDRICKSON an occasion which had given him an opportunity to observe the character and oratorical traits of that famous man. paucis interpositis diebus iterum Laelium multo diligentius meliusquedixisse iterumqueeodem modo a consulibusrem esse prolatam. gravius et vehementius posse defendi. ut egisse causam. quod is in dicendo atrocior acriorqueesset.160 G.cum eum socii domumreduxissentegissentquegratias et ne defatigareturoravissent. ut eum admoneretet ad dicenditempusadduceret. Unum quasicomperendinatusmediumdiem fuisse." . L. only hinted at in the words of the De oratorejust cited. scriptoresillos male mulcatosexisse cum Galba. sed etiam in 15 Concerning this formula for citation of a literary source see above. quae picariasde P.. Interim cum esset ei nuntiatumtempus esse. The narrative. verecundeet dubitanterrecepisse. but in accordance with the usage of dialogue citation alluded to already we need not hesitate to assign the passage to the Memoirs of Rutilius. in his revision of Jahn's commentary.decrevissesenatum. Nam cum in silva Sila facta caedesesset notiquehominesinterfectiinsimulareturque familia.partim etiam liberisocietatiseius. Addebat etiam idque ad rem pertinereputabat. if other reasons can be adduced which shall make this seem the more probable explanation of its origin. non commentatumputares. quoadei nuntiatum esset consules descendisse. ex quo significabatillum non in agendo solum. quod ei viro succedendumesset. locutum esse ita: se quae fecisset honoris causa eorumstudioseaccuratequefecisse.quemtotum Galbam in considerandacausa componendaqueposuisse. Laeli publicanoscausamdetulissead Galbam.ut de ea re cognoscerentet statuerentconsules. The passage is introduced with the words memoria teneo Smyrnae me ex P. referring to my study says: "Wir haben kein Recht.omnibusexclusis commentatum-n quadam cum cognitionisdies esset et ipse Rutilius rogatu sociorumdomumad Galbammane venisset. quorumalii aliud dictareeodemtempore solitus esset.ut ex senatus consultoP. Cum consulesre audita AMPLIUSde consilii sententia pronuntiavissent. illum autem.Galba. CornelioL. Scipio et D. Brutus.ut sempersolitus esset. p.sed se arbitraricausamillam a Ser. Kroll. Tum Laelium. Itaque auctoritateC. Memoriateneol5Smyrnaeme ex P. 153. cum diceret adulescentulose accidisse. exisse in aedis eo colore et eis oculis. solche Berufungen auf miindliche Tradition als bare Miunze zu nehmen. Causampro publicanisaccurate. ut opinor. consulesde re atroci magnaquequaererent. eleganterque dixisse Laelium. and uses it (contrary to the intention of Rutilius) to exalt the impassioned oratory of Galba above the careful and finished speech of Laelius. Rutilio Rufo audivisse. where Cicero uses it for the purposes of syncritical characterization of Galba and Laelius.

writing out an historical record of his own life and memories.alteragraviteragendiad animosaudientiumpermovendos. and with the presumable character of such a work it will be seen that the tone of autobiographical reminiscence in our passage would harmonize very naturally. It is not of course possible to demonstrate beyond question that this matter is derived from the written page of Rutilius: the point which I do urge is that so far as the form of acknowledgment is concerned it pernits us to weigh evenly the balance between the two possible channels of transmission. But this .multoqueplus proficiatis qui inflammetiudicemquamille qui doceat: elegantiamin Laelio. cum duae summae sint in oratore laudes. Quidmulta?magnaexpectatione. P. maintains the fiction of oral report). consules (where the interposition of ut opinor. has little plausibility for Cicero recalling casually the memory of a story heard thirty-two or thirty-three years before. But more significant. plurimis audientibus. ut opinor. for Cicero. erudite detail of the names of the censors from whom the corporation had obtained their concession. una subtilitate disputandiad docendum. But the Memoirs of Rutilius afford the most natural possible starting-point for the assumption of a literary source. It seems to me therefore most probable that Cicero has in this instance employed for his purposes a description drawn from the written page of Rutilius. Brutus. In the first place it is clear that the assumption of a literary source would gain or lose in probability according to the presence or absence of a definite work to which the matter could be appropriately referred. is Cicero's exact designation of the time. But has Cicero used it in the sense and with the purpose for which Rutilius himself told it? Cicero uses it for the sake of showing by a concrete and historical example the superiority of the oratory of emotional appeal to the oratory of sober reason and argument. in reference to an event of no general historical importance. Itaque multis querellismultaquemiserationeadhibitasociosomnibus approbantibusilla die quaestioneliberatos esse. and especially the quite needless and. and we may now therefore consider what evidence may be invoked to deflect the scale to the one side or the other. Scipio et D. vim in Galbafuisse.THE MEMOIRS OF RUTILIUS RUFUS 161 meditandovehementematque incensumfuisse. deprecatory of too exact knowledge. Ex hac Rutilii narratione suspicari licet. What would be natural for Rutilius. coram ipso Laelio sic illam causam tanta vi tantaque gravitate dixisse Galbamut nulla fere pars orationissilentio praetiretur.

but his observation (at least as he recalled it in later life) was not touched with admiration for what he saw. his literary slaves even showed themselves as the victims of that same unrestrained vehemence. This circumstance had given him an opportunity of personal observation. and still more as employed earlier by this same Galba in his own defense. These three instances. as I have indicated above. Still. HENDRICKSON inference he designates as his own and does not attribute it to Rutilius: ex hac Rutili narratione suspicari licet. For one familiar with the vocabulary of Stoic condemnation the words vehementem . sed etiam in meditando vehementematque incensum fuit. Its point. etc. The essential point of Rutilius' narrative is clearly not the oratory of Galba or its success. and it must seem scarcely credible that Rutilius could have uttered without qualification the concluding words. as Cicero reports them: itaque multis querelismultaquemiserationeadhibita.162 G. etc. and the young Rutilius (adulescentulus of seventeen or eighteen) in their behalf had been one of the group who had gone to attend him from his house to the forum. For when Galba presented himself to accompany his escort to the forum. there came forth a man whose appearance even before the trial itself revealed a passion and vehemence of emotion which no Stoic could look upon with respect or admiration: nay more. but the display of uncontrolled emotion which was seen. was to justify the condemnation of Galba's notorious self-defense in the affair of the Lusitanians (an episode which Rutilius could only report on the evidence of tradition and of Cato's description) by an appeal to his own personal experience and observation of the man himself. even with this cautious qualification. in this instance Galba had been invoked on the advice of Laelius as a last resort for the protection of the defendants. belonged together in Rutilius' Memoirs. as I have intimated. L. To be sure. and when once this relation is observed it is not difficult to see what the real meaning of our passage was in its original setting. For one has only to recall that in the passage from the De oratorealready cited Rutilius appears as the bitter critic of this sort of oratory as exercised by Crassus. it must be said that Cicero has at least suffered his readers to be misled by appealing to the testimony of Rutilius for a confirmation of the general argument which runs through the Brutus. it is contained in the words ex quo significabat illum non in agendo solum.

ut ego non modo tecum Servium Galbam collegam nostrum. Laeli. One will think most naturally of Seneca De ira. We have now reviewed the attitude of Rutilius toward rhetoric as 1B There remains still one other allusion to this narrative of Rutilius in Cicero. multus ore totorubor.. On this same question Cato (with whose judgment Rutilius had concurred in the case of the perfidy to the Lusitanians) had spoken Contra Ser. etc. . i. Cicero has preserved apparently in all essential details the elements of the narrative as it stood in Rutilius..g. verum ne Atticorum quidem oratorum quemquam . So. 3: ut scias autem non esse sanos quos ira possedit. 39). This moral in its larger aspects was already manifest in the appearance of Galba when he came forth from his place of preparation. it would seem. . e. it was illustrated by the exhausted condition of his scribes and helpers-idque ad rem pertinereputabat. But in a slighter. where Scipio is represented as expressing his pleasure at the discourse of Laelius with these words: multas tu quidem. micant oculi. Aemilius Paullus had won from the consul M. . of its success and approval (omnibus approbantibus) won by pathos (querellis) and appeals to pity (miseratione). (conferre velim). Servilius the reproach that he had learned nothing praeterquamloqui. quem tu quoad vixi t omnibus anteponebas. . saepe causas ita defendisti. but an abundance of parallel utterances may be found in almost any Stoic source.. The generalization contained in these words was. 42. This appears quite clearly when one notes how he has turned to his own ends of praise precisely that which Rutilius had used for censure. ipsum illorum habitum intuere: nam ut furentium ita irascentium eadem signa sunt: flagrant ac certa indicia sunt. but to point a moral. That this purpose (rem) was to furnish material for the glorification of Galba's oratory.. Rutilius had told the story not to adorn the tale of his early life. In his earliest appearance as an orator his scurrilous attack upon the character of L. made by Cicero upon the basis of the passage of Rutilius which we have under consideration."6 The whole career of Galba was of a kind to alienate the sympathy of a man like Rutilius. It is found in De re publica iii. yet significant degree. .THE MEMOIRS OF RUTILIus RUFUS 163 atque incensum will suffice. It is possible that in quid multa there is contained a hint of curtailment and of suppression of the inferences which Rutilius himself drew from the narrative. is obviously incredible. 1.words which afford a sufficient commentary on Rutilius' description of Galba as he came from his workroom eo colore et eis oculis. et id ipsum maledice et maligne (Livy xlv. Galbam ad milites.

and. Knowing as we now do the attitude of Rutilius. 14. third..modestaDiogeneset sobria[Gelliusvi. or to recognize a certain scorn of rhetorical elaboration in scita et teretia. as we have seen. Phil. 270. 228 ff. it should be noted that still further matter in i. In the senate they spoke through an interpreter. with philosophical conviction (and with something of old Roman severity superadded) shared the general Stoic antipathy to the current rhetoric of the schools and the forum.17 Reverting for a moment to Cicero De oratore. vituperabat.Violentainquiuntet rapidaCarneadesdicebat. in which the characterization of the oratorical style of each bears marks of this antipathy. To these one other significant and interesting example may still be added. just as for Galba's self-defense Rutilius depended upon Cato. L. in contrast to the impetuous vehemence of Carneades and the elegant grace of Critolaus.which reflect cated by the imperfects reprehendebat. Rutilius. HENDRICKSON seen in three famous cases: first. However this account may have been used by Varro (or Gellius' immediate source). XXV (1905). is derived from Rutilius. To him as a secondary source is attributed a description of the famous embassy of the three philosophers in the year 155. his allusion to Galba's self-defense against the charge of perfidy to the Lusitanians. second. vividly that high disdain of a course of conduct which looked to 17 The relation of this account to the doctrine of the tria genera dicendi I have discussed in Amer. 10]. It is obviously impossible to assign this fragment to any special place or occasion. but it is at least conceivable that it may have stood in connection with the passages already cited. so here he drew from Polybius. the story of his own observation of Galba drawn from an episode of his youth. The double designation of source by Gellius (who on his part has it from Varro) would indicate that. . scita et teretia Critolaus. Jour. They had come as members of a legation to Rome from the Athenians to seek remission of a fine which the senate had imposed. It is indiferebat. his condemnation of Crassus's defense of the Servilian law. it is not straining a point to hear his censure in violenta et rapida. yet it is clear that the intention of Rutilius was to praise the "modesty and sobriety" of Diogenes the Stoic.164 G. but outside they discoursed as philosophers before large audiences: Tum admirationifuisse aiunt Rutilius et Polybius philosophorumtrium sui cuiusquegenerisfacundiam.

in the absence of external evidence. If true it would not be out of keeping with the character of Rutilius to have himself narrated the story of the speech of Lysias proffered to Socrates. The answer to that objection may be found in some considerations which follow. Up to this point allusion has been made with intentional ambiguity to the "Memoirs" of Rutilius. The passage from the Brutus. that he himself described his own trial and professed his own unwillingness to use any other defense than that which was dictated by truth: non modo supplex iudicibus esse noluit. The reconstruction of a point of view is quite a different task from the collecting of fragments. but one may suspect that the comparison of Rutilius to Socrates and the apochryphal story of Socrates' courteous refusal of the oration of Lysias'8 would not have been out of keeping with the proud and self-conscious uprightness of the manilla philosophorum de se ipsorum opinio firma in hoc viro et stabilis inventa est (Brutus 114). to assign any portion to Rutilius. It is probable also. Cf. In the word noluit there is contained a hint that this was described by Rutilius himself. 10. But since my purpose was to bring together all of Rutilius' judgments upon rhetoric and oratory I have ventured to err rather on the side of more than of less. derived from Posidonius). 18In Brutus 115 Cicero implies that both Crassus and Antonius offered their assistance for his defense. is a compact unit quite clearly ascribed. I am conscious that not all of the material which I have invoked for recovering a section of Rutilius' Memoirs is attested with equal certainty. In the description which follows it would be difficult. It may be urged indeed against all that I have drawn from Cicero that its purely Ciceronian color casts doubt upon its direct provenancefrom Rutilius. sed ne ornatius quidem aut liberius causam dici suam. Let us now approach more directly the question of the source from which the matter in Cicero is drawn. III. . as an analogue to his own situation. descriptive of the defense of the publicani by Laelius and Galba. The passages from the De oratore are less certain and of different degrees of probability. in view of the scorn with which Rutilius reports the servile appeals of Crassus and Galba. quam simplex ratio veritatisferebat. his use of the story of the impossibility of finishing what Apelles had left unfinished in the Coan Venus.THE MEMOIRS OF RUTILIUS RUFUS 165 personal safety rather than to self-respecting uprightness. as a task like that of finishing what Panaetius had left undone (De off.

essential identity. reported upon the authority of Polybius as well as that of Rutilius. 65. Hosius (1927.. v. as we shall see presently in one significant example. cit. 18). .. Kroll (Teuffel) par. but 19Leo. Pais. curiously. a "Roman history. citing with the formulas orToptat and E' rats loroptats. apparently assumes two independent works. HENDRICKSON The historians of literature distinguish two works attributed to Rutilius: one a Latin autobiography De vita sua. It is possible however. Concerning the death of Scipio it is obviously quite conceivable that incidental allusion should have been made to it. to show by some other considerations that the Greek work was personal. The title o-ropta(-ac). Lit. the other. The appeal to a Greek-speaking audience would inevitably entail explanations of fact and of usage which would be superfluous for his Roman readers. To him also we owe the information that it was written in Greek.LaWK loropta. These are the only passages which afford any suggestion that Rutilius handled in either work a period antecedent to his own time.'9 Nissen pointed out that all the fragments in both works refer to events of Rutilius' lifetime. Rom. and with reference to the embassy of the philosophers I have in the preceding shown a context in which it might have stood. to be sure. I believe. p.166 G. It is not necessary of course to think of the two works as identical. 209) declares for independence. That the Latin and Greek works of Rutilius which are thus defined were not in reality separate books. which has been variously received by subsequent scholars. and again as 'ra4rptos o-ropta." referred to most specifically by Athenaeus under the title 'Pw. cit. with the exception of the allusion to the death of Scipio Africanus and the account of the embassy of the three philosophers referred to above. is referring to Rutilius as the author of a "Roman history" seems to imply something more than personal memoirs of the author's time. op. Presumably to the same work allusion is made by Plutarch. op. col.. Miinzer. and therefore in some sense an adaptation and perhaps an extension of the Latin life. But this does not advance the question essentially. autobiographical. p. Athenaeus. and both of these items are. is appropriate to rebus quibus interfuit is qui narret (Gell. the title of which is afforded by a few meager citations in Charisius and Diomedes. 1279. 346. L. but that the latter was a Greek version or paraphrase of the former is a view advanced by Nissen. as it appears in Plutarch. 142. 3. p.

Note that Velleius places Rutilius in the category of historiarum auctores. and alludes to the fact that in standing for the consulship together in 116 B. Scaurus. et tres ad L. "our history"). Livius vor.21 But what if Cicero was not acquainted with them? It sounds at first paradoxical. The principal evidence for this conclusion is an argument ex silentio. col.e. and his legal activity.. but of such peculiar and noteworthy character that no one I think will deny to it weight. C. 'PcOwLGatKL)V loroplav fK5EoK6oTLt rf 'EXXivwv 4tv2." it is quite certain that the former covered the period of his own lifetime. He calls attention to their similar dispositions: erat uterque natura vehemens et acer (113). while Scaurus in turn upon acquittal had prosecuted Rutilius upon the same charge.C." Cf. P. But further clarification is possible.. also Nissen. Curio. After characterizing the oratory of Scaurus. C. 20Ath." For this reason. after characterizing Rutilius' character. he proceeds to a syncritical discussion of the other two: de Scauro et Rutilio breviterlicet dicere. Untersuch. Rutilius. if not absolute cogency. but nevertheless I venture to suspect that Cicero has for his several accounts of Rutilius drawn upon the Greek memoirs. and that they. had quite suppressed the Latin work. for even if he had written a "history" as distinct from a "life. Rutilius. the defeated candidate. had accused Scaurus of ambitus. etc. his industry. as well as because Cicero is a Latin writer and a Roman. Cicero proceeds to name his works: huius et orationessunt. In the same manner. 1280): "Eine direkte Benutzung des lat. Sallust. cit. But doubtless the same "history" is meant. 42. . It would find a place in autobiography more naturally than in a "Roman history. In Brutus 110 Cicero comes to a group of four orators. p. Mtinzer (op. The material which I have adduced from Cicero represents personal opinion and judgment with relevant illustration.. Werkes liegt by Cicero. M. 168e. it would seem that the only natural source to name is the Latin books De vita sua.20 But in any case the matter resolves itself merely into a question of the degree of difference. Gracchus. an allusion which by itself could refer to a work in Latin. Fufidium libri scripti de vita ipsius acta sane utiles. Reserving the first and the last for later treatment. and 274c where in the mouth of a Roman interlocutor Rutilius is referred to as having written rhv 7rarptov ioropiav (i. 21 Cf. as perhaps fuller and more widely circulated.THE MEMOIRS OF RUTILIUS RUFUS 167 it is quite conceivable that he has introduced the word "Roman" to contrast with the apparent paradox of a Roman writing in Greek.

90 B. at Cyri vitam et disciplinam legunt. Caesar 262. de quibusante dixi. Scaurilibri. Here. Sisenna 228. but no mention of the libri de vita sua. For of the books of Scaurus he proceeds to say. Tum Brutus: Mihi quidem. as Brutus is represented as ignorant of the similar works of Scaurus and Catulus. Panaeti auditor. If now we could look at this passage by itself. The same point of view he pursues somewhat further in referring to the memoirs of Q. but also because the two autobiographies must have been close to each other in time of appearance (ca.).inquit.familiaremsuum. Titius 167. quos nemo legit. What then shall we say?-that. But it is nevertheless true that in other cases where the orators in question were the authors of historical or other works he has not failed to refer to them. nec iste notus est nec illi. Furiumpoetam. sed neque tam nostris rebus aptam nec tamen Scauri laudibus anteponendam. the absence of any allusion to them need not surprise us. and to include them in his characterizations: Cato 66. however. It is the deliberate juxtaposition of Scaurus and Rutilius in parallel characterization which gives significance to Cicero's silence. multa praeclara de iure. Fannius 101. qui libernihilonotiorest quamilli tres. Cicero is writing a history of oratory and is free to ignore other than oratorical writings of those whom he mentions.-sed haec mea culpa est.C. prope perfectus in Stoicis. Catulus 132.168 G. even the tragedies of C. We should be . We may add to these considerations the fact that Cicero assumes an attitude of special patronage toward these early monuments of Roman autobiography against the neglect of his time. praeclaramillan quidem. Catulus: the purity of his style is discernible not only from his orations but also ex eo libro quem de consulatuet de rebus gestis suis conscriptummolli et Xenophontiogeneresermonismisit ad A. and related in period and substance. The omission is noteworthy not only because of the pairing of these two figures in a deliberate syncrisis. doctus vir et Graecis litteris eruditus. numquamenim in manus inciderunt-nunc autem et a te sumam et conquiramista posthac curiosius [1321. so Cicero likewise was in fact ignorant of the Latin life of Rutilius? This is not a compelling conclusion. there is no mention of Rutilius' similar work. HENDRICKSON Cicero refers to his writings: sunt eius orationes ieiunae. and finally Scaurus in this place. L. but that it seems the only natural explanation of the evidence I do not hesitate to say.

It is the description of the institution of the Roman market days or nundinae. of the Greek memoirs. for no Roman need be told that the nundinae came three times a month. . quamquam Timaeus eum quasi Licinia et Mucia lege repetit Syracu2as. A part of such explanation is already present in the passage of Athenaeus." Here it will be seen allusion was made to an institution which for the Greek reader required an explanation. above). . nono autem die intermisso rure ad mercatum legesqueaccipiendasRomamvenirent. and 63 (of the birthplace of Lysia). 1].R. though without assigning it to any specific title. In like manner Cicero explains technicalities of Greek law by Roman analogies in Brutus 48 (of Isocrates).THE MEMOIRS OF RUTILIUS RUFUS 169 tempted to believe in that case that the Latin work had early been suppressed by the wider diffusion. But the original context contained more. as a brief comparison reveals: Nundinasferiarumdiem esse volueruntantiquiquo mercandigratiaurbem rustici venirent [Paul. material which he drew from Rutilius was translated or adapted from the Greek. A slight but perhaps significant hint of the procedure which is thus assumed for Cicero may be gathered from one Rutilian fragment which Macrobius quotes. so far as Cicero is concerned.ex Fest. 22 There is perhaps a hint of translation from the Greek in the phrase unum quasi comperendinatus medium diem fuisse (Brutus 87. It sets forth "that the law did not permit more than three guests to be entertained at dinner except on market days. A plausible context for this passage is to be found in the account of the lex Fannia in Athenaeus 274c. when five might be entertained: this happened three times in each month. It would seem then that. which can only have been used in addressing a non-Roman public. for which (through Posidonius) Rutilius is the source. annumita diviseruntut nonis modo diebus urbanasres usurparent.22 This would explain why in the examples which have been adduced there is throughout a purely Ciceronian color.etc. and perhaps by the greater fulness. The significant words here are Romanos and Romam. and it is fortunately preserved for us by Macrobius: Rutilius scribit Romanosinstituisse nundinas ut octo quidem diebus in agris rustici opus facerent. ii.]. with no suggestion in vocabulary or style of an older Latinity. . nostrimaiores. employing a Roman technical term as analogous (quasi) to some Greek expression of similar meaning. quasi committeret contra legem quo quis iudicio circumveniretur ( = lex Sempronia)..reliquisseptem ut rura colerent [VarroR.

and is the number stated by Varro and Dionysius. It must t b&a T)V error of translation from the Greek of someone who subtracted one from epv4a or a similar formula. which made special provision for the nundinae.yop& 6L' 7/u. I find no comment on this discrepancy in any discussion of the nundinae.23 Greek audience ('Pw. written apparently as preface or epilogue to his history. and like it appealing to a = apud Romanos). L. and go on from this to describe his own life as innocent and law-abiding. The error can be an scarcely be credited to Rutilius and in any event is hard to explain. dialogue-scarcely existed at all. There are in the Attic orators many examples of such rudimentary steps toward autobiography. . In setting forth the story of Coriolanus he reports his indictment and the resolution fixing the hearing upon it for the third following market day (EXpi T?'S TplTqS ayopas= in trinum nundinum). closed the week of eight nundinae. It would seem that to the Greek of the classical period the very idea of expression in prose outside of the few recognized literary forms-oratory. but the invidiousness of self-praise and the absence of a recognized vehicle were effective checks. In our fragment of Rutilius eight is said to be the number of working-days in the fields (octo diebus in agris) where seven of course is correct. HENDRICKSON The need for Rutilius' explanation arose from mention of the terms of the lex Fannia.pas days va. and for them some clarification was necessary. From this Dionysius digresses to make clear to his Greek readers the Roman usage: al be aiyopal'PwjuatotlsYLyVVTO0 US Kal Therefollowsthen an ac. Similarly in Dionysius we find an explanation arising from casual mention of the same institution. A defendant at the bar might refute the calumnies of the prosecution. The self-confidence or assurance which impelled to speech concerning one's self was not lacking.CXpL T7V KaC' 7as xpovwv5L)pepas'vaT-S. In Greek it is rendered sometimes simply by v &yopa.uataoLs Whether autobiography is Roman in origin or is derived from Greek exemplars is a question of some perplexity which has been variously answered. Nothing comparable to the Roman week of eight days existed among the Greeks. or i &yopa r b5La r(v evve4a&yogkvn (Dio). count similar to our fragment of Rutilius. Next in point of time comes the treatise 7TEpl TOiV L8'ov f3Lovof Nicolaus of Damascus toward the end of the first century. dictated by the necessity of self-defense.170 G. or v &. They stand out for us in typical form in 23 The Roman the ninth day. Apparently the earliest recorded titles which profess self-portrayal are exactly the works of Rutilius and Scaurus de vita sua. etymologically days (just as in French and German eight days is the familiar designation of a week of seven).r7s. history.

86. Xenophon's Anabasis is a chapter of his own life written with apologetic purpose in the form of historical narrative. and whether with conscious relationship or not he is the forerunner of the Hellenistic rulers and generals who described and defended their own lives and deeds. It would be possible to name other indications of the existence of forms of Greek autobiography antedating any Roman practice: the striking fragment of Bion addressed to Antigonus in reply to the malevolent stories of rivals of the king's favor (which Horace appears to have known and emulated) . pp. assuring him that if he will not undertake the story of his consulship. ersten Buches d. 1898. Similarity of title does not of course demonstrate relationship. Misch. 25 Diog.THE MEMOIRS OF RUTILIuS RUFUS 171 Plato's fiction of the Apology of Socrates. scribam ipse de me. That it was professedly a record of his own deeds appears from Polybius' designation of it as Vrouv'70. but in a larger way one can scarcely doubt that the first Roman writers of personal memoirs were influenced by such Hellenistic predecessors. p. In effect he might be called the "inventor" of the genre.26 24 Cf. "Das Schlussgedicht d. p. From the chips and splinters which have survived of this literature the bro-uv. He is the earliest writer of personal memoirs. 46-47. Laert. Nachrichten.ara of out voluAratus stand with somewhat sharper outline. 469 ff. and in the more comprehensive memoirs of Sulla-libri rerum suarum.25 personal poems of introduction or conclusion identifying and characterizing the author. It is to them as well as to Roman models that Cicero appeals in addressing Lucceius." GMtt. . such as are found in Augustan poets.amlAol 7rEpl rTv l8ltov rpiwev. Autobiographie. With wider scope Isocrates used the forensic form in his imaginary Antidosis24for a comprehensive presentation of his own life and activity. multorum tamen exemplo et clarorum virorum. a form of title which appears again in the book of Q. and which certainly reflect Alexandrine usage. His work was minous and composed without literary pretense to justify the writer's r6le in the affairs of the Peloponnesus and of the Achaean League. Properz. 26 See especially Leo. and Norlin in his Introduction to the Loeb translation. iv.w1u. xvii. though he professes nothing new and motivates his performance by the transparent pretext of a judicial selfdefense. Lutatius Catulus de consulatu et de rebus gestis suis.

and though the Lucio be not Lucilio (as Cichorius cautiously conjectured). If we are justified in attributing to it the passages on oratory and orators which have been considered above. col. Like Lucilius.27with comment and observation upon social conditions and legislation. cit. creating a substantial and picturesque background of circumstance against which to pronounce a judgment. his attitude is that of a man who felt himself in opposition to the prevailing men and morals of his time. upon oratory and jurisprudence. as of rhetoric and oratory in the material adduced above.. In the meagerness of express fragments in Latin. not afraid of the accusation of self-laudation-fiduciam potius morum 27 See the survey of Munzer. HENDRICKSON Under such a title as De vita sua one might naturally expect a relatively brief account such as might have been an outgrowth of Rutilius' own defense before the court. his older contemporary and friend. or the Greek LoaToptaL. upon men and manners generally. He spoke bluntly and fearlessly as one confident of his own character. It would appear that the work aimed to be a personal history setting forth his participation in public affairs during his whole career. it is difficult to recover any considerable impression of the tone and spirit of the work. The Latin fragment 9 (from Charisius) starts off with the suggestion of a story from the life of a Roman barrister: pro Lucio familiare veniebam. somewhat in the manner of Nicolaus. more analogous to Hellenistic memoirs. and to the implications of titles like Sulla's libri rerum suarum.172 G. it would appear that Rutilius was leisurely and familiar in his comments upon men and institutions. of political dishonesty and corruption as in allusion to Marius and Pompey. not summary and austere. But the existence of at least five books (as cited by the Latin grammarians. who follows the encomiastic formula. there is no citation by books from the Greek version) must lead one to believe that something more comprehensive was undertaken. In the story of Galba and Laelius we must recognize a well-developed literary sense. . Most of the intelligible fragments are critical. 1277. L. op. and in the uncertainty of material derived from the Greek. yet in conjunction with the story of Galba and the account of the lex Fannia one may be permitted to assume for the work as a whole a tone of intimate and informal reminiscence. or one might think of it as arranged by categories of "virtues" (4perat) with illustrations from his career. of social decay and disintegration as in reference to the lex Fannia.

In fact. The title and actual citations appear first in Charisius and Diomedes who draw from sources scarcely earlier than the second century. Whether the absence of allusion to the Latin work is evidence of its early disappearance or not. To Rutilius' life Cicero makes no allusion (as noted above). On the other hand the Greek turopta of Rutilius is named as a source in writings which can be referred confidently to Posidonius. nullius ante se imperatoris exemplum secutus (Val. and other sources may at least suggest that his language was not lacking in point and contrast. and of himself. I fear. 13). Leo noted that the Latin fragments show the familiar clausulae of Ciceronian usage.rapKELa which Cicero says was conspicuous in him. still their deliberate employment by Rutilius would be a criterion of stylistic purpose of rather curious interest. a younger contemporary. For praise of others as well as for himself some traces of the conventional forms of encomium are still discernible. at all events the use of the Greek treatise by . so self-praise was implicit in autobiography. too slight to warrant a generalization for his whole work.THE MEMOIRS OF RUTILIus RUFUS 173 quam adrogantiam-and firm in that Stoic avi. Max. but the autobiography of Scaurus he refers to as Scauri laudes. as when of Scipio at Numantia he says with rhetorical syncrisis: primum contra consuetudinem imperatorum ipse pro lectis lecticis utebatur(frag. 3. But the material is. The rhetorical color of some of the dicta attributed to him in Seneca. 2). that as consul he employed gladiatorial teachers for the better training of raw recruits. Valerius Maximus. While the use of rhythmical clausulae is not so rhetorical a trait as we used to think. familiare veniebam (like esse videatur). The disappearance of the Latin work De vita sua during the century and more that followed its production seems to have been almost complete. a quality which need not be at variance with Cicero's characterization of his orations as jejune. As ancient biography was a development out of encomium. ii. To afford any judgment or feeling for the style of Rutilius the fragments are too slight. and thought that the ablative form familiare was dictated by the cadence. unless I am mistaken there is no allusion to Rutilius as the author of an autobiography before the familiar reference in the Agricola of Tacitus-nec id Rutilio et Scauro citrafidem aut obtrectationi fuit-with such a juxtaposition of the names of Rutilius and Scaurus as might have been expected in Cicero.

Rutilius appears as a specimen innocentiae and in the following year (pro Rab. and naturally of the Latin life. Appian. His name must have early passed over to the schools of declamation. refer. Undoubtedly much. but the question does not seem to admit of solution.) he is called documentum nostris hominibus virtutis. who might still be presumed to entertain a class conviction of the guilt of Rutilius. in a phrase of declamatory extravagance-virum non saeculi sui. To what extent the Memoirs contributed to the stereotyped fame of Rutilius as a man of unsullied virtue it is impossible to say. From this time on his fame suffered a kind of rhetorical canonization. Plutarch. Athenaeus. In the oration against Piso of 55. It is assumed confidently by scholars that both Sallust and Livy made use of Rutilius. but their historical value is negligible. and it is a fair inference that it was only thus that he was known to Ovid. Velleius brackets him with his kinsman Livius Drusus. This is not to say that there are not memorable tributes in some of these utterances. but quite as much we may suspect was due to the senatorial tradition of outrage at his conviction by an equestrian court. To be sure in this place in designating him as inter viros optimos atque innocentissimos he qualifies his praise as a personal judgment (mihi videtur). Ovid contrasts the rigors of Tomi as a place of exile with the charm of Smyrna: I nunc et veterumnobis exemplavirorum. Post. Qui forti casummente tulere. but doubtless out of consideration for the equestrian group among the judges whom he was addressing. and Dio is presumptive evidence of the wider diffusion of the Greek work. Et grave magnanimiroburmirareRutili Non usi redituscondicionedati. Cicero's attitude is consistent in extravagant praise from his earliest mention of Rutilius in the oration pro Fonteio of the year 69. L. In this phrase we see him already foreshadowed in the familiar r6le which he plays in Seneca as a Roman counterpart in perfect virtue to Socrates. and like Cato he ceased to be a historical character and fades and stiffens into an exemplum. That an archaist like Sallust should have known and used a book which was unknown to Cicero is not of course improbable.174 G. HENDRICKSON Diodorus. sed omnis aevi .

Cf. To the archaists of the second century of our era we owe a brief resuscitation of earlier republican Latin. But it is in Seneca that his role as an exemplumis most clearly seen. Catonem narrabis.THE MEMOIRS OF RUTILIUS RUFUS 175 optimum. Only less trite than Cato's fortitude in the face of death was Rutilius' cheerful acceptance of exile. The type of context in which he appears in Seneca is well illustrated in Epp. they rescued from oblivion many works of this earlier time and made from them their grammatical excerpts. damnatos mihi Camillos et Rutilios narrat. especially Socrates and Cato. iam mihi. 300: utitur in defensionem claris et nobilibus exemplis. Plutarch. aequiore animo passus est se patriaeeripi quamsibi exilium28-a masterpiece of fusin Preface to the Agricola the tian! Even Tacitus' familiar allusion seems a somewhat conventionalized tribute to the integrity of Rutilius and the purity of his time. We noted above Fronto's possession of orations of Galba which had barely survived into Cicero's time. In some similar manner we may guess that Rutilius' De vita sua had been recovered from public or family archives. cum ad contemnendam mortem ventum fuerit. It contrasts glaringly with the corruption and cynicism which drove Rutilius into exile and became the motive for his writing. and when once it had satisfied the demands of scholastic curiosity it lapsed again into the sleep from which for a moment it had been awakened. the friend and younger contemporary of Rutilius. and Mucius Scaevola for indifference to pain. 3. etc. 24. Dio. and in all cases I believe but one he is associated with other heroic names. . he parries the triteness of his next example with an assumed remonstrance of his correspondent: Decantatae. For acquaintance with the Greek "History" a better case may be made. i. NEW HAVEN 28 Dial. Cicero's ignorance-like Brutus' unacquaintance with the works of Scaurus and Catulus-is an index of the fate which overtook nearly all pre-Ciceronian prose. but even here there is ground for suspecting that the history of Posidonius. and Athenaeus. As for the Latin life. After naming Rutilius and Metellus as instances of heroism in exile. which actual acquaintance with the Life must surely have qualified. in omnibus scholis fabulae istae sunt. is the intermediate source for Diodorus. Emulating the Greek Atticists in their quest for the old and authentic word and form. It was however a fleeting revival. 4. He alludes to Rutilius about a dozen times. inquis. There is little or nothing in all this post-Ciceronian allusion to indicate that Rutilius continued to be read either in Latin or in Greek. also Quintilian Decl. Appian.