As this volume in its revision has not had the advantage of Dr. Tyrrell's scholarship, it asks for every indulgence that the reader can bring himself to grant it. It makes no claim to anything even approaching a full treatment of the subject. Neither this nor any other volume of our work is to be regarded as other than a mere transitory contribution to the study of Cicero's Correspondence; the best that our edition can hope for is that it may prove a sort of scaffolding, by the aid of which some of the very learned and acute young scholars of to-day may erect a permanent building "four-square, a work without flaw." Even with this limited aim the present volume can claim but little. Though it has been in great part re-written, I am only too conscious of what even indulgent criticism must regard as grievous shortcomings; and I feel little doubt that there is a great quantity of literature on the subject which has wholly escaped my notice. But I have done my best to render it here and there a little less inadequate than it was in its original form. That little, I fear, would have been hardly attained (if it has been attained at all) were it not for the invaluable assistance given me by my friend, Dr. J. S. Reid, Fellow of Caius College, and Professor of Ancient History in the University of Cambridge, not only from his published works, but from a great number of learned manuscript notes which he was good enough to put at my disposal. Of this, as of nearly every other work on Cicero issued by British scholars, Professor Reid pars magna fuit. I desire here to render him my warmest thanks. The last two-thirds of the Commentary, and the whole of the Introduction, have been read by another friend, Dr. W. A. Goligher, Professor of Ancient History and Classical Archaeology in the University of Dublin, whose trenchant and acute criticisms have been of the greatest service, and to whom I am very grateful. I am also deeply indebted to Mr. J. T. Gibbs, Manager of the Dublin University Press, who has devoted no little time to reading through the several sheets before they went to press, and, by his accurate knowledge of English, has saved me from many errors of expression.

TRINITY COLLEege, Dublin,
August, 1915.

L. C. P.

141, col. a, line 8

for 'tu est' read 'tu es'.

13,

84,

117, line 8,

172, b,

from end, after tenere]' add "see Introd., p. xvi, note 2'. 5 from end, before commulcium' add 'as 0. E. Schmidt has suggested and Sjögren (Comm. Tull., p. 56) approved'.

291, 17,

for mihi' (italics) read mihi' (roman). See Adn. Crit. for 'reddendas-quod' read 'reddendas: quod'.

,, 291, col. b, lines 26-28, for the conjunction . . . Atticus would' read' quod,

,, 295, line 11,

taking it as a conjunction. But Lehmann (p. 80), in a learned discussion, shows that it is not necessary. We may take quod as a relative pronoun with idem (cf. Acad. i. 35, quod vides idem significare Pomponium). Atticus would'.

for 'pudentem' read 'impudentem'. See Adn. Crit.

300, col. a, line 6, for 728' read '727'.

for 'Haec' read Hanc'; and for scribenda' read 'scribendam'. See Adn. Crit.

,, 353, col. b, line 4, after 'praebere' add also in 660. 1 (bene de nostro)'.

356, a, lines 1-6, This interpretation is incorrect. See Introd., p. lxxxi,

Perhaps we should put a comma after velim', and govern 'memineris' (line 11) by that word, as is done by Müller and Baiter. But it is possible with other editors, e.g. Wesenberg and Klotz, to put a full stop. We can then take memineris' as a case of the future used for the imperative (cp. Madvig, 384 obs.: Roby, 1589).

for 'sum' read 'sum'.

for 'vi Idus' read VII Idus'.

for a Bruti' read a Bruti'.

for 'quo' read ‘quo'.

for 'te exspectare' read exspectare te'. See Adn. Crit. for cum eo' read cum eo'.

for huius modi videtur' read huius modi mihi videtur'. for 'quod praesens', read ut praesens'. See Adn. Crit.

INTRODUCTION.

I. CICERO'S CASE AGAINST CAESAR.1

IN September of the year B.C. 46, Cicero delivered in the Senate a very fine speech, which has come down to us, the pro Marcello. This Marcus Marcellus had been Consul in the year 51, and had taken a very active part against Caesar. Among his enemies exiled after Pharsalia, there was not one whom Caesar had greater reason to regard with feelings of vindictive indignation. Knowing that one of the strongest of Caesar's political principles was the enfranchisement of the Transpadane Gauls-nay, more, that he had always treated them as actually of right full Roman burgesses-Marcellus in his consulship seized the opportunity of wounding him in his most sensitive part. A distinguished

1 This section of the Introduction, which, with some additions, originally appeared as an article in the Quarterly Review (No. 368, October, 1896, pp. 395-422), is here republished by the kind permission of the proprietor and editor. A few notes have been added, and some corrections made.

? It was inevitable that sooner or later Roman citizenship must be extended to the Transpadanes, once it had been conceded to all Italians up to the Po by the legislation which followed the Social War: the Alps, and not the Po, are the natural boundaries of Italy. And in 89 the first step in that direction was taken by giving the Transpadanes Latin rights. The full enfranchisement of the Transpadanes became a plank in the democratic platform, and one which Caesar was especially solicitous to strengthen in every possible way since his tour of agitation in that district in 68. Caesar always treated the Transpadane soldiers in his army as full Roman citizens; and Hirtius, B. G. viii. 24. 3, speaks of the colonies in that region as colonias civium Romanorum. Further, Novum Comum was a colony founded by Caesar and treated by him as a citizen-colony : ep. Suet. Iul. 28, Marcellus. . . rettulit etiam ut colonis, quos rogatione Vatinia Novum Comum deduxisset, civitas adimeretur, quod per ambitionem et ultra praescriptum data esset; but citizenship had not been formally granted by the government at Rome, and therefore the inhabitants of Novum Comum and the Transpadane towns might, according to the strictest law, be regarded as not possessing Roman citizenship. We find that it was one of Caesar's first acts, when he got possession of Rome in 49, to pass a Lex Iulia de Transpadanis, formally granting them full Roman citizenship: Dio Cass. xli. 36. 3.

VOL. V.

b

citizen of Novum Comum, one of the towns recently founded by Caesar as a burgess-colony, was staying in Rome. In the view of Caesar this man should have been regarded as a full burgess of Rome, and as such have enjoyed as complete an immunity from corporal punishment as the Consul himself. Marcellus had him publicly scourged. So much for Caesar and his Transpadane! After Pharsalia, Marcellus retired to Mitylene. Cicero, who was at this time leading a somewhat subdued but not unpleasant life in Rome,' on terms of the closest intimacy with leading Caesarians, such as Dolabella, Hirtius, and Pansa, to whom he was teaching declamation in return for their instruction in the art of dining, no doubt felt that there was an invidious contrast between his own lot and that of the exiled Optimate. He felt that while a great patrician, a consular and a devotee of republicanism, was living in obscurity and loneliness in Mitylene, it looked awkward (ἄμορφον or σόλοικον he himself would have called it) that he should pass a gay existence among the leading men of Rome. It was almost essential to his dignity, even to his comfort, that Marcellus should be restored. But a very obstinate resistance was encountered from the staunch republican himself, who much preferred the freedom of Mitylene to an enslaved life in the metropolis. But at last the consent of Marcellus to accept pardon if tendered to him was obtained. The friends of Marcellus probably had not much hope of success; but, to their infinite delight, they found Caesar ready to offer to his enemy a full pardon. This striking act of

1 Cp. Fam. ix. 26 (479). 3 Cp. vol. iv, p. li. Ferrero (ii. 303) says: "Worn out by the burden of his years and misfortunes, Cicero accepted these invitations just for the pleasure of society, though from time to time he felt a sting of remorse when something happened to recall the miserable catastrophe which had cost him so many of his friends." Such passages as Fam. ix. 16. 5 (472), where he defends his conduct, show that his conscience was far from easy.

2 Fam. ix. 16. 7 (472); 18. 3 (473): cp. vol. iv. p. li.

4 We have a cordial letter of thanks from Marcellus to Cicero, Fam. iv. 11 (496), in reply to a letter from Cicero (unfortunately lost-but a letter to Servius Sulpicius, Fam. iv. 4 (495), supplies the deficiency), which told him of the scene in the Senate on the occasion that he delivered the pro Marcello. The letters of Cicero to Marcellus (Fam. iv. 7 to 10) are all earnest appeals to him to consent to take steps to obtain his recall. Marcellus said that Cicero's advice finally decided him to permit efforts to be made to secure his pardon. But when the pardon was granted, Marcellus did not make any haste to return: cp. Fam. iv. 10 (536). He was not at Athens on his journey home until May 45: cp. Ep. 613.