The Sources of Plutarch's Life of Cicéro
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
STUDIA HISTOR IC A 86 ALFRED GUDEMAN THE SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICÉRO EDIZIONE ANASTATICA "L'ERMA" di B RETSCHN E I DER - ROMA 1971 THE SOURCES OF FLUTARCH'S LIFE ΟF CICERO 1_ L The results of source investigations have but rarely met with an acqulescextce at all commensurate with the labor, the acumen, and the learning so often expended upon them. This is due to several causes. In the first place, the entire or partial loss of the original or earlier authorities naturally gives a more of less wide latitude to the constructive imagi- nation, and, in consequence, different conclusions are often drawn from the same concrete material. In the second place, any_ one who haq even superficially examined the contributions in the field of source research must needs have observed that, . scholars have, with few laudable exceptions, failed to ascertain at the very outset, as far as this is still possible, 1 BIBLIOGRAPHY: Heeren, De fontibus etc. Plutarchi, Göttingen, τ82ο, pg. 184-187; J. G. Lagus, Plutarchus vitae Ciceronis scriptor, Helsiagfors, 1846; Linker, Emendationen zu Sallust in Wiener .4kad ‚rol. XΙΙΙ (1854) pρ. 266 ff.; H. Klapp, De vitarum Plutarchi auctoribus Romanis, Bonn, 1862 ; G. S. Sibínga, De Ρlutzrcki in vita Citerons fontibus etc. (c. 1 -23), Leiden Dies. /863; H. Ρeter', Die Quellen Plutarchs in den Biographien der Römer, π µνηµα Haile, ι865, ρρ. 129— Χ 35; WPPt7Säcker, Cicero's b ó u. Plut. in Fleck. Jahrb. CXI (1875) pp. 417 ff.; Ditλ i, Die jiingeren Quellen der Catil. Verschwörung, ibid. CXIII (1876) ρρ. 851 fi.; G. Thouret, De Cic., Asin., ... rerum Caesar. scriptoribus, Leipz. Diss. ι877 (= Leipχ. Stud. I pp. 313 ff.); Schliephacke, Ueber die griech. Quellen der Catit. Verschwörung, Goslar; 1877 ; J. Besser, De Coniurat. Catit., Leípz. Dies. 1880; Ch. Graux, fntrod. to his edition of Dem. and Cic., Paris, 1881; E. Schmidt, De Cie. commentario ... a Plutarcho ... expresso, Jena Dise. 1884; id. Plut. 's Bericht liber die Cati'. Verschwörung, Lϋbeck, 1885 ;; Thiaucourt, Étude sur la Conjuration de Cat. de Sa11., Paris, 1887; K. B11resch, Dié Quellen zu den vorhand. Ber. über die Cati'. Ver- acT wörung in Comment, in honorer Ribbeckü, 1888, pp. 217 if.; Gudeman, 4 hew Source in Plutarch's Life of Cicero ín Transactions Elmer. Philo'. Assoc. voL XX (1889) pp. 139-.158 (cited as Transact.); Willrich, De Coniurat. Catit. σ ι894 ; f ntόinr, Göttingen Dies. 1893; Felke, De Sallustii Catilina, Illuster Diss. B, Sshavaxtz, Bericht über die Catilin. Verschwörung in Hermes vol. XXXII (• 897) pp 534-609; F. Leo, .Die Griech. Rom. Biographie etc., 1901, pp. 162-163. τ 2 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICÉRO what authorities were accessible to the later writer, as well as the extent to which he would be likely to have utilized all the available ώ terial — a problem which can only be solved, if soluble at all, by a thorough examination of the working method, as it is revealed in the writings of the particular author under investigation. But even where these conditions have been complied with, a practice has been all but univer- sally followed which in my judgment must be held primarily responsible for the many failures met with in this field of philological study. I refer to the constant practice of at once assuming direct indebtedness on the score of more or less striking coincidences, whether in form or substance or both, the very probable contingency being tod often lost sight of that such parallelisms may have been unavoidable, the, similarity of the subject-matter naturally leading to simi- larity in its stylistic presentation, or that they had passed more or less intact through intermediary channels, or, finally, that two writers were independently indebted to a third source common to both. Unfortunately we are rarely in a position to determine with anything like satisfactory accuracy the real condition of affairs, but there is, at least, one criterion which almost invariably enables us to state dogmatically, if not what actually did happen, at all events what did not. - It is a principle which, so. far as my observation goes, has hitherto been ignored in source investigations. I have elsewhere had occasion to dwell upon this, 2 but its prime importance for the present study may justify Ιfty formulating it again: Mere coincidence or similitude of statement with some earlier author, be it never so striking when taken by itself, not only affords no reliable clue to direct indebted- ness, but actually renders such an assumption frequently impossible, in case there be found to exist side by side squally noteworthy divergences or contradictions. ΧΧΧ 2 Cp. Transact. Amer. Philo'. Assoc. vol. Έ (1900) P. 95 f.; Introd. to Tac. Germ.. p. L. SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICERO 3 It will thus be apparent that the only method that can yield acceptable results will consist in a process of elimination, i.e. we must endeavor to determine what predecessors, from out the list possibly accessible, an author could not, for one reason or another, have consulted. It will then be, in many cases, comparatively easy to decide to what extent he probably util- ized the authorities still remaining, provided, of course,that their character, purpose, and scope are satisfactorily ascertainable. II. If we apply these general methodological principles to an investigation into the Sources of Plutarch's Life of Cicero, our first task would naturally be to acquire an adequate conception of his biographical method i in regard to the faithfulness or freedom with which he followed still extant authorities 2 and to his habits of citing or suppressing his sources of information. Finally, as we are here dealing with the biography of a Roman, the question also arises whether Plutarch was sufficiently conversant with Latin to enable him to make an intelligent use of the Latin works, so indispensable to a satisfactory treatment of the career of the great orator. That the answer ca'n only be a strong affirmative has been shown elsewhere. 3 As regards the other problems a careful and unbiased examination yields the following conclusions : The extent of Plutarch's indebtedness to his Roman prede- cessors is largely conditioned by their number, their char- acter, their exhaustiveness, and their accessibility. It must, 1 Cp. H. Peter, Die Quellen Plutarchs etc. pp. 1-4 ; Wachsmuth, Ejnlejt. in das Stud. d. alt. Gesch. s.u. : B. Perrin, Plutareh's T/,emistocles and Aristides, New York, 1901, ρρ. 1-±o ; Leo 1.c. pp. 155 ff. 2 Especially instructive in this connection is his life of Coriolanus, for which the narrative of Dionysius of Halicarnassus constituted almost the only source. Cf. Peter, Die Quellen etc. pp. 7-17. 8 Cp. Transact. p. 140 ff. and the useful but far from exhaustive discussion of Sickinger, De linguae Latínae aped Plutarchuron religuiis et vestigiίs, Freiburg Diss. 1883. W. Vornefeld, De scrt torυm Latinorurn lacis a . lutarcho citatis, Munster Diss. 1901, is superficial and worthless. The famous statement in Plut. Dem. c. 3 (see Appendix III) merely sigιιífies that he did not feel οm- petent to institute a comparison between Demosthenes and Cicero as orators. Cp. Klapp 1.c. p. 3 and Peter, Die Quellen etc. p. 61. 4 SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICÉRO therefore, be determined for each biography independently. On the other hand, Plutarch, following the all but universal prac- tice·of ancient historians, did not feel galled upon to ransack the primary and often widely scattered sources, in case this laborious task had already been satisfactorily performed by others.¢ That this had been done for the life and career of Cicero before Plutarch became his biographer can admit of no doubt. He was, therefore, relieved of the necessity of con- sulting a great variety of authors who wrote in what was to him after all a foreign, albeit not an unfamiliar language. But quite apart from this consideration, an extensive Latin library was certainly not accessible to him in his small native town which, as he tells us with touching local pride, he did not care to desert,, lest it grow less by even one inhabitant. This assumption is, indeed, confirmed by his own words in Dem. 2,6 which must have been written with special reference to the biography of Cicero, for the following reasons: In the first place, this complaint would have been unjustified, if he had taken advantage of his residence in Rome to acquaint himself fully with the extensive literature on Cicero at his disposal or had taken pains to collect such traditions con- cerning him as still survived in the imperial city. In the second place, in composing the life of Demosthenes he was not in the predicament of which he speaks, for all the sources were written in Greek, and the orations, in particular, must have long been familiar to him. The proximity of Athens, moreover, rendered these sources easy of access, and his opportunities for acquiring hearsay information were, to judge from his associations, unquestionably abundant . 6 Again, Plutarch conforms to the usage of ancient historiog- raphy in habitually suppressing the authorities whom he most 4 Cp. H. Peter, Die geschichtl. Literat. etc. II, pp. 191 f.; Leo 1.c. p. 162. 6 See Appendix III. 6 It will not therefore appear accidental that the biography of Cicero contains ν µν ∆ηλ θ&&ον Σ στ β ο: no such phrases as Dem. c. 31, 1' i` oli e& r 8&Yxsis, ό we, ί ω Εν διηκοισαµν. w *ge?s έ:έy: ή e SOURCES OF PLUTARCH'S LIFE OF CICÉRO 5 extensively followed? Where he does cite them, it is gener- ally with reference to minor details, or because of discrepan- cies in the traditional records which he did not care or was unable to reconcile.