Apart from Cicero's general agreement with Catulus in politics, there were special causes for his enthusiasm. Catulus was one of the viri consulares who had given their unreserved approval to the measures taken for the suppression of the Catilinarian conspiracy, and was the first to confer on Cicero the greatest glory of his life, the title "Father of his country[[222]]." So closely did Cicero suppose himself to be allied to Catulus, that a friend tried to console him for the death of Tullia, by bidding him remember "Catulus and the olden times[[223]]." The statement of Catulus, often referred to by Cicero, that Rome had never been so unfortunate as to have two bad consuls in the same year, except when Cinna held the office, may have been intended to point a contrast between the zeal of Cicero and the lukewarmness of his colleague Antonius[[224]]. Archias, who wrote in honour of Cicero's consulship, lived in the house of the two Catuli[[225]].
We have seen that when Cicero found it too late to withdraw the first edition of the Academica from circulation, he affixed a prooemium to each book, Catulus being lauded in the first, Lucullus in the second. From the passages above quoted, and from our knowledge of Cicero's habit in such matters, we can have no difficulty in conjecturing at least a portion of the contents of the lost prooemium to the Catulus. The achievements of the elder Catulus were probably extolled, as well as those of his son. The philosophical knowledge of the elder man was made to cast its lustre on the younger. Cicero's glorious consulship was once more lauded, and great stress was laid upon the patronage it received from so famous a man as the younger Catulus, whose praises were sung in the fervid language which Cicero lavishes on the same theme elsewhere. Some allusion most likely was made to the connection of Archias with the Catuli, and to the poem he had written in Cicero's honour. Then the occasion of the dialogue, its supposed date, and the place where it was held, were indicated. The place was the Cuman villa of Catulus[[226]]. The feigned date must fall between the year 60 B.C. in which Catulus died, and 63, the year of Cicero's consulship, which is alluded to in the Lucullus[[227]]. It is well known that in the arrangement of his dialogues Cicero took every precaution against anachronisms.
The prooemium ended, the dialogue commenced. Allusion was undoubtedly made to the Hortensius, in which the same speakers had been engaged; and after more compliments had been bandied about, most of
which would fall to Cicero's share, a proposal was made to discuss the great difference between the dogmatic and sceptic schools. Catulus offered to give his father's views, at the same time commending his father's knowledge of philosophy. Before we proceed to construct in outline the speech of Catulus from indications offered by the Lucullus, it is necessary to speak of the character and philosophical opinions of Catulus the elder.
In the many passages where Cicero speaks of him, he seldom omits to mention his sapientia, which implies a certain knowledge of philosophy. He was, says Cicero, the kindest, the most upright, the wisest, the holiest of men[[228]]. He was a man of universal merit, of surpassing worth, a second Laelius[[229]]. It is easy to gather from the De Oratore, in which he appears as an interlocutor, a more detailed view of his accomplishments. Throughout the second and third books he is treated as the lettered man, par excellence, of the company[[230]]. Appeal is made to him when any question is started which touches on Greek literature and philosophy. We are especially told that even with Greeks his acquaintance with Greek, and his style of speaking it, won admiration[[231]]. He defends the Greeks from the attacks of Crassus[[232]]. He contemptuously contrasts the Latin historians with the Greek[[233]]. He depreciates the later Greek rhetorical teaching, while he bestows
high commendation on the early sophists[[234]]. The systematic rhetoric of Aristotle and Theophrastus is most to his mind[[235]]. An account is given by him of the history of Greek speculation in Italy[[236]]. The undefiled purity of his Latin style made him seem to many the only speaker of the language[[237]]. He had written a history of his own deeds, in the style of Xenophon, which Cicero had imitated[[238]], and was well known as a wit and writer of epigrams[[239]].
Although so much is said of his general culture, it is only from the Academica that we learn definitely his philosophical opinions. In the De Oratore, when he speaks of the visit of Carneades to Rome[[240]], he does not declare himself a follower of that philosopher, nor does Crassus, in his long speech about Greek philosophy, connect Catulus with any particular teacher. The only Greek especially mentioned as a friend of his, is the poet Antipater of Sidon[[241]]. Still it might have been concluded that he was an adherent either of the Academic or Peripatetic Schools. Cicero repeatedly asserts that from no other schools can the orator spring, and the whole tone of the De Oratore shows that Catulus could have had no leaning towards the Stoics or Epicureans[[242]]. The probability is that he had never placed himself under the instruction of Greek teachers for any length of time, but had rather gained his information
from books and especially from the writings of Clitomachus. If he had ever been in actual communication with any of the prominent Academics, Cicero would not have failed to tell us, as he does in the case of Antonius[[243]], and Crassus[[244]]. It is scarcely possible that any direct intercourse between Philo and Catulus can have taken place, although one passage in the Lucullus seems to imply it[[245]]. Still Philo had a brilliant reputation during the later years of Catulus, and no one at all conversant with Greek literature or society could fail to be well acquainted with his opinions[[246]]. No follower of Carneades and Clitomachus, such as Catulus undoubtedly was[[247]], could view with indifference the latest development of Academic doctrine. The famous books of Philo were probably not known to Catulus[[248]].
I now proceed to draw out from the references in the Lucullus the chief features of the speech of Catulus the younger. It was probably introduced by a mention of Philo's books[[249]]. Some considerable portion of the speech must have been directed against the innovations made by Philo upon the genuine Carneadean doctrine. These the elder Catulus had repudiated with great warmth, even charging Philo with wilful misrepresentation of the older Academics[[250]]. The most important part of the speech, however, must have consisted of a defence of Carneades and Arcesilas against