§§ 1-11. Cicero explains that Crassus and Antonius were by no means so deficient in learning as was commonly supposed; and argues that eloquence, such as they possessed, could never have been acquired without a wide range of learning. He expresses his intention of giving in their words a treatise on oratory based on greater practical experience than that possessed by previous writers.

I. nobis pueris, abl. not dat.

2. attigisse, 'had dabbled in:' cp. pro Arch. 8. 17 'quod si ipsi haec neque attingere neque sensu nostro gustare possemus:' so above, i. 18. 82; 19. 87.

3. illa, in those days,' before Greek literature was included in the ordinary curriculum for boys. The strong language of Cicero (pro Arch. 3. 5) as to the extended study of Greek refers to a somewhat later date than the boyhood of Crassus and Antonius. Cp. Gallus ii3. 756: the English abridgment follows the erroneous view of earlier editions.

5. arbitrarentur: the conj. does not depend upon quamquam directly, but the verb is attracted into the mood of praedicarent. Cp. phrases like 'quod diceret,' Roby, § 1746. Madvig on de Fin. iii. 70 writes non dubito quin Cicero nunquam in recta oratione particulae quamquam in protasi coniunctivum subiecerit, nisi ubi aliqua lateret potentialis, condicionalisve

Р

aut similis significatio.' It is of course not unusual to find quamquam with conj. in silver-age writers. Cp. Roby, § 1697. Dräger, Hist. Synt. ii. 737-9. So Kühner, ii. p. 957. For an instance where the conjunctive, if defensible at all, must be defended as here, cp. iii. 7. 27 with the note. Of the five passages quoted by Zumpt, § 574, only one is allowed to stand by good editors: Tusc. v. 30. 85 'quamquam enim sint in quibusdam malis'' although they should be in some troubles.' In de Off. i. 2. 6, Baiter and Holden read ' quamquam sunt:' in pro Mur. 9. 20, Halm and Kayser have 'quamquam loquor' [but cp. Heitland's note]: for de Fin. iii. 21. 70 see Madvig ad loc. For his fifth example Zumpt gives a false reference. He is in error in saying that it is found only in these passages. We may add Tusc. i. 45. 109; de Leg. iii. 8. 18; Brut. 2. 8; Phil. vi. 1. 3 (with King's note). It is better to regard this instance as one of simple attraction than as a 'conj. coniecturalis' with Adler-although they might not think.' Cp. Madvig, § 361, obs. 3.

6. incensos studio: cp. de Rep. i. 22. 36, where Scipio says 'peto a vobis ut sic me audiatis neque ut omnino expertem Graecarum rerum, neque ut eas nostris anteponentem, sed ut unum e togatis; patris diligentia non illiberaliter institu