¹ Read to the Oxford Philological Society in November, 1962. I should like to express my gratitude to the Society for a welcome opportunity, friendly encouragement and helpful discussion. I owe special debts to Mr. A. N. Sherwin-White, Mr. R. G. M. Nisbet, Mr. J. P. V. D. Balsdon, Prof. A. Momigliano and Mr. R. Meiggs.

² Peter, H., Die Quellen Plutarchs in den Biographien der Römer (Halle, 1865), 7 ff.Google Scholar; Mommsen, Römische Forschungen II, 113 ff.; E. Schwartz, P-W s.v. Dionysios, col. 943.

³ The parallels can usually be traced easily enough from the notes in Ziegler's edition; but add the following: 1, 2 ∼ Dion. Hal. 8, 51; 3, 1 ∼ 7, 62, 8, 29; 4, 3 ∼ 8, 51 (?), 8, 29; 15, 1 ∼ 7, 62; 21, 3 ∼ 8, 41.

⁴ Publicola is mentioned at 33, 2; Numa at 39, II. On the problem of these ‘cross-references’see Ziegler, P-W s.v. Plutarchos, col. 262 ff. (Sonderabdruck); R. Flacelière, Vies I, XXIV ff.; Bühler, W., Maia XIV (1962), 272 f.Google Scholar

⁵ cf. (e.g.) Romulus 28, Numa 4, Publicola 15, Camillus 19.

⁶ The only certain case seems to be 39, II, where Dionysius' statement (8, 62, 2) that the women mourned Coriolanus for a year is corrected in the light of Numa 12.

⁷ It is perhaps worth drawing attention to passages where there is a strong verbal echo of very ordinary phraseology though the general sense has been a good deal modified: 9, 9, πολλῶν μὲν διαφθαρέντων πολλῶν δ δ’ ἁλόντων from Dion. Hal. 6, 93, πολλοὺς μὲν ἀνῃρηκότες…πολλοὺς δ’ αἰχμαλώτους ἄγοντες; 21, 3, ἐδήλωσε δὲ…τὴν διάθεσιν…εἰσελθὼν γὰρ οἴκαδε… from 7, 67, ἐδήλωσε τὴν γενναιότητα…ἐπειδὴ οἴκαδε ἀφικόμενος…

⁸ See Plutarch's own statement, Alexander I: οὐχ ἱστορίας γράφομεν ἀλλὰ βίους, οὔτε ταῖς ἐπιφανεστάταις πράξεσι πάντως ἔνεστι δήλωσις ἀρετῆς ἤ κακίας, ἀλλὰ πρᾶγμα βραχὺ πολλάκις καὶ ῥῆμα καὶ παιδιάτις ἔμφασιν ἤθους ἐποίησε μᾶλλον ἤ μάχαι μυριόνεκροι καὶ παρατάξεις αἱ μέγισται καὶ πολιορκίαι πόλεων.

⁹ Volumnia's speech (35, 2–9) is about as much as he ever allows himself.

¹⁰ So Coriolanus' speech in 8, 29 ff., and Veturia's in 8, 48–53, are drawn on for the early life.

¹¹ That Marcius was an orphan is stated in Veturia's speech, Dion. Hal. 8, 51.

¹² Rep. 491 D–E: οὐκοῦν…καὶ τὰς ψυχὰς οὔτω φῶμεν τὰς εὐφυεστάτας κακῆς παιδαγωγίας τυχούσας διαφερόντως κακὰς γίγνεσθαι. Similarly, ibid. 495 B.

¹³ See de Lacy, P., AJP LXXIII (1952), 195 ff.Google Scholar Dem.-Ant. is probably earlier than Cor.-Alc.

¹⁴ Fabius I; Cic., T.D. 2, 37. Not proverbial, according to Otto, Sprichwörter, s.v. arma; but perhaps Roman rather than Greek.

¹⁵ Philopoemen is almost certainly earlier than Cor.; see the combinations summarized by Ziegler, P-W s.v. Plutarchos, col. 263–4 (Sonderabdruck).

¹⁶ Note ὑπερασπίσας 3, 3, and Dion. Hal. 8, 29, 4.

¹⁷ The account of the corona civica is one of several antiquarian digressions in the Life. It corresponds to Quaest. Rom.92, except that Plutarch now adds a fourth explanation (ἔστι δέ κ.τ.λ) and what is in effect a fifth (ἧν δὲ καί κ.τ.λ.). Compare the treatment of Quaest. Rom. 49 in Cor. 14: Plutarch in his antiquarian work gave three explanations of why candidates did not wear tunics, in the Life he rejects one of these. Compare also 19 and Quaest. Rom. 42; 24 and Quaest. Rom. 70. Quaest. Rom. clearly represents an earlier stage of knowledge of primitive Rome than the Lives (cf. H. J. Rose, Roman Questions, pp. 46–48); whether or not Plutarch had the writing of the Lives in mind when he made the collection we cannot say.

¹⁸ But it is possible that ἐν ἐκείνῃ…ἀνιερώκασι is an interpolation. It is perhaps worth observing that the effect of Plutarch's mistake, if it is one, is to make Coriolanus much younger; and this seems more appropriate to the character of iracundia which he gives him (cf. Ar., Rhet. 1389 a 9: (οἱ νέοι)…θυμικοὶ καὶ ὀξύθυμοι καὶ οἷοι ἀκολουθεῖν τῇ ὀργῇ κ.τ.λ.).

¹⁹ Festus p. 67 L: ‘cum ex castris in proelium exirum est, procinctos, quasi praecinctos atque expedites, nam apud antiquos togis incincti pugnitasse dicuntur’. Serv. auctus, Aen. 7, 612: ‘veteres Latini cum necdum arma haberent praecinctis togisbellabant: unde etiam milites in procinctu esse dicuntur’. It was generally believed that such unwritten wills were in order in early times (Cic., ND II, 9, with Pease's note). By the late Republic, unwritten wills of this kind were obsolete: in Caesar's camp before battle (BG I, 39, 5) ‘vulgo … testamenta obsignabantur’. In later times again unwritten dispositions before witnesses could be valid. Roby, , Roman Private Law I, 216 f.Google Scholar; Girard, Manuel de Droit Remain, 796.

²⁰ As he does again at 16, 5, where he makes Coriolanus speak of Ἑλλήνων οἱ ἀκρατέστατα (Naber: κράτιατα is nonsense, μάλιστα would be possible) δημοκρατούμενοι, though the democratic practices in question are those of late fifth- and fourth-century Athens.

²¹ In the same way Titus Latinius, who is simply a countryman in Dionysius, is called καθαρὸς δεισιδαιμονίας by Plutarch (24, 2), to give credit to his improbable story.

²² Ar., EN 1124^a3 ff.; see also περἰ ὕψους 7, I.

²³ 20, 9; 21, 5; and 31, 5, may be profitably compared with the corresponding parts of Dionysius.

²⁴ But if a historian seriously asked at what point Tullus began to be jealous, and accepted Plutarch's account, he would be accepting a conjecture.

²⁵ Brutus=Plutarch's οἱ φίλοι καὶ οἰκεῖοι, 18, 5.

²⁶ cf. Plu. 29, 3. On Dionysius' theory of the προβούλευμα, see Cary, E. in the Loeb Dionysius, vol. 1, XXV ff.Google Scholar

²⁷ cf. Livy 2, 35, 2: ‘in exeuntem e curia impetus factus esset, ni peropportune tribuni diem dixissent.’ But there is no sign in Coriolanus of the use of Livy: contrast Camillus.

²⁸ And should be added to Liddell and Scott.

²⁹ Plutarch's idea of the virtues and faults of early Rome appears elsewhere: see I, 6, on the use of virtus, ἀνδρεία, as a general word for virtue; 24, 8, on primitive Roman simplicity; 25, 7, on Roman piety, now a thing of the past.

³⁰ Of course, it is a feature always implicit in the story. We must not say that it is new in Plutarch, only that he makes much more of it than does Dionysius. cf. Cic., Brutus 41–43, where Coriolanus is treated as plane alter Themistocles, who conatum iracundiae suae morte sedavit. (This passage is important evidence for comparisons between Greek and Roman heroes before Plutarch; it is interesting that he preferred to pair Themistocles with Camillus.)

³¹ cf. Plato, Laws 731; Plu., de cohibenda ira 7, 456D (fever and anger); Epictetus fr. XII Schenkl (a slow fever compared to the slow and deep anger of μεγαλόθυμοι πσᾴως τινες; Coriolanus would be an example).