[Footnote 222:  Plutarch, Aem.  Paull. 5.]

[Footnote 223:  Livy xl. 37.]

[Footnote 224:  Livy, Epit. 48.]

[Footnote 225:  Livy xxxix. 8-18.]

[Footnote 226:  Plutarch, Cato the Elder 8.]

[Footnote 227:  Gellius (x. 23) quotes a fragment of Cato’s speech de Dotibus, in which the following sentences occur:  “Si quid perverse taetreque factum est a muliere, multitatur:  si vinum bibit, si cum alieno viro probri quid fecerit, condempnatur.  In adulterio uxorem tuam si prehendisses sine indicio impune necares:  illa te, si adulterares sive tu adulterarere, digito non auderet contingere, neque ius est.”  Under such circumstances a bold woman might take her revenge illegally.]

[Footnote 228:  Gellius i. 6; cp.  Livy, Epit. 59.]

[Footnote 229:  e.g. ad Fam. xiv. 2.]

[Footnote 230:  The story of the relations of Cicero, Terentia, Clodius, and Clodia, in Pint. Cic. 29 is too full of inaccuracies to be depended on.  In the 41st chapter what he says of the divorce and its causes must be received with caution; it seems to come from some record left by Tiro, Cicero’s freedman and devoted friend, and as Cicero obviously loved this man much more than his wife, we can understand why the two should dislike each other.]

[Footnote 231:  Plutarch, Ti.  Gracch. 1; Gaius Gracch. 19.  The letters of Cornelia which are extant are quite possibly genuine.]

[Footnote 232:  The recent edition of the Ars amatoria by Paul Brandt has an introduction in which these points are well expressed.]

[Footnote 233:  Catullus 72. 75.]

[Footnote 234:  Ciceron et ses amis, p. 175.]

[Footnote 235:  Decimus Brutus, one of the tyrannicides of March 15, 44.]

[Footnote 236:  Sall. Cat. 25.]

[Footnote 237:  Plut. Lucullus 6.]

[Footnote 238:  Cic. ad Fam. viii. 7:  a letter of Caelius, in which he tells of a lady who divorced her husband without pretext on the very day he returned from his province.]

[Footnote 239:  Plut. Cato min. 25 and 52.  Plutarch seems to be using here the Anti-Cato of Caesar, but the facts must have been well known.]

[Footnote 240:  e.g. ad Att. xv. 29.]

[Footnote 241:  ad Fam. ix. 26.]

[Footnote 242:  The so-called Laudatio Turiae is well known to all students of Roman law, as raising a complicated question of Roman legal inheritance; but it may also be reckoned as a real fragment of Roman literature, valuable, too, for some points in the history of the time it covers.  It was first made accessible and intelligible by Mommsen in 1863, and the paper he then wrote about it has lately been reprinted in his Gesammelte Schriften, vol. i., together with a new fragment discovered on the same site as the others in 1898.  This fragment, and a discussion of its relation to the whole, will he found in the Classical Review for June 1905, p. 261; the laudatio without the new fragment in C.I.L. vi. 1527.]