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 the dogmatic schools[251].  Catulus evidently concerned himself more with the system of the later