PREFACE. point of view of pure scholarship something to be said for it, I think with method with a sixth form has always been to make an historical work and illustration to hang a a peg on which by way of comment as possible. It is on this plan that I have proceeded to hang as much historical teaching in my notes, which, the literary question of the relation between Plutarch so far as they do not deal with and Tacitus, mainly are concerned with the elucidation of historical and constitutional points. For grammatical difficulties, where they occur, I merely give reference to Madvig's Greek Syntax; while to the lexicographical knowledge of Plutarch, which forms so valuable a part of Dr. Holden's editions, I make no claim. reason. At any rate my own The various monographs, German periodicals, and other books which have been of use to me are referred to in their proper place. It only remains for me to express my thanks to Mr. W. W. Fowler, Sub-rector of Lincoln College, Oxford, a well-known and distinguished Plutarchean scholar, for his kindness in reading over the proofs of the Introduction, and to Mr. S. R. Brooke, of Grantham School, for doing the same kind office to the notes. Whatever errors and blemishes may still remain, considerably fewer than they would have been but for this assistance. they are The text adopted is mainly that of Sintenis, with a few exceptions given on page cxxiii. ch's ius, etc. they are interspersed quite after s manner with quotations from poets (conf. 16, 22, and 27, 31), and in several places show that imperfect knowledge of Latin which now from Plutarch himself that he possessed. τι δὲ ὄψε ποτέ καὶ πόῤῥω τῆς ἡλικίας ἠρξάμεθα ο ακοῖς γράμμασιν ἐντυγχάνειν . . . . ἐν δὲ 'Ρώμῃ καὶ περὶ τὴν Ἰταλίαν διατριβαῖς οὐ σχολῆς οὔσης εἔζεσθαι περὶ τὴν ρωμαϊκὴν διάλεκτον ὑπὸ χρειῶν TIKV, Demosth. c. 2. (3) The writer of these A was a friend of Mestrius Florus, and had ed in Italy with him (Oth. 14), and that Tus Florus was known to Plutarch we learn Lis Moral Writings, in several of which he ap as an interlocutor, while that Plutarch visited several times and once during Vespasian's reign so know from himself (de Soller. Anim. 19, and de Curios. 15). We shall therefore take it for ted that Plutarch is the author of our two Lives. Another question however immediately suggests if on reading these Lives, which is not so easily osed of, and into which, especially as the subject 18 never to have been treated in any English , it will be necessary to enter with some detail. reigns of Galba and Otho, of which Plutarch writes the history, are, as is well known, also rated by a more brilliant historian than Plutarch, one who is also much more familiar to most ents. They in fact form the subject of the first half of the second book of the Histories of Tacitus. w instances have come down to us from classical |