An apologie for sundrie proceedings by iurisdiction ecclesiasticall, of late times by some chalenged, and also diuersly by them impugned By which apologie (in their seuerall due places) all the reasons and allegations set downe as well in a treatise, as in certaine notes (that goe from hand to hand) both against proceeding ex officio, and against oaths ministred to parties in causes criminall; are also examined and answered: vpon that occasion lately reuiewed, and much enlarged aboue the first priuate proiect, and now published, being diuided into three partes: the first part whereof chieflie sheweth what matters be incident to ecclesiasticall conisance; and so allowed by statutes and common law: the second treateth (for the most part) of the two wayes of proceeding in causes criminal ... the third concerneth oaths in generall ... Whereunto ... I haue presumed to adioine that right excellent and sound determination (concerning oaths) which was made by M. Lancelot Androvves ....

CHAP. III. Of the sundry kindes of obiecting Crimes by a partie mentioned in the Ciuill lawe: as by reason of a mans publique charge and fun∣ction: also by way of Exception, Supplication, Cōplaint, De∣lation, and Accusation. The true signification of the worde Ac∣cusatio, his diuers acceptions, definition, and exposition thereof, with some reason of the frequencie of Accusatio in Courtes of the Ciuill lawes, in former times is also declared.

THe same, and none other maner is likewise pra∣ctised to bring offences into question by the lawes both Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall, in such Courtes, as either of those Lawes haue place and vse: That is to say, either by a partie, or els by the Office of the Iudge.

Crimes in such Courtes may be brought into question be∣fore a Iudge, vpon a parties prosecution (whereof we are first to speake) two maner of wayes. The one Commendablie, the o∣ther not so commendablie. Commendablie in two sortes, either by reason of some office and charge, or by reason of a mans owne necessary interest. By reason of a mans Office and due∣tie, as when Triumuiri regij, Procuratores Fisci, Aduocati regij (as French writers call them) or (as we speake and practise here in England) when the Queenes Atturney generall (who by due∣tie is bound thereunto) preferreth inditement or information a∣gainst some suspected criminous person, or wrong doer. This hath verie neere affinitie with that Denunciation or Presentment (called Iudiciall) which is to be spoken of hereafter. And albeit there be a kinde of partie; yet it is of the nature of proceeding of Office, which I also touched in the Chapter next precedent.

The Commendable prosecution by a partie against an Offence, in respect of a mans owne priuate interest; is either by way of Exception and chalenge, done in his owne necessarie defence, and to auoide punishment; or per viam querelae, by way of Com∣plaint for attayning his right.

Exception is sometimes taken against witnesses that be brought against vs, to this intent onely; that by obiecting and proouing them to be lewde or affectionate persons, there may no credite

be giuen to them in their depositiōs; and not to haue them puni∣shed. And this obiecting of Crimes by way of Exception, hath not y^e force of an Accusation. Or els 1 1.1 it is taken (before issue ioy∣ned) against him that would accuse vs, by our obiecting of some crime also vnto him. Now if this be done onely to the end to repel him from accusing; then hath it not the effect of an Accusation, whereby he may be punished (though he be proued guiltie.) But if he that so excepteth, doe set downe the time, place, &c. of such crime obiected against his aduersarie, and doe also instant the Iudge to condemne him: then shall it be proceeded in, as in Accusation, and may be called a Recrimination, or Crosse-accusa∣tion, made by the defendant.

The prosecution per Querelam, is also of two sortes: the one extraiudiciall, when 2 1.2 a man oppressed, humbly and ciuillie complai∣neth and expostulateth of some wrong done vnto him, desiring reme∣die, not so much to haue the other punished, as that himselfe may, (by ordinarie course of lawe) haue reason done him. This may properly be called Querimonia, a supplication to the Superior. The other Querela, is Iudiciall, being a kinde of Appellation; 3 1.3 and is either done by complaint vnto the soueraigne Prince, of some wrong done by an high Court (such as Praefectus Praetorio kept among the Romanes) from which none Appellation lieth: or els is a Com∣plaint vnto a superiour Iudge, of refusall, or delay to do iustice, by his inferiour Iudge; with vs commonly termed a double Querele. Thus much for the most commendable sortes of prosecution of offences, instituted by a partie.

Of those which be not so commendable prosecutions of of∣fences by parties, one is called Delatio, being the more odious and base; the other is Accusatio, properly so termed.

Delatio like wise is of two sorts. The one may be described to be a 4 1.4 secret accusation or imputation of some crime against any, made vnto a Magistrate, by him that is no way particularly in∣teressed in the cause. Against such, was that law 5 1.5 of Constantinus conceiued, whereby it was prouided, that no priuate person should be a delatour, or preferrer vp of crimes; and that none should be put vp, without the Aduocate of the finances, or reuenues of the crowne; whom we call the Atturney generall. And of such Delatours or Tale-carriers was this woorthy saying of an Emperour meant:

Princeps, qui delatores non castigat, irritat. Priuy accusers & back∣biters take encouragement enough from such a Prince, as will but heare, without giuing them any rebuke. Which saying, Suetonius 1 1.6 attributeth to Domitian; and Plinius 2 1.7 vnto Traian.

There is a second sort of Delatours & preferrers vp of crimes, which deale more openly then the former. And we finde also in law, two kindes of these. The first be a kinde of Calumniatours or Sycophants, 3 1.8 that preferre publikely (yet vnder other mens names and persons by them suborned and excited) some criminall matter a∣gainst any person. The other sort be those, who (for gaine or re∣ward) do in their owne names, preferre vp criminall and poenall matter against others. And of these, some doe informe of con∣ceiled landes or goods; due and escheated to the common trea∣sure of the Crowne; yet supposed to be deteyned wronfully, by any others. And these by the Ciuill lawe 4 1.9 are said to be odious and hated of other men; because they doe it for no duetie to the Prince or common weale; but vpon a greedie desire, to enioye to them selues, part of the gaine by others losse: being (by that law) some time a third, and sometimes a halfe part of that, which they finde (in trueth) to haue bin deteined by wrong, intruded vpon, or vsur∣ped. Others be mentioned there also, who preferre informations against offenders of such lawes, as do inflict mulctes & pecunia∣rie penalties for the offence; vpon hope of such gaine, as (by those lawes) is assigned to come vnto their share. This kind of Delators in this Realme, we call Infourmers, or Promoters: though their prosecutiō in this Realme do much participate (as afore is shew∣ed) with that, which is called ex Officio promoto, & in that respect, be greatly priuiledged. Among the Romanes such were cal∣led Quadruplatores, because commonly the fourth part of the penaltie, was awarded vnto them. So that by like reason our In∣fourmers may be called in Latine Triplatores, when they haue a third part; and Duplatores, when they haue the one halfe, as they haue in this Realme (vpon penall statutes) most vsually.

In what detestation and hatred this kinde of men (though not altogether vnnecessarie) were had amongs the old Romanes, this saying of Quintilian doth manifest, 5 1.10 Ad deferendos reospraemio duci, proximum est latrocinio. To be induced for reward or gaine, to preferre criminall matter against offenders, is next a kin to robberie.

And in deede, Delatours were farre more stomacked, and ma∣ligned, then other Accusours, as may bee gathered by these places in the Ciuill lawe. 1 1.11 Wee doe iudge him that ac∣cuseth in such a crime, to deserue rather rewarde, then to bee called a Delatour. And againe in another place: 2 1.12 Let not such feare either the name or suspicion of Delatours.

The last of those wayes, by which a partie brings offen∣ces into question and discussing before a Iudge, is Accusa∣tion. It is called 3 1.13 Accusatio ab Ad, & Caussa: quia Accusa∣tor quasi ad causam vocat. There bee other wordes of neere signification vnto this, yet not the same altogether, as po∣stulare, when it is vsed with the ablatiue case, Postulare aliquem crimine, insimulare, incusare, and such like. But there is a diffe∣rence noted betwixt this last, and Accusation, which is this: We are saide (saieth 4 1.14 one) properly incusare, such as bee our bet∣ters, and to accuse those, that be our equals or inferiours. But this difference is not much obserued. 5 1.15 This worde Accusation is sometimes so generally taken, that it signifieth an Action in a Ciuill cause; like as, on the contrary side, Action is taken for Accusation. Tullie, pro Milone nameth it Actionem Perduellionis. But most properly it is called Accusation, when it is intended in causes Criminall.

We reade of inwarde, and of externall, or outwarde Accusa∣tions. Internall Accusation is of a mans owne conscience. Such is the Accusation spoken of by Salomon. 6 1.16 Hee that is first in his owne cause, is iust: or as the vulgar Latine translation rea∣deth it, The iust man, is the first Accuser of himselfe.

Externall, or outward Accusation is either Priuate, or Publike. Priuate is either betwixt enemies, or betwixt friendes. That priuate Accusation and imputation which is among enemies, is of three sortes: either spitefull vpbraiding, called of the Grecians by the generall name 7 1.17 of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a worde also fit∣ting euery Accusation: or reproche and reuiling called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: or els Calumniation; that is, malicious or false wresting of his enemies wordes or actions, to an offensiue purpose.

Priuate Accusation of one friend touching another, is nothing els, but a friendly expostulation with him, that is supposed not to haue dealt singlie or considerately, in the course of good friend∣ship,

called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of the Grecians. That Accusation which is pub∣like, is either ciuillie moued, that is, for priuate amends vnto the partie grieued: or criminallie, that is, for some publike punishment; whether it be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And it is that Accusation, which here we especially treate of.

This publike Accusation, is sometimes done ore tenus; that is by bare wordes without writing, which the Grecians doe expresse also by the aforesaide name of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. But most vsually publike Accusation is made by writing. That, which is conceiued in writing, in a more large signification, conteyneth and rea∣cheth euen vnto those preferrings of crimes (afore spoken of) that are done by Exception or Chalenge, by Complaint, or by Delation. And vnto this publike Accusation, which is of more generall acception, that definition of Aristotle agreeth: viz. that it is a publike declaration against some, of iniuries or crimes committed. But in the strict and proper signification it is taken for that solemne Accusation termed by the Grecians 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and also sometimes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; when as this latter is not taken gene∣rally, but for the most especiall kinde thereof onely.

The effect of this Accusation, when the crime declared is proued to bee true, and by arguments conuicted; is called by the Grecians 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; that is, 1 1.18 (as the Latines doe expresse it) arguere.

There is also another different acception from the former, of the worde Accusour, that is not hitherto touched: which is, when that worde is applied 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 vnto any, that testifieth some criminall matter against another. And in this signification, wee doe finde it very 2 1.19 vsually taken in holy Scripture, as shall afterwarde more fully appeare. So in sundry statutes of this Realme, as namely in these wordes of a statute; viz. duely ac∣cused or detected by two lawfull witnesses: 25. Hen. 8. cap. 14. and in such other statutes; whereby is required, that the Accusours be brought face to face, against the prisoner: meaning thereby such witnesses as are to giue euidence (vpon their oathes) against the partie conuented. Hereof we haue diuers examples, and namely in these wordes of a statute, 3 1.20 That no person shalbe conuicted &c. or suffer &c. vnlesse the same offendour &c. be accused by two sufficient & lawfull witnesses, as shal willingly without violence cōfesse the same.

Where the witnesses sayings are called Accusation, & their De∣positions, Confession. Likewise in the same Kings dayes, where it is thus prouided, 1 1.21 That no person shalbe convicted &c. for any trea∣sons &c. that nowe be, or hereafter shalbe &c. vnlesse the same of∣fendour be thereof accused by two lawfull accusers: which saide accu∣sers at the time of the arraignment of the partie accused (if they be then liuing) shalbe brought in person before the partie so accused, and auowe and mainteyne that, that they haue to say against the partie, to proue him guiltie of the Treasons or Offences, conteyned in the Bill of inditement. So that here, those that giue euidence to prooue the matter of the enditement (which must needes be the witnesses) are called Accusers. which termein these & like statutes, seemeth to haue bin borrowed from the cōmon speach of men (who of∣ten vse to say thus; Who is able to accuse me of such or such things? meaning, to testifie against them) rather then that the true pro∣prietie of the worde was there followed. For Iustice Brooke in his Abridgement testifieth, 2 1.22 That the common triall at the Com∣mon lawe is by Iurie and witnesses, and not by Accusers. So that al∣beit witnesses touching offences (by some statutes and by vsuall speeche of the vulgar sort) be termed Accusers: yet (by his opinion) they doe (in very deede) differ much, in that the one is (as he saith) the triall of the Common lawe, but not the other. The true difference betwixt them he there prooueth also out of the Ciuill lawe; vpon relation made vnto him, by a Doctour in that facultie; and willeth it to be noted as a saying, which hee well alloweth. By the Ciuill lawe (sayeth 3 1.23 he) Accusers be as parties, and not as witnesses. For witnesses ought to bee indifferent, and not to come till they be called. But accusers doe offer themselues to accuse. For it is a good chalenge of a witnesse to say; that hee was one of his accusers. Quod nota.

Nowe howe vnreasonable were it, to admitte the testimo∣nie of a partie in his owne cause? So that by the Ciuill lawe (by which this prosecution is most properly handled,) Accu∣sation (truely so called) is defined to bee, Ius vlciscendi so∣lenni & poenali iudicio, poenas ac delicta: A right which the lawe yeeldeth to any of prosecuting crimes and offences for reuenge and pu∣nishment, by publique and solemne iudgement.

For the explaning wherof, we haue to note in this behalfe that

crimes or offences be of two sorts. Some be priuate, whereby a cōmon person onely, and no publique person, nor the state of the Common wealth (otherwise then by consequence) is offended. And this kinde cannot be prosecuted, but by the very party grie∣ued, or by some of his kinne and propinquitie. And it may be vr∣ged, either to the end of ciuil reuenge; that is, amends pecuniarie, called actio vel accusatio criminalis ciuiliter: or to the ende of a publique punishment, called accusatio criminalis, criminaliter mo∣ta. The crimes that be publique, are those that be heinous, as more deeply touching the state of the whole cōmon wealth and pub∣lique peace, then the former; and therefore may be prosecuted by any man, being called populares actiones, quia competunt cuilibet de populo: 1 1.24 sauing that certaine persons, for especiall causes, are by lawe from accusation to be repelled.

Vnder the word of solemne iudgement, be three things contei∣ned, and vnderstood, that such an Accusour must vndergoe. First 2 1.25 he must present the name of the accused person in publique iudge∣ment, as an offender in such a speciall crime: Then must he subscribe his owne name, whereby he is said vinculum inscriptionis accipere: And he must also be committed vnto the like custodie and ward, that the Accused (in regard of the qualitie of the fault, and dignitie of the Accusour) is to susteine, vntill the suite be finished. By this bande of Inscription or Subscription, the 3 1.26 Accusour bindeth himselfe to pro∣secute the sute: and professeth withall, that if he proue not the Crime, which he layeth against the Accused; then he himselfe will and shall endure the same punishment; that such crime (when it is in deede committed) doth deserue.

How vnusuall soeuer this be among vs, or how seuere this course of punishment may seeme vnto some: yet do we find the equitie of it in Scripture, and that it is to be inflicted vpon such, that calumniously impute false crimes vnto others. If vpon dili∣gent inquisition (saith 4 1.27 the Lord) it be found by the Iudges, that the witnesse is false, and hath giuen false witnesse against his brother; then shall ye doe vnto him, as he had thought to doe vnto his brother, &c. Thine eye shall haue no compassion, but life for life, eye for eye, toothe for toothe, hand for hand, foote for foote. How much more then vp∣on a wilfull Accuser, which calumniously seeketh for reuenge sake, vpon an vntrue Accusation so knowen vnto himselfe, to

bring another man into so deepe danger? An 1 1.28 example hereof we haue, in the stoning of the two Elders, that calumniously ac∣cused or witnessed against Susanna. This poenatalionis, or retalia∣tion, is also allowed by sundrie ecclesiasticall writers in like case: as by 2 1.29 Eutychianus, and 3 1.30 Sixtus, auncient Bishops of Rome. For witnesses be sometimes compelled to beare witnesse, who per∣haps may slippe by affection, inconsideration, or want of remem∣brance: which is therefore more excusable in them, then in Ac∣cusers; insomuch as these Accusers come willingly, without any excitation of others, to doe it. For nemo inuitus agere vel 4 1.31 accu∣sare compellitur: No man is compelled to bring an Action or an Ac∣cusation, sauing in especial cases, as 5 1.32 in Heresie. Omnes enim haere∣ticum prodere atque accusare debent: and in Treason also thus farre, that he which doth not at least reueile it, (though a man be not bound to prosecute therein as an Accuser) is to be pu∣nished, as partaker of the Treason. But this Inscription, ad poe∣nam Talionis, to endure the penaltie due, if he be not able to prooue his Accusation; is 6 1.33 not required in Accusations of priuate Crimes, whether they be Ciuillie, or Criminallie mooued and pro∣secuted.

Here perhaps some will marueile, how this prosecution of Crimes by way of Accusation, coulde be so vsuall, as it was (in former times) in the common weales of Athens, Rome, and such like, insomuch as it became (there) to be the most ordi∣narie meane of all others, to bring Crimes and offences into question: considering the great troubles and dangers, that by Lawe, did accompany the Accusers. Such therefore are to vn∣derstand, that fewe or none Accusers would deale so vnconsi∣deratly, as to vndertake it, vntill they thought themselues suffi∣ciently furnished with witnesses and other proofes, able to con∣uince them, whom they accused. Next, they are to remem∣ber, the vse of it to haue bene greatest in populare Common weales, where the readiest steppe to attaine vnto most honou∣rable offices and dignities (next vnto seruice in warres) was to be able to speake and deliuer their mindes eloquently be∣fore the whole people; who were the soueraigne Iudges (in most of those causes) either by way of Accusation, or els in D•…•…∣fence of others, being by Accusation called into dangerous que∣stion

of their liues, limmes, honour, libertie, countrey, or of their goods and landes. Thirdly, that when it was in most fre∣quent vse, the people were heathen, and vninstructed in the true knowledge of God: so that they thought, to put vp an iniurie done either to themselues, or to their friendes, to be great pu∣sillanimitie, and a token of a base minded man; and to be (in deede) a vice very discommendable, euen as the contrary vice thereunto is; viz. of doing Iniurie. For so 1 1.34 Aristotle teacheth in his Morall philosophie. In which respect, all danger to them∣selues, was the lesse regarded by them. Lastly, they thought themselues bounde in strict termes of duetie, no lesse to perse∣cute and to plague their enemies by all meanes, then they were to doe good, and to shew kindenesse vnto their friendes. There∣fore the same 2 1.35 Philosopher makes this to be a good argument and consequence; Wee must doe good to our friendes; therefore we must hurt and annoy our enemies. But Christ refuteth this hea∣thenish opinion in the Gospel, Matth. 5. vers. 43. & 44.

Now for proofes of that wee haue saide in this behalfe, we are furnished of them out of the grauest writers among the Greekes and Latines. Plutarch saith thus: 3 1.36 Publique Iudge∣ments and Accusations haue bene of long time ordeined, to th'en∣tent young men might be bredde vp in the studie of Eloquence; and that they might thereby be excited to the valoure of a braue minde: that like as dogs of the best kinde by naturall instinct doe at first sight fiercely assaile wilde beastes: euen so noble youthes should be kindled and inflamed with great courage thus by accusations to set vpon lewde and euill members in a Common weale. To like purpose 4 1.37 writeth Quintilian; Crediti sunt clari Iuuenes, obsidem dare Reipub. ma∣lorum Ciuium accusationem: quia nec odisse improbos, nec simulta∣tem prouocare, nisi exfiduciâ bonae mentis videbantur. Tullie assig∣neth three seuerall motiues, whereby without any discommen∣dation in those times a man might be drawen to become an Ac∣cuser of others. A man may be well induced (saith he) 5 1.38 to be an Accuser, either Pietate, in a duetifull care: by necessitie; or els by reason of his yeeres. If hee willingly enter into it, I doe attribute it to his Pietie: If he were commanded, then vnto necessitie: If in hope to attaine glory and renowne, I ascribe it to his youth. But vpon any other occasion to doe it, doth rather deserue resistance, then pardon.

He also else-where teacheth, for what ende we may enter into Accusation of others. Of accusing, we are not, (saith he) 1 1.39 to make as it were an vsuall trade or profession; neither are we at any time to doe it, but either in behalfe of the Common weale, as the two Luculli did; or for our nearest friends and allies, being tyrannously, and pite∣ously oppressed, whom we haue receiued to our patronizing, as M. Ca∣to, Cn. Domitius, and others did: or els but once onely, as happely in our flourishing youth, for attayning honour thereby. But it seemeth, that the chiefest ende among the rest was, for procuring with the people glorie & reputation of eloquence vnto thēselues. For so Apuleius an auncient writer testifieth, where he 2 1.40 saith thus. He doth not accuse me for to procure vnto himselfe glorie, as M. Anto∣nius did Cn. Carbo &c. For it was vsuall (saith he) with yong men of greatest ripenesse in learning, for their commendation to vndertake to accuse others, thereby to giue an experiment of themselues in Iudi∣ciall Courts, to the entent, that at some notable Iudgement or ar∣raignement they might become knowen vnto the multitude of Ci•…•…i∣zens. Yet this Custome, which in olde time was permitted vnto yong beginners, to set out thereby the forwardnesse and sharpenesse of their wittes, is long agone (saith he) growne into disuse. But what might be the very true causes of the giuing ouer of such Accusations, it will not be amisse here also to examine, as being very requi∣site for the perfite vnderstanding of the nature of it, and of some other discourses following.

Notes

• 1 1.1

  l. 1. ff. vi. bon. rapt. l. 2. ff. de tab. exhib.
• 2 1.2

  l. 1 C. Retum amotatum.
• 3 1.3

  l. Arbitrio. vbi gloss. & Bart. ff. qui satisdare co∣guntur,
• 4 1.4

  l. 10. §. Qui nomen. ff. de iure patr.
• 5 1.5

  l. pen. C. de De∣latorib. lib. 10.
• 1 1.6

  Sueto. in Domit.
• 2 1.7

  Plin. in Panegy. de Traiano.
• 3 1.8

  l. nostris C. de Calumniator.
• 4 1.9

  l. ex varia C. de Delatorib. lib. x.
• 5 1.10

  Quintil. lib. vlti. cap. 7.
• 1 1.11

  l. 3. C. de Ma∣lefic.
• 2 1.12

  l. Nulli. in fine, C. de. Epis. & Cleric.
• 3 1.13

  Isidor. vt in c. forus. de verb. signif.
• 4 1.14

  Servius in prim. Aeneid.
• 5 1.15

  l. Qui accusare, C. de edendo. l. Si maritus. § Si negauer. ff. de adulter.
• 6 1.16

  Prouerb. 18. vers. 17.
• 7 1.17

  Plutarch in vi∣ta Publicol.
• 1 1.18

  l. indicasse. ff. de verb. signific.
• 2 1.19

  Vide infr•…•…. cap. 15.
• 3 1.20

  1. Ed. 6. ca. 12. in fine.
• 1 1.21

  5. & 6. Edw. 6. cap. 11.
• 2 1.22

  Tit. Corone. nu. 220.
• 3 1.23

  Brooke. ibid.
• 1 1.24

  l. de his. C. qui accusare non possunt.
• 2 1.25

  l. finali. C. de accus.
• 3 1.26

  l. qui crimen. C. qui accusare non possunt.
• 4 1.27

  Deut. 19. V. 16. & sequent.
• 1 1.28

  Dan. cap. 13.
• 2 1.29

  Epist. 2. ad E∣piscopos Siciliae.
• 3 1.30

  Sixtus 3. Epist. 2. ca. 4. ad Episco∣pos Orientales.
• 4 1.31

  l. 1. C. vt nemo inuitus ag.
• 5 1.32

  l. Manichaeos. C. de haeret.
• 6 1.33

  l. Fin. ff. de priu. delict. l. fin. ff. de furtis.
• 1 1.34

  Arist. lib. 5. Ethic.
• 2 1.35

  Arist. 2. li. Topic.
• 3 1.36

  Plut. in vita Luculli.
• 4 1.37

  Quintil. li. 1•…•…. ca. 7.
• 5 1.38

  Cic. pro 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• 1 1.39

  Cic. li. 2. Offic.
• 2 1.40

  Apuleius in 2. defens. Mag.