BOOK I CH. XIV § 37. 129

in animi notione—reponere. Here at last we have the open avowal of the principle on which the criticism is founded ; all is false which dis- agrees with our mpoAnyis. According to Epicurus repeated impressions (sensations) fix a type (rpoAnyis) in the mind, to which we attach a name, and when any new object offers itself, claiming to be called by this name, we must measure it by the type. So Cleanthes said that each perception (pavracia) made an impression on the soul like that made by a seal on wax ; and Cic. notices a theory memoriam esse signatarum rerum in mente vestigia Tusc. 1 61: cf. also Orator 19 and 133 (in reference to a speech of Demosthenes) ea oratio in eam formam quae est insita in mentibus nostris includi sic potest, ut major eloquentia non requiratur, and Plato Rep. v 462 A dpa @ viv dindOopev eis TO Tod dyabod tyvos nuiv dpyorrer, quoted in Sch.’s n. On constr. repono in notione see § 29 n.
Ch. xv. § 38. Persaeus: see Krische 436—443. What is here said of his opinions agrees with the account in Philodemus pp. 75, 76 Iepoaios de OjdCs €otw...apavitay Td Saponoy, f) pnOev Urép attov ywwecKer, dtav év TO wept trav bedv réyn aiverOa ta wept Ta Tpepovta Kal wpedovvra Geods vevopicOat kat reripioOat mparoy, kata Ta V7d Tpodikov yeypappeva (V.D. 1 118), pera 8€ radra Tovs evpovras } tpopas oxéras 7 Tas GdXas Téyvas, ws Anpntpa kat A.vucov. These opinions were common to many of the Stoics, see 11 60—62, 11 41, Leg. m 27. C. himself desired to erect a temple to Tullia after her death (Aé¢. x11 36, &c.) and frequently as- serts his belief in the divinity of the souls of the good, (Consol. fr. 5,) which was indeed a part of the ordinary Roman belief, and is recognized as such in Leg, 11 22 deorum manium jura sancta sunto. Bonos leto datos divos habento. Sometimes C. puts forward opinions closely approaching those of Eukemerus (§ 119) as in Tuse. 1 28 guid? totum prope caelum nonne humano genere completum est ?......ipst Wi majorum gentium di, qui habentur, hine a nobis profecti in caelum reperientur. Quaere quorum demonstrantur sepulchra in Graecia ; reminiscere quae tradantur mysteriis: tum denique guam hoe late pateat intelleges.
quo quid absurdius quam: Heind. quotes the foll. exx. of a clause with quam added after a comparative to explain a preceding ablative, 7%. 119 quo nihil turpius physico quam fiert quicquam sine causa dicere (where see Madyv.), Orat. 1 169 quid ergo hoe fitri turpius potest quam...ita labi ; see also Orat. 1 38 and 302, and Allen’s n. here. [Ac 1 45 hoe quidquam esse turpius, quam praecurrere. Parallels in Greek are common. J.S. R.] We have had similar exx. of guod explained by a succeeding clause, § 2 n.
res sordidas. The Stoics, sensible of the mischiefs which might arise from disturbing the religious beliefs of the vulgar, endeavoured to find a place for these in their philosophy, explaining each divinity as a separate manifestation of the one supreme God, and getting rid, as far as they could, of immoral or degrading superstitions by the free use of allegory. But it was scarcely possible to do this with the’ mass of the inferior deities, Epona, Cloacina, and others such as Augustine sums up, C. D. vi 9, and to