Krey—John of Salisbury and the Classics. 979 
quotation which follows this could hardly have been taken 
except from the original. 
Aulus Gellius is the source of many quotations and the “At- 
ticae JSToctes” is often mentioned. John had evidently read the 
work since he states “In Atticis Hoctibus legisse memini” * 1 2 and 
the length and accuracy of his quotations quite corroborate this 
statement. 
Three writers whom John quotes in hut a single passage are 
Publilius Syrus, Serenus Sammonicus, and Solinus. His 
quotations, however, are so long and accurate that he could 
hardly have obtained them from mediaeval sources and it is 
reasonable to conclude that he had used the works in whole or 
in part. It is true that they were not very generally known 
and that he mentions Publilius Syrus calling him Publilius 
Clodius. On the other hand, the appreciative description seems 
to show that he was acquainted with this author. Five lines 
are quoted from the medical verses of Serenus Sammonicus and 
as this writer was coming into use about this time John probably 
obtained the quotation from the original. The same holds true 
of Solinus. 
Of the later Latin writers Appolinaris Sidonius, Dionysius 
Cato, Apuleius, Avienus, Macrobius and Claudianus can be 
credited to John without hesitation/ Eutropius is not so cer¬ 
tain. Of the four quotations from this writer in the Polycrati- 
cus, two can he traced directly to other sources while the others 
are too short to afford convincing evidence that John had the 
work. Schaarschmidt has attempted to prove that John was 
familiar with this writer by saying that he quotes him once 
without mentioning his name, hut the passage in question is a 
word for word quotation from Orosius. On the other hand, 
John possessed this work before his death since he bequeathed 
it to Chartres. 2 Schaarschmidt may, therefore, he correct, even 
though the evidence he adduces is had.* 
2 Migne, p. 525. 
1 Schaarschmidt, p. - 
2 Migne, Introduction, p. xii. 
* Besides these writers who furnished John with most of this quota¬ 
tions, he introduces material which cannot be traced to any known 
Latin sources. Scholars, for the last fifty years, have been trying to 
