42 armin d. baum
himself had composed to somebody else and explains how he had pro-
duced these unauthentic letters.57
Mithridates to (my) cousin the king Mithridates, greetings.
1 I have often admired the letters of Brutus, not only on account of (their)
forcefulness and conciseness, but also for possessing the style of a leader’s
mind. 2 for they seem to make use of nothing elegant unless it might adhere
to greatness of soul. 3 now what I think about such texts I do not deem
worth disputing in this context. 4 But since you declare them to be hard to
answer, I supposed that I must make an attempt at response, and furnish
texts of a sort as was probable for each of those who had written letters
(back to Brutus) to have said in reply. 5 But the (proper) approach was dif-
ficult to find because of (my) ignorance of both the fortune and opinion
around the cities at that time. 6 at this point I surely did not neglect the
impulse, but by reading over materials from the histories, and above all by
bringing together things in the second and third letters in order to make
observations about the earlier ones, I too welded together an account from
(my) ingenuity. 7 But, naturally, how difficult it turns out (to be) to contend
with another person’s skill when it is hard even to keep up one’s own! 8 now
Brutus, although he dispatched countless letters (as is reasonable for a man
who wages war against many nations)—whether by his own hand or by one
of those approved for hire for these matters—published only those which
were written easily, because (his) correction was scarcely adequate for ( just
those) few. 9 therefore when the man was unable to imitate himself in every
detail (as he edited his archive), how is it possible for us both to take on the
likeness of another and to sing in harmony with our own intention? 10 But
how sweet an emotion is hope that not only entices success but soothes
failure; because of it I claim my right to fall short of nobody else in order to
indulge you most. 11 and yet it has not escaped my attention that the one
who was writing to many men and districts suitably adhered to one style,
but someone else arguing on behalf of others, if he varies the type (of style),
will seem to have strayed from his aim; but by cleaving to the same form (of
style) he will appear both unpersuasive and stale. 12 one must still consider
in addition to these points that some suppose the distinguishing mark of a
leader to be to send letters full of contempt to (his) subordinates; but in our
view the rash response (to such missives) brings (with it) the contempt due
to fools, but humility is no longer proportionate for a response in kind. 13 In
spite of all this, then, after I tallied up the difficulties at the outset (although
they are so many), I nevertheless set upon the task, composing (what is)
for myself a brief exercise, and for you no great acquisition—but for many
perhaps it is even easily despised. 14 for things that are admirable prior to
(their) attempt are typically easy to be overlooked (when viewed) alongside
the knowledge (acquired) from (their) completion.
57 trans. by r. M. Calhoun, “the letter of Mithridates,” in frey et al. (eds.), Pseudepig-
raphie und Verfasserfiktion, 298–307.