page 389 note 1 Ellis is too kind to Avianus in suggesting that he had in mind Phaedo 60–61, where Socrates relates how he had once turned some Aesopic fables into verse. If Avianus preferred to base his fables on what he admits was a poor Latin version instead of directly on the clear, easy Greek of Babrius (see Appendix B), then it is unlikely that he had either the ability or the inclination to read Plato. I suggest that he was misled by references to Socratici libri (Cicero, de orat. 3. 67, Horace C. 3. 21. 9) and Socraticae chartae (Horace, A.P. 310) into supposing that Socrates himself had written the books which contained his teachings. St. Jerome madea not dissimilar error at about the same time, when he pretended that he derived the knowledge of Pythagorean teachings he in fact owed to Cicero and Seneca from the original works of Pythagoras (Ep. 84. 6. 2). His rival Rufinus was quick to point out that there were no original writings of Pythagoras: Jerome could only reply, rather lamely, ‘de dogmatibus eorum, non de libris locutus sum, quae potui in Cicerone, Bruto ac Seneca discere’ (Apol. adv. Ruf. 3. 39: Cf.Hagendahl, H., Latin Fathers and the Classics [1958], pp. 176–7).Google Scholar