us, were
both up in arms. Rufinus had hoped, through his son-in-law, to reap a
rich harvest from Pudentilla's fortune; Aemilianus resented the
treatment of his brother, Sicinius Clarus. They sought, therefore,
how they might have their revenge. Their first step was to win
Pontianus and Pudens to their side. This they succeeded in doing, in
spite of the generous treatment accorded by Apuleius to his step-sons.
Pontianus fell sick and died before they could carry out their
designs. He had, moreover, repented of his baseness to his former
friend, though death prevented him from showing what his repentance
was worth. Pudens, however, was completely under the thumb of
Aemilianus and Rufinus, and a number of more or less serious charges
were brought against Apuleius in his name.

He was accused of having won the heart of Pudentilla by sorcery, of
being a man of immoral life, and of having married his elderly bride
solely for the sake of her money. The trial took place at Sabrata
(_Apol._ 59), the modern Zowara, lying on the coast some sixty miles
west of Oea. The case was tried by the proconsul himself, Claudius
Maximus. The date cannot be precisely fixed. But Claudius Maximus was
probably proconsul at some time between the years 155-158 A.D. (see
note on _Apol._ 1), at any rate not later than 161 A.D., since
Antoninus Pius is mentioned as the reigning princeps (died March 161
A.D.). Apuleius had no difficulty in disposing of the charges brought
against him, and incidentally found an opportunity for a flamboyant
display of the learning of which he was so proud. He may well on
occasion have practised magic: his insatiable curiosity must assuredly
have led him to experiment in this direction, and his subsequent
reputation confirms these suspicions. But the specific charges of
magic on this occasion were frivolous and absurd. In the first portion
of the speech Apuleius plays with his accusers, mocking them from the
heights of his superior learning. In the second portion, where he
defends his marriage with Pudentilla and justifies his dealings with
his step-sons, he clears himself in good earnest, nay does more than
clear himself. For he unveils in the most merciless fashion the
villany of his accusers--the base ingratitude of Pudens, and the
unspeakable turpitude of Rufinus.

That Apuleius was acquitted cannot be doubted. His case speaks for
itself. But it is noteworthy that we hear of him no more at Oea, where
he had resided