Yes, Atticus had almost certainly mentioned Procilius in his previous letter to Cicero, which prompted Cicero's dismissive response. [1, 2, 3]

We can infer the exact nature of Atticus’s missing message based on the timeline and literary clues within the surviving text of Letters to Atticus: [1]

1. Atticus Recommended Procilius

In Letters to Atticus (2.1), written just shortly before the letter in question, Cicero announced his grand plans to write a major geographical and historical treatise ("The geographical work I had planned..."). Atticus, acting as an encouraging friend and literary advisor, appears to have written back suggesting that Cicero consult Procilius as a primary source for the project. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

2. Cicero’s Direct Rebuttal

When Cicero replies in Letters to Atticus (2.2), he is directly shooting down Atticus's reading recommendation: [1]

"unde multo plura didiceris quam de Procilio!"
("...There is a deal more to be learned from [Dicaearchus] than from Procilius.") [1]

3. The Missing Correspondence

Because the Letters to Atticus only preserve Cicero’s side of the conversation, Atticus’s original letter containing the mention of Procilius is entirely lost. [1]

This specific interaction highlights how the collection functions: it reads like a one-sided telephone conversation where we must reconstruct Atticus’s questions and book recommendations from Cicero's sharp reactions. [1, 2, 3]

If you would like to explore what Cicero’s planned geographical project looked like—or why he preferred the Greek philosopher Dicaearchus instead—just let me know!

 Marcus Tullius Cicero did not like the historical and geographical writings of the contemporary Roman historian Procilius. [1, 2]

In a letter to his close friend Titus Pomponius Atticus (Letters to Atticus, Book II, Letter 2), Cicero directly compared Procilius to the Greek philosopher and geographer Dicaearchus. While Atticus admired Procilius, Cicero openly dismissed his scholarship. [1, 2, 3]

The Specific Critique

• Latin Text: "...o magnum hominem, et unde multo plura didiceris quam de Procilio!"
• English Translation: "...What a great man [Dicaearchus]! There is a deal more to be learned from him than from Procilius." [1, 2]

Cicero ultimately believed that Procilius's works lacked depth, substance, and educational value when stacked against premier Greek sources. [1, 2]

Contextual Distinctions

Depending on your reading, the name Procilius appears in two other contexts within Cicero's surviving correspondence, though neither relates to his literary tastes:

• Political Trials: In Letters to Atticus (4.15), Cicero mentions a politician named Procilius who was condemned by a Roman jury for a violent crime (likely murder or severe electoral misconduct). [1, 2, 3]
• Senate Declarations: In Letters to his Brother Quintus (2.6), Cicero notes a senator named Procilius swearing an oath that a specific political snub in the Senate had never happened to anyone else before.[1]

If you are analyzing a specific passage from his letters, please let me know which book or letter number you are referencing. I can then provide a more targeted textual breakdown or look into the exact historical context of that individual.

L'AI può commettere errori, quindi verifica le risposte 

Is that the only ref by Cicero? He is quoted by Varro and Pliny, where lat eng?

Yes, the critical letter to Atticus (Letters to Atticus, 2.2) is Cicero's only surviving literary reference to the work of the historian Procilius. The other mentions in Cicero's texts refer strictly to the political and court appearances of a contemporary figure named Procilius. [1]

However, Procilius's lost historical work (often referred to as his Annals) is explicitly preserved through quotations by both Varro and Pliny the Elder. [1, 2]

The original Latin text and English translations for those specific citations are detailed below. [1]

---

1. Marcus Terentius Varro, De Lingua Latina (Book V, 148-150)

Varro quotes Procilius to explain the origin and legendary history of the Lacus Curtius in the Roman Forum. Procilius provided one of three competing myths regarding how the chasm opened up. [1, 2, 3]

• Latin Text:

  "In Foro Lacum Curtium a Curtio dictum constat, et de eo triceps historia: nam et Procilius non idem prodidit quod Piso, nec quod is Cornelius secutus. A Procilio relatum in eo loco dehisse terram et id ex S.C. [senatus consulto] ad haruspices relatum esse; responsum deum Manium postilionem postulare, id est civem fortissimum eo demitti. Tum quendam Curtium virum fortem armatum ascendisse in equum et a Concordia versum cum eo praecipitatum; eo facto locum coisse..."

  [1, 2, 3]
• English Translation:

  "It is agreed that the Lacus Curtius in the Forum was named for Curtius, and there are three versions of its history: for Procilius did not record the same story as Piso, nor that which Cornelius followed. It is related by Procilius that in that place the earth opened up, and by decree of the Senate the matter was referred to the soothsayers; the answer was given that the gods of the Underworld demanded a 'postilione'—that is, that the bravest citizen be sent down into it. Then a certain brave man named Curtius, fully armed, mounted his horse and plunged headlong into it from the side of the Temple of Concord; by this deed, the place closed up..."

  [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

---

2. Pliny the Elder, Naturalis Historia (Book VIII, Chapter 4)

Pliny cites Procilius as an authority on Roman zoological history, specifically regarding an embarrassing logistical error during Pompey the Great's African Triumph involving elephants. [1, 2]

• Latin Text:

  "Procilius negat potuisse triumphante Pompeio Magno iunctos exire portam qua introibatur."

• English Translation:

  "Procilius states that at Pompey the Great's triumph, the team of elephants harnessed together were unable to pass out through the gate by which they were supposed to enter."

  [1, 2, 3]

(Note: Pliny also explicitly registers Procilius as an official authority or source in the indices/bibliographies for Book VIII and Book XI of his Natural History). [1, 2]

---

If you are tracking down fragments for a broader look at republican-era literature, I can provide the fragments of other contemporary historians mentioned in Cicero's letters, like Lucius Lucceius. Would you like to explore those? [1]