 Despite the gradual condemnation of the work and the accusation that Sigonio had created it himself , there were some holdouts . Robinson Ellis , in 1893 , argued that the Pseudo @-@ Ciceronian Consolatio , while probably not a genuine work of Cicero 's , was not a forgery by Sigonio . He reasoned that , because St. Ambrose <unk> had claimed to have found a copy of the work so close to its rediscovery by Sigonio in 1583 , it was possible that Sigonio had simply found the <unk> text . He also proposed the idea that , because the Pseudo @-@ Ciceronian Consolatio contained all of the extant fragments from Lactantius 's work , the true Consolatio had been lost and replaced by a " spurious one " in the distant past that was read by Lactantius , Augustine , and Jerome , who mistakenly assumed its veracity ; this false Consolatio was then rediscovered by Sigonio , who unwittingly believed it also to be genuine . Finally , Ellis argued that , because Sigonio was a man of " high character " who had spent much of his life editing the fragments of Cicero , for Sigonio to stoop to forgery would have been completely out of character . 
