This paper is divided in two parts. The first looks at the case of multiple citations of Ephorus and Teopompus; the second at the sources of FGrHist 104. In the conclusion I argue that the sources of the latter, as a school product is part of a tradition generated as an effect of the Canon of historians and historical “Cycle”. This text was initially produced as a composite text with elements from Ephorus and others fromTeopompus. Fragmentary texts theory, the analysis of manuscripts and Quellenforschung, with the approach from multiple citations bring to the conclusion that FGrHist 104 is not a “fragmentary historian” neither a fragment, but it can be treated as a fragment of “Ephorus and Teopompus”. Keywords: Eforo, Teopompo, FGrHist 104, Canone, Citazioni multiple.