13. Forte, when joined with a verb, must be translated by the phrase, “happen;" as, is tum forte aberat," he happened at that time to be away," &c.

14. Idem is very frequently to be translated "also.”

15. Maximè, joined with ibi, ubi, and quum, signifies "the particular time and place."

16. Nam, enim, and tandem, are sometimes used merely to impart a peculiar emphasis, especially to questions; as, quid enim? quid tandem? "why pray?" or, "how pray?" "for what possible reason?"" in what possible way?" que tandem ratio est? "what, may I ask, is the reason?" A similar use is made of yàg and Tóre. Compare also such phrases as, id enim ferendum esse negat (xxii. 25.), “that, above all, he said was intolerable."

17. Et, when placed at the beginning of a sentence, conveys a very peculiar emphasis. In this position, it repeats and confirms or illustrates some foregoing assertion; as, Et Hannibal movit, (xxi. 39.) "And Hannibal did move," &c. Et consul alter velut, &c. (xxii. 42.) "The other Consul, too," &c. (even the other Consul). Et aliam formam novi delectus, (xxii. 57.) " A new and strange form of enlistment, also." Et jam ibi nequaquam eadem quies, &c. (xxiv. 27.) "And there, indeed, by this time, there was no longer," &c. Et jam ad Hexap. erant, &c. (xxiv. 32.) "Already, indeed, Hippocrates and Epicydes were at the," &c. Et Statorius regi pedites conscripsit, (xxiv. 48.) "And Statorius did enrol," &c.

18. In order to transfer the full force of Latin and Greek sentences, it is necessary to pay an especial attention to their emphasis. In the ancient languages, this prominence is imparted to certain words, not, as in modern tongues, by periphrasis or the use of a different form of letter, but simply by means of the collocation of the words; the most emphatic generally beginning the sentence, sometimes concluding it, when such is not its natural position; but always so placed as to attract attention. As the English idiom does not admit of this variety of arrangement, it must be evident that a strictly word-for-word translation must fail, in almost every instance, to convey that emphasis upon which the logical connexion and sequence of sentences so mainly

depends; and that, by adopting a short paraphrase, or some similar license, such as a resolution of the relative, or the inversion of the voice of a verb with a corresponding change of cases, we shall be more likely to retain accurately the sense of the original. For instance, Si hoc P. Sempronius diceret (1. xxii. 60.) signifies, "If this was what P. Sempronius said." If the arrangement were, Si P. Sempronius hoc diceret, the proper translation would be, "If it was P. Sempronius who said this;" and, if the order of the words were, Si diceret hoc P. Sempronius, we should find that they meant, "if Sempronius said so," that is, in contradistinction to the thing being done.

Libertatem, quæ

To take another instance at random. media est, nec spernere modicè, nec habere sciunt, (l. xxiv. 25.) signifies, in connexion with the preceding sentence, "as for liberty, which lies between (those extremes), they can neither be rationally indifferent to, nor enjoy it." As the instances of emphasis, however, are frequently illustrated, wherever they occur, in the following notes, it is unnecessary to multiply examples here.

It may not be irrelevant to lay down two general rules, examples of which will be found constantly recurring in all classical Latin. 1. That the personal pronouns always convey an emphasis; because, as they are contained in the terminations of verbs, any further or more distinct expression of them is equivalent to a repetition; as, Ego, si quis &c., habeo quid sententiæ dicam, (l. xxiii. 13.); "For my part, if any one inquires &c., I have a proposal to make." 2. When the relative begins a period, it is always emphatic, and must be resolved; as, Cui quoniam parum succedit; "but as this is not successful;" quod ubi innotuit, "and (but, or though) when this became known."

THE Punic wars occupied, from the beginning of the first Punic war to the final reduction of Carthage, altogether one hundred and nineteen years, including the intervals of twenty-two and thirty-three years, which divided the three campaigns.

The quarrel, which began immediately after the arrangement of a peace with Pyrrhus, ostensibly originated in a dispute respecting the Mamertine mercenaries, who had, in two separate bodies, severally sought the protection of Rome and Carthage against the vengeance of Syracuse (see History); and the war began with the occupation of Messana by the Consul Appius Claudius. After various alternations of fortune, of which the most remarkable were the successes of Regulus, his subsequent defeat by the Spartan Condottieri under Xanthippus, and the decisive naval victory of Lutatius Catulus at the Ægates (Levanzo, Favignano, and Maretimo); the Carthaginians evacuated Sicily, of which they had held the southern part for about eighty years; and the Romans acquired their first province beyond sea, (A. U.C. 513; B. C. 241.)

In order to compensate the loss of Sicily and other Mediterranean islands, and to establish a check upon Rome, the Carthaginians adopted the suggestion of Hamilcar Barca, and founded a dominion in Spain, which soon after afforded a provocation for the renewal of hostilities. The history of the second Punic war comprises two distinct invasions; that of Italy by Hannibal, and that of Africa by Scipio. This latter movement, however, was not an original design on the part of the Romans, but was suggested by an artifice practised, one hundred and seven years previously, by Agathocles of Syracuse, under similar circumstances. When besieged in his capital by the Carthaginians, he suddenly forced his way through the blockade, and embarking with a few troops, appeared unexpectedly before Carthage; when the result of his presenting himself in an attitude which it was believed impossible that he could have assumed, except as a conqueror, was the arrangement of a peace on favourable terms.

Respecting distant invasions, the general testimony of history establishes the principle, that, except where a communication with home can be maintained by land or sea, the consequences have been always humiliating and disastrous, especially in countries where an ungenial climate, physical obstacles and peculiarities, with poverty of soil and absence of refinement, have destroyed invading armies more effectually than actual reverses in the field. Herodotus records, (iii. 134 sq.) that Darius Hystaspes, the second in succession after Cyrus the Great, instigated by his Queen, who represented the necessity of finding occupation for the idle arms of his subjects, crossed the Ister with an army of 700,000 men, and commenced the pursuit of an enemy, protected by a seemingly interminable desert, always within view and never overtaken, and always harassing and breaking the ranks of the Persians when least expected. At length the Scythian King, Idanthyrsus, sent an embassy to the Persian Monarch, with an enigmatical present, consisting of a mouse, a bird, a frog, and five arrows, which a sagacious courtier interpreted as an intimation, that, unless the invaders could hide themselves in the earth, or soar into the air, or dive beneath the water, they must fall by the arrows. After considerable loss, the Persians effected a retreat over the bridge of the Ister, which was kept open by the fidelity of the Ionians, who had been left to guard it.

The same Scythians, (known after their migration eastward as Parthians,) armed with long bows, like those with which the English archers "stitched together" their enemies at Crecy and Halidon Hill, destroyed the army of Crassus, in the deserts of Mesopotamia.

Soon afterwards, Antony, after marching 100,000 men three hundred miles into the desert, and fighting eighteen skirmishes, exclusively of the nature of a guerilla warfare, returned to Armenia, after losing 24,000 men by starvation and the missiles of the enemy.

In a repetition of the same expedition, the Emperor Julian lost his life near Ctesiphon (Al Modain), whence Jovian, who was elected on the spot as his successor, led the fainting remnant of the army to Nisibis, where they met reinforcements, and were saved.

But of all such failures, the most signal and tragical was the retreat of the French army from Moscow, in 1812, when, of 680,500 men, only 20,000 unarmed soldiers found a shelter in Poland; their feet covered with old hats, and their shoulders with pieces of canvass, and the skins of horses torn raw from the flesh-the largest invading army, and the most pitiably defeated, since the time of Cambyses. The most successful, for a time, of all such schemes of distant conquest, was the progress of the arms of the Crescent in the eighth century. In fifty years after Mohammed's expulsion from Mecca, Constantinople, the capital of the Christian world, was successfully besieged by the Kaliph; in one hundred years the empire extended from India to the Pyrenees; and in three years after the invasion of Spain, (A. D. 711.) Musa proposed to annex by conquest Germany, Italy, and France. This project was partially carried out by Musa's successor in command, Abderrahman (in 731), who advanced as far as the Loire, where he was met and defeated by Charles le Martel, in the memorable battle of Tours. It was not, however, until 1683, that Europe was definitely relieved from its Mohammedan invaders, by John Sobieski at the battle of Vienna.

The final destruction of Carthage was principally effected by the incessant warnings and remonstrances of Cato, whose enmity is believed to have arisen from some personal insult received in Carthage, when he visited it as an ambassador. On the extinction of the Carthaginian power, the trade which that people had carried on between the west coast of Africa and Europe-exchanging the gold and ivory of the former for the cereal produce of the latter-fell into the hands of the Phocæans of Massilia.