case when an indicative takes the place of the subjunctive in the apodosis to a past tense of that mood (above, Ch. III. 172; iv. (c)). The following examples will explain this indirect construction: Occasio egregie rei gerendæ fuit, si (Furius) protinus de via ad castra oppugnanda duxisset. Liv. XXXI. 21. Admonebat me res, ut hoc quoque loco intermissionem eloquentiæ deplorarem: ni vererer, ne de me ipso aliquid viderer queri. Cic. Off. II. 19. Præclare viceramus, nisi spoliatum, inermem, fugientem Lepidus recepisset Antonium. Cic. ad dir. XII. 10. Pons sublicius iter pæne hostibus dedit, ni unus vir fuisset, Horatius Cocles. Liv. II. 10. Ipsæ inter se legiones octava et quintadecuma ferrum parabant; ni miles nonanus preces et adversum aspernantis minas interjecisset. Tac. I. 23. Trudebantur in paludem, ni Caesar productas legiones instruxisset. Ib. 63. Cæcina circumveniebatur, ni prima legio sese opposuisset. Ib. 65. Stesichorus si tenuisset modum, videtur æmulari proximus Homerum potuisse. Quint. x. 1. 62. Here the true apodosis in the first example would be, res egregie gesta esset; in the second, et deplorassem; in the fourth, paene dedit implies et dedisset; in the fifth, the ferrum parabant leads us to the apodosis, et decertassent; in the sixth, the consequence is not the imperfect trudebantur, 'they were in the act of being thrust,' but et trusi essent, which must be supplied; the same remark applies to the seventh example, where we must add, et circumventus esset, and the full form of the last example would be, Stesichorus videtur aemulari proximus Homerum potuisse, et proximus aemulatus esset, si tenuisset modum. In the third example, as in those given above (172, IV. (c)), it is possible to understand the pluperfect indicative as the real apodosis to recepisset, but the implied meaning is expressed most clearly, if we add to viceramus the phrase, et victoria frueremur.

(7) The apodosis is omitted altogether, if the conditional clause amounts to the expression of a wish (above, 172, 1. (e) ), in which case the result is that which we would do, if the wish were realized. And this omission also takes place when the apodosis would be expressed by the same verb as that of the conditional clause, in a sentence dependent on some expression of attempting, expecting, wondering, or the like. The following examples illustrate the latter usage: Circumfunduntur ex reliquis hostes partibus, si quem aditum reperire possent. Cæs. B. G. vi. 37. Palus erat non magna inter nostrum atque hostium exercitum.

Hanc si nostri

transirent, hostes exspectabant. Ib. II. 9. Helvetii, si perrumpere possent, conati, operis munitione et militum concursu et telis repulsi, hoc conatu destiterunt. Ib. 1. 8. Tentata res est, si primo impetu capi Ardea posset. Liv. I. 57. Te adeunt fere omnes, si quid velis. Cic. ad. div. III. 9. Mirabar, si tu mihi quicquam adferres novi. Ter. Phorm. III. 2. 5. If we examine these passages, we shall see that in the first we must supply ut reperirent aliquem aditum; in the second, the enemies' expectation would be clearly expressed if we added quid facturi essent nostri; in the third and fourth the full phrases would be conati perrumpere si possent; and capere Ardeam, si capi posset; in the fifth we must insert ut discant; and in the last the meaning is mirabar, quid novi adferres, si quid adferres.

(8) The conditional particle may be occasionally omitted, if the construction is otherwise complete and obvious, as in the following examples: Unum cognoris, omnes noris. Ter. Phorm. II. 1. 35. cf. I. 4. 9. Decies centena dedisses huic parco, paucis contento; quinque diebus nihil erat in loculis. Hor. Serm. I. 3. 15. Dedisses huic animo (Corellii Rufi) par corpus; fecisset, quod optabat. Plin. Ep. 1. 12.

(e) The conditional particle may be added to the comparative particles, ut, velut, ac, quam, and it forms one word with quam in quasi, but it is generally omitted after tamquam. Thus we have, Milites, quis impugnandus agger, ut si murum succederent, gravibus superne ictibus conflictabantur. Tac. Ann. II. 20. Sequani absentis Ariovisti crudelitatem, velut si coram adesset, horrebant. Cæs. B. G. 1. 32. Egnatii absentis rem ut tueare, æque a te peto, ac si mea negotia essent. Cic. Fam. XIII. 43. Deleta est Ausonum gens perinde ac si internecivo bello certasset. Liv. IX. 25. Quidam idcirco deum esse non putant, quia non apparet, nec cernitur: proinde, quasi nostram ipsam mentem videre possimus. Cic. Mil. 31. Stultissimum est, in luctu capillum sibi evellere, quasi calvitio mæror levetur. Cic. Tusc. III. 26. Parvi primo ortu sic jacent, tamquam omnino sine animo sint. Cic. Fin. v. 15. Antonium Plancum sic contemnit, tamquam si illi aqua et igni interdictum sit. Cic. Phil. VI. 4.

Obs. On the distinction between nisi and si non, see p. 201.

§ 9 (b). Definitive Sentences.

204 The rules for the construction of the relative pronoun have been fully given (above, 141); and it has been shown

(above, 194, (B), Obs. 196) that the relative may be used for the demonstrative combined with a copulative or adversative particle. In this place, however, it is necessary to direct the student's attention to those cases in which the relative with the indicative mood represents the functions of the defining adjective (above, 123, 8, (b); 128, x., (a)), and especially to those forms of the defining sentence in which the relative seems to be in itself conditional or indefinite.

The distinction between the definitive and the subjunctive sentence should be obvious to every one who can recognize the difference between an epithet and a predicate (above, 124). It is clear that this distinction does not consist in the meaning of the epithet or predicate used, but in the construction of the word which for the time being serves to define or predicate. As is well known, the most indefinite of all the pronouns may be used as the subject of a sentence, and we have seen that these pronouns, no less than the demonstratives, contribute to the machinery of the distinctive sentence. Although therefore the relative word may be vague or indefinite in itself, or may have the conditional particle prefixed, it will still form a definitive sentence, if it serves as the attribute or qualification of some single term and is used with the indicative mood. If we say ' a possible contingency,' 'an uncertain amount,' 'however large a sum,' &c., it is manifest that these vague attributes are, in point of syntax, as completely epithets, qualifications, or defining expressions as the most precise and distinct adjectives would have been, and, conversely, that a different construction would convert the most definite expressions into predicates or even adverbs. The student then will see that we have definitive sentences in all the following uses of the relative or relative particles with the indicative mood.

(a) The relative or relative particle with si may introduce a definitive sentence; thus, Errant, si qui in bello omnes secundos rerum proventus exspectant. Cæs. B. G. VII. 29. Tu melius existimare videris de ea, si quam nunc habemus, facultate. Cic. Brut. 87. Nuda fere Alpium cacumina sunt, et si quid est pabuli, obruunt nives. Liv. XXI. 37. Summum bonum est, vivere seligentem, quæ secundum naturam sunt, et si quae contra naturam sunt, rejicientem. Cic. Fin. III. 9. Jam non tam mihi videntur injuriam facere, si qui hæc disputant, quam si cujus aures ad hanc disputationem patent. Cic. ad div. III. 6.-Studiose equidem utor poëtis nostris, sed

sicubi illi defecerunt, verti multa de Græcis, ne quo ornamento careret Latina oratio. Cic. Tusc. II. 11.

Obs. If the verb is subjunctive the nature of the sentence is of course changed; thus in the following passages the sentences dependent on sicunde and si quando are conditional and not definitive: Tentabantur urbes, sicunde spes aliqua se ostendisset. Livy, xxvI. 38. Utinam, inquit Pontius Samnis, tum essem natus, si quando Romani dona accipere cœpissent! Cic. de Off. 11. 21.

(B) The vague relatives and relative particles quicunque,' who• ever,' ubicunque, 'wherever,' undecunque, 'whencesoever,' quocunque, 'whithersoever,' quandocunque, 'whensoever,' utcunque, ‘howsoever,' quantuscunque, 'how great soever,' quotcunque, 'how many soever,' are used with the indicative in adjectival sentences; thus, Quoscunque de te queri audivi, quacunque ratione potui, placavi. Cic. Quint. Fr. I. 2. Quemcunque hæc pars perditorum lætatum morte Cæsaris putabit, hunc in hostium numero habebit. Cic. Att. XIV. 13. Hoc mementote, quoscunque locos attingam, unde ridicula ducantur, ex iisdem locis fere etiam graves sententias posse duci. Cic. Or. II. 61. Quod quibuscunque verbis dixeris, facetum tamen est, re continetur; quod mutatis verbis, salem amittit, in verbis habet leporem omnem. Cic. Or. II. 62. Nihil est virtute amabilius, quam qui adeptus erit, ubicunque erit gentium, a nobis diligetur. Cic. Nat. Deor. I. 44. Ubicunque Patricius habitat, ibi carcer privatus est. Liv. VI. 36. Non undecunque causa fluxit, ibi culpa est. Quint. VII. 3. 33. Hæc novi judicii forma terret oculos, qui, quocunque inciderunt, veterem consuetudinem fori, et pristinum morem judiciorum requirunt. Cic. Mil. 1. Verres quacunque iter fecit, ejusmodi fuit, ut non legatus populi Romani, sed ut quædam calamitas pervadere videretur. Cic. Verr. 1. 16. Quandocunque ista gens (Græcorum) suas literas dabit, omnia corrumpet. Plin. N. H. XXуIII. 1 med. Orator utcunque se adfectum videri et animum audientium moveri volet, ita certum vocis admovebit sonum. Cic. Or. XVII. Hoc, quantumcunque est, quod certe maximum est, totum est tuum. Cic. Marcell. 2. Homines benevolos, qualescunque sunt, grave est insequi contumelia. Cic. Att. XIV. 14. But the following sentences are conditional: Debeo, quantumcunque possim, in eo elaborare, ut &c. Cic. Fin. 1. 4. Quotcunque Senatus creverit, populusve jusserit, tot sunto. Cic. Leg. III. 3.

(7) The same sense of vagueness may be conveyed in a definitive clause by the reduplicated pronouns and particles, quisquis,

ubiubi, undeunde, quoquo, utut, quantus quantus, quotquot; thus, Quisquis homo huc profecto venerit, pugnos edet. Plaut. Amph. I. 1. 153. Omnia mala ingerebat (Hecuba), quemquem adspexerat. Id. Men. v. 1. 17. Quisquis honos tumuli, quidquid solamen humandi est, Largior. Virg. Æn. x. 193. Plus certe attulit huic populo dignitatis, quisquis ille est, si modo est aliquis, qui non illustravit modo, sed etiam genuit in hac urbe dicendi copiam, quam illi, qui Ligurum castella expugnaverunt. Cic. Brut. 73. Quidquid erit, tibi erit. Cic. ad div. II. 10. In amicitia quidquid est, id verum et voluntarium est. Cic. Lael. VIII. Nunc ubiubi sit animus, certe quidem in te est. Cic. Tusc. 1. 29. Quoquo hic spectabit, eo tu spectato simul. Plaut. Pseud. III. 2. 69. Id, utut est, etsi dedecorum est, patiar. Plaut. Bacch. v. 2. 73. Quantiquanti, bene emitur, quod necesse est. Cic. Att. XII. 24. Tu, quantus quantus, nil nisi sapientia es. Ter. Ad. III. 3. 40. Si leges duæ, aut si plures, aut quotquot erunt, conservari non possunt, quia discrepant inter se, ea maxime conservanda putatur, quæ ad maximas res pertinere videtur. Cic. Inv. II. 49.

Obs. The particles quamvis and quamtumvis, though apparently synonymous with quantusquantus, are used with the subjunctive mood, and constitute a concessive sentence, thus, Ista, quantumvis exigua sint, in majus excedunt. Sen. Ep. 85. Illa mali generis vineta quæ, quamvis robusta sint, propter sterilitatem fructu carent, emendantur insitione facta. Colum. IV. 22.

§ 10. (c) Subjunctive Sentences.

205 The subjunctive sentence, properly so called, is a special characteristic of Latin syntax, at least so far as concerns the uniform employment of the subjunctive mood. Its general effect is to express by means of the relative clause a number of adverbial or predicative phrases. The predicative or adverbial nature of the subjunctive sentence is most plainly seen in the use of the subjunctive after sunt qui, inveniuntur qui, reperiuntur qui, &c.; for here qui talis ut (175), (4), Obs.), and this meaning may be conveyed by the predicative adjective (140, (b)). Even relative clauses which would otherwise be definitive, become subject to the operation of this rule when they are found included in an oblique or predicative sentence. Thus in the example given above (p. 242), Socrates dicebat omnes in eo, quod scirent, satis esse eloquentes, it is clear that we should have written omnes in eo, quod sciunt, satis sunt eloquentes, if we had been expressing the thought as our own, for

=