(gg) The highest degree of a quality, magnitude, or number, is expressed by quam or quantus with the superlative and the verb possum, which, however, may be omitted even with a superlative adverb. Thus we have, Jugurtha quam maximas potest copias armat. Sall. Jug. 13. Gallinæ avesque reliquæ cubilia sibi nidosque construunt, eosque quam possunt mollissime substernunt, ut quam facillime ova serventur. Cic. N. D. II. 52. Hannibal medio Etruriæ agro prædatum profectus, quantam maximam vastitatem potest cædibus incendiisque consuli procul ostendit. Liv. XXII. 3. Mihi nihil fuit optatius, quam ut quam gratissimus erga te esse cognoscerer. Cic. ad div. 1. 5. Definitio est oratio, quæ, quid sit id, de quo agitur, ostendit quam brevissime. Cic. Or. 33. Tam sum amicus reipublicæ, quam qui maxime. Cic. ad div. IV. 2. Gratissimum mihi feceris, si huic commendationi meæ tantum tribueris, quantum cui tribuisti plurimum. Ibid. XIII. 22. Grata ea res, ut quae maxime senatui unquam, fuit. Liv. v. 25. Cæsar sit pro prætore eo jure, quo qui optimo. Cic. Phil. v. 16.

(3) When a difference of degree is implied in the comparison, we have the three following forms of the comparative sentence.

(aa) A comparative or superlative adjective is introduced in both clauses, which are placed on an equal footing by the opposition. of quo—eo, quanto tanto with the comparatives, and of ut quisque -ita with the superlatives, as in the following examples: Quo major est in animis præstantia et divinior, eo majore indigent diligentia. Cic. Tusc. IV. 27. Duæ ad Luceriam ferebant viæ, altera aperta, sed quanto tutior, tanto fere longior, altera per furculas Caudinas brevior. Liv. IX. 2. Quo quisque est sollertior et ingeniosior, hoc docet iracundius et laboriosius. Cic. Q. Rosc. 11. Quanto perditior quisque est, tanto acrius urget. Hor. Serm. I. 2. 15. In morbis corporis ut quisque est difficillimus, ita medicus nobilissimus atque optimus quæritur. Cic. Cluent. 21. Ut quisque est vir optimus, ita difficillime esse alios improbos suspicatur. Cic. Q. Fr. I. 1. 4. Ut quisque optime dicit, ita maxime dicendi facultatem, variosque eventus orationis timet. Cic. Or. 1. 26.

(bb) A comparative is introduced into the first clause only, and the object compared is introduced by quam; thus, Minus dixi, quam volui de te. Plaut. Capt. II. 3. 70. Segnius homines bona, quam mala sentiunt. Liv. xxx. 21. Meliora sunt ca, quæ natura,

quam illa, quæ arte perfecta sunt. Cic. N. D. II. 34. Nihil praestabilius viro, quam periculis patriam liberare. Cic. Mil. 35.

(cc) This quam is omitted after the neuters plus, amplius, minus, longius, when the standard of comparison is a definite number or magnitude (163, (e), d); thus we have, Nec enim plus decem millia hominum erant. Liv. XLII. 8. Commius cum equitibus venerat, qui numero non amplius erant quingenti. Cæs. B.G. VIII. 10. Constabat, non minus ducentos Carthaginiensium equites fuisse. Rex, qua sex mensibus iter fecerat, eadem minus diebus triginta in Asiam reversus est. Corn. Nep. 11. 5. Spatium, quod non est amplius pedum DC. Cæs. B. G. 1. 38. Cæsar certior est factus, magnas Gallorum copias non longius millia passuum octo ab hibernis suis afuisse. Ib. v. 53.

(dd) We have an ablative with pro, when the standard of comparison is an expectation rather than the object itself, as in the following examples: Proelium atrocius, quam pro numero pugnantium, editur. Liv. XXI. 29. In quiete utrique consuli dicitur visa species viri majoris, quam pro humano habitu, augustiorisque. Liv. VIII. 6. Minor caedes, quam pro tanta victoria, fuit. Liv. x. 14. Suevi frumenta ceterosque fructus patientius, quam pro solita Germanorum inertia, laborant. Tac. Ger. XLV.

(ee) The object compared is expressed by the ablative alone (above, 163, (e)), if it is implied that the quality is possessed by that object, though not in the same degree; thus, Elephanto beluarum nulla prudentior est. Cic. N. D. 1. 35. Tunica propior pallio est. Plaut. Trin. v. 2. 30. Vilius argentum est auro, virtutibus aurum. Hor. Ep. 1. 1. 52. Sapientia humana omnia inferiora virtute ducit. Cic. Tusc. IV. 26. Quid est in homine ratione divinius? Cic. Leg. 1. 7. Non ego hac nocte longiorem vidi. Plaut. Amph. 1. 1. 123. O matre pulcra filia pulcrior. Hor. 1 Carm. I. 16.

Obs. This construction is particularly common with the ablatives solito, justo, aequo, dicto, spe, exspectatione, opinione, when we wish to express that the degree is higher than what is customary, right, proper, or than our words, thoughts, hopes, expectations, or opinions (163, (e) y); thus we say, Seditionem solito magis metuendam Manlius faciebat. Liv. VI. 14. Non verendum est, ne plus aequo quid in amicitiam congeratur. Cic. Lael. 16. Cæsar opinione celerius venturus

esse dicitur. Cic. ad div. XIV. 23.

nium Romam venit. Liv. xxvI. 26. sua efficiebat. Cæs. B. C. III. 21.

Lævinus consul serius spe om-
Servilius consul minus opinione

B. Subordinate Sentences.

§ 8. (a) Conditional Sentences.

203 It has been mentioned above (192) that the conditional sentence is that form of the hypothetical, in which a categorical proposition has an adverbial sentence dependent on it. This adverbial sentence is really of the nature of a relative clause, to which the categorical sentence furnishes the antecedent. Though it is most usually expressed by means of the particle si, the inflected relative may be used in the same sense; for qui haec fecerit, bonus erit is quite equivalent to si quis haec fecerit, bonus erit. But the proper meaning of si itself is in whatever case;' and its correlative or antecedent may be occasionally expressed by ita or sic, as Hoc ipsum ita justum est, quod recte fit, si est voluntarium (Cic. de Off. 1. 9), 'this very thing is just on the condition that it is rightly done in those cases in which it is voluntary.' Patres decreverunt, ut quum populus regem jussisset, id sic ratum esset, si Patres auctores fierent (Liv. I. 17), ' that should be determined on the condition that (in those cases in which) the Senate recommended it.'

Obs. That the conditional clause is really relative is shown also by the structure of the optative sentence, which is expressed not only by si and ut or utinam (above, 172, (1), (e) 128, xiv. Obs.), but also by qui, as in the phrase: qui illum Dii omnes perduint (Ter. Phorm. 1. 2. 73. Plaut. Men. III. 1, 6. cf. Cic. Att. IV. 7).

The four different kinds of conditional propositions are given and explained in 128. XVI; and the usage of the different moods and tenses is discussed in the preceding chapter. It only remains to show the various forms in which the Latin idiom exhibits the connexion between the protasis or conditional clause and the main clause or apodosis.

(a) Regularly and properly the apodosis appears as the direct antecedent or correlative of the conditional clause, as in the following examples: Si fato omnia fiunt, nihil nos admonere potest, ut cautiores simus. Cic. Div. 11. 8. Dies affert, vel hora potius, nisi provisum est, magnas sæpe clades. Cic. Phil. III. 1. Ante misissem ad te literas, si genus scribendi invenirem. Cic. ad div. VI. 10 med. Non possem vivere, nisi in literis viverem. Cic. ibid. 1x. 26.

(B) Sometimes, however, the apodosis must be supplied from the terms of the main sentence, which, as it is expressed, stands in an indirect relation to the conditional clause. This is really the

xxxi.

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 div. XII. 10. Pons sublicius iter pæne hostibus dedit, ni unus vir fuisset, Horatius Cocles. Liv. 11. 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 im- ' perfect 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. 1. 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. 1. 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