Immagini della pagina

The truth seems to be, that it owes its origin to the fondness of the Romans for the figure ellipse. In the hurry of animated narrative the speaker would sometimes leave to the mind of the auditor to supply the verb which should precede the infinitive which he used, just as the Germans omit their verb haben after participles in their writings. These omitted verbs were usually cœpi, cœperunt; solet, solent; and the indef. cerneres, videres, audires, etc.; for we may often find these verbs used in passages perfectly similar to those in which they are omitted. We have noted the following instances anterior to Sallust:

Consonat terra; clamorem utrimque efferunt ;
Imperator utrimque hinc et illinc Jovi

Vota suscipere, hortari exercitum ;

Pro se quisque id, quod quisque et potest et valet
Edit, ferro ferit.

Plaut. Amph. i. 1, 74.

Sed angues oculis omnis circumvisere,

Ego cunas recessim rursum vorsum trahere et ducere
tantoque angues acrius


Id. ib. v. 1, 61.

Id. Bac. ii. 3, 55.

Ubi portu exiimus, homines remigio sequi.

Ego illud sedulo

Negare factum. Ille instat factum.-Ter. Andr. i. 1, 119.

Magna vero agere gratias Thais mihi?

Id. Eun. iii. 1, 1, and throughout

the early part of that scene.

Ipsa accumbere

Mecum, mihi sese dare, sermonem quærere.

Id. ib. iii. 3, 9.

See also iv. 1, 4, 12; Heaut. v. 1, 19; Phor. i. 2, 67.

Cicero, it might be expected, would make frequent use of this mode of giving animation to the narrative in his orations; but this is by no means the case. In his early speeches he uses it occasionally, as in that for Roscius Amerinus we have in one place (38) eight of these infinitives; in Verr. ii. 76, three; ii. 77, two; iii. 25, four; iv. 15, two; 19, two; 34, five; 65, four. The only instances of it that we have met with in his later speeches are six in that against Piso (28). He does not use it at all in his didactic writings, and very rarely in his Epistles.

Cæsar, it would appear, was at first inclined to use this form,


as suited to the easy familiar tone of his Commentaries, for we meet with it three times in i. 16, but never afterwards. His good taste, it would seem, revolted against it. Nepos never employs it, neither does Hirtius.

We are now arrived at Sallust, who sows it ὅλῳ τῷ θυλάκῳ : but we must first notice Virgil and Horace. The latter, like the comic poets, uses it sparingly, and with one exception only in light sportive narrative, namely, Sat. i. 9, 9; ii. 6, 113; Ep. i. 7, 61. The exception is Carm. iii. 16, 7, where the verb to be supplied is norant. The former is much more profuse in its em. ployment; he uses it once in the Georgics (i. 199), and thus lavishly in the Eneis: ii. 97, 132, 169, 685; iii. 140, 666; iv. 421; v. 685; vi. 199, 491, 557; vii. 15; viii. 215, 493, 689; ix. 377, 509, 538; x. 267, 288, 299, 458; xi. 142, 822, 883; xii. 216-twenty-seven places in all. Wagner gives some more examples, but they may be easily explained on other principles.


The historic infinitive occurs 86 times in the Catilina, and 287 times in the Jugurtha. In his use of it Sallust is only followed by Livy and Tacitus among the historians; for it is never to be found in Velleius, Curtius, Florus, or Ammianus. occurs 38 times in the first two books of Livy, and much more rarely in the remaining books. We meet it 65 times in the two first books of Tacitus' History; and 44 times in the two first of the Annals. These portions of Livy and Tacitus, we may observe, are each more than equal in quantity to the two pieces of Sallust. In fine, the hist. inf. probably appears more frequently in the Jugurtha alone than in all the remaining Latin literature. It might therefore, perhaps, be termed the Sallustian infinitive.

2. It seems not improbable that Sallust was the first to use in history the second pers. sing. of verbs indefinitely. The Latin, as is well known, can express but imperfectly the Greek ris, Italian si, French on, German man. Our own language is in the same state, and both agree in substituting for it the second sing. of a verb. Thus, where the French would have on verrait, the Latins use cerneres, videres, animadverteres, and we, you would see, etc. The most remarkable instance we have met of the use of this indef. is the Dixeris, etc. of Horace, Sat. ii. 6, 39, where it means the first person, just like the French on; many instances occur in Sallust, and it is often to be understood in him before the hist. inf. It is not used by Cæsar or Nepos. Even in Livy it occurs but twice (ii. 3; iii. 35) in the first three books.

Like ourselves also the Latins sometimes expressed this indef.

by the first plur. A striking instance is stertimus, on ronfle, Pers. iii.3: comp. iv. 42; Juv. iii. 6; Hor. Carm. i. 2, 13. In Cat. i. 3, qua fruimur would perhaps be best rendered in French by dont on jouit, and memoriam nostri by sa mémoire, or la mémoire de soi.

In this place, therefore, nostri, is of each of us individually. We have shown (Hor. Excursus II.) that nostri, as a gen. (and of course vestri, mei, tui, sui) is, in reality, a possessive, with caput, or corpus, understood. The proper word, we think, is caput, which (and in Greek кɛpaλý) answers precisely to our person (mask) and denotes personality, life, etc. Thus propter meum caput (Plaut. Capt. v. 1, 15) is, on my account; in decem capita libera interficis (Cat. ap. Gell. xiii. 24), capita is persons. The meaning of nostri, here given, offers an easy explanation of the phrase similes nostri, vestri, used so frequently by Cicero. each of us; of you.

It is

3. Sallust uses what appear to be poetic forms and enallages. Thus the termination of the third perf. plur. in ere, instead of erunt, is frequent in him, while it never occurs in Cæsar, Nepos, or Cicero. We add this last, for in the two places of his works in which we have met fuere (Or. 47; Verr. i. 6), we are confident that it was introduced by the copyists. It must not, however, be concealed that censuere occurs in the ancient Senatusconsultum de Bacchanalibus; so that this form may have been in ordinary use in old times.

4. Sallust, we are quite convinced, also in imitation of the poets, uses the enallage of the pluperf. for the perf. of verbs. On no other principle can we explain such passages as Cat. vii. 5; xxiv. 1; 1. 4; Jug. xci. 1, and many other places to which we have directed attention in our notes.

5. The use of the simple for the compound verb, so frequent in the poets, occurs also, we think, in Sallust. Thus quærere is i. q. acquirere, Jug. iii. 3 ; lxxxv. 30, etc.; captæ, i. q. acceptæ, xxxii. 1; mittere, i. q. demittere, or immittere, lxvii. 1; poni, i. q. deponi, or componi, cxii. 1.

6. Like the poets, Sallust continually uses the freq. as equivalent to the simple verb. Thus he invariably uses ducto, never duco, a practice in which he is nearly solitary. Ago rarely occurs in his writings, while agito is frequent. He also uses the following frequentatives dictito, objecto, missito, advento, sustento, imperito, negito, tutor, and others.


7. Another practice, in which he agrees with the poets, is in

using the adj. for the adv., as subdolus ejus augere amentiam, Jug. xxxviii. 1; quietus aciem exornat, lii. 5, etc.

8. Frequently amid adjectives or participles, Sallust uses the gen. or abl. of quality: see Cat. xviii. 4; xlviii. 5, etc.

9. He is also fond of using two nearly synonymous terms for the sake of greater effect, as liberum atque solutum, Cat. vi. 1 ; neque modum neque modestiam, xi. 4; clades atque calamitas, xxxix. 4; pollens potensque, Jug. i. 3 ; fessi lassique, liii. 5; incerti ignarique, lxvii. 1; fidus acceptusque, lxxi. 3; varius incertusque, lxxiv. 1,



10. A double structure also occurs at times in Sallust, as neque majus aliud neque præstabilius invenias, magisque naturæ industriam hominum quam vim aut tempus deesse, Jug. i. 2. invenias governs first the simple acc., and then the acc. with an inf. see also xxv. 1; xlix. 2; Cat. v. 9. In like manner he uses the same word in different senses.

11. The asyndeton occurs continually in Sallust, especially when he employs the hist. inf.

12. He is very fond of using the figures zeugma and synesis, by which one word is, as it were, included in another. These cases are noticed in the notes.

13. Sallust, like the Greek orators, is fond of employing the personal pron. ego with the verb.

14. In Sallust we meet with structures that are rarely, if ever, to be found in other writers. Such are Quæ homines arant, etc., Cat. ii. 7; in usu cotidiano, etc., xlviii. 2; camera lapideis, etc. Iv. 4; in fuga, lvii. 4 ; novissume rediens, etc., Jug. x. 2 ; qui sub imperio, etc., xiii. 1 ; humi pabulum, xviii. 1 : see on Cat. xxxix. 2; Jug. xliii. 2; xlix. 5.

15. He very rarely uses the pron. se, almost always sese, like the old poets.

16. In the use of the propositions cum and ex, his practice is peculiar. He employs the former where others use in, as ea modo cum animo habere, Jug. xi. 8; and the latter, where the ordinary term is ab: see Jug. cii. 8.

17. In like manner Sallust's use of postquam has somewhat peculiar in it. Of this conj. Cæsar hardly ever makes any use; the author of the piece, De Bell. Alex., employs it only twice, while in that De Bell. Afric., which is not much longer, it occurs not less than fifteen times, and used with the same variety as by Sallust; an argument, by the way, that these two pieces are

not by the same writer. Cicero also makes little use of it. Nepos employs it about fifteen times, sometimes as the first, sometimes as the second word in the sentence; and to judge by his usage, it should, in Latin prose, be always followed by a verb in the perfect, succeeded by another in the same tense, as id postquam resciverunt legatos ad eum miserunt, Paus. 3. The poets, however, frequently use the present tense with a present or a perf. after it, and in this they are followed by Sallust almost alone, for the instances in Tacitus and others are very rare. We meet many instances, but his favourite mode is to use a perf. followed by a present. It is followed in him sometimes by the imperf., of which a few instances occur in other writers; at other times by the pluperf., of which there are instances, even in Cicero.

18. Sed. This conj. in Sallust answers to the Greek dέ, and therefore, like it, is sometimes our but; at other times our now. Thus ἦν δέ τις ἐν Τρώεσσι Δάρης, Il. v. 9, is now there was, etc., and our translators very properly render, ἦν δὲ ὁ Βαραββᾶς Anorns (John xviii. 40), now Barabbas was a robber. notes we have noticed many places where scd will bear no other sense than this.

In our

19. Igitur. Sallust uses this word for the Greek ovv, or rather yáo, which is employed so frequently, especially by the orators, like our then, or now, in commencing a narrative or argument. This may be remarked, particularly in the speeches of Isæus, and Sallust more than once thus commences, or resumes a subject: see Cat. liv. 1; Jug. lxxiii. 1; xcvi. 1. But Sallust's great peculiarities in his use of this word, are his so frequently making it inferential, like our accordingly, in which he is countenanced by Varro alone, and his placing it as the first word in the sentence, of which practice we have only a single instance in Nepos, and a very few in Cicero, or even in Livy. Cæsar never uses this word at all, his favourite words of transition being at, ita, itaque.

20. Sallust may also be regarded as the introducer into Latin prose of the word ceterum. Indeed, even among the poets it occurs only, we believe, in Terence (Eun. i. 2, 7; Hec. iii. 3, 31), for we have not met with it in Plautus. In Nepos (Eum. 8) we have found it once, as also once in Cicero (ad Quint. Fr. ii. 14), but never in Cæsar. It occurs twelve times only in the first five books of Livy, but it is a favourite with Tacitus. Sallust employs it only twice in the Catilina; but twenty-four times in the

« IndietroContinua »