Seston Abydena separat urbe fretum. Evadere is joined by Cicero with er and ab, but Livy and Sallust use it with the ablative alone; it may take the accusative, according to § 386; e. g., evadere amnem, flammam, insidias, silvas, but this occurs only in the silver age. Prohibere, to keep at a distance, prevent, admits of a double construction; the most common is to put the hostile thing or person in the accusative; as, hostes prohibere populationibus or ab oppidis; Cic., p. Leg. Man., 7, a quo periculo prohibete rempublicam, and in the same chapter, erit humanitatis vestrae, magnum horum civium numerum calamitate prohibere. In like manner, defendere is joined with the accusative of the thing to be warded off, or of the thing or person to be defended. In the former sense defendere is commonly used with the accusative alone; as, defendere nimios ardores solis, but ab aliquo may also be added in the latter sense ab is very frequently joined to it; as, a periculo, a vi, ab injuria. After the analogy of prohibere, the verb interdicere alicui is used almost more frequently with the ablative, aliqua re, than with the accusative aliquid; e. g., Caes., Bell. Gall., i., 46, Ariovistus omni Gallia interdixit Romanis; Quintil., vi., 3, 79, quod ei domo sua interdixisset, and hence the well-known formula, alicui aqua et igni interdicere. See the excellent disquisition of Perizonius on Sanctius, Minerv., p. 345, foll., ed. sexta; compare § 418. The dative, with verbs denoting "to differ," is attested by a sufficient number of passages; but it is impossible to ascertain what was the practice with the verbs denoting "to distinguish," for there are no decisive passages. Horace says, vero distinguere falsum, turpi secernere honestum, secernere privatis publica, but it is uncertain whether vero, turpi, and privatis, are datives or ablatives. The poets now and then use the dative instead of ab with the ablative, with verbs denoting separation; e. g., Virg., Eclog., vii., 47, solstitium pecori defendite; Georg., iii., 155, oestrum arcebis gravido pecori; Horat., Carm., i., 9, 17, donec virenti canities abest; for otherwise abesse is always joined with ab. (Compare, however, § 420.) Dissentire, dissidere, and discrepare are construed, also, with cum, and discordare cum aliquo is more frequent than ab aliquo. The genitive, which is sometimes joined by poets to verbs of separation, is entirely Greek; e. g., Plaut., Rud., i., 4, 27, me omnium jam laborum levas; Horat., Carm., ii., 9, 17, desine mollium tandem querelarum; ibid., iii., 27, 69, abstineto irarum calidaeque rixae; ibid., iii., 17, in fin., cum famulis operum solutis; Serm., ii., 3,, morbi purgatus; and, according to this analogy, the genitive is used, also, with adjectives of the same meaning; Horat., Serm., ii., 2, 119, operum vacuus ; de Art. Poet., 212, liber laborum, Carm., i., 22, purus sceleris. So Tacitus, Annal., i., 49, uses diversus with the genitive, instead of ab aliqua re. [ 470.] Note 2.-The adjective alienus (strange), in the sense of "unfit" or "unsuited," is joined either with the ablative alone or with ab; e. g., Cic., de Off., i., 13, fraus quasi vulpeculae, vis leonis videtur, utrumque homine alienissimum est; non alienum putant dignitate, majestate sua, institutis suis; but Cicero just as often uses the preposition ab. In the sense of "disaffected" or "hostile" alienus always takes ab; e. g., homo alienus a litteris, animum alienum a causa nobilitatis habere. In the former sense of "unsuited," being the opposite of proprius (§ 411), it may also be joined with the genitive; e. g., Cic., de Fin., i., 4, quis alienum putet ejus esse dignitatis, and in the latter (after the analogy of inimicus) with the dative; as, Cic., p. Caec., 9, id dicit quod illi causae maxime est alienum. Alius, too, is sometimes found with the ablative, which may be regarded as an ablative of separation; e. g., Horat., Epist., i., 16, 20, neve putes alium sapiente bonoque beatum Epist., ., 1, 239, alius Lysippo; Phaedr., Prolog., lib. iii., 41, alius Sejano; Varro., de R. R., iii., 16, quod est aliud melle; Cic., ad Fam., xi., 2, in speaking of Brutus and Cassius, says, nec quidquam aliud libertate communi quaesisse. But this ablative may also be compared with the ablative joined to comparatives. [§ 471.] 11. The ablative is used with esse (either ex pressed or understood) to denote a quality of a person or a thing (ablativus qualitatis). But the ablative is used only when the substantive denoting the quality does not stand alone (as in the case of the genitive, see § 426), but is joined with an adjective or pronoun-adjective. Hence we cannot say, e. g., Caesar fuit ingenio, or homo ingenio, a man of talent (which would be expressed by an adjective), but we say Caesar magno, summo, or excellenti ingenio, or homo summo ingenio. Agesilaus statura fuit humili et corpore exiguo, Nepos. Omnes habentur et dicuntur tyranni, qui potestate sunt perpetua in ea civitate, quae libertate usa est, Nep., Milt. L. Catilina, nobili genere natus, fuit magna vi et animi et corporis, sed ingenio malo pravoque, Sallust, Cat., 5. Prope (Hennam) est spelunca quaedam, infinita altitudine, qua Ditem patrem ferunt repente cum curru extitisse, Cic., in Verr., iv., 48. Note. The explanation of the ablative of quality by the ellipsis of praeditus is only intended to suggest some mode of accounting for the fact of a substantive being joined with an ablative. With the same object in view, we prefer connecting the ablative with esse or its participle ens (though it does not occur), in the absence of which a substantive enters into an immediate connexion with an ablative, without being grammatically dependant upon it: claris natalibus est, he is of noble birth; vir claris natalibus, homo antiqua virtute et fide. With regard to the difference between the ablative and the genitive of quality, the genitive is more comprehensive, all ideas of measure being expressed by this case alone; but in other respects the distinction is not very clear. In general, however, it may be said that the genitive is used more particularly to express inherent qualities, and the ablative both inherent and accidental qualities. Thus, in speaking of transitory qualities or conditions, the ablative is always used; as, bono animo sum, maximo dolore eram, and Cicero, ad Att., xii., 52, by using the genitive securi animi es, suggests that he is speaking of something permanent, not merely transitory. See Krüger's Grammat., p. 532. The genitive of plural substantives is rare. Sometimes the two constructions Live Liv../4. with the ablative and the genitive, are found combined; e. g., Cic., add 1.7 + note. Fam., iv., 8, neque monere te audeo, praestanti prudentia virum, nec confirmare maximi animi hominem; ibid., i., 7, Lentulum eximia spe, summae virtutis adolescentem; Nep., Datam., 3, Thyum, hominem maximi corporis terribilique facie -optima veste texit. [§ 472.] 12. The ablative with the preposition cum is used to express the manner in which anything is done (usually indicated by adverbs), provided the manner is expressed by a substantive; e. g., cum fide amicitiam colere; litterae cum cura diligentiaque scriptae; cum voluptate audire; cum dignitate potius cadere, quam cum ignominia servire, are equivalent to fideliter colere, diligenter scriptae, libenter audire, &c. If an adjective is joined with the substantive, the ablative alone (ablativus modi) is gener ally used, and the preposition cum is joined to it only when an additional circumstance, and not an essential characteristic of the action, is to be expressed. The substantives implying manner; as, modus, ratio, mos, and others, never take the preposition cum. Thus we always read, hoc modo scripsi; non uno modo rem tractavi; omni modo egi cum rege; aliqua ratione tollere te volunt; constituerunt qua ratione ageretur, and the like; in the same way, humano modo et usitato more peccare, more bestiarum vagari, latronum ritu vivere, more institutoque omnium defendere, the genitive in these cases supplying the place of an adjective. We farther say, aequo animo fero; maxima fide amicitias coluit; summa aequitate res constituit, and very frequently viam incredibili celeritate confecit; librum magna cura diligentiaque scripsit, the action of the verb being in intimate connexion with the adverbial circumstance. But when the action and the circumstance are considered separately, the preposition cum is used; e. g., majore cum fide auditur; conclamant cum indecora exultatione (in Quintil.); tanta multitudo cum tanto studio adest (Cic., p. Leg. Man., 24); Verres Lampsacum venit cum magna calamitate civitatis (Cic., in Verr., i., 24), the calamitas being only the consequence of his presence. Hence cum is also used when the connexion between the subject and the noun denoting the attribute is only external; e. g., procedere cum veste purpurea; heus tu qui cum hirquina astas barba (Plaut., Pseud., iv., 2, 12); whereas procedere coma madenti, nudis pedibus incedere, aperto capite sedere, express circumstances or attributes inseparable from the subject. Quid est aliud gigantum modo bellare cum diis, nisi naturae repugnare? Cic., Cat. Maj., 2. Legiones nostrae in eum saepe locum profectae sunt alacri Epaminondas a judicio capitis maximă discessit gloria, Romani ovantes aç gratulantas Horatium accipiunt, eo ma- Toc de Or. 19, Note 1.-The difference observed between the ablativus modi and cum, in the case of substantives joined with adjectives, is a nicety of the Latin language which it is difficult to explain by a rule, although it is based on sound principles. Cicero, de Orat., i., 13, in speaking of the peculiar difference between the oratorical and philosophical style, combines the two constructions: illi (the philosophers) tenui quodam exanguique sermone disputant, hic (the orator) cum omni gravitate et jucunditate explicat: by cum Cicero here denotes the additional things which the orator employs. If he had alluded only to the mode of speaking, he would have said magna gravitate rem explicat. But there are, nevertheless, some passages in which no difference is apparent; as, Cic., de Invent., i., 39, Quod enim certius legis scriptor testimonium voluntatis suae relinquere potuit, quam quod ipse magna cum cura atque diligentia scripsit? de Nat. Deor., ii., 38, impetus coeli cum admirabili celeritate movetur. The beginner must observe that the ablativus modi is more frequent than the use of cum, which, we hope, is explained in an intelligible manner. The ablativus modi occurs also in the words condicio or lex, in the sense of "condition," or "term," and in periculum, danger, risk; e. g., nulla condicione (like nullo pacto) fieri potest; quavis condicione pacem facere; aequa condicione disceptare; hac, ea condicione or lege ut or ne (§ 319); meo, tuo, vestro, alicujus periculo facere aliquid (but when the substantive stands alone, we say cum periculo, that is, periculose); auspicio, auspiciis, ductu imperioque alicujus rem gerere or militare. Some cases in which the ablative is used, and which are commonly considered as ablativi modi, are in reality of a different kind; hac mente, hoc consilio feci, for example, should rather be called ablativi causae; navi vehi, pedibus ire, pervenire aliquo, capite onera ferre, vi urbes expugnare, on the other hand, are ablativi instrumenti, but they acquire the nature of an ablativus modi if the substantive is joined with an adjective; as, magna vi irruere, magna vi defendere aliquem, or they become ablatives absolute, implying a description; e. g., nudis pedibus ambulare, processit madenti coma, composito capillo, gravibus oculis, fluentibus buccis, pressa voce et temulenta. (Pseud. Ĉic., post Red. in Sen., 6.) See § 645. The ablative in Cic., Lael., 15, miror (de Tarquinio) illa superbia et importunitate si quemquam amicum habere potuit, must likewise be regarded as an ablative absolute, being the same as quum tanta ejus superbia et importunitas fuerit. As the preposition cum cannot be used in any of these cases, we may consider it as a practical rule that the manner in which a thing is done is expressed by the ablativus modi. In some expressions the ablative of substantives alone is found without cum. Thus we say silentio praeterire, or facere aliquid (but also cum silentio audire), lege agere; jure and injuria facere; magistratus vitio creatus is a common expression, indicating that an election had not taken place in due form. Cicero uses aliquid recte et ordine, modo et ratione, ratione et ordine fit, via et ratione disputare, and frequently, also, ratione alone; e. g., ratione facere, ratione voluptatem sequi (de Fin., i., 10), with reason, i. e., in a rational way; sometimes, also, voluntate facere in the sense of sponte, voluntarily. [ 473.] Note 2. If we compare the above rules with those given under Nos. 1 and 2, the ablative expressing company alone is excluded, for company is expressed by cum, even in such cases as servi cum telis comprehensi | sunt, cum ferro in aliquem invadere, when we are speaking of instruments which a person has (if he uses them, it becomes an ablativus instrumenti); farther, Romam veni cum febri; cum nuntio exire, as soon as the news ar rived; cum occasu solis copias educere, as soon as the sun set. It must be observed, as an exception, that the ancient writers, especially Caesar and Livy, in speaking of military movements, frequently omit the preposition cum, and use the ablative alone; e. g., Liv., vii., 9, Dictator ingenti exercitus ab urbe profectus; xxx., 11, exercitu haud minore, quam quem prius habuerat, ire ad hostes pergit; xli., 1, eodem decem navibus C. Furius duumvir navalis venit; i., 14, egressus omnibus copiis, where Drakenborch gives a long list of similar expressions in Livy, with which we may compare the commentators referred to by him and Oudendorp on Caes., Bell. Gall., ii., 7. This omission of the preposition occurs, also, when accompanying circumstances are mentioned, and not persons; e. g., Liv., vii., 20, quum populatione peragrati fines essent; v., 45, castra clamore invadunt. The Greeks, especially Xenophon, use the dative in the same way; compare Matthiae, Greek Gram., 405, and also Livy, x., 25, majori mihi curae est, ut omnes locupletes reducam, quam ut multis rem geram militibus, which is an ablativus instrumenti, unless it be explained by the analogy of the expressions mentioned above. [ 474.] We may add here the remark that the participles junctus and conjunctus are joined by Cicero with the ablative alone, instead of the dative (according to § 412 and 415), or the preposition cum; e. g., ad Att., ix., 10, infinitum bellum junctum miserrima fuga; p. Cluent., 6, repente est exorta mulieris importunae nefaria libido, non solum dedecore, verum etiam scelere conjuncta; de Orat., i., 67, dicendi vis egregia, summa festivitate et venustate conjuncta. See Garatoni's note on Philip., v., 7, hujus mendicitas aviditate conjuncta in fortunas nostras imminebat. See, also, p. Planc., 10; Philip., iii., 14; Brut., 44. This construction is also found with implicatus in Cic., Phit., ii., 32, and with admixtus in de Nat. Deor., ii., 10. Compare the construction of simul in § 321. [§ 475.] 13. (a) The ablative, without a preposition, is used to express the point of time at which anything happens. (Duration of time is expressed by the accusative, see § 395.) Qua nocte natus Alexander est, eadem Dianae Ephesiae templum deflagravit, Cic., De Nat. Deor., ii., 27. Pyrrhi temporibus jam Apollo versus facere desierat, Cic., De Divin., ii., 56. Pompeius extrema pueritia miles fuit summi imperatoris, ineunte adolescentia maximi ipse exercitus imperator, Cic., p. Leg. Man., 10. Note. Our expressions "by day" and "by night" are rendered in Latin by the special words interdiu and noctu, but the ordinary ablatives die and nocte also occur not unfrequently, as in the combination, die ac nocte, die noctuque, nocte et interdiu. Vespere or vesperi is "in the evening," see § 98 and 63. Ludis is also used to denote time, in the sense of tempore ludorum, and on the same principle we find Saturnalibus, Latinis, gladiatoribus, for ludis gladiatoriis. See Drakenborch on Livy, ii., 36. Other substantives which, properly speaking, do not express time, are used in that sense either with the preposition in (compare 318), or without it; e. g., initio and principio, adventu and discessu alicujus, comitiis, tumultu, and bello; but of bello the ablative alone is more common, if it is joined with an adjective or genitive; as, bello Latinorum, Veienti bello, bello Punico secundo, and after this analogy, also, pugna Cannensi, for in pugna Cannensi. Thus, also, we say, in pueritia; but when an adjective denoting time is joined to pu eritia, the ablative alone is used. It is, in general, very rare and unclassical to use in with substantives expressing a certain space of time; as, hora, dies, annus, &c., for the purpose of denoting the time when anything happens; for in tempore is used only when tempus signifies "distress" or "misery" (as it sometimes does in Cicero: in illo tempore, hoc quidem in tempore, and in Livy, in tali tempore, where we should say "under such circumstances"), and "in time," " at the right time;" but in both cases the ablative alone also occurs, and tempore in the sense of "early" has even become an adverb. An earlier form of this adverb is tempori or temperi, of which a comparative temperius is formed. Livy (i., 18 and 57), however, has the expression in illa aetate, at that period, for which Cicero would have used the ablative alone. [§ 476.] (b) The ablative is also used to express the time before and the time after a thing happened, and ante and post are in this case placed after the ablative. The meaning, however, is the same as when ante and post are joined with the accusative in the usual order, just as we may sometimes say, in the same sense, "three years after," and "after three years," post tres annos decessit, and tribus annis post decessit. In this connexion the ordinal numerals may be employed, as well as the cardinal ones: post tertium annum, and tertio anno post, are the same as |