صور الصفحة
النشر الإلكتروني

where C and M add incertum between sint and an, which, as Gelenius saw, is wholly superfluous.

(See further the Addenda, p. 118.)

X. 33. 6. Before leaving this chapter we may note a few lines further on, in § 6, another trace of the same busy person, in the genitive plural, which PF give naked in its original shape (' uigiliumque ') and which M writes uiciumque, *but which F3Up and TDLA decently correct to uigilumque, saving the grammar, but with no profit to the sense, since no uigiles whatever have been mentioned save those stationis primae which happen to be the two preceding words. The glossographer explains the word statio just as in 5. 48. 6, where to stationibus the bulk of the MSS. add uigiliis, but O adds et uigiliis, and D* with the Ed. Princeps and Aldus uigiliisque. For other examples of glosses decently veiled by a -que or et see 5. 51. 3; 6. 4. 9; 8. 13. 6.

X. 21. 14 fuisse tantum bellum ut nec duce uno nec exercitu geri potuerit MPFUрOTD; to this a second uno is added before exercitu by A2; and before the second nec by DLA (who place the first uno before duce); and after exercitu by H. J. Mueller. But the text of the best MSS. is perfectly sound; the words uno and geri are distributed between the pair of coordinate clauses, though in meaning both go with both. This principle of 'Interwoven order' ought to be more familiar to scholars as it has often caused misunderstanding and needless disturbance of texts. No one fails to see through it in such examples as Aen. IX. 12,

nunc tempus equos, nunc poscere currus,

though few readers of the Aeneid realise perhaps how much Vergil loved the playfulness of the construction. We have already called attention to it in Livy in our note on II. 41. 6 (see further Class. Rev. XIV. (1900) p. 357); other examples are

3. 28. I qui tractus castrorum quaeque forma esset.

3. 38. I neque animis . . . im minutis neque . . . honoris insignibus prodeunt.

So in 5. 7. 4 (seditio and posset); 5. 26. 10 (imperatori Romano and maturam uictoriam dedisset); 7. 2. 7 (temere and alternis); 7. 26. 15 (ea and classis); 9. 28. 4 (multitudo and contulerat).

X. 30. 9. This passage has been discussed above with 7. 10. 13.

X. 35. 14. In this passage a suggestion of Drakenborch, based merely on his knowledge of Livian usage, is strikingly confirmed by the test of the linear method (see pp. 11 sq. sup.). All the available good MSS. (MPUþTDLa— the reader will know by this time with what reserves we call Up 'good') give

di bene uerterent; facerentque quod se dignum quisque ducerent; consulem M. Atilium uel solum, si nemo alius sequatur, iturum aduersus hostes.

Duker saw that the subject which Livy intended for facerent was certainly not a crowd of dissentient deities-the only meaning which the text in this shape would allow-but the despondent and discordant soldiers whom the consul is trying to arouse. He accordingly cut out the q- after facerent as a duplication of the following q of quod.

But Drakenborch, following the regular usage of these prefatory appeals to heaven,' proposed to deal more freely, but also, as we believe, more soundly, with the corruption, by writing

facerent, quod di bene verterent, quod se dignum quisque ducerent.

Now the parenthetic prayer contains just nineteen letters, the normal length of an uncial line; put the words into linear shape and we have

facerent quod

di bene uerterent quod

se dignum quisque duce


The two lines ending in -erent quod made the falling out into the marginlet us call it the excidence of the first quod-clause extremely easy. When they came to be put back, three of them got into the wrong place, but the quod, by one or other of several familiar ways [cf. V. (1911), p. 6, and our note on 4. 7. 10], reattached itself to facerent, though reduced to the form q,

i.e. -que.

Drakenborch's emendation therefore is strongly commended by linear considerations. The argument is, of course, not impaired at whatever portion of the lines the two homoea

uerterent quod happened to stand, since in any case, from the number of the letters between them, the second was bound to come directly below the first.

Just below in § 17 in precisely the same way an uncial line of seventeen letters, segniter arma capit, has fallen out altogether in the archetypes of MPUþ before a following segniter. And in the next chapter (36. 2) the words prius impetus, excident before the next prius, have in the archetype of PUp been restored in the middle of § 3 after diuersique.

X. 36. 9. non uirtus solum consulis sed fors etiam adiuuit.

So MUPTDA (and PL save that they write cos for consulis). So also Plaut. Capt. 202

in re mala animo si bono utare, adiuuat,

and Caesar (B. Gall. 7. 17. 2)

alteri quod nullo studio agebant non multum adiuuabant ('were not much good').

1 E.g. 3. 26. 9 (Cincinnatus) rogatus ut, quod bene uerteret, togatus mandata senatus audiret ;

29. 22. 5 iuberentque, quod di bene uerterent, traicere.

And this use of transitive verbs without an expressed object is, in fact, a favourite idiom with Livy; take e.g. 2. 21. 4 tanti errores implicant temporum (scil. te or scriptorem rerum); or iuuabit in Fraef. 3 ("it will be to the good'); or enixius ad bellum adiuuerunt ('gave more vigorous help,' 29. I. 18).

But our good correctors are busy again, and Gruter's consulem has supplanted Livy's consulis; rather feebly, for it was Rome that fortune meant to help, not merely the brave consul; and so Livy tells us just below (§ 12) Numen etiam deorum respexisse nomen Romanum uisum.

X. 43. 13. We choose for the last of these notes a passage whose treatment by eminent hands is typical of the mischief done to serious study by brilliant scholarship tinged with impatience.

In one of the campaigns of the Great Samnite War by the strategy of Papirius Cursor a force of 8,000 Samnites (10. 40. 6) who were marching to relieve Cominium, then besieged by his colleague Carvilius, had been cut off from their own camp at Aquilonia; but meanwhile (c. 43. 8) Cominium had been abandoned by the Samnite forces and surrendered. Learning this, they try to return to their camp near Aquilonia, but finding that place also in the hands of the Romans, they bivouac in the open for the night.

Eo ipso loco temere sub armis strati passim inquietum omne tempus noctis exspectando timendoque lucem egere. Prima luce, incerti quam in partem intenderent iter, repente in fugam consternantur conspecti ab equitibus qui egressos nocte ab oppido [i.e. a Cominio] Samnites persecuti uiderant multitudinem non uallo, non stationibus firmatam. Conspecta et ex muris Aquiloniae ea multitudo erat iamque etiam legionariae cohortes sequebantur [the result being that the force takes to flight in the direction of Bovianum, and reaches it after serious loss].

The unlucky Samnites have they are in danger of being Their one desire is to escape

Surely nothing could be clearer than this. no time to fortify a camp, and they know that surrounded but do not know where to turn. without delay; and from whatever quarter an attack is threatened, that is a direction in which escape is cut off. So soon therefore as they are 'sighted (conspecti) by a Roman force, especially a cavalry force, they take to their heels. The Roman infantry at Aquilonia see them too, but cannot overtake them.

This dramatic incident, sketched in Livy's briefest and happiest manner, contented everyone down to Doujat,1 who wished to alter conspecti ab into conspectis, substituting the less for the more important side of the incident; for unless the Roman cavalry had sighted the Samnites, the Samnites, like Brer Rabbit, might have kept on saying nothing,' but the moment they were discovered run they must. Madvig cuts the knot, and the point, with his lordly knife; conspecti, we are told, is an interpolation, which makes nonsense

[ocr errors]

1 As well as Drakenborch and later Frigell (Dissertatio de Livii emendandi ratione, p. 30).

by anticipating the last clause of the sentence (uiderant multitudinem non uallo, non stationibus firmatam), but which the (remarkably sensitive) interpolator thought to be necessary in order to explain the et which follows conspecta in the next sentence. This ingenuity however explains too much and too little. For if conspecti were simply equivalent to the clause uiderant. . . firmatam, an equivalence which Madvig alleges as his main complaint against it, then the conspecta et could be perfectly well regarded as referring back merely to that clause-as indeed it can, whether it be or be not true that that clause adds nothing to the conspecti.

Now MPFUрTDLA, that is all the good MSS. which exist of this end of the Book, agree in reading conspecti ab with no hint of difficulty; and if an interpolator was the author of the participle he must have lived either before the time of Symmachus, or at all events before the uncial text was copied into minuscule. He must further have been an exceedingly good scholar to find exactly the right place for his addition in a tightly packed sentence, being in fact the one and only place where it could be inserted without producing ambiguity and disturbance to the order of events. Such a choice is much more likely to be Livy's than anyone else's.

But were Madvig and Doujat right in supposing that conspecti means no more than the uiderant which follows?

In the first place the point of the uiderant clause lies not in the main verb but in the phrase which acts as its object. The point of the addition is that the Roman cavalry saw before them not an army but a mere defenceless crowd of soldiers, inviting an attack.

In the second place, and chiefly, the whole trouble has been created by ignoring the peculiar and interesting use of conspici, which not merely means 'to be observed,' but, when it is a person or his property that is observed, generally suggests that the person is conscious of the fact. So that we only need to 'declare' that here conspecti expresses exactly the meaning which Doujat 'ignorantly' desired, i.e. 'realizing that they were discovered.' Here are a few examples: Sall. Cat. 7. 6 Sic quisque hostem ferire, murum ascendere, conspici dum tale facinus facere properabat.

Livy says of Hannibal (XXI. 4. 5) in a famous passage:

Vestitus nihil inter aequales excellens: arma atque equi conspiciebantur [i.e. their owner took care to keep them in splendid condition].

XXII. 24. 5 (Fabius has gone to Rome, and his Master of the Horse, Minucius, at once begins to indulge in ostentatious defiance):

Ipse autem quod minime quis crederet cum hostis propius esset tertiam partem militum frumentatum duabus in castris retentis dimisit; dein castra propius hostem mouit ... in tumulum hosti conspectum ut intentum sciret esse ad frumentatores si qua uis fieret tutandos.

45. 7. 3. (The defeated Perseus seeks an interview with his conqueror Aemilius Paullus, and comes into the Roman camp, to the great excitement of

the Roman soldiers, who crowd round the visitor so closely that Paullus has to send officers to extricate him. Livy, in his dramatic manner, pauses for a sentence to suggest the thoughts of the soldiers and of Perseus also.)

Perseus caput belli erat nec ipsius tantum patris auique quos sanguine ac genere contingebat fama conspectum eum efficiebat, sed effulgebant [i.e. to their imaginations] Philippus et magnus Alexander [Perseus chooses to come without retinue, accompanied only by his son] nullo suorum alio comite qui socius calamitatis miserabiliorem eum1 faceret.

This last sentence shows explicitly that Livy was feeling keenly what Perseus felt; he had already suggested it by his choice of the word conspectum. A very clear and closely parallel passage is in 25. 16. 2: ad exta sacrificio perpetrato angues duo ex occulto adlapsi adedere iocur, conspectique repente ex oculis abierunt.' In fact this example alone would suffice. Our English idiom is precisely similar: in the Morning Post of December 17, 1914, there is written: 'Sighted by our patrol, the enemy ships took to flight.'

Further examples will be found, if anyone needs them, in I. 47. 5 (conspici); 2. 5. 5 (conspectius); 4. 13. 5 (conspectus elatusque), and 28. 2. 3 (ab hoste conspecti sunt trepidarique repente coeptum).

Sed haec hactenus. This case alone might be enough to show how much the manuscripts of this Decade have to teach those who will study them with patience. We have done our best to speak with all respect of serious students like Weissenborn and H. J. Mueller, and with much more than respect of great scholars like Gronov and Madvig, whose splendid achievements with far smaller material can never be belittled or forgotten. But to the toiling scribes, who saved for us so great an inheritance, every scholar owes an even deeper debt. To condemn or obliterate their work unjustly is neither wise, nor grateful, nor scholarly, nor even honest to those who will come after.


We have once more to thank Professors Postgate and Anderson for valuable criticism.

X. 13. 10 'quid attineret as a question in Orat. Obl. is contrary to Livy's consistent practice, which is to use the infinitive; see 37. 15. 2; 45. 19. 2; 2. 41. 6. I had noticed the incongruity in quid attineret before I read Weissenborn's note on your passage, which I regard as important corroboration. Unless therefore you are prepared to alter the imperfect, rogitans is necessary.'-J. P. P.

This raises an old question on which the evidence is not quite so clear as Dr. Postgate has inferred from texts printed without critical information. We have no doubt that the Infinitive is right in 2. 41. 6 (quid attinuisse 'what was the point of granting land?') and in 6. 23. 7 (quid attinere 'what is the point of letting Roman power decay?'). Here the Infinitives represent attinuit and attinet of the Recta. But in 45. 19. 2 the only MS. (Vindob.) gives attineret, and Drak. retains it

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
« السابقةمتابعة »