21. Why Marcus Cicero very scrupulously avoided any use of the words novissime and novissimus. IT is clear that Marcus Cicero was unwilling to use many a word which is now in general circulation, and was so in his time, because he did not approve of them; for instance, novissimus and novissine. For although both Marcus Cato and Sallust, as well as others also of the same period, have used that word generally, and although many men besides who were not without learning wrote it in their books, yet he seems to have abstained from it, on the ground that it was not good Latin, since Lucius Aelius Stilo, who was the most learned man of his time, had avoided its use, as that of a novel and improper word. Moreover, what Marcus Varro too thought of that word I have deemed it fitting to show from his own words in the sixth book of his De Lingua Latina, dedicated to Cicero: “What used to be called extremum or 'last,'” says he, “is beginning to be called generally novissimum, a word which within my own memory both Aelius and several old men avoided as too new a term; as to its origin, just as from vetus we have vetustior and veterrimus, so from novus we get novior and novissimus.”
21. Quam ob causam M. Cicero his omnino verbis “novissime” et “novissimus” observantissime uti vitarit. NON paucis verbis, quorum frequens usus est nunc et fuit, M. Ciceronem noluisse uti manifestum est, quod ea non probaret; velut est et “novissimus” et “novissime.” Nam cum et M. Cato et Sallustius et alii quoque aetatis eiusdem verbo isto promisce usitati sint, multi etiam non indocti viri in libris id suis scripserint, abstinuisse eo tamen tamquam non Latino videtur, quoniam qui doctissimus eorum temporum fuerat, L. Aelius Stilo, ut novo et inprobo verbo uti vitaverat. Propterea, quid M. quoque Varro de ista voce existimaverit, verbis ipsius Varronis ex libro De Lingua Latina ad Ciceronem sexto demonstrandum putavi. “Quod ‘extremum,’” inquit, “dicebatur, dici ‘novissimum’ coeptum vulgo, quod mea memoria ut Aelius, sic senes aliquot, quod nimium novum verbum esset, vitabant; cuius origo, ut a ‘vetere’ ‘vetustius’ ac ‘veterrimum,’ sic a ‘novo’ declinatum ‘novius’ et ‘novissimum.’”
22. A passage taken from Plato's book entitled Gorgias, on the abuses of false philosophy, with which those who are ignorant of the rewards of true philosophy assail philosophers without reason. PLATO, a man most devoted to the truth and most ready to point it out to all, has said truly and nobly, though not from the mouth of a dignified or suitable character, all that in general may be said against those idle and worthless fellows, who, sheltered under the name of philosophy, follow profitless idleness and darkness of speech and life. For although Callicles, whom he makes his speaker, being ignorant of true philosophy, heaps dishonourable and undeserved abuse upon philosophers, yet what he says is to be taken in such a way that we may gradually come to understand it as a warning to ourselves not to deserve such reproofs, and not by idle and foolish sloth to feign the pursuit and cultivation of philosophy. I have written down Plato's own words on this subject from the book called Gorgias, not attempting to translate them, because no Latinity, much less my own, can emulate their qualities: “Philosophy, Socrates, is indeed a nice thing, if one pursue it in youth with moderation; but if one occupy oneself with it longer than is proper, it is a corrupter of men. For even if a man be well endowed by nature and follow philosophy when past his youth, he must necessarily be ignorant of all those things in which a man ought to be versed if he is to be honourable, good and of high repute. For such men are ignorant both of the laws relating to the city, and of the language which it is necessary to use in the intercourse of human society, both privately and publicly, and of the pleasures and desires of human life; in brief, they are wholly unacquainted with manners. Accordingly, when they engage in any private or public business, they become a laughing-stock; just exactly as statesmen, I suppose, become ridiculous when they enter into your debates and discussions.” A little later he adds the following: "But I think it best to take part in both. It is good to pursue philosophy merely as a matter of education, and to be a philosopher is not dishonourable when one is young; but when one who is already older persists in the business, the thing becomes laughable, Socrates, and I for my part feel the same towards those who philosophize as towards those who lisp and play. Whenever I see a little boy, to whom it is fitting to speak thus, lisping and playing, I am pleased, and it seems to me becoming and liberal and suited to the age of childhood; but when I hear a small boy speaking with precision, it seems to me to be a disagreeable thing; it wounds my ears and appears to be something befitting a slave. When, however, one hears a man lisping, or sees him playing, it appears ridiculous, unmanly and deserving of stripes. I feel just the same way towards the philosophers When I see philosophy in a young man, I rejoice; it seems to me fitting, and I think that the young man in question is ingenuous; that he who does not study philosophy is not ingenuous and will never himself be worthy of anything noble or generous. But when I see an older man still philosophizing and not giving it up, such a man, Socrates, seems to me to deserve stripes. For, as I have just said, it is possible for such a man, even though naturally well endowed, to become unmanly, avoiding the business of the city and the marketplace, where, as the poet says, men become “most eminent,” and living the rest of his life in hiding with young men, whispering in a corner with three or four of them, but never accomplishing anything liberal, great or satisfactory." These sentiments, as I have said, Plato put into the mouth of a man of no great worth indeed, yet possessing a reputation for common sense and understanding and a kind of uncompromising frankness. He does not, of course, refer to that philosophy which is the teacher of all the virtues, which excels in the discharge of public and private duties alike, and which, if nothing prevents, governs cities and the State with firmness, courage and wisdom; but rather to that futile and childish attention to trifles which contributes nothing to the conduct and guidance of life, but in which people of that kind grow old in “ill-timed playmaking,” regarded as philosophers by the vulgar, as they were by him from whose lips the words that I have quoted come.
22. Locus exemptus ex Platonis libro qui inscribitur Gorgias, de falsae philosophiae probis, quibus philosophos temere incessunt qui emolumenta verae philosophiae ignorant. PLATO, veritatis homo amicissimus eiusque omnibus exhibendae promptissimus, quae omnino dici possint in desides istos ignavosque, qui obtentu philosophiae nominis inutile otium et linguae vitaeque tenebras secuntur, ex persona quidem non gravi neque idonea, vere tamen ingenueque dixit. Nam etsi Callicles, quem dicere haec facit, verae philosophiae ignarus, inhonesta indignaque in philosophos confert, proinde tamen accipienda sunt quae dicuntur, ut nos sensim moneri intellegamus, ne ipsi quoque culpationes huiuscemodi mereamur neve inerti inanique desidia cultum et studium philosophiae mentiamur. Verba ipsa super hac re Platonis ex libro qui appellatur Gorgias scripsi, quoniam vertere ea consilium non fuit, cum ad proprietates eorum nequaquam possit Latina oratio aspirare ac multo minus etiam mea: φιλοσοφία γάρ τοί ἐστιν, ὦ Σώκρατες, χαρίεν, ἐάν τις αὐτοῦ μετρίως ἅψηται ἐν τῇ ἡλικίᾳ· ἐὰν δὲ περαιτέρω τοῦ δέοντος ἐνδιατρίψῃ, διαφθορὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων. ἐὰν γὰρ καὶ πάνυ εὐφυὴς ᾖ καὶ πόρρω τῆς ἡλικίας φιλοσοφῇ, ἀνάγκη πάντων ἄπειρον γεγονέναι ἐστίν, ὧν χρὴ ἔμπειρον εἶναι τὸν μέλλοντα καλὸν κἀγαθὸν καὶ εὐδόκιμον ἔσεσθαι ἄνδρα. καὶ γὰρ τῶν νόμων ἄπειροι γίγνονται τῶν κατὰ τὴν πόλιν καὶ τῶν λόγων, οἷς δεῖ χρώμενον ὁμιλεῖν ἐν τοῖς συμβολίαοις τοῖς ἀνθρώποις, καὶ ἰδίᾳ καὶ δημοσίᾳ, καὶ τῶν ἡδονῶν τε καὶ ἐπιθυμιῶν τῶν ἀνθρωπείων, καὶ συλλήβδην τῶν ἠθῶν παντάπασιν ἄπειροι γίγνονται. ἐπειδὰν οὖν ἔλθωσιν εἴς τινα ἰδίαν ἢ πολιτικὴν πρᾶξιν, καταγέλαστοι γίγνονται ὥσπερ γε, οἶμαι, οἱ πολιτικοί, ἐπειδὰν αὖ εἰς τὰς ὑμετέρας διατριβὰς ἔλθωσι καὶ τοὺς λόγους, καταγέλαστοί εἰσι. Paulo post addit haec: ἀλλʼ, οἶμαι, τὸ ὀρθότατόν ἐστιν, ὀμφοτέρων μετασχεῖν. φιλοσοφίας μέν, ὅσον παιδείας χάριν, καλὸν μετέχειν, καὶ οὐκ αἰσχρὸν μειρακίῳ ὄντι φιλοσοφεῖν· ἐπειδὰν δὲ ἤδη πρεσβύτερος ὢν ἄνθρωπος ἔτι φιλοσοφῇ, καταγέλαστον, ὦ Σώκρατες, τὸ χρῆηα γίγνεται, καὶ ἔγωγε ὁμοιότατον πάσχω πρὸς τοὺς φιλοσοφοῦντας, ὥσπερ πρὸς τοὺς ψελλιζομένους καὶ παίζοντας. ὅταν μὲν γὰρ παιδίον ἴδω, ᾧ ἔτι προσήκει διαλέγεσθαι οὕτω, ψελλιζόμενον καὶ παῖζον, χαίρω τε, καὶ χαρίεν μοι φαίνεται καὶ ἐλευθέριον καὶ πρέπον τῇ τοῦ παιδίου ἡλικίᾳ. ὅταν δὲ σαφῶς διαλεγομένου παιδαρίου ἀκούσω, πικρόν τί μοι δοκεῖ χρῆμα εἶναι καὶ ἀνιᾷ μου τὰ ὦτα καί μοι δοκεῖ δουλοπρεπές τι εἶναι· ὅταν δὲ ἀνδρὸς ἀκούσῃ τις ψελλιζομένου ἢ παίζοντα ὁρᾷ, καταγέλαστον φαίνεται καὶ ἄνανδρον καὶ πληγῶν ἄξιον. ταὐτὸν οὖν ἔγωγε τοῦτο πάσχω καὶ πρὸς τοὺς φιλοσοφοῦντας. περὶ νέῳ μὲν γὰρ μειρακίῳ ὁρῶν φιλοσοφίαν ἄγαμαι καὶ πρέπειν μοι δοκεῖ καὶ ἡγοῦμαι ἐλεύθερόν τινα εἶναι τοῦτον τὸν ἄνθρωπον, τὸν δὲ μὴ φιλοσοφοῦντα ἀνελεύθερον καὶ οὐδέποτε οὐδενὸς ἀξιώσοντα ἑαυτὸν οὔτε καλοῦ οὔτε γενναίου πράγματος· ὅταν δὲ δὴ πρεσβύτερον ἴδω ἔτι φιλοσοφοῦντα καὶ μὴ ἀπαλλαττόμενον, πληγῶν μοι δοκεῖ ἤδη δεῖσθαι, ὦ Σώκρατες, οὗτος ὁ ἀνήρ. ὃ γὰρ νῦν δὴ ἔλεγον, ὑπάρχει τούτῳ τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ, κἂν πάνυ εὐφυὴς ᾖ, ἀνάνδρῳ γενέσθαι, φεύγοντι τὰ μέσα τῆς πόλεως καὶ τὰς ἀγοράς, ἐν αἷς ἔφη ὁ ποιητὴς τοὺς ἄνδρας “ἀριπρεπεῖς” γίγνεσθαι, καταδεδυκότι δὲ τὸν λοιπὸν βίον βιῶναι μετὰ μειρακίων, ἐν γωνίᾳ τριῶν ἢ τεττάρων ψιθυρίζοντα, ἐλεύθερον δὲ καὶ μέγα καὶ ἱκανὸν μηδέποτε φθέγξασθαι. Haec Plato sub persona quidem, sicuti dixi, non proba, set cum sensus tamen intellegentiaeque communis fide et cum quadam indissimulabili veritate disseruit, non de illa scilicet philosophia, quae virtutum omnium disciplina est quaeque in publicis simul et privatis officiis excellit civitatesque et rempublicam, si nihil prohibeat, constanter, fortiter et perite administrat, sed de ista futtili atque puerili meditatione argutiarum, nihil ad vitam neque tuendam neque ordinandam promovente, in qua id genus homines consenescunt male feriati, quos philosophos esse et vulgus putat et is putabat, ex cuius persona haec dicta sunt.
23. A passage from a speech of Marcus Cato on the mode of life and manners of women of the olden time; and also that the husband had the right to kill his wife, if she were taken in adultery. Those who have written about the life and civilization of the Roman people say that the women of Rome and Latium “lived an abstemious life”; that is, that they abstained altogether from wine, which in the early language was called temetum; that it was an established custom for them to kiss their kinsfolk for the purpose of detection, so that, if they had been drinking, the odour might betray them. But they say that the women were accustomed to drink the second brewing, raisin wine, spiced wine and other sweet-tasting drinks of that kind. And these things are indeed made known in those books which I have mentioned, but Marcus Cato declares that women were not only censured but also punished by a judge no less severely if they had drunk wine than if they had disgraced themselves by adultery. I have copied Marcus Cato's words from the oration entitled On the Dowry, in which it is also stated that husbands had the right to kill wives taken in adultery: “When a husband puts away his wife,” says he, “he judges the woman as a censor would, and has full powers if she has been guilty of any wrong or shameful act; she is severely punished if she has drunk wine; if she has done wrong with another man, she is condemned to death.” Further, as to the right to put her to death it was thus written: “If you should take your wife in adultery, you may with impunity put her to death without a trial; but if you should commit adultery or indecency, she must not presume to lay a finger on you, nor does the law allow it.”
23. Verba ex oratione M. Catonis de mulierum veterum victu et moribus; atque inibi, quod fuerit ius marito in adulterio uxorem deprehensam necare. Qui de victu atque cultu populi Romani scripserunt mulieres Romae atque in Latio “aetatem abstemias egisse,” hoc est vino semper, quod “temetum” prisca lingua appellabatur, abstinuisse dicunt, institutumque ut cognatis osculum ferrent deprehendendi causa, ut odor indicium faceret, si bibissent. Bibere autem solitas ferunt loream, passum, murrinam et quae id genus sapiant potu dulcia. Atque haec quidem in his quibus dixi libris pervulgata sunt, sed Marcus Cato non solum existimatas, set et multatas quoque a iudice mulieres refert, non minus si vinum in se, quam si probrum et adulterium admisissent. Verba Marci Catonis adscripsi ex oratione quae inscribitur De Dote, in qua id quoque scriptum est, in adulterio uxores deprehensas ius fuisse maritis necare: “Vir,” inquit, “cum divortium fecit, mulieri iudex pro censore est, imperium quod videtur habet, si quid perverse taetreque factum est a muliere; multaturmultitatur, si vinum bibit; si cum alieno viro probri quid fecit, condemnatur.” De iure autem occidendi ita scriptum: “In adulterio uxorem tuam si prehendisses, sine iudicio inpune necares; illa te, si adulterares sive tu adulterarere, digito non auderet contingere, neque ius est.”
24. That the most elegant speakers used the expressions die pristini, die crastini, die quarti, and die quinti, not those which are current now. I HEAR die quarto and die quinto, which the Greeks express by ei)s teta/rthn kai\ ei)s pe/mpthn, used nowadays even by learned men, and one who speaks otherwise is looked down upon as crude and illiterate. But in the time of Marcus Tullius, and earlier, they did not, I think, speak in that way; for they used diequinte and diequinti as a compound adverb, with the second syllable of the word shortened. The deified Augustus, too, who was well versed in the Latin tongue and an imitator of his father's elegance in discourse, has often in his letters used that means of designating the days. But it will be sufficient to show the undeviating usage of the men of old, if I quote the regular formula of the praetor, in which, according to the usage of our forefathers, he is accustomed to proclaim the festival known as the Compitalia. His words are as follows: “On the ninth day the Roman people, the Quirites, will celebrate the Compitalia; when they shall have begun, legal business ceases.” The praetor says dienoni, not die nono. And not the praetor alone, but almost all antiquity, spoke in that way. Look you, this passage of the well-known poet Pomponius comes to my mind, from the Atellan farce entitled Mevia:For six days now I've done no stroke of work;The fourth day (diequarte) I, poor wretch, shall starve to death. There is also the following passage from Coelius in the second book of his Histories: “If you are willing to give me the cavalry and follow me yourself with the rest of the army, on the fifth day (diequinti) I will have your dinner ready for you in the Capitol at Rome.” But Coelius took both the story itself and the word from the fourth book of Marcus Cato's Origines, where we find the following: “Then the master of the horse thus advised the Carthaginian dictator: 'Send me to Rome with the cavalry; on the fifth day (diequinti) your dinner shall be ready for you in the Capitol.'” The final syllable of that word I find written sometimes with e and sometimes with i; for it was usual with those men of olden times very often to use those letters without distinction, saying praefiscine and praefiscini, proclivi and proclive, and using many other words of that kind with either ending; in the same way too they said die pristini, that is, “the day before,” which is commonly expressed by pridie, changing the order of the words in the compound, as if it were pristino die. Also by a similar usage they said die crastini, meaning crastino die or “to-morrow.” The priests of the Roman people, too, when they make a proclamation for the third day, say diem perendini. But just as very many people said die pristini, so Marcus Cato in his oration Against Furius said die proximi or “the next day”; and Gnaeus Matius, an exceedingly learned man, in his Mimiambi, instead of our nudius tertius, or “four days ago,” has die quarto, in these lines:Of late, four days ago (die quarto), as I recall,The only pitcher in the house he broke. Therefore the distinction will be found to be, that we use die quarto of the past, but diequarte of the future.
24. “Die pristini,” “die crastini” et “die quarti” et “die quinti” qui elegantius locuti sint dixisse, non ut ea nunc vulgo dicuntur. “DIE quarto” et “die quinto,” quod Graeci εἰς τετάρτην καὶ εἰς πέμπτην dicunt, ab eruditis nunc quoque dici audio, et qui aliter dicit pro rudi atque indocto despicitur. Sed Marci Tullii aetas ac supra eam non, opinor, ita dixerunt, “diequinte” enim et “diequinti” pro adverbio copulate dictum est, secunda in eo syllaba correpta. Divus etiam Augustus, linguae Latinae non nescius munditiarumque patris sui in sermonibus sectator, in epistulis plurifariam significatione ista dierum non aliter usus est. Satis autem erit perpetuae veterum consuetudinis demonstrandae gratia verba sollemnia praetoris ponere, quibus more maiorum ferias concipere solet quae appellantur Compitalia. Ea verba haec sunt: “Dienoni populo Romano Quiritibus Compitalia erunt; quando concepta fuerint, nefas.” “Dienoni” praetor dicit, non “die nono.” Neque praetor solum, sed pleraque omnis vetustas sic locuta est. Venit ecce illius versus Pomponiani in mentem, qui est ex Atellania, quae Mevia inscribitur:Díes hic sextus, cúm nihil egi: diequarte Moriár fame. Suppetit etiam Coelianum illud ex libro Historiarum secundo: “Si vis mihi equitatum dare et ipse cum cetero exercitu me sequi, diequinti Romae in Capitolium curabo tibi cena sit cocta.” Et historiam autem et verbum hoc sumpsit Coelius ex Origine IV. M. Catonis, in qua ita scriptum est: “Igitur dictatorem Carthaginiensium magister equitum monuit: ‘Mitte mecum Romam equitatum; diequinti in Capitolio tibi cena cocta erit.’” Extremam istius vocis syllabam tum per e tum per i scriptam legi; nam sane quam consuetum is veteribus fuerit, litteris is plerumque uti indifferenter, sicuti “praefiscine” et “praefiscini,” “proclivi” et “proclive” atque alia item multa hoc genus varie dixerunt; “die pristini” quoque eodem modo dicebatur, quod significabat “die pristino,” id est priore, quod vulgo “pridie” dicitur, converso compositionis ordine, quasi “pristino die.” Atque item simili figura “die crastini” dicebatur, id erat “crastino die.” Sacerdotes quoque populi Romani, cum condicunt in diem tertium, “die perendini” dicunt. Sed ut plerique “die pristini,” ita M. Cato in oratione Contra Furium “die proximi” dixit, “die quarto” autem Cn. Matius, homo impense doctus, in Mimiambis pro eo dicit, quod “nudius quartus” nos dicimus, in his versibus:Nuper die quarto, ut recordor, et certeAquarium urceum unicum domi fregit.Hoc igitur intererit, ut “die quarto” quidem de praeterito dicamus, “diequarte” autem de futuro.
25. The names of certain weapons, darts and swords, and also of boats and ships, which are found in the books of the early writers. ONCE upon a time, when I was riding in a carriage, to keep my mind from being dull and unoccupied and a prey to worthless trifles, it chanced to occur to me to try to recall the names of weapons, darts and swords which are found in the early histories, and also the various kinds of boats and their names. Those, then, of the former that came to mind at the time are the following: spear, pike, fire-pike, half-pike, iron bolt, Gallic spear, lance, hunting-darts, javelins, long bolts, barbed-javelins, German spears, thonged-javelin, Gallic bolt, broadswords, poisoned arrows, Illyrian hunting-spears, cimeters, darts, swords, daggers, broadswords, double-edged swords, small-swords, poniards, cleavers. Of the lingula, or “little tongue,” since it is less common, I think I ought to say that the ancients applied that term to an oblong small-sword, made in the form of a tongue; it is mentioned by Naevius in his tragedy Hesione. I quote the line:Pray let me seem to please you with my tongue,But with my little tongue (lingula).The rumpia too is a kind of weapon of the Thracian people, and the word occurs in the fourteenth book of the Annals of Quintus Ennius. The names of ships which I recalled at the time are these: merchant-ships, cargo-carriers, skiffs, warships, cavalry-transports, cutters, fast cruisers, or, as the Greeks call them, ke/lhtes, barques, smacks, sailing-skiffs, light galleys, which the Greeks call i(stiokopoi or e)paktri/des, scouting-boats, galliots, tenders, flatboats, vetutiae moediae, yachts, pinnaces, long-galliots, scullers' boats, caupuls, arks, fair-weather craft, pinks, lighters, spy-boats.
25. Telorum et iaculorum gladiorumque, atque inibi navium quoque vocabula, quae scripta in veterum libris reperiuntur. TELORUM, iaculorum gladiorumque vocabula quae in historiis veteribus scripta sunt, item navigiorum genera et nomina, libitum forte nobis est sedentibus in reda conquirere, ne quid malarum ineptiarum vacantem stupentemque animum occuparet. Quae tum igitur suppetierant, haec sunt: hasta, pilum, phalarica, semiphalarica, soliferrea, gaesa, lancea, spari, rumices, trifaces, tragulae, frameae, mesanculae, cateiae, rumpiae, scorpii, sibones, siciles, veruta, enses, sicae, machaeraemacherae, spathae, lingulae, pugiones, clunacula. De “lingula,” quoniam est minus frequens, admonendum existimo, lingulam veteres dixisse gladiolum oblongum in speciem linguae factum, cuius meminit Naevius in tragoedia Hesiona. Versum Naevi apposui:Síne mi gerere mórem videar língua, verum língula. Item “rumpia” genus teli est Thraecae nationis, positumque hoc vocabulum in Quinti Enni Annalium XIV. Navium autem, quas reminisci tunc potuimus, appellationes hae sunt: gauli, corbitae, caudicae, longae, hippagines, cercuri, celoces vel, ut Graeci dicunt, κέλητες, lembi, oriae, lenunculi, actuariae, quas Graeci ἱστιοκώπους vocant vel ἐπακτρίδας, prosumiae vel geseoretae vel oriolae, stlattae, scaphae, pontones, vectoriaevetutiae mydiamoediae, phaseli, parones, myoparones, lintres, caupuli, camarae, placidae, cydarum, ratariae, catascopium.
26. That Asinius Pollio showed ignorance in criticizing Sallust because he used transgressus (crossing) for transfretatio (crossing the sea) and trangressi (those who had crossed) for qui transfretaverant (those who had crossed the sea). ASINIUS POLLIO, in a letter which he addressed to Plancus, and certain others who were unfriendly to Gaius Sallustius, thought that Sallust deserved censure because in the first book of his Histories he called the crossing of the sea and a passage made in ships transgresses, using transgressi of those who had crossed the sea, for which the usual term is transfretare. I give Sallust's own words: “Accordingly Sertorius, having left a small garrison in Mauretania and taking advantage of a dark night and a favourable tide, tried either by secrecy or speed to avoid a battle while crossing (in transgressu).” Then later he wrote: “When they had crossed (transgressos), a mountain which had been seized in advance by the Lusitanians gave them all shelter.” This, they say, is an improper and careless usage, supported by no adequate authority. “For transgressus,” says Pollio, “comes from transgredi, 'to step across,' and this word itself refers to walking and stepping with the feet.” Therefore Pollio thought that the verb transgredi did not apply to those who fly or creep or sail, but only to those who walk and measure the way with their feet. Hence they say that in no good writer can transgressus be found applied to ships, or as the equivalent of transfretatio. But, since cursus, or “running,” is often correctly used of ships, I ask why it is that ships may not be said to make a transgressus, especially since the small extent of the narrow strait which flows between Spain and the Afric land is most elegantly described by the word transgressio, as being a distance of only a few steps. But as to those who ask for authority and assert that ingredi or transgredi has not been used of sailing, I should like them to tell me how much difference they think there is between ingredi, or “march,” and ambulare, or “walk.” Yet Cato in his book On Farming says: “A farm should be chosen in a situation where there is a large town near by and the sea, or a river where ships pass (ambulant).” Moreover Lucretius, by the use of this same expression, bears testimony that such figures are intentional and are regarded as ornaments of diction. For in his fourth book he speaks of a shout as “marching” (gradientem) through the windpipe and jaws, which is much bolder than the Sallustian expression about the ships. The lines of Lucretius are as follows:The voice besides doth often scrape the throat;A shout forth marching (gradiens) doth make the windpipe rough. Accordingly, Sallust, in the same book, uses progressus, not only of those who sailed in ships, but also of floating skiffs. I have added his own words about the skiffs: “Some of them, after going (progressae) but a little way, the load being excessive and unstable, when panic had thrown the passengers into disorder, began to sink.”
26. Inscite ab Asinio Pollione reprehensum SallustiumSellustium, quod transfretationem “transgressum” dixerit, et “transgressos” qui transfretassent. ASINIO POLLIONI in quadam epistula, quam ad Plancum scripsit, et quibusdam aliis C. Sallusti iniquis, dignum nota visum est, quod in primo Historiarum maris transitum transmissumque navibus factum “transgressum” appellavit eosque, qui fretum transmiserant, quos “transfretasse” dici solitum est, “transgressos” dixit. Verba ipsa Sallusti posui: “Itaque Sertorius, levi praesidio relicto in Mauretania, nanctus obscuram noctem, aestu secundo furtim aut celeritate vitare proelium in transgressu conatus est.” Ac deinde infra ita scripsit: “Transgressos omnis recipit mons praeceptus a Lusitanis.” Hoc igitur et minus proprie et ἀπερισκέπτως et nullo gravi auctore dictum aiunt. “Nam ‘transgressus,’” inquit, “a transgrediendo dicitur idque ipsum ab ingressu et a pedum gradu appellatum.” Idcirco verbum “transgredi” convenire non putavit neque volantibus neque serpentibus neque navigantibus, sed his solis qui gradiuntur et pedibus iter emetiuntur. Propterea negant aput scriptorem idoneum aut navium “transgressum” reperiri posse aut pro transfretatione “transgressum.” Sed quaero ego, cur non, sicuti “cursus” navium recte dici solet, ita “transgressus” etiam navibus factus dici possit. Praesertim cum brevitas tam angusti fretus, qui terram Africam Hispaniamque interfluit, elegantissime “transgressionis” vocabulo, quasi paucorum graduum spatium, definita sit. Qui auctoritatem autem requirunt et negant dictum “ingredi” “transgredi” ve in navigantibus, volo uti respondeant quantum existiment interesse “ingredi” atque “ambulare.” Atqui Cato De Re Rustica: “Fundus,” inquit, “eo in loco habendus est, ut et oppidum prope amplum sit et mare aut amnis, qua naves ambulant.” Appetitas porro huiuscemodi translationes habitasque esse pro honestamentis orationis, Lucretius quoque testimonium in hac eadem voce dicit. In quarto enim libro clamorem per arterias et per fauces “gradientem” dicit, quod est nimio confidentius quam illud de navibus Sallustianum. Versus Lucreti hi sunt:Praeterea radit vox fauces saepe, facitqueAsperiora foras gradiens arteria clamor. Propterea Sallustius in eodem libro non eos solum qui navibus veherentur, sed et scaphas quoque nantes “progressas” dicit. Verba ipsa de scaphis posui: “Earum aliae paululum progressae nimio simul et incerto onere, cum pavor corpora agitaverat, deprimebantur.”
27. A story of the Roman and the Carthaginian people, showing that they were rivals of nearly equal strength. IT is stated in ancient records that the strength, the spirit and the numbers of the Roman and the Carthaginian people were once equal. And this opinion was not without foundation. With other nations the contest was for the independence of one or the other state, with the Carthaginians it was for the rule of the world. An indication of this is found in the following word and act of each of the two peoples: Quintus Fabius, a Roman general, delivered a letter to the Carthaginians, in which it was written that the Roman people had sent them a spear and a herald's staff, signs respectively of war and peace; they might choose whichever they pleased and regard the one which they should choose as sent them by the Roman people. The Carthaginians replied that they chose neither one; those who had brought them might leave whichever they liked; that whatever should be left them they would consider that they themselves had chosen. Marcus Varro, however, says that neither the spear itself nor the staff itself was sent, but two tokens, on one of which was engraved the representation of a staff; on the other that of a spear.
27. Historia de populo Romano deque populo Poenico, quod pari propemodum vigore fuerint aemuli. IN litteris veteribus memoria extat quod par quondam fuit vigor et acritudo amplitudoque populi Romani atque Poeni. Neque inmerito aestimatum. Cum aliis quidem populis de uniuscuiusque republica, cum Poenis autem de omnium terrarum imperio decertatum. Eius rei specimen est in illo utriusque populi verbo factoque: Q. Fabius, imperator Romanus, dedit ad Carthaginienses epistulam. Ibi scriptum fuit populum Romanum misisse ad eos hastam et caduceum, signa duo belli aut pacis, ex quis utrum vellent eligerent; quod elegissent, id unum ut esse missum existimarent. CarthaginiensesCathaginienses responderunt neutrum sese eligere, sed posse qui adtulissent utrum mallent relinquere; quod reliquissent, id sibi pro electo futurum. M. autem Varro non hastam ipsam neque ipsum caduceum missa dicit, sed duas tesserulas, in quarum altera caduceum, in altera hastae simulacra fuerint incisa.
28. About the limits of the periods of boyhood, manhood and old age, taken from the History of Tubero. TUBERO, in the first book of his History, has written that King Servius Tullius, when he divided the Roman people into those five classes of older and younger men for the purpose of making the enrolment, regarded as pueri, or “boys,” those who were less than seventeen years old; then, from their seventeenth year, when they were thought to be fit for service, he enrolled them as soldiers, calling them up to the age of forty-six iuniores, or “younger men,” and beyond that age, seniores, or “elders.” I have made a note of this fact, in order that from the rating of Servius Tullius, that most sagacious king, the distinctions between boyhood, manhood, and old age might be known, as they were established by the judgment, and according to the usage, of our forefathers.
28. De aetatum finibus pueritiae, iuventae, senectae, ex Tuberonis historia sumptum. TUBERO in Historiarum primo scripsit Servium Tullium regem, populi Romani cum illas quinque classes seniorum et iuniorum census faciendi gratia institueret, “pueros” esse existimasse qui minores essent annis septem decem, atque inde ab anno septimo decimo, quo idoneos iam esse reipublicae arbitraretur, milites scripsisse, eosque ad annum quadragesimum sextum “iuniores” supraque eum annum “seniores” appellasse. Eam rem propterea notavi, ut discrimina, quae fuerint iudicio moribusque maiorum “pueritiae,” “iuventae,” “senectae,” ex ista censione Servi Tulli, prudentissimi regis, noscerentur.
29. That the particle atque is not only conjunctive, but has many and varied meanings. THE particle atque is said by the grammarians to be a copulative conjunction. And as a matter of fact, it very often joins and connects words; but sometimes it has certain other powers, which are not sufficiently observed, except by those engaged in a diligent examination of the early literature. For it has the force of an adverb when we say “I have acted otherwise than (atque) you,” for it is equivalent to aliter quam tu; and if it is doubled, it amplifies and emphasizes a statement, as we note in the Annals of Quintus Ennius, unless my memory of this verse is at fault:And quickly (atque atque) to the walls the Roman manhood came.The opposite of this meaning is expressed by deque, also found in the early writers. Atque is said to have been used besides for another adverb also, namely statim, as is thought to be the case in these lines of Virgil, where that particle is employed obscurely and irregularly:Thus, by Fate's law, all speeds towards the worse,And giving way, falls back; e'en as if oneWhose oars can barely force his skiff upstreamShould chance to slack his arms and cease to drive;Then straightway (atque) down the flood he's swept away.
29. Quod particula “atque” non complexiva tantum sit, sed vim habeat plusculam variamque. “ATQUE” particula a grammaticis quidem coniunctio esse dicitur conexiva. Et plerumque sane coniungit verba et conectit; sed interdum alias quasdam potestates habet non satis notas, nisi in veterum litterarum tractatione atque cura exercitis. Nam et pro adverbio valet, cum dicimus “aliter ego feci atque tu,” significatur enim “aliter quam tu,” et si gemina fiat, auget incenditque rem de qua agitur, ut animadvertimus in Q. Enni Annalibus, nisi memoria in hoc versu labor:Atque atque accedit muros Romana iuventus; cui significationi contrarium est quod itidem a veteribus dictum est, “deque.” Et praeterea pro alio quoque adverbio dicitur, id est “statim” factum, quod in his Vergili versibus existimatur, ubi obscure et insequentur particula ista posita est:sic omnia fatisIn peius ruere ac retro sublapsa referri;Non aliter quam qui adverso vix flumine lembumRemigiis subigit, si brachia forte remisit,Atque illum in praeceps prono rapit alveus amni.