Syntax of the verb and clauses

The Ablative Absolute often takes the place of a Sub ordinate Clause.

Thus it may replace—

A Temporal Clause (§ 541 ff.):— patre interfectō , [his] father having been killed. [This corresponds to cum pater interfectus esset, when his father had been killed.]

recentibus sceleris êius vestīgiīs (Q. C. 7.1.1) , while the traces of the crime were fresh. [Cf. dum recentia sunt vestīgia .]

A Causal Clause (§ 540):— at eī quī Alesiae obsidēbanturpraeteritā diē quā auxilia suōrum exspectāverant,cōnsūmptōomnīfrūmentō, conciliō coāctō cōnsultābant (B. G. 7.77) , but those who were under siege at Alesia, since the time, etc., had expired, and their grain had been exhausted, calling a council (see 5 below), consulted together. [Cf. cum diēs praeterīsset , etc.]

Dārēus,dēspērātā pāce, ad reparandās vīrīs intendit animum (Q. C. 4.6.1) , Darius, since he despaired of peace, devoted his energies to recruiting his forces. [Cf. cum pācem dēspērāret .]

A Concessive Clause (§ 527):— at eō repūgnantefīēbat (cōnsul), immo vērō eō fīēbat magis (Mil. 34) , but though he (Clodius) opposed, he (Milo) was likely to be elected consul; nay, rather, etc.

turribus excitātīs, tamen hās altitūdō puppium ex barbarīs nāvibus superābat (B. G. 3.14) , although towers had been built up, still the high sterns of the enemy's ships rose above them.

A Conditional Clause (§ 521):— occurrēbat eī, mancam et dēbilem praetūram futūram suam, cōnsule Milōne (Mil. 25) , it occurred to him that his prœtorship would be maimed and feeble, if Milo were consul. [ sī Milō cōnsul esset .]

quā (regiōne) subāctālicēbit dēcurrere in illud mare (Q. C. 9.3.13), if this region is subdued, we shall be free to run down into that sea.

quā quidem dētrāctā (Arch. 28) , if this be taken away.

A Clause of Accompanying Circumstance:— ego haec ā Chrȳsogonō meā sponte, remōtō Sex.Rōsciō, quaerō; (Rosc. Am. 130), of my own accord, without reference to Sextus Roscius (Sextus Roscius being put aside), I ask these questions of Chrysogonus.

nec imperante necsciente nec praesente dominō (Mil. 29) , without their master's giving orders, or knowing it, or being present.

As the English Nominative Absolute is far less common than the Ablative Absolute in Latin, a change of form is generally required in translation. Thus the present participle is oftenest to be rendered in English by a relative clause with when or while; and the perfect passive participle by the perfect active participle. These changes may be seen in the following example:— At illī, intermissō spatiō, imprūdentibus nostrīs atque occupātīs in mūnītiōne castrōrum, subitō sē ex silvīs ēiēcērunt; impetū que in eōs factō quī erant in statiōne prō castrīs conlocātī, ācriter pūgnāvērunt; duābusque missīs subsidiō cohortibus ā Caesare, cum hae ( perexiguō intermissō locī spatiō inter sē) cōnstitissent, novō genere pūgnae perterritīs nostrīs , per mediōs audācissimē perrūpērunt sēque inde incolumīs recēpērunt.— CAESAR, B. G. 5.15.

But they, having paused a space, while our men were unaware and busied in fortifying the camp, suddenly threw themselves out of the woods; then, making an attack upon those who were on guard in front of the camp, they fought fiercely; and, though two cohorts had been sent by Cæsar as reinforcements, after these had taken their position (leaving very little space of ground between them), as our men were alarmed by the strange kind of fighting, they dashed most daringly through the midst of them and got off safe.

For the Ablative with Prepositions, see § 220.

THE ABLATIVE AS LOCATIVE

Ablative of Place

The Locative Case was originally used (literally) to denote the place where and (figuratively) to denote the time when (a development from the idea of place). But this case was preserved only in names of towns and a few other words, and the place where is usually denoted by the Ablative. In this construction the Ablative was no doubt, used at first without a preposition, but afterwards it became associated in most instances with the preposition in.

In expressions of Time and Place the Latin shows a variety of idiomatic constructions (Ablative, Accusative, and Locative), which are systematically treated in § 423 ff.

TIME AND PLACE

Time

Time when, or within which, is expressed by the Ablative; time how long by the Accusative.

Ablative:— cōnstitūtā diē, on the appointed day; prīm˘ lūce, at daybreak.

quotā hōrā, at what o'clock? tertiā vigiliā, in the third watch.

tribus proximīs annīs (Iug. 11) , within the last three years.

diēbusvīgintī quīnque aggerem exstrūxērunt (B. G. 7.24) , within twentyfive days they finished building a mound.

Accusative:— diēs continuōs trīgintā, for thirty days together.

cum trīduumiter fēcisset (B. G. 2.16) , when he had marched three days.

The Ablative of Time is locative in its origin (§ 421 ); the Accusative is the same as that of the extent of space (§ 425 ).

Special constructions of time are the following:—

The Ablative of time within which sometimes takes in, and the Accusative of time how long per, for greater precision:— in diēbus proximīs decem (Iug. 28) , within the next ten days.

lūdī per decem diēs (Cat. 3.20) , games for ten days.

Duration of time is occasionally expressed by the Ablative:— militēs quīnque hōrīs proelium sustinuerant (B. C. 1.47) , the men had sustained the fight five hours.

In this use the period of time is regarded as that within which the act is done, and it is only implied that the act lasted through the period. Cf. inter annōs quattuordecim ( B. G. 1.36 ), for fourteen years.

Time during which or within which may be expressed by the Accusative or Ablative of a noun in the singular, with an ordinal numeral:— quīntō diē, within [just] four days (lit. on the fifth day). [The Romans counted both ends, see § 631. d.]

rēgnat iam sextum annum, he has reigned going on six years.

Many expressions have in Latin the construction of time when where in English the main idea is rather of place:— pūgnā Cannēnsī; (or, apud Cannās), in the fight at Cannœ

lūdīs Rōmānīs, at the Roman games.

omnibus Gallicīs bellīs, in all the Gallic wars.

In many idiomatic expressions of time, the Accusative with ad , in, or sub is used. Such are the following:— supplicātiō dēcrēta est in Kalendās Iānuāriās, a thanksgiving was voted for the first of January.

convēnērunt ad diem, they assembled on the [appointed] day.

ad vesperum, till evening; sub vesperum, towards evening.

sub idem tempus, about the same time; sub noctem, at nightfall.

Distance of time before or after anything is variously expressed: post (ante) trēs annōs, post tertium annum, trēs post annōs, tertium post annum, tribus post annīs, tertiō post annō (§ 414), three years after.

tribus annīs (tertiō annō) post exsilium (postquam ēiectus est), three years after his exile.

hīs tribus proximīs annīs, within the last three years.

paucīs annīs, a few years hence.

abhinc annōs trēs (tribus annīs), ante hōs trēs annōs, three years ago.

triennium est cum (trēs annī sunt cum), it is three years since.

octāvō mēnse quam, the eighth month after (see § 434. N.).

In Dates the phrase ante diem (a. d.) with an ordinal, or the ordinal alone, is followed by an accusative, like a preposition; and the phrase itself may also be governed by a preposition.

The year is expressed by the names of the consuls in the ablative absolute, usually without a conjunction (§ 419. a):— is diēs erat a. d. v. Kal. Apr. (quīntum Kalendās Aprīlīs) L. Pīsōne A. Gabīniō cōnsulibus (B. G. 1.6) , that day was the 5th before the calends of April (March 28), in the consulship of Piso and Gabinius.

in a. d. v. Kal. Nov. (Cat. 1.7) , to the 5th day before the calends of November (Oct. 28).

xv. Kal. Sextīlīs, the 15th day before the calends of August (July 18). [Full form: quīntō decimō diē ante Kalendās .]

For the Roman Calendar, see § 631.

Extent of Space

Extent of Space is expressed by the Accusative:— fossās quīndecim pedēs lātās (B. G. 7.72) , trenches fifteen feet broad.

prōgressus mīlia passuum circiter duodecim (id. 5.9), having advanced about twelve miles.

in omnī vītā suā quemque ā rēctā cōnscientiā trānsversum unguem nōn oportet discēdere (quoted inAtt. 13.20), in all one's life, one should not depart a nail's breadth from straightforward conscience.

This Accusative denotes the object through or over which the action takes place and is kindred with the Accusative of the End of Motion (§ 427 . 2).

Measure is often expressed by the Genitive of Quality (§ 345. b): vāllum duodecim pedum (B. G. 7.72) , a rampart of twelve feet (in height).

Distance when considered as extent of space is put in the Accusative; when considered as degree of difference, in the Ablative (§ 414):— mīlia passuum tria ab eōrum castrīs castra pōnit (B. G. 1.22) , he pitches his camp three miles from their camp.

quīnque diērum iter abest (Liv. 30.29) , it is distant five days' march.

trīgintā mīlibus passuum īnfrā eum locum (B. G. 6.35) , thirty miles below that place (below by thirty miles).

Relations of Place

Relations of Place Originally all these relations were expressed by the cases alone. The accusative, in one of its oldest functions, denoted the end of motion; the ablative, in its proper meaning of separation, denoted the place from which , and, in its locative function, the place where. The prepositions, originally adverbs, were afterwards added to define more exactly the direction of motion (as in to usward, toward us ), and by long association became indispensable except as indicated below. are expressed as follows:—

The place from which, by the Ablative with ab , dē , or ex .

The place to which (or end of motion), by the Accusative withd or in.

The place where, by the Ablative with in (Locative Ablative).

Examples are:—

Place from which:— ā septentriōne, from the north.

cum ā vōbīsdiscesserō; (Cat. M. 79), when I leave you.

dē prōvinciādēcēdere, to come away from one's province.

dē monte, down from the mountain.

negōtiātorex Āfricā (Verr. 2.1.14) , a merchant from Africa.

ex Britanniāobsidēs mīsērunt (B. G. 4.38) , they sent hostages from Britain.

Mōsa prōfluit ex monteVosegō; (id. 4.10), the Meuse (flows from) rises in the Vosges mountains.

Place to which (end of motion）:— nocte ad Nerviōspervēnērunt (B. G. 2.17) , they came by night to the Nervii.

adībam ad istum fundum (Caec. 82) , I was going to that estate.

in Āfricamnāvigāvit, he sailed to Africa; in Ītaliamprofectus, gone to Italy.

lēgātumin Treverōs mittit (B. G. 3.11) , he sends his lieutenant into the [country of the] Treveri.

Place where:— in hāc urbe vītam dēgit, he passed his life in this city.

sī inGalliāremanērent (B. G. 4.8) , if they remained in Gaul.

dum haec in Venetīs geruntur (id. 3.17), while this was going on among the Veneti.

oppidum in īnsulā positum (id. 7.58), a town situated on an island.

With names of towns and small islands, and with domus and rūs , the Relations of Place are expressed as follows:—

The place from which, by the Ablative without a preposition.

The place to which, by the Accusative without a preposition.

The place where, by the Locative. The Locative has in the singular of the first and second declensions the same form as the Genitive, in the plural and in the third declension the same form as the Dative or Ablative. (See p. 34, footnote.)

Examples are:—

Place from which:— Rōmāprofectus, having set out from Rome; Rōmāabesse, to be absent from Rome.

domōabīre, to leave home;rūrereversus, having returned from the country.

Place to which:— cum Rōmamsextō diē Mutinā vēnisset (Fam. 11.6.1) , when he had come to Rome from Modena in five days (on the sixth day).

DēlōRhodumnāvigāre, to sail from Delos to Rhodes.

rūsībō, I shall go into the country.

domum iit, he went home. The English home in this construction is, like domum , an old accusative of the end of motion. [So, suāsdomōsabīre, to go to their homes.]

Place where (or at which）:—

The Locative Case is also preserved in the following nouns, which are used (like names of towns) without a preposition:—

bellī, mīlitiae (in contrast to domī ), abroad, in military service.

Cf. īnfēlīcī arborī; (Liv. 1.26), on the ill-omened (barren) tree; terrā marīque, by land and sea.

Special uses of place from which, to which, and where are the following:—

With names of towns and small islands ab is often used to denote from the vicinity of, and ad to denote towards, to the neighborhood of:— ut ā Mutinā discēderet (Phil. 14.4) , that he should retire from Modena (which he was besieging).

erat ā Gergoviā dēspectus in castra (B. G. 7.45) , there was from about Gergovia a view into the camp.

ad Alesiam proficīscuntur (id. 7.76), they set out for Alesia.

ad Alesiam perveniunt (id. 7.79), they arrive at Alesia (i.e. in the neighborhood of the town).

D. Laelius cum classe ad Brundisium vēnit (B. C. 3.100) , Decimus Lœlius came to Brundisium with a fleet (arriving in the harbor).

The general words urbs , oppidum , īnsula require a preposition to express the place from which, to which, or where:—

With the name of a country, ad denotes to the borders; in with the accusative, into the country itself. Similarly ab denotes away from the outside; ex, out of the interior.

Thus ad Ītaliam pervēnit would mean he came to the frontier, regardless of the destination; in Ītaliam, he went to Italy, i.e. to a place within it, to Rome, for instance.

So ab Ītaliā profectus est would mean he came away from the frontier, regardless of the original starting-point; ex Ītaliā, he came from Italy, from within, as from Rome, for instance.

With all names of places at, meaning near (not in), is expressed by ad or apud with the accusative. pūgna ad Cannās, the fight at Cannae.

conchās ad Câiētam legunt (De Or. 2.22) , at Caieta (along the shore).

ad (apud) īnferōs, in the world below (near, or among, those below).

Large islands, and all places when thought of as a territory and not as a locality, are treated like names of countries:— in Siciliā, in Sicily.

in Ithacā leporēs illātī moriuntur (Plin. H. N. 8.226) , in Ithaca hares, when carried there, die. [Ulysses lived at Ithaca would require Ithacae .]

The Ablative without a preposition is used to denote the place from which in certain idiomatic expressions:— cessisset patriā (Mil. 68) , he would have left his country.

patriā pellere, to drive out of the country.

manū mittere, to emancipate (let go from the hand).

The poets and later writers often omit the preposition with the place from which or to which when it would be required in classical prose:— mānīs Acheronte remissōs (Aen. 5.99) , the spirits returned from Acheron.

Scythiā profectī; (Q. C. 4.12.11), setting out from Scythia.

Ītaliam Lāvīniaque vēnit lītora (Aen. 1.2) , he came to Italy and the Lavinian shores.

terram Hesperiam veniēs (id. 2.781, you shall come to the Hesperian land.

Aegyptum proficīscitur (Tac. Ann. 2.59) , he sets out for Egypt.

In poetry the place to which is often expressed by the Dative, occasionally also in later prose:— it clāmor caelō (Aen. 5.451) , a shout goes up to the sky.

facilis dēscēnsus Avernō (id. 6.126), easy is the descent to Avernus.

diadēma capitī repōnere iussit (Val. Max. 5.1.9), he ordered him to put back the diadem on his head.

The preposition is not used with the supine in -um (§ 509) and in the following old phrases:—

vēnum dare, to sell (give to sale). [Hence vēndere .]

vēnum īre, to be sold (go to sale). [Hence vēnīre .]

forās (used as adverb), out: as,forās ēgredī, to go out of doors.

suppetiās advenīre, to come to one's assistance.

When two or more names of place are used with a verb of motion, each must be under its own construction:— quadriduō quō haec gesta sunt rēs ad Chrȳsogonum in castra L. Sullae Volā terrās dēfertur (Rosc. Am. 20) , within four days after this was done, th matter was reported TO Chrysogonus IN Sulla's camp AT Volaterrœ.

The accusative with or without a preposition is often used in Latin when motion to a place is implied but not expressed in English (see k , N.).

Domum denoting the place to which, and the locative domī , may be modified by a possessive pronoun or a genitive:— domum rēgis (Deiot. 17) , to the king's house. [But also in M. Laecae domum (Cat. 1.8) , to Marcus Lœca's house.]

domī meae, at my house; domī Caesaris, at Cæsar's house.

domī suae vel aliēnae, at his own or another's house.

At times when thus modified, and regularly when otherwise modified, in domum or in domō is used:— in domum prīvātam conveniunt (Tac. H. 4.55), they come to gether in a private house.

in Mārcī Crassī castissimā domō (Cael. 9) , in the chaste home of Marcus Crassus. [Cf. ex Anniānā Milōnis domō, § 302. e.]

The place where is denoted by the Ablative without a preposition in the following instances:—

Often in indefinite words, such as locō , parte , etc.:— quibus locōpositī (De Or. 3.153), when these are set in position.

quā parte bellī vīcerant (Liv. 21.22) , the branch of warfare in which they were victorious.

locīs certīs horrea cōnstituit (B. C. 3.32) , he established granaries in particular places.

Frequently with nouns which are qualified by adjectives (regularly when tōtus is used):— mediā urbe (Liv. 1.33) , in the middle of the city.

tōtā Siciliā (Verr. 4.51) , throughout Sicily (in the whole of Sicily).

tōtā Tarracīnā (De Or. 2.240) , in all Tarracina.

cūnctāAsiā atque Graeciā (Manil. 12) , throughout the whole of Asia and Greece too.

In many idiomatic expressions which have lost the idea of place: pendēmus animīs (Tusc. 1.96) , we are in suspense of mind (in our minds).

sociusperīculīsvōbīscum aderō; (Iug. 85.47), I will be present with you, a companion in dangers.

Freely in poetry:— lītorecurvō; (Aen. 3.16), on the winding shore.

antrōsēclūsa relinquit (id. 3.446), she leaves them shut up in the cave.

Ēpīrō, Hesperiā (id. 3.503), in Epirus, in Hesperia.

premit altum cordedolōrem (id. 1.209), he keeps down the pain deep in his heart.

The way by which is put in the Ablative without a preposition: viā breviōre equitēs praemīsī; (Fam. 10.9), I sent forward the cavalry by a shorter road.

Aegaeō marī trāiēcit (Liv. 37.14) , he crossed by way of the Ægean Sea.

prōvehimur pelagō (Aen. 3.506) , we sail forth over the sea.

In this use the way by which is conceived as the means of passage.

Position is frequently expressed by the Ablative with ab (rarely ex ), properly meaning from:— Apparently the direction whence the sensuous impression comes. ā tergō, in the rear; ā sinistrā, on the left hand. [Cf. hinc, on this side.]

ā parte Pompêiānā, on the side of Pompey.

ex alterā parte, on the other side.

māgnā ex parte, in a great degree (from, i.e. in, a great part).

Verbs of placing, though implying motion, take the construction of the place where:—

Such are pōnō , locō , collocō , statuō , cōnstituō , etc.:— quī in sēde ac domō collocāvit (Par. 25) , who put [one] into his place and home.

statuitur eques Rōmānus in Aprōnī convīviō (Verr. 3.62) , a Roman knight is brought into a banquet of Apronius.

īnsula Dēlos in Aegaeō marī posita (Manil. 55) , the island of Delos, situated in the Ægean Sea.

sī in ūnō Pompêiō omnia pōnerētis (id. 59), if you made everything depend on Pompey alone.

Compounds of pōnō take various constructions (see the Lexicon under each word).

Several verbs are followed by the Ablative.

These are acquiēscō , dēlector , laetor , gaudeō , glōrior , nītor , stō , maneō , fīdō , cōnfīdō , cōnsistō , contineor . nōminibus veterum glōriantur (Or. 169) , they glory in the names of the ancients. [Also, dē dīvitiīs (in virtūte, circā rem, aliquid, haec） glōriārī.]

spē nītī; (Att. 3.9), to rely on hope.

prūdentiā fīdēns (Off. 1.81) , trusting in prudence.

The ablative with these verbs sometimes takes the preposition in (but fīdō in is late), and the ablative with them is probably locative. Thus,—in quibus causa nītitur (Cael. 25) , on whom the case depends.

With several of these verbs the neuter Accusative of pronouns is often found. For fīdō and cōnfīdō with the Dative, see § 367.

The verbals frētus , contentus , and laetus take the Locative Ablative:— frētus grātiā Brūtī; (Att. 5.21.12), relying on the favor of Brutus.

laetus praedā, rejoicing in the booty.

contentus sorte, content with his lot. [Possibly Ablative of Cause.]

nōn fuit contentus glōriā (Dom. 101) , he was not content with the glory.

So intentus , rarely: as, aliquō negōtiō intentus (Sall. Cat. 2 ), intent on some occupation.

SPECIAL USES OF PREPOSITIONS

For a list of Prepositions with their ordinary uses, see § 221 .

Adverbs and Prepositions

Certain Adverbs and Adjectives are sometimes used as Prepositions:—

The adverbs prīdiē , postrīdiē , propius , proximē , less frequently the adjectives propior and proximus , may be followed by the Accusative:— prīdiē Nōnās Mâiās (Att. 2.11) , the day before the Nones of May (see § 631).

postrīdiē lūdōs (Att. 16.4) , the day after the games.

propius perīculum (Liv. 21.1) , nearer to danger.

propior montem (Iug. 49) , nearer the hill.

proximus mare ōceanum (B. G. 3.7) , nearest the ocean.

Prīdiē and postrīdiē take also the Genitive (§ 359 . b ). Propior , propius , proximus , and proximē , take also the Dative, or the Ablative with ab :— propius Tiberī quam Thermopylīs (Nep. Hann. 8) , nearer to the Tiber than to Thermopylæ.

Sugambrī quī sunt proximī Rhēnō (B. G. 6.35) , the Sugambri, who are nearest to the Rhine.

proximus ā postrēmō (Or. 217) , next to the last.

Ūsque sometimes takes the Accusative, but ūsque ad is much more common:— terminōs ūsque Libyae (Iust. 1.1.5), to the bounds of Libya.

ūsque ad castra hostium (B. G. 1.51) , to the enemy's camp.

The adverbs palam , procul , simul , may be used as prepositions and take the Ablative:— rem crēditōrī palam populō solvit (Liv. 6.14) , he paid the debt to his creditor in the presence of the people.

haud procul castrīs in modum mūnicipī exstrūcta (Tac. H. 4.22) , not far from the camp, built up like a town.

simul nōbīs habitat barbarus (Ov. Tr. 5.10.29), close among us dwells the barbarian.

But simul regularly takes cum ; procul is usually followed by ab in classic writers; and the use of palam as a preposition is comparatively late.

The adverb clam is found in early Latin with the Accusative, also once with the Genitive and once in classical Latin with the Ablative:— clam mātrem suam (Pl. Mil. 112), unknown to his mother.

clam patris (id. Merc. 43), without his father's knowledge.

clam vōbīs (B. C. 2.32.8), without your knowledge.

Prepositions often retain their original meaning as Adverbs:—

Ante and post in relations of time:— quōs paulōante dīximus (Brut. 32) , whom I mentioned a little while ago.

posttribus diēbus, three days after (cf. § 424. f).

Adversus , circiter , prope :— nēmōadversus ībat (Liv. 37.13.8) , no one went out in opposition.

circiter pars quārta (Sall. Cat. 56), about the fourth part.

prope exanimātus, nearly lifeless.

Ā or ab, off, in expressions of distance, with the Ablative of Degree of Difference (§ 414):— ā mīlibus passuum circiter duōbus Rōmānōrum adventum exspectābant (B. G. 5.32) , at a distance of about two miles (about two miles off) they awaited the approach of the Romans.

In general, prepositions ending in -ā:— Aeolus haec contrā (Aen. 1.76) , thus Æolus in reply.

forte fuitiūxtā tumulus (id. 3.22), there happened to be a mound close by.

Some Prepositions and Adverbs which imply comparison are followed, like comparatives, by quam , which may be separated by several words, or even clauses.

Such words are ante , prius , post, posteā , prīdiē , postrīdiē; also magis and prae in compounds:— neque ante dīmīsit eum quam fidem dedit (Liv. 39.10) , nor did he let him go until he gave a pledge.

post diem tertium quam dīxerat (Mil. 44) , the third day after he said it.

Catō ipse iam servīre quam pūgnāre māvult (Att. 7.15) , Cato himself by this time had rather be a slave than fight.

Gallōrum quam Rōmānōrum imperia praeferre (B. G. 1.17) , [they] prefer the rule of Gauls to that of Romans.

The ablative of time is sometimes followed by quam in the same way (§ 424 . f ): as,—octāvō mēnse quam (Liv. 21.15) , within eight months after , etc.

The following Prepositions sometimes come after their nouns: ad , citrā , circum , contrā , dē , ē ( ex ), inter , iūxtā , penes , propter , ultrā; so regularly tenus and versus, and occasionally others:— [ūsus] quem penes arbitrium est et iūs et norma loquendī; (Hor. A. P. 72), custom, under whose control is the choice, right, and rule of speech.

cûius ā mē corpus est cremātum, quod contrā decuit ab illō meum (Cat. M. 84) , whose body I burned [on the funeral pile], while on the contrary (contrary to which) mine should have been burned by him.

SYNTAX OF THE VERB

MOODS AND TENSES

The Syntax of the Verb relates chiefly to the use of the Moods (which express the manner in which the action is conceived) and the Tenses (which express the time of the action). There is no difference in origin between mood and tense; and hence the uses of mood and tense frequently cross each other. Thus the tenses sometimes have modal significations (compare indicative in apodosis, § 517. c; future for imperative, § 449. b); and the moods sometimes express time (compare subjunctive in future conditions, § 516. b, and notice the want of a future subjunctive).

The parent language had, besides the Imperative mood, two or more forms with modal signification. Of these, the Subjunctive appears with two sets of terminations, -ā-m, -ā-s, in the present tense ( moneam, dīcam ), and -ē-m, -ē-s, in the present ( amem ) or other tenses (essem, dīxissem). The Optative was formed by iē-, ī-, with the present stem (sim, duim) or the perfect ( dīxerim ). (See details in §§ 168, 169.)

Each mood has two general classes or ranges of meaning. The uses of the Subjunctive may all be classed under the general ideas of will or desire and of action vividly conceived; and the uses of the Optative under the general ideas of wish and of action vaguely conceived.

It must not be supposed, however, that in any given construction either the subjunctive or the optative was deliberately used because it denoted conception or possibility. On the contrary, each construction has had its own line of development from more tangible and literal forms of thought to more vague and ideal; and by this process the mood used came to have in each case a special meaning, which was afterwards habitually associated with it in that construction. Similar developments have taken place in English. Thus, the expression I would do this has become equivalent to a mild command, while by analysis it is seen to be the apodosis of a present condition contrary to fact (§ 517): if I were you, etc. By further analysis, I would do is seen to have meant, originally, I should have wished (or I did wish） to do.

In Latin, the original Subjunctive and the Optative became confounded in meaning and in form, and were merged in the Subjunctive, at first in the present tense. Then new tense-forms of the subjunctive were formed, For the signification of the tense-endings, see §§ 168 , 169. and to these the original as well as the derived meanings of both moods became attached (see § 438). All the independent uses of the Latin subjunctive are thus to be accounted for.

The dependent uses of the subjunctive have arisen from the employment of some independent subjunctive construction in connection with a main statement. Most frequently the main statement is prefixed to a sentence containing a subjunctive, as a more complete expression of a complex idea (§ 268). Thus a question implying a general negative (quīn rogem? why should n't I ask?) might have the general negative expressed in a prefixed statement (nūlla causa est, there is no reason); or abeat, let him go away, may be expanded into sine abeat . When such a combination comes into habitual use, the original meaning of the subjunctive partially or wholly disappears and a new meaning arises by implication. Thus, in mīsit lēgātōs quī dīcerent, he sent ambassadors to say (i.e. who should say), the original hortatory sense of the subjunctive is partially lost, and the mood becomes in part an expression of purpose. Similar processes may be seen in the growth of Apodosis. Thus, tolle hanc opīniōnem , lūctum sustuleris, remove this notion, you will have done away with grief (i.e. if you remove, etc.).

The Infinitive is originally a verbal noun (§ 451), modifying a verb like other nouns: volō vidēre , lit. “I wish for-seeing”: compare English “what went ye out for to see?” But in Latin it has been surprisingly developed, so as to have forms for tense, and some proper modal characteristics, and to be used as a substitute for finite moods.

The other noun and adjective forms of the verb have been developed in various ways, which are treated under their respective heads below.

The proper Verbal Constructions may be thus classified:—

I. Indicative: Direct Assertion or Question (§ 437).

MOODS

INDICATIVE MOOD

The Indicative is the mood of direct assertions or questions when there is no modification of the verbal idea except that of time.

The Indicative is sometimes used where the English idiom would suggest the Subjunctive:— longum est, it would be tedious [if, etc.]; satius erat, it would have been better [if, etc.]; persequī possum, I might follow up [in detail].

Substitutes for the Indicative are (1) the Historical Infinitive (§ 463 ), and (2) the Infinitive in Indirect Discourse (§ 580 ).

For the Indicative in Conditions, see §§ 515, 516; for the Indicative in implied Commands, see § 449. b.

SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD

The Subjunctive in general expresses the verbal idea with some modification These modifications are of various kinds, each of which has had its own special development (cf. § 436 ). The subjunctive in Latin has also many idiomatic uses (as in clauses of Result and Time) where the English does not modify the verbal idea at all, but expresses it directly. In such cases the Latin merely takes a different view of the action and has developed the construction differently from the English. such as is expressed in English by auxiliaries, by the infinitive, or by the rare subjunctive (§ 157. b).

The Subjunctive is used independently to express—

An Exhortation or Command (Hortatory Subjunctive: § 439).

A Concession (Concessive Subjunctive: § 440).

A Wish (Optative Subjunctive:§ 441).

A Question of Doubt etc. (Deliberative Subjunctive: § 444).

A Possibility or Contingency (Potential Subjunctive: § 446).

For the special idiomatic uses of the Subjunctive in Apodosis, see § 514.

The Subjunctive is used in dependent clauses to express—

Condition: future or contrary to fact (§§ 516. b, c, 517).

Purpose (Final, § 531).

Characteristic (§ 535).

Result (Consecutive, § 537).

Time (Temporal, § 546).

Indirect Question (§ 574).

The Subjunctive is also used with Conditional Particles of Comparison (§ 524), and in subordinate clauses in the Indirect Discourse (§ 580).

SUBJUNCTIVE IN INDEPENDENT SENTENCES

Hortatory Subjunctive

The Hortatory Subjunctive is used in the present tense to express an exhortation or a command. The negative is nē . hōs latrōnēs interficiāmus (B. G. 7.38) , let us kill these robbers.

caveant intemperantiam, meminerint verēcundiae (Off. 1.122) , let them shun excess and cherish modesty.

The hortatory subjunctive occurs rarely in the perfect (except in prohibitions: § 450 ): as, —Epicūrus hōc vīderit (Acad. 2.19) , let Epicurus look to this. The term hortatory subjunctive is sometimes restricted to the first person plural, the second and third persons being designated as the jussive subjunctive; but the constructions are substantially identical. Once in Cicero and occasionally in the poets and later writers the negative with the hortatory subjunctive is nōn : as,—ā lēgibus nōn recēdāmus (Clu. 155) , let us not abandon the laws.

The Second Person of the hortatory subjunctive is used only of an indefinite subject, except in prohibitions, in early Latin, and in poetry:— iniūriās fortūnae, quās ferre nequeās, dēfugiendō relinquās (Tusc. 5.118) , the wrongs of fortune, which you cannot bear, leave behind by flight.

exoriāre aliquis ultor (Aen. 4.625) , rise, some avenger.

istō bonō ūtāre dum adsit, cum absit nē requīrās (Cat. M. 33) , use this blessing while it is present; when it is wanting do not regret it.

doceās iter et sacra ōstia pandās (Aen. 6.109) , show us the way and lay open the sacred portals.

For Negative Commands (prohibitions), see § 450.

The Imperfect and Pluperfect of the hortatory subjunctive denote an unfulfilled obligation in past time:— morerētur, inquiēs (Rab. Post. 29) , he should have died, you will say.

potius docēret (Off. 3.88) , he should rather have taught.

nē poposcissēs (Att. 2.1.3) , you should not have asked.

saltem aliquid dē pondere dētrāxisset (Fin. 4.57) , at least he should have taken something from the weight.

In this construction the Pluperfect usually differs from the Imperfect only in more clearly representing the time for action as momentary or as past. This use of the subjunctive is carefully to be distinguished from the potential use (§ 446 ). The difference is indicated by the translation , should or ought (not would or might ).

The Hortatory Subjunctive is used to express a concession. Many scholars regard the concessive subjunctive as a development of the Optative Subjunctive in a wish. The Present is used for present time, the Perfect for past. The negative is nē . sit fūr, sit sacrilegus: at est bonus imperātor (Verr. 5.4) , grant he is a thief, a godless wretch: yet he is a good general.

fuerit aliīs; tibi quandō esse coepit (Verr. 2.1.37) , suppose he was [so] to others; when did he begin to be to you?

nēmō is umquam fuit: nē fuerit (Or. 101) , there never was such a one [you will say]: granted (let there not have been).

nē sit summum malum dolor, malum certē est (Tusc. 2.14) , granted that pain is not the greatest evil, at least it is an evil.

The concessive subjunctive with quamvīs and licet is originally hortatory (§ 527 . a , b ).

For other methods of expressing Concession, see § 527.

For the Hortatory Subjunctive denoting a Proviso, see § 528. a.

Optative Subjunctive

The Optative Subjunctive is used to express a Wish. The present tense denotes the wish as possible, the imperfect as unaccomplished in present time, the pluperfect as unaccomplished in past time. The negative is nē :— ita vīvam (Att. 5.15) , as true as I live, so may I live.

ne vīvam sī sciō; (id. 4.16.8), I wish I may not live if I know.

dī tē perduint (Deiot. 21) , the gods confound thee!

valeant, valeant cīvēs meī; sint incolumēs (Mil. 93) , farewell, farewell to my fellow-citizens; may they be secure from harm.

dī facerent sine patre forem (Ov. M. 8.72) , would that the gods allowed me to be without a father (but they do not)!

The perfect subjunctive in a wish is archaic:— dī faxint (Fam. 14.3.3) , may the gods grant.

quod dī ōmen āverterint (Phil. 12.14, in a religious formula), and may the gods avert this omen.

The Optative Subjunctive is often preceded by the particle utinam; so regularly in the imperfect and pluperfect:— falsus utinam vātēs sim (Liv. 21.10.10) , I wish I may be a false prophet.

utinam Clōdius vīveret (Mil. 103) , would that Clodius were now alive.

utinam mē mortuum vīdissēs (Q. Fr. 1.3.1) , would you had seen me dead.

utinam nē vērē scrīberem (Fam. 5.17.3) , would that I were not writing the truth.

Utinam nōn is occasionally used instead of utinam nē : as, — utinam susceptus nōn essem (Att. 9.9.3) , would that I had not been born.

In poetry and old Latin utī or ut often introduces the optative subjunctive; and in poetry sī or ō sī with the subjunctive sometimes expresses a wish:— ut pereat positum rōbīgine tēlum (Hor. S. 2.1.43) , may the weapon unused perish with rust.

ō sī angulus ille accēdat (id. 2.6.8), O if that corner might only be added!

sī nunc sē nōbīs ille aureus rāmus ostendat (Aen. 6.187) , if now that golden branch would only show itself to us!

The subjunctive with utī ( ut ) or utinam was originally deliberative, meaning how may I , etc. (§ 444 ). The subjunctive with sī or ō sī is a protasis (§ 512 . a ), the apodosis not being expressed. The subjunctive of wish without a particle is seldom found in the imperfect or pluperfect except by sequence of tenses in Indirect Discourse (§ 585 ): as, ac venerāta Cerēs, ita culmō surgeret altō ( Hor. S. 2.2.124 ), and Ceres worshipped [with libations] that so she might rise with tall stalk. [I addressing the goddess directly the prayer would be: ita surgās .]

Velim and vellem , and their compounds, with a subjunctive or infinitive, are often equivalent to an optative subjunctive:— velim tibi persuādeās (Fam. 9.13.2) , I should like to have you believe (I should wish that you would persuade yourself).

dē Menedēmō vellem vērum fuisset, dē rēgīnā velim vērum sit (Att. 15.4.4) , about Menedemus I wish it had been true; about the queen I wish it may be.

nōllem accidisset tempus (Fam. 3.10.2) , I wish the time never had come.

māllem Cerberum metuerēs (Tusc. 1.12) , I had rather have had you afraid of Cerberus (I should have preferred that you feared Cerberus).

Velim etc., in this use, are either potential subjunctives, or apodoses with the protasis omitted (§ 447 . 1. N.). The thing wished may be regarded as a substantive clause used as object of the verb of wishing (§ 565 . N.1).

Deliberative Subjunctive

The Subjunctive was used in sentences of interrogative form, at first when the speaker wished information in regard to the will or desire of the person addressed. The mood was therefore hortatory in origin. But such questions when addressed by the speaker to himself, as if asking his own advice, become deliberative or, not infrequently, merely exclamatory. In such cases the mood often approaches the meaning of the Potential (see § 445). In these uses the subjunctive is often called Deliberative or Dubitative.

The Subjunctive is used in questions implying (1) doubt, indignation, or (2) an impossibility of the thing's being done. The negative is nōn . quid agam, iūdicēs? quō mē vertam (Verr. 5.2) , what am I to do, judges ? whither shall I turn?

etiamne eam salūtem (Pl. Rud. 1275) , shall I greet her?

quid hōc homine faciās? quod supplicium dīgnum libīdinī êius inveniās (Verr. 2.40) , what are you to do with this man? what fit penalty can you devise for his wantonness?

an ego nōn venīrem (Phil. 2.3) , what, should I not have come?

quid dīcerem (Att. 6.3.9) , what was I to say?

quis enim cēlāverit īgnem (Ov. H. 15.7) , who could conceal the flame?

The hortatory origin of some of these questions is obvious. Thus, quid faciāmus ?= faciāmus [ aliquid ], quid ? let us do—what? (Compare the expanded form quid vīs faciāmus ? what do you wish us to do? ) Once established, it was readily transferred to the past: quid faciam ? what AM I to do? quid facerem ? what WAS I to do? Questions implying impossibility, however, cannot be distinguished from Apodosis (cf. § 517 ).

In many cases the question has become a mere exclamation, rejecting a suggested possibility: mihi umquam bonōrum praesidium dēfutūrum putārem (Mil. 94) , could 1 think that the defence of good men would ever fail me!

The indicative is sometimes used in deliberative questions: as,— quid agō , what am I to do?

Potential Subjunctive

Of the two principal uses of the Subjunctive in independent sentences (cf. § 436), the second, or Potential Subjunctive, The name Potential Subjunctive is not precisely descriptive, but is fixed in grammatical usage. is found in a variety of sentence-forms having as their common element the fact that the mood represents the action as merely conceived or possible, not as desired (hortatory, optative) or real (indicative). Some of these uses are very old and may go back to the Indo-European parent speech, but no satisfactory connection between the Potential and the Hortatory and Optative Subjunctive has been traced. There is no single English equivalent for the Potential Subjunctive; the mood must be rendered, according to circumstances, by the auxiliaries would, should, may, might, can, could.

The Potential Subjunctive is used to suggest an action as possible or conceivable. The negative is nōn .

In this use the Present and the Perfect refer without distinction to the immediate future; the Imperfect (occasionally the Perfect) to past time; the Pluperfect (which is rare) to what might have happened.

The Potential Subjunctive has the following uses:—

In cautious or modest assertions in the first person singular of expressions of saying, thinking, or wishing(present or perfect):— pāce tuā dīxerim (Mil. 103) , I would say by your leave.

haud sciam an (Lael. 51） , I should incline to think.

tū velimsīc exīstimēs (Fam. 12.6) , I should like you to think so.

certum affīmāre nōn ausim (Liv. 3.23) , I should not dare to assert as sure.

Vellem , nōllem , or māllem expressing an unfulfilled wish in present time may be classed as independent potential subjunctive or as the apodosis of an unexpressed condition (§ 521 ): as— vellem adesset M. Antōnius (Phil. 1.16) , I could wish Antony were here.

In the indefinite second person singular of verbs of saying, thinking, and the like (present or imperfect):— crēdāsnōn dē puerō scrīptum sed ā puerō; (Plin. Ep. 4.7.7), you would think that it was written not about a boy but by a boy.

crēderēsvictōs (Liv. 2.43.9) , you would have thought them conquered.

reōs dīcerēs (id. 2.35.5), you would have said they were culprits.

vidērēssusurrōs (Hor. S. 2.8.77) , you might have seen them whispering (lit. whispers).

fretō assimilāre possīs (Ov. M. 5.6) , you might compare it to a sea.

With other verbs, in all persons, when some word or phrase in the context implies that the action is expressed as merely possible or conceivable:—

nīl egocontulerimiūcundō sānus amīcō; (Hor. S. 1.5.44), when in my senses I should compare nothing with an interesting friend.

fortūnam citiusreperiās quam retineās (Pub. Syr. 168) , you may sooner find fortune than keep it.

aliquis dīcat (Ter. And. 640) , somebody may say.

In this use the subjunctive may be regarded as the apodosis of an undeveloped protasis . When the conditional idea becomes clearer, it finds expression in a formal protasis , and a conditional sentence is developed.

Forsitan, perhaps, regularly takes the Potential Subjunctive except in later Latin and in poetry, where the Indicative is also common:— forsitan quaerātis quī iste terror sit (Rosc. Am. 5) , you may perhaps inquire what this alarm is.

forsitan temerē fēcerim (id. 31), perhaps I have acted rashly.

The subjunctive clause with forsitan (= fors sit an ) was originally an Indirect Question: it would be a chance whether , etc.

Fortasse, perhaps, is regularly followed by the Indicative; sometimes, however, by the Subjunctive, but chiefly in later Latin:— quaerēs fortasse (Fam. 15.4.13) , perhaps you will ask.

Other expressions for perhaps are (1) forsan (chiefly poetical ; construed with the indicative or the subjunctive, more commonly the indicative), fors (rare and poetical; construed with either the indicative or the subjunctive). Forsit (or fors sit ) occurs once ( Hor. S. 1.6.49 ) and takes the subjunctive. Fortasse is sometimes followed by the infinitive with subject accusative in Plautus and Terence. Fortassis (rare; construed like fortasse ) and fortasse an (very rare; construed with the subjunctive) are also found.

IMPERATIVE MOOD

The Imperative is used in Commands and Entreaties:— cōnsulite vōbīs, prōspicite patriae, cōnservāte vōs (Cat. 4.3) , have a care for yourselves, guard the country, preserve yourselves.

dīc , Mārce Tullī, sententiam, Marcus Tullius, state your opinion.

tē ipsum concute (Hor. S. 1.3.35) , examine yourself.

vīve, valēque (id. 2.5.110), farewell, bless you (live and be well)!

miserēre animī nōn dīgna ferentis (Aen. 2.144) , pity a soul bearing undeserved misfortune.

The third person of the imperative is antiquated or poetic:— ollīs salūs populī suprēma lēx estō (Legg. 3.8) , the safety of the people shall be their first law.

iūsta imperia suntō, eīsque cīvēs modestē pārentō (id. 3.6), let there be lawful authorities, and let the citizens strictly obey them.

In prose the Hortatory Subjunctive is commonly used instead (§ 439 ).

The Future Imperative is used in commands, etc., where there is a distinct reference to future time:—

In connection with some adverb or other expression that indicates at what time in the future the action of the imperative shall take place. So especially with a future, a future perfect indicative, or (in poetry and early Latin) with a present imperative:— crāspetitō, dabitur (Pl. Merc. 769) , ask to-morrow [and] it shall be given.

cum valētūdinī cōnsulueris, tumcōnsulitōnāvigātiōnī; (Fam. 16.4.3), when you have attended to your health, then look to your sailing.

Phyllida mitte mihī, meus est nātālis, Iollā; cum faciam vitulā prō frūgibus, ipse venītō (Ecl. 3.76) , send Phyllis to me, it is my birthday, Iollas; when I [shall] sacrifice a heifer for the harvest, come yourself.

dīc quibus in terrīs, etc., et Phyllida sōlus habētō (id. 3.107), tell in what lands, etc., and have Phyllis for yourself.

In general directions serving for all time, as Precepts, Statutes, and Wills:— is iūris cīvīlis cūstōs estō (Legg. 3.8) , let him (the prætor) be the guardian of civil right.

Boreā flante, nēarātō, sēmen nē iacitō (Plin. H. N. 18.334) , when the north wind blows, plough not nor sow your seed.

The verbs sciō , meminī , and habeō (in the sense of consider） regularly use the Future Imperative instead of the Present:— fīliolō mē auctum scītō (Att. 1.2) , learn that I am blessed with a little boy.

sīc habētō, mī Tirō; (Fam. 16.4.4), so understand it, my good Tiro.

dē pallā mementō, amābō; (Pl. Asin. 939), remember, dear, about the gown.

The Future Indicative is sometimes used for the imperative; and quīn (why not?) with the Present Indicative may have the force of a command:— sī quid acciderit novī, faciēs ut sciam (Fam. 14.8) , you will let me know if anything new happens.

quīn accipis (Ter. Haut. 832) , here, take it (why not take it?).

Instead of the simple Imperative, cūrā ut , fac ( fac ut ), or velim , followed by the subjunctive (§ 565), is often used, especially in colloquial language:— cūrā ut Rōmae sīs (Att. 1.2) , take care to be at Rome.

fac ut valētūdinem cūrēs (Fam. 14.17) , see that you take care of your health

domī adsītis facite (Ter. Eun. 506) , be at home, do.

eum mihi velim mittās (Att. 8.11) , I wish you would send it to me.

For commands in Indirect Discourse, see § 588.

For the Imperative with the force of a Conditional Clause, see § 521. b.

Prohibition (Negative Command)

Prohibition is regularly expressed in classic prose (1) by nōlī with the Infinitive, (2) by cavē with the Present Subjunctive, or (3) by nē with the Perfect Subjunctive:— In prohibitions the subjunctive with nē is hortatory; that with cavē is an object clause (cf. §§ 450 . N.2, 565. N.1). (1) nōlī putāre (Lig. 33) , do not suppose (be unwilling to suppose).

nōlī impudēns esse (Fam. 12.30.1) , don't be shameless.

nōlīte cōgere sociōs (Verr. 2.1.82) , do not compel the allies.

(2) cavē putēs (Att. 7.20) , don't suppose (take care lest you suppose).

cavē īgnōscās (Lig. 14) , do not pardon.

cavē festīnēs (Fam. 16.12.6) , do not be in haste.

(3) nē necesse habueris (Att. 16.2.5) , do not regard it as necessary.

nē sīs admīrātus (Fam. 7.18.3) , do not be surprised.

hōc facitō; hōc nē fēceris (Div. 2.127) , thou shalt do this, thou shalt not do that.

nē Apellae quidem dīxeris (Fam. 7.25.2) , do not tell Apella even.

nē vōs quidem mortem timueritis (Tusc. 1.98) , nor must you fear death.

All three of these constructions are well established in classic prose. The first, which is the most ceremonious, occurs oftenest; the third, though not discourteous, is usually less formal and more peremptory than the others. Instead of nōlī the poets sometimes use other imperatives of similar meaning (cf. § 457 . a ):— parce piās scelerāre manūs (Aen. 3.42) , forbear to defile your pious hands.

cētera mitte loquī; (Hor. Epod. 13.7), forbear to say the rest.

fuge quaerere (Hor. Od. 1.9.13) , do not inquire.

Cavē nē is sometimes used in prohibitions; also vidē nē and (colloquially) fac nē : as, fac nē quid aliud cūrēs ( Fam. 16.11 ), see that you attend to nothing else. The present subjunctive with nē and the perfect with cavē are found in old writers; nē with the present is common in poetry at all periods:— nē exspectētis (Pl. Ps. 1234) , do not wait.

nē metuās (Mart. Ep. 1.70.13) , do not fear.

cave quicquam responderis (Pl. Am. 608) , do not make any reply.

Other negatives sometimes take the place of nē :— nihil īgnōveris (Mur. 65) , grant no pardon (pardon nothing).

nec mihi illud dīxeris (Fin. 1.25) , and do not say this to me.

The regular connective , and do not , is nēve .

The Present Imperative with nē is used in prohibitions by early writers and the poets:— nē timē (Pl. Curc. 520) , don't be afraid.

nimium nē crēde colōrī; (Ecl. 2.17), trust not too much to complexion.

equō nē crēdite (Aen. 2.48) , trust not the horse.

The Future Imperative with nē is used in prohibitions in laws and formal precepts (see § 449. 2).

INFINITIVE MOOD

The Infinitive is properly a noun denoting the action of the verb abstractly. It differs, however, from other abstract nouns in the following points: (1) it often admits the distinction of tense; (2) it is modified by adverbs, not by adjectives; (3) it governs the same case as its verb; (4) it is limited to special constructions.

The Latin Infinitive is the dative or locative case of such a noun The ending -ĕ ( amāre , monēre , regere , audīre ) was apparently locative, the ending -ī ( amārī , monērī , regī , audīrī ） apparently dative; but this difference of case had no significance for Latin syntax. The general Latin restriction of the ī- infinitives to the passive was not a primitive distinction, but grew up in the course of time. and was originally used to denote Purpose; but it has in many constructions developed into a substitute for a finite verb. Hence the variety of its use.

In its use as a verb, the Infinitive may take a Subject Accusative (§ 397. e), originally the object of another verb on which the Infinitive depended. Thus iubeō tē valēre is literally I command you for being well (cf. substantive clauses, § 562. N.).

Infinitive as Noun

The Infinitive, with or without a subject accusative, may be used with est and similar verbs (1) as the Subject, (2) in Apposition with the subject, or (3) as a Predicate Nominative. In these constructions the abstract idea expressed by the infinitive is represented as having some quality or belonging to some thing.

As Subject:— dolēre malum est (Fin. 5.84) , to suffer pain is an evil.

bellum est sua vitia nōsse (Att. 2.17) , it's a fine thing to know one's own faults.

praestatcompōnerefluctūs (Aen. 1.135) , it is better to calm the waves.

In Apposition with the Subject:— proinde quasi iniūriamfacere id dēmum esset imperiō ūtī; (Sall. Cat. 12), just as if this and this alone, to commit injustice, were to use power. [Here facere is in apposition with id .]

As Predicate Nominative:— id est convenienter nātūrae vīvere (Fin. 4.41) , that is to live in conformity with nature. [Cf. ūtī in the last example.]

An infinitive may be used as Direct Object in connection with a Predicate Accusative (§ 393 ), or as Appositive with such Direct Object:— istuc ipsum nōn esse cum fueris miserrimum putō; (Tusc. 1.12), for I think this very thing most wretched, not to be when one has been. [Here istuc ipsum belongs to the noun nōn esse .]

miserārī,invidēre,gestīre,laetārī, haec omnia morbōs Graecī appellant (id. 3.7), to feel pity, envy, desire, joy,—all these things the Greeks call diseases. [Here the infinitives are in apposition with haec .]

An Appositive or Predicate noun or adjective used with an infinitive ín any of these constructions is put in the Accusative, whether the infinitive has a subject expressed or not. Thus, —nōn esse cupidum pecūnia est (Par. 51) , to be free from desires (not to be desirous) is money in hand. [No Subject Accusative.] The infinitive as subject is not common except with est and similar verbs. But sometimes, especially in poetry, it is used as the subject of verbs which are apparently more active in meaning:— quōs omnīs eadem cupere, eadem ōdisse, eadem metuere, in ūnum coēgit (Iug. 31) , all of whom the fact of desiring, hating, and fearing the same things has united into one.

ingenuās didicisse fidēliter artīs ēmollit mōrēs (Ov. P. 2.9.48), faithfully to have learned liberal arts softens the manners.

posse loquī ēripitur (Ov. M. 2.483) , the power of speech is taken away.

Rarely the Infinitive is used exactly like the Accusative of a noun:— beātē vīvere aliī in aliō, vōs in voluptāte pōnitis (Fin. 2.86) , a happy life different [philosophers] base on different things, you on pleasure.

quam multa ... facimus causā amīcōrum, precārī ab indīgnō, supplicāre, etc. (Lael. 57) , how many things we do for our friends' sake, ask favors from an unworthy person, resort to entreaty, etc.

nihil explōrātum habeās, nē amāre quidem aut amārī (id. 97), you have nothing assured, not even loving and being loved.

Many complementary and other constructions approach a proper accusative use of the infinitive, but their development has been different from that of the examples above. Thus, avāritia ... superbiam , crūdēlitātem , deōs neglegere , omnia vēnālia habēre ēdocuit (Sall. Cat. 10 ), avarice taught pride, cruelty , to neglect the gods , and to hold everything at a price.

Infinitive as Apparent Subject of Impersonals

The Infinitive is used as the apparent Subject with many impersonal verbs and expressions:

Such are libet , licet , oportet , decet , placet , vīsum est , pudet , piget , necesse est , opus est , etc.:— libet mihi cōnsīderāre (Quinct. 48) , it suits me to consider.

necesse est morī (Tusc. 2.2) , it is necessary to die.

quid attinet glōriōsē loquī nisi cōnstanter loquāre (Fin. 2.89) , what good does it do to talk boastfully unless you speak consistently?

neque mē vīxisse paenitet (id. 84), I do not feel sorry to have lived.

gubernāre mē taedēbat (Att. 2.7.4) , I was tired of being pilot.

This use is a development of the Complementary Infinitive (§ 456 ); but the infinitives approach the subject construction and may be con veniently regarded as the subjects of the impersonals.

With impersonal verbs and expressions that take the Infinitive as an apparent subject, the personal subject of the action may be expressed—

By a Dative, depending on the verb or verbal phrase:— rogant ut id sibifacere liceat (B. G. 1.7) , they ask that it be allowed them to do this.

nōn lubet enimmihidēplōrāre vītam (Cat. M. 84) , for it does not please me to lament my life.

vīsum est mihidē senectūte aliquid cōnscrībere (id. 1), it seemed good to me to write something about old age.

quid est tam secundum nātūram quamsenibusēmorī; (id. 71), what is so much in accordance with nature as for old men to die?

exstinguīhominī suō tempore optābile est (id. 85), for a man to die at the appointed time is desirable.

By an Accusative expressed as the subject of the infinitive or the object of the impersonal:— sī licet vīvereeum quem Sex. Naevius nōn volt (Quinct. 94) , if it is allowed a man to live against the will of Sextus Nœvius.

nōnne oportuit praescīsse mēante (Ter. And. 239) , ought I not to have known beforehand?

ōrātōremīrāscī minimē decet (Tusc. 4.54) , it is particularly unbecoming for an orator to lose his temper.

pudēretmē dīcere (N. D. 1.109) , I should be ashamed to say.

cōnsilia ineunt quōrum eōs in vestīgiō paenitēre necesse est (B. G. 4.5) , they form plans for which they must at once be sorry.

Libet , placet , and vīsum est take the dative only; oportet , pudet , piget , and generally decet , the accusative only; licet and necesse est take either case.

A predicate noun or adjective is commonly in the Accusative; but with licet regularly, and with other verbs occasionally, the Dative is used:— expedit bonās esse vōbīs (Ter. Haut. 388) , it is for your advantage to be good.

licuit esse ōtiōsō Themistoclī; (Tusc. 1.33), Themistocles might have been inactive (it was allowed to Themistocles to be inactive).

mihi neglegentī esse nōn licet (Att. 1.17.6) , I must not be negligent. [But also neglegentem .]

cūr hīs esse līberōs nōn licet (Flacc. 71) , why is it not allowed these men to be free?

nōn est omnibus stantibus necesse dīcere (Marc. 33) , it is not necessary for all to speak standing.

When the subject is not expressed, as being indefinite ( one , anybody ), a predicate noun or adjective is regularly in the accusative (cf. § 452 . 3. N.2): as,— vel pāce vel bellō clārum fierī licet (Sall. Cat. 3 ), one can become illustrious either in peace or in war

Complementary Infinitive

Verbs which imply another action of the same subject to complete their meaning take the Infinitive without a subject accusative.

Such are verbs denoting to be able, dare , undertake, remember, forget, be accustomed, begin, continue, cease, hesitate, learn, know how, fear, and the like:— hōc queō dīcere (Cat. M. 32) , this I can say.

mittō quaerere (Rosc. Am. 53) , I omit to ask.

vereor laudāre praesentem (N. D. 1.58) , I fear to praise a man to his face.

ōrō ut mātūrēs venīre (Att. 4.1) , I beg you will make haste to come.

oblīvīscī nōn possum quae volō; (Fin. 2.104), I cannot forget that which I wish.

dēsine id mē docēre (Tusc. 2.29) , cease to teach me that.

dīcere solēbat, he used to say.

audeō dīcere, I venture to say.

loquī posse coepī, I began to be able to speak.

The peculiarity of the Complementary Infinitive construction is that no Subject Accusative is in general admissible or conceivable. But some infinitives usually regarded as objects can hardly be distinguished from this construction when they have no subject expressed. Thus volō dīcere and volō mē dīcere mean the same thing , I wish to speak , but the latter is object-infinitive, while the former is not apparently different in origin and construction from queō dīcere (complementary infinitive), and again volō eum dīcere , I wish him to speak , is essentially different from either (cf. § 563 . b ).

Many verbs take either a Subjunctive Clause or a Complementary Infinitive, without difference of meaning.

Such are verbs signifying willingness, necessity, propriety, resolve, command, prohibition, effort, and the like (cf. § 563):— dēcernere optābat (Q. C. 3.11.1) , he was eager to decide.

optāvit ut tollerētur (Off. 3.94) , he was eager to be taken up.

oppūgnāre contendit (B. G. 5.21) , he strove to take by storm.

contendit ut caperet (id. 5.8), he strove to take.

bellum gerere cōnstituit (id. 4.6), he decided to carry on war.

cōnstitueram ut manērem (Att. 16.10.1) , I had decided to remain.

For the infinitive with subject accusative used with some of these verbs instead of a complementary infinitive, see § 563 . Some verbs of these classes never take the subjunctive, but are identical in meaning with others which do:— eōs quōs tūtārī dēbent dēserunt (Off. 1.28) , they forsake those whom they ought to protect.

aveō pūgnāre (Att. 2.18.3) , I'm anxious to fight.

In poetry and later writers many verbs may have the infinitive, after the analogy of verbs of more literal meaning that take it in prose:— furit tē reperīre (Hor. Od. 1.15.27) , he rages to find thee. [A forcible way of saying cupit (§§ 457, 563. b).]

saevit exstinguere nōmen (Ov. M. 1.200) , he rages to blot out the name.

fuge quaerere (Hor. Od. 1.9.13) , forbear to ask (cf. § 450. N. 1).

parce piās scelerāre manūs (Aen. 3.42) , forbear to defile your pious hands.

A Predicate Noun or Adjective after a complementary infinitive takes the case of the subject of the main verb:— fierīque studēbam êius prūdentiā doctior (Lael. 1) , I was eager to become more wise through his wisdom.

sciō quam soleās esse occupātus (Fam. 16.21.7) , I know how busy you usually are (are wont to be).

brovis esse labōrō, obscūrus fīō; (Hor. A. P. 25), I struggle to be brief, I become obscure.

Infinitive with Subject Accusative

The Infinitive with Subject Accusative is used with verbs and other expressions of knowing, thinking, telling, and perceiving (Indirect Discourse, § 579):— dīcit montem ab hostibus tenērī (B. G. 1.22) , he says that the hill is held by the enemy. [Direct: mōns ab hostibus tenētur.]

Infinitive of Purpose

In a few cases the Infinitive retains its original meaning of Purpose.

The infinitive is used in isolated passages instead of a subjunctive clause after habeō , dō, ministrō :— tantum habeō pollicērī (Fam. 1.5A. 3), so much I have to promise. [Here the more formal construction would be quod pollicear .]

ut Iovī bibere ministrāret (Tusc. 1.65) , to serve Jove with wine (to drink).

merīdiē bibere datō; (Cato R. R. 89), give (to) drink at noonday.

Parātus , suētus , and their compounds, and a few other participles (used as adjectives), take the infinitive like the verbs from which they come:— id quod parātī sunt facere (Quint. 8) , that which they are ready to do.

adsuēfactī superārī (B. G. 6.24) , used to being conquered.

currū succēdere suētī; (Aen. 3.541), used to being harnessed to the chariot

cōpiās bellāre cōnsuētās (B. Afr. 73), forces accustomed to fighting.

In prose these words more commonly take the Gerund or Gerundive construction (§ 503 ff.) either in the genitive, the dative, or the accusative with ad :— īnsuētus nāvigandī (B. G. 5.6) , unused to making voyages.

alendīs līberīs suēti (Tac. Ann. 14.27) , accustomed to supporting children.

corpora īnsuēta ad onera portanda (B. C. 1.78) , bodies unused to carry burdens.

The poets and early writers often use the infinitive to express purpose when there is no analogy with any prose construction:— fīlius intrō iit vidēre quid agat (Ter. Hec. 345) , your son has gone in to see what he is doing. [In prose: the supine vīsum .]

nōn ferrō Libycōs populāre Penātīs vēnimus (Aen. 1.527) , we have not come to lay waste with the sword the Libyan homes.

lōrīcam dōnat habēre virō; (id. 5.262), he gives the hero a breastplate to wear. [In prose: habendam .]

So rarely in prose writers of the classic period.

For the Infinitive used instead of a Substantive Clause of Purpose, see § 457.

For tempus est abīre , see § 504. N. 2.

Peculiar Infinitives

Many Adjectives take the Infinitive in poetry, following a Greek idiom:— dūrus compōnere versūs (Hor. S. 1.4.8) , harsh in composing verse.

cantārī dīgnus (Ecl. 5.54) , worthy to be sung. [In prose: quī cantētur .]

fortis trāctāre serpentīs (Hor. Od. 1.37.26) , brave to handle serpents.

cantāre perītī; (Ecl. 10.32), skilled in song.

facilēs aurem praebēre (Prop. 3.14.15) , ready to lend an ear.

nescia vincī pectora (Aen. 12.527) , hearts not knowing how to yield.

tē vidēre aegrōtī; (Plaut. Trin. 75), sick of seeing you.

Rarely in poetry the infinitive is used to express result:— fingit equum docilem magister īre viam quā mōnstret eques (Hor. Ep. 1.2.64) , the trainer makes the horse gentle so as to go in the road the rider points out.

hīc levāre ... pauperem labōribus vocātus audit (Hor. Od. 2.18.38) , he, when called, hears, so as to relieve the poor man of his troubles.

These poetic constructions were originally regular and belong to the Infinitive as a noun in the Dative or Locative case (§ 451 ). They had been supplanted, however, by other more formal constructions, and were afterwards restored in part through Greek influence.

The infinitive occasionally occurs as a pure noun limited by a demonstrative, a possessive, or some other adjective:— hōc nōn dolēre (Fin. 2.18) , this freedom from pain. [Cf. tōtum hōc beātē vīvere (Tusc. 5.33) , this whole matter of the happy life.]

nostrum vīvere (Per. 1.9), our life (to live).

scire tuum (id. 1.27), your knowledge (to know).

Exclamatory Infinitive

The Infinitive, with Subject Accusative, This construction is elliptical; that is, the thought is quoted in Indirect Discourse, though no verb of saying etc. is expressed or even, perhaps, implied (compare the French dire que ). Passages like hancine ego ad rem nātam miseram mē memorābō ? (Plaut. Rud. 188) point to the origin of the construction. may be used in Exclamations (cf. § 397. d):— tē in tantās aerumnās propter mē incidisse (Fam. 14.1) , alas, that you should have fallen into such grief for me!

mēne inceptō dēsistere victam (Aen. 1.37) , what! I beaten desist from my purpose?

The interrogative particle -ne is often attached to the emphatic word (as in the second example). The Present and the Perfect Infinitive are used in this construction with their ordinary distinction of time (§ 486 ).

A subjunctive clause, with or without ut , is often used elliptically in exclamatory questions. The question may be introduced by the interrogative -ne:— quamquam quid loquor? tē ut ūlla rēs frangat (Cat. 1.22) , yet why do I speak? [the idea] that anything should bend you!

egone ut tē interpellem (Tusc. 2.42) , what, I interrupt you?

ego tibi īrāscerer (Q. Fr. 1.3) , I angry with you?

The Infinitive in exclamations usually refers to something actually occurring; the Subjunctive, to something contemplated.

Historical Infinitive

The Infinitive is often used for the Imperfect Indicative in narration, and takes a subject in the Nominative:— tum Catilīna pollicērī novās tabulās (Sall. Cat. 21), then Catiline promised abolition of debts (clean ledgers).

ego īnstāre ut mihi respondēret (Verr. 2.188) , I kept urging him to answer me.

pars cēdere, aliī īnsequī; neque sīgna neque ōrdinēs observāre; ubi quemque perīculum cēperat, ibi resistere ac prōpulsāre; arma, tēla, equī, virī, hostēs atque cīvēs permixtī; nihil cōnsiliō neque imperiō agī; fors omnia regere (Iug. 51) , a part give way, others press on; they hold neither to standards nor ranks; where danger overtook them, there each would stand and fight; arms, weapons, horses, men, foe and friend, mingled in confusion; nothing went by counsel or command; chance ruled all.

This construction is not strictly historical , but rather descriptive , and is never used to state a mere historical fact. It is rarely found in subordinate clauses. Though occurring in most of the writers of all periods, it is most frequent in the historians Sallust, Livy, Tacitus. It does not occur in Suetonius .

TENSES

The number of possible Tenses is very great. For in each of the three times, Present, Past, and Future, an action may be represented as going on, completed, or beginning; as habitual or isolated; as defined in time or indefinite (aoristic); as determined with reference to the time of the speaker, or as not itself so determined but as relative to some time which is determined; and the past and future times may be near or remote. Thus a scheme of thirty or more tenses might be devised.

But, in the development of forms, which always takes place gradually, no language finds occasion for more than a small part of these. The most obvious distinctions, according to our habits of thought, appear in the following scheme:—

Most languages disregard some of these distinctions, and some make other distinctions not here given. The Indo-European parent speech had a Present tense to express a and g, a Perfect to express d, an Aorist to express h, a Future to express c and i, and an Imperfect to express b. The Latin, however, confounded the Perfect and Aorist in a single form (the Perfect scrīpsī ), thus losing all distinction of form between d and h, and probably in a great degree the distinction of meaning. The nature of this confusion may be seen by comparing dīxī , dicāvī , and didicī (all Perfects derived from the same root, DIC), with e)/deica, Skr. adiksham, de/deixa, Skr. dideça. Latin also developed two new forms, those for e ( scrīpseram ) and f ( scrīpserō ), and thus possessed six tenses, as seen in § 154. c.

The lines between these six tenses in Latin are not hard and fast, nor are they precisely the same that we draw in English. Thus in many verbs the form corresponding to I have written (d) is used for those corresponding to I am writing (a) and I write (g) in a slightly different sense, and the form corresponding to I had written (e) is used in like manner for that corresponding to I was writing (b). Again, the Latin often uses the form for I shall have written (f) instead of that for I shall write (i). Thus, nōvī, I have learned, is used for I know; cōnstiterat, he had taken his position, for he stood; cōgnōverō, I shall have learned, for I shall be aware. In general a writer may take his own point of view.

TENSES OF THE INDICATIVE

INCOMPLETE ACTION: PRESENT TENSE

The Present Tense denotes an action or state (1) as now taking place or existing, and so (2) as incomplete in present time, or (3) as indefinite, referring to no particular time, but denoting a general truth:—

senātus haec intellegit, cōnsul videt, hīc tamen vīvit (Cat. 1.2) , the senate knows this, the consul sees it, yet this man lives.

tibi concēdō meās sēdīs (Div. 1.104) , I give you my seat (an offer which may or may not be accepted).

exspectō quid velīs (Ter. And. 34) , I await your pleasure (what you wish).

tū āctiōnem īnstituis, ille aciem īnstruit (Mur. 22) , you arrange a case, he arrays an army. [The present is here used of regular employment.]

minōra dī neglegunt (N. D. 3.86) , the gods disregard trifles. [General truth.]

obsequium amīcōs, vēritās odium parit (Ter. And. 68) , flattery gains friends, truth hatred. [General truth.]

The present of a general truth is sometimes called the Gnomic Present.

The present is regularly used in quoting writers whose works are extant:— Epicūrus vērō ea dīcit (Tusc. 2.17) , but Epicurus says such things.

apud illum Ulixēs lāmentātur in volnere (id. 2.49), in him (Sophocles) Ulysses laments over his wound.

Polyphēmum Homērus cum ariete colloquentem facit (id. 5.115), Homer brings in (makes) Polyphemus talking with his ram.

Present with iam diū etc.

The Present with expressions of duration of time (especially iam diū, iam dūdum) denotes an action continuing in the present, but begun in the past (cf. § 471. b).

In this use the present is commonly to be rendered by the perfect in English:— iam diū īgnōrō quid agās (Fam. 7.9) , for a long time I have not known what you were doing.

tē iam dūdum hortor (Cat. 1.12) , I have long been urging you.

patimur multōs iam annōs (Verr. 5.126) , we suffer now these many years. [The Latin perfect would imply that we no longer suffer.]

annī sunt octō cum ista causa versātur (cf. Clu. 82), it is now eight years that this case has been in hand.

annum iam audīs Cratippum (Off. 1.1) , for a year you have been a hearer of Cratippus.

adhūc Plancius mē retinet (Fam. 14.1.3) , so far Plancius has kept me here.

The difference in the two idioms is that the English states the beginning and leaves the continuance to be inferred, while the Latin states the continuance and leaves the beginning to be inferred. Compare he has long suffered ( and still suffers ) with he still suffers ( and has suffered long ). Similarly the Present Imperative with iam dūdum indicates that the action commanded ought to have been done or was wished for long ago (cf. the Perfect Imperative in Greek): as, —iam dūdum sūmite poenās (Aen. 2.103) , exact the penalty long delayed.

Conative Present

The Present sometimes denotes an action attempted or begun in present time, but never completed at all (Conative Present, cf. § 471. c):— iam iamque manū tenet (Aen. 2.530) , and now, even now, he attempts to grasp him.

dēnsōs fertur in hostīs (id. 2.511), he starts to rush into the thickest of the foe.

dēcernō quīnquāgintā diērum supplicātiōnēs (Phil. 14.29) , I move for fifty days' thanksgiving. [Cf. senātus dēcrēvit, the senate ordained.]

Present for Future

The Present, especially in colloquial language and poetry, is often used for the Future:— īmusne sessum (De Or. 3.17) , shall we take a seat? (are we going to sit?)

hodiē uxōrem dūcis (Ter. And. 321) , are you to be married to-day?

quod sī fit, pereō funditus (id. 244), if this happens, I am utterly undone.

ecquid mē adiuvās (Clu. 71) , won't you give me a little help?

in iūs vocō tē. nōn eō. nōn īs (Pl. Asin. 480) , I summon you to the court. I won't go. You won't?

Eō and its compounds are especially frequent in this use (cf. where are you going to-morrow? and the Greek ei)=mi in a future sense). Verbs of necessity , possibility , wish , and the like (as possum , volō , etc.) also have reference to the future.

For other uses of the Present in a future sense, see under Conditions (§ 516. a. N.), antequam and priusquam (§ 551. c), dum (§ 553. N. 2), and § 444. a. N.

Historical Present

The Present in lively narrative is often used for the Historical Perfect:— affertur nūntius Syrācūsās; curritur ad praetōrium; Cleomenēs in pūblico esse nōn audet; inclūdit sē domī; (Verr. 5.92), the news is brought to Syracuse; they run to headquarters; Cleomenes does not venture to be abroad; he shuts himself up at home.

This usage, common in all languages, comes from imagining past events as going on before our eyes ( repraesentātiō , § 585 . b. N.).

For the Present Indicative with dum, while, see § 556.

The present may be used for the perfect in a summary enumeration of past events (Annalistic Present):— Rōma interim crēscit Albae ruīnīs: duplicātur cīvium numerus; Caelius additur urbī mōns (Liv. 1.30) , Rome meanwhile grows as a result of the fall of Alba: the number of citizens is doubled; the Cœlian hill is added to the town

IMPERFECT TENSE

The Imperfect denotes an action or a state as continued or repeated in past time:— hunc audiēbant anteā; (Manil. 13), they used to hear of him before.

[Sōcratēs] ita cēnsēbat itaque disseruit (Tusc. 1.72) , Socrates thought so (habitually), and so he spoke (then).

prūdēns esse putābātur (Lael. 6) , he was (generally) thought wise. [The perfect would refer to some particular case, and not to a state of things.]

iamque rubēscēbat Aurōra (Aen. 3.521) , and now the dawn was blushing.

āra vetus stābat (Ov. M. 6.326) , an old altar stood there.

The Imperfect is a descriptive tense and denotes an action conceived as in progress or a state of things as actually observed. Hence in many verbs it does not differ in meaning from the Perfect. Thus rēx erat and rēx fuit may often be used indifferently; but the former describes the condition while the latter only states it. The English is less exact in distinguishing these two modes of statement. Hence the Latin Imperfect is often translated by the English Preterite:— Haeduī graviter ferēbant, neque lēgātōs ad Caesarem mittere audēbant (B. G. 5.6) , the Hædui were displeased, and did not dare to send envoys to Cæsar. [Here the Imperfects describe the state of things.] But,—

id tulit factum graviter Indūtiomārus (id. 5.4), Indutiomarus was displeased at this action. [Here the Perfect merely states the fact.]

aedificia vīcōsque habēbant (id. 4.4), they had buildings and villages.

The Imperfect represents a present tense transferred to past time. Hence all the meanings which the Present has derived from the continuance of the action belong also to the Imperfect in reference to past time.

The Imperfect is used in descriptions:— erant omnīnō itinera duo ... mōns altissimus impendēbat (B. G. 1.6) , there were in all two ways ... a very high mountain overhung.

With iam diū , iam dūdum , and other expressions of duration of time, the Imperfect denotes an action continuing in the past but begun at some previous time (cf. § 466).

In this construction the Imperfect is rendered by the English Pluperfect:— iam dūdum flēbam (Ov. M. 3.656) , I had been weeping for a long time.

cōpiās quās diū comparābant (Fam. 11.13.5) , the forces which they had long been getting ready.

The Imperfect sometimes denotes an action as begun (Inceptive Imperfect), or as attempted or only intended (Conative Imperfect; cf § 467):—

in exsilium ēioiēbam quem iam ingressum esse in bellum vidēbam (Cat. 2.14) , was I trying to send into exile one who I saw had already gone into war?

hunc igitur diem sibi prōpōnēns Milō, cruentīs manibus ad illa augusta centuriārum auspicia veniēbat (Mil. 43) , was Milo coming (i.e. was it likely that he would come), etc.?

sī licitum esset veniēbant (Verr. 5.129) , they were coming if it had been allowed (they were on the point of coming, and would have done so if, etc.).

To this head may be referred the imperfect with iam , denoting the beginning of an action or state: as, — iam que arva tenēbant ultima (Aen. 6.477) , and now they were just getting to the farthest fields.

The Imperfect is sometimes used to express a surprise at the resent discovery of a fact already existing:— ō tū quoque aderās (Ter. Ph. 858) , oh, you are here too!

ehem, tūn hīc erās, mī Phaedria (Ter. Eun. 86) , what! you here, Phœdria?

ā miser! quantā labōrābās Charybdī; (Hor. Od. 1.27.19), unhappy boy, what a whirlpool you are struggling in [and I never knew it]!

The Imperfect is often used in dialogue by the comic poets where later writers would employ the Perfect:— ad amīcum Calliclem quoi rem aībat mandāsse hīc suam (Pl. Trin. 956) , to his friend Callicles, to whom, he said, he had intrusted his property.

praesāgībat mī animus frūstrā mē īre quom exībam domō; (Pl. Aul. 178), my mind mistrusted when I went from home that I went in vain.

So, in conversation the imperfect of verbs of saying (cf. as I was a-saying ) is common in classic prose:— at medicī quoque, ita enim dīcēbās, saepe falluntur (N. D. 3.15) , but physicians also,—for that is what you were saying just now,—are often mistaken.

haec mihi ferē in mentem veniēbant (id. 2.67, 168), this is about what occurred to me, etc. [In a straightforward narration this would be vēnērunt .]

The Imperfect with negative words often has the force of the English auxiliary could or would:— itaque (Dāmoclēs) nec pulchrōs iliōs ministrātōrēs aspiciēbat (Tusc. 5.62) , therefore he could not look upon those beautiful slaves. [In this case did not would not express the idea of continued prevention of enjoyment by the overhanging sword.]

nec enim dum eram vōbīscum animum meum vidēbātis (Cat. M. 79) , for, you know, while I was with you, you could not see my soul. [Here the Perfect would refer only to one moment.]

Lentulus satis erat fortis ōrātōr, sed cōgitandī nōn ferēbat labōrem (Brut 268), Lentulus was bold enough as an orator, but could not endure the exertion of thinking hard.

For the Epistolary Imperfect, see § 479; for the Imperfect Indicative in apodosis contrary to fa, see § 517. b. c.

FUTURE TENSE

The Future denotes an action or state that will occur hereafter.

The Future may have the force of an Imperative (§ 449. b).

The Future is often required in a subordinate clause in Latin where in English futurity is sufficiently expressed by the main clause: cum aderit vidēbit, when he is there he will see (cf. § 547).

sānābimur sī volēmus (Tusc. 3.13) , we shall be healed if we wish (cf. § 516. a).

But the Present is common in future protases (§ 516 . a N.).

COMPLETED ACTION: PERFECT TENSE

Perfect Definite and Historical Perfect

The Perfect denotes an action either as now completed (Perfect Definite), or as having taken place at some undefined point of past time (Historical or Aoristic Perfect).

The Perfect Definite corresponds in general to the English Perfect with have; the Historical Perfect to the English Preterite (or Past): (1) ut ego fēcī, quī Graecās litterās senex didicī (Cat. M. 26) , as I have done, who have learned Greek in my old age.

diūturnī silentī fīnem hodiernus diēs attulit (Marc. 1) , this day has put an end to my long-continued silence.

(2) tantum bellum extrēmā hieme apparāvit, ineunte vēre suscēpit, mediā aestāte cōnfēcit (Manil. 35) , so great a war he made ready for at the end of winter, undertook in early spring, and finished by midsummer.

The distinction between these two uses is represented by two forms in most other Indo-European languages, but was almost if not wholly lost to the minds of the Romans. It must be noticed, however, on account of the marked distinction in English and also because of certain differences in the sequence of tenses.

The Indefinite Present, denoting a customary action or a general truth (§ 465), often has the Perfect in a subordinate clause referring to time antecedent to that of the main clause:— quī in compedibus corporis semper fuērunt, etiam cum solūtī sunt tardius ingrediuntur (Tusc. 1.75) , they who have always been in the fetters of the body, even when released move more slowly.

simul ac mihi collibitum est, praestō est imāgō; (N. D. 1.108), as soon as I have taken a fancy, the image is before my eyes.

haec morte effugiuntur, etiam sī nōn ēvēnērunt, tamen quia possunt ēvenīre (Tusc. 1.86) , these things are escaped by death even if they have not [yet] happened, because they still may happen.

This use of the perfect is especially common in the protasis of General Conditions in present time (§ 518 . b ).

The Perfect is sometimes used emphatically to denote that a thing or condition of things that once existed no longer exists: fuit ista quondam in hāc rē pūblicā virtūs (Cat. 1.3) , there was once such virtue in this commonwealth.

habuit, nōn habet (Tusc. 1.87) , he had, he has no longer.

fīlium habeō ... immo habuī; nunc habeam necne incertumst (Ter. Haut. 93), I have a son, no, I had one; whether I have now or not is uncertain.

fuimus Trōes, fuit Īlium (Aen. 2.325) , we have ceased to be Trojans, Troy is no more.

Special Uses of the Perfect

The Perfect is sometimes used of a general truth, especially with negatives (Gnomic Perfect):— quī studet contingere mētam multa tulit fēcitque (Hor. A. P. 412) , he who aims to reach the goal, first bears and does many things.

nōn aeris acervus et aurī dēdūxit corpore febrīs (id. Ep. 1.2.47), the pile of brass and gold removes not fever from the frame.

The gnomic perfect strictly refers to past time; but its use implies that something which never did happen in any known case never does happen, and never will (cf. the English “ Faint heart never won fair lady” ); or, without a negative that what has once happened will always happen under similar circumstances.

The Perfect is often used in expressions containing or implying a negation, where in affirmation the Imperfect would be preferred:— dīcēbat melius quam scrīpsit Hortēnsius (Or. 132) , Hortensius spoke better than he wrote. [Here the negative is implied in the comparison: compare the use of quisquam , ūllus , etc. (§§ 311, 312), and the French ne after comparatives and superlatives.]

The completed tenses of some verbs are equivalent to the incomplete tenses of verbs of kindred meaning.

Such are the preteritive verbs ōdī, I hate; meminī, I remember; nōvī, I know; cōnsuēvī, I am accustomed, Cf. dētestor , reminīscor , sciō , soleō . with others used preteritively, as vēnerat (=aderat, he was at hand, etc.), cōnstitērunt, they stand firm (have taken their stand), and many inceptives (see § 263. 1):—

quī diēs aestūs maximōs efficere cōnsuēvit (B. G. 4.29) , which day generally makes the highest tides (is accustomed to make).

cûius splendor obsolēvit (Quinct. 59) , whose splendor is now all faded.

Many other verbs are occasionally so used: as, —dum oculōs certāmen āverterat (Liv. 32.24) , while the contest had turned their eyes (kept them turned). [Here āverterat = tenēbat .]

PLUPERFECT TENSE

The Pluperfect is used (1) to denote an action or state completed in past time; or (2) sometimes to denote an action in indefinite time, but prior to some past time referred to:— (1) locī nātūra erat haec, quem locum nostrī castrīs dēlēgerant (B. G. 2.18) , this was the nature of the ground which our men had chosen for a camp.

Viridovīx summam imperī tenēbat eārum omnium cīvitātum quae dēfēcerant (id. 3.17), Viridovix held the chief command of all those tribes which had revolted.

(2) neque vērō cum aliquid mandāverat cōnfectum putābat (Cat. 3.16) , but when he had given a thing in charge he did not look on it as done.

quae sī quandō adepta est id quod eī fuerat concupītum, tum fert alacritātem (Tusc. 4.15) , if it (desire) ever has gained what it had [previously] desired, then it produces joy.

For the Epistolary Pluperfect, see § 479.

FUTURE PERFECT TENSE

The Future Perfect denotes an action as completed in the future:— ut sēmentem fēceris, ita metēs (De Or. 2.261) , as you sow (shall have sown), so shall you reap.

carmina tum melius, cum vēnerit ipse, canēmus (Ecl. 9.67) , then shall we sing our songs better, when he himself has come (shall have come).

sī illīus īnsidiae clāriōrēs hāc lūce fuerint, tum dēnique obsecrābō; (Mil. 6), when the plots of that man have been shown to be as clear as daylight, then, and not till then, shall I conjure you.

ego certē meum officium praestiterō (B. G. 4.25) , I at least shall have done my duty (i.e. when the time comes to reckon up the matter, I shall be found to have done it, whatever the event).

Latin is far more exact than English in distinguishing between mere future action and action completed in the future. Hence the Future Perfect is much commoner in Latin than in English. It may even be used instead of the Future, from the fondness of the Romans for representing an action as completed:— quid inventum sit paulō post vīderō (Acad. 2.76) , what has been found out I shall see presently.

quī Antōnium oppresserit bellum taeterrimum cōnfēcerit (Fam. 10.19) , whoever crushes (shall have crushed) Antony will finish (will have finished) a most loathsome war.

EPISTOLARY TENSES

In Letters, the Perfect Historical or the Imperfect may be used for the present, and the Pluperfect for any past tense, as if the letter were dated at the time it is supposed to be received:— neque tamen, haec cum scrībēbam, eram nescius quantīs oneribus premerēre (Fam. 5.12.2) , nor while I write this am I ignorant under what burdens you are weighed down.

ad tuās omnīs [epistulās] rescrīpseram prīdiē; (Att. 9.10.1), I answered all your letters yesterday.

cum quod scrīberem ad tē nihil habērem, tamen hās dedī litterās (Att. 9.16) , though I have nothing to write to you, still I write this letter.

In this use these tenses are called the Epistolary Perfect, Imperfect, and Pluperfect. The epistolary tenses are not employed with any uniformity, but only when attention is particularly directed to the time of writing (so especially scrībēbam , dabam , etc.).

TENSES OF THE SUBJUNCTIVE

The tenses of the Subjunctive in Independent Clauses denote time in relation to the time of the speaker.

The Present always refers to future (or indefinite) time, the Imperfect to either past or present, the Perfect to either future or past, the Pluperfect always to past.

The tenses of the Subjunctive in Dependent Clauses were habitually used in certain fixed connections with the tenses of the main verb.

These connections were determined by the time of the main verb and the time of the dependent verb together. They are known, collectively, as the Sequence of Tenses. The so-called Sequence of Tenses is not a mechanical law. Each tense of the subjunctive in dependent clauses (as in independent) originally denoted its own time in relation to the time of the speaker, though less definitely than the corresponding tenses of the indicative. Gradually, however, as the complex sentence was more strongly felt as a unit, certain types in which the tenses of the dependent clause seemed to accord with those of the main clause were almost unconsciously regarded as regular, and others, in which there was no such agreement, as exceptional. Thus a pretty definite system of correspondences grew up, which is codified in the rules for the Sequence of Tenses. These, however, are by no means rigid. They do not apply with equal stringency to all dependent constructions, and they were frequently disregarded, not only when their strict observance would have obscured the sense, but for the sake of emphasis and variety, or merely from carelessness.

Sequence of Tenses

The tenses of the Subjunctive in Dependent Clauses follow special rules for the Sequence of Tenses.

With reference to these rules all tenses when used in independent clauses are divided into two classes,—Primary and Secondary.

PRIMARY.—The Primary Tenses include all forms that express present or futuretime. These are the Present, Future, and Future Perfect Indicative, the Present and Perfect Subjunctive, and the Present and Future Imperative.

SECONDARY.—The Secondary Tenses include all forms that refer to past time. These are the Imperfect, Perfect, and Pluperfect Indicative, the Imperfect and Pluperfect Subjunctive, and the Historical Infinitive.

To these may be added certain forms less commonly used in independent clauses:—(1) Primary: Present Infinitive in Exclamations; (2) Secondary: Perfect Infinitive in Exclamations (see §§ 462 , 485. a N.). The Perfect Definite is sometimes treated as primary (see § 485. a).

For the Historical Present, see § 485. e; for the Imperfect Subjunctive in Apodosis, see § 485. h.

The following is the general rule for the Sequence of Tenses:— The term is sometimes extended to certain relations between the tenses of subordinate verbs in the indicative and those of the main verb. These relations do not differ in principle from those which we are considering; but for convenience the term Sequence of Tenses is in this book restricted to subjunctives, in accordance with the usual practice.

In complex sentences a Primary tense in the main clause is followed by the Present or Perfect in the dependent clause, and a Secondary tense by the Imperfect or Pluperfect:—

PRIMARY TENSES

SECONDARY TENSES

In applying the rule for the Sequence of Tenses, observe—

(1) Whether the main verb is (a) primary or (b) secondary.

(2) Whether the dependent verb is to denote completed action (i.e. past with reference to the main verb) or incomplete action (i.e. present or future with reference to the main verb). Then—

If the leading verb is primary, the dependent verb must be in the Present if it denotes incomplete action, in the Perfect if it denotes completed action.

If the leading verb is secondary, the dependent verb must be in the Imperfect if it denotes incomplete action, in the Pluperfect if it denotes completed action:— (1) He writes [primary] to warn [incomplete action] us, scrībit ut nōs moneat.

I ask [primary] what you were doing [now past], rogō quid fēceris.

(2) He wrote [secondary] to warn [incomplete] us, scrīpsit ut nōs monēret.

I asked [secondary] what you were doing [incomplete], rogāvī quid facerēs.

Notice that the Future Perfect denotes action completed (at the time referred to), and hence is represented in the Subjunctive by the Perfect or Pluperfect:— He shows that if they come (shall have come), many will perish, dēmōnstrat , sī vēnerint , multōs interitūrōs.

He showed that if they should come (should have come), many would perish, dēmōnstrāvit , sī vēnissent, multōs interitūrōs.

In the Sequence of Tenses the following special points are to be noted:—

The Perfect Indicative is ordinarily a secondary tense, but allows the primary sequence when the present time is clearly in the writer's mind:— ut satis esset praesidī prōvīsum est (Cat. 2.26) , provision has been made that there should be ample guard. [Secondary sequence.]

addūxī hominem in quō satisfacere exterīs nātiōnibus possētis (Verr. 1.2) , I have brought a man in whose person you can make satisfaction to foreign nations. [Secondary sequence.]

est enim rēs iam in eum locum adducta, ut quamquam multum intersit inter eōrum causās quī dīmicant, tamen inter victōriās nōn multum interfutūrum putem (Fam. 5.21.3) , for affairs have been brought to such a pass that, though there is a great difference between the causes of those who are fighting, still I do not think there will be much difference between their victories. [Primary sequence.]

ea adhibita doctrīna est quae vel vitiōsissimam nātūram excolere possit (Q. Fr. 1.1.7) , such instruction has been given as can train even the faultiest nature. [Primary sequence.]

The Perfect Infinitive in exclamations follows the same rule:— quemquamne fuisse tam scelerātum quī hōc fingeret (Phil. 14.14) , was any one so abandoned as to imagine this? [Secondary.]

adeōn rem redīsse patrem ut extimēscam (Ter. Ph. 153) , to think that things have come to such a pass that I should dread my father! [Primary.]

After a primary tense the Perfect Subjunctive is regularly used to denote any past action. This the Perfect Subjunctive may represent—

A Perfect Definite:— nōn dubitō quīn omnēs tuī scrīpserint (Fam. 5.8) , I do not doubt that all your friends have written. [Direct statement: scrīpsērunt .]

quā rē nōn īgnōrō quid accidat in ultimīs terrīs, cum audierim in Ītaliā querellās cīvium (Q. Fr. 1.1.33) , therefore I know well what happens at the ends of the earth, when I have heard in Italy the complaints of citizens. [Direct statement: audīvī .]

A Perfect Historical:— mē autem hīc laudat quod rettulerim, nōn quod patefēcerim (Att. 12.21) , me he praises because I brought the matter [before the senate], not because I brought it to light. [Direct statement: rettulit.]

An Imperfect:— sī forte cecidērunt, tum intellegitur quamfuerint inopēs amīcōrum (Lael. 53) , if perchance they fall (have fallen), then one can see how poor they were in friends. [Direct question: quam inopēs erant?]

quī status rērum fuerit cum hās litterās dedī, scīre poteris ex C. Titiō Strabōne (Fam. 12.6) , what the condition of affairs was when I wrote this letter, you can learn from Strabo. [Direct question: quī status erat ?]

quam cīvitātī cārus fueritmaerōre fūneris indicātum est (Lael. 11) , how dear he was to the state has been shown by the grief at his funeral. [Direct question: quam cārus erat?]

ex epistulīs intellegī licet quam frequēns fueritPlatōnis audītor (Or. 15) , it may be understood from his letters how constant a hearer he was of Plato. [Direct question: quam frequēns erat?]

Thus the Perfect Subjunctive may represent, not only a Perfect Definite or a Perfect Historical of a direct statement or question, but an Imperfect as well. This comes from the want of any special tense of the subjunctive for continued past action after a primary tense. Thus, mīror quid fēcerit may mean (1) I wonder what he has done , (2) I wonder what he did (hist. perf.), or (3) I wonder what he was doing. In clauses of Result, the Perfect Subjunctive is regularly (the Present rarely) used after secondary tenses:— Hortēnsius ārdēbat dīcendī cupiditāte sīc ut in nūllō umquam flagrantius studium vīderim (Brut. 302) , Hortensius was so hot with desire of speaking that I have never seen a more burning ardor in any man.

[Siciliam Verrēs] per triennium ita vexāvit ac perdidit ut ea restituī in antīquum statum nūllō modō possit (Verr. 1.12) , for three years Verres so racked and ruined Sicily that she can in no way be restored to her former state. [Here the Present describes a state of things actually existing.]

videor esse cōnsecūtus ut nōn possit Dolābella in Ītaliam pervenīre (Fam. 12.14.2) , I seem to have brought it about that Dolabella cannot come into Italy.

This construction emphasizes the result; the regular sequence of tenses would subordinate it. There is a special fondness for the Perfect Subjunctive to represent a Perfect Indicative:— Thorius erat ita nōn superstitiōsus ut illa plūrima in suā et sacrificia et fāna contemneret; ita nōn timidus ad mortem ut in aciē sit ob rem pūblicam interfectus (Fin. 2.63) , Thorius was so little superstitious that he despised [contemnēbat] the many sacrifices and shrines in his country; so little timorous about death that he was killed [interfectus est] in battle, in defence of the state.

A general truth after a past tense follows the sequence of tenses: ex hīs quae tribuisset, sibi quam mūtābilis esset reputābat (Q. C. 3.8.20) , from what she (Fortune) had bestowed on him, he reflected how inconstant she is. [Direct: mūtābilis est .]

ibi quantam vim ad stimulandōs animōs īra habēret appāruit (Liv. 33.37) , here it appeared what power anger has to goad the mind. [Direct: habet .]

In English the original tense is more commonly kept.

The Historical Present (§ 469) is sometimes felt as a primary, ometimes as a secondary tense, and accordingly it takes either the primary or the secondary sequence:— rogat ut cūret quod dīxisset (Quinct. 18) , he asks him to attend to the thing he had spoken of. [Both primary and secondary sequence.]

After the historical present, the subjunctive with cum temporal must follow the secondary sequence:— quō cum vēnisset cōgnōscit (B. C. 1.34) , when he had come there he learns.

cum esset pūgnātum hōrīs quīnque, nostrīque gravius premerentur, impetum in cohortīs faciunt (id. 1.46), when they had fought for five hours, and our men were pretty hard pressed, they make an attack on the cohorts.

The Historical Infinitive regularly takes the secondary sequence:— interim cotīdiē Caesar Haeduōs frūmentum, quod essent pollicitī, flāgitāre (B. G. 1.16) . meanwhile Cæsar demanded of the Hœdui every day the grain which they had promised.

The Imperfect and Pluperfect in conditions contrary to fact (§ 517) and in the Deliberative Subjunctive (§ 444) are not affected by the sequence of tenses:— quia tāle sit, ut vel sī īgnōrārent id hominēs vel sī obmutuissent (Fin. 2.49) , because it is such that even if men WERE ignorant of it, or HAD BEEN silent about it.

quaerō ā tē cūr C. Cornēlium nōn dēfenderem (Vat. 5) , I ask you why I was not to defend Caius Cornelius? [Direct: cūr nōn dēfenderem ?]

The Imperfect Subjunctive in present conditions contrary to fact (§ 517) is regularly followed by the secondary sequence:— sī aliī cōnsulēs essent, ad tē potissimum, Paule, mitterem, ut eōs mihi quam amīcissimōs redderēs (Fam. 15.13.3) , if there were other consuls, I should send to you, Paulus, in preference to all, that you might make them as friendly to me as possible.

sī sōlōs eōs dīcerēs miserōs quibus moriendum esset, nēminem exciperēs (Tusc. 1.9) , if you were to call only those wretched who must d you would except no one.

The Present is sometimes followed by a secondary sequence, seemingly because the writer is thinking of past time:— sed sī rēs cōget, est quiddam tertium, quod neque Seliciō nec mihi displicē bat: ut neque iacēre rem paterēmur, etc. (Fam. 1.5A. 3), but if the case shall demand, there is a third [course] which neither Selicius nor myself disapproved, that we should not allow, etc. [Here Cicero is led by the time of displicēbat .]

sed tamen ut scīrēs, haec tibi scrībō (Fam. 13.47) , but yet that you may know, I write thus. [As if he had used the epistolary imperfect scrībēbam (§ 479).]

cûius praeceptī tanta vīs est ut ea nōn hominī cuipiam sed Delphicō deō tribuerētur (Legg. 1.58) , such is the force of this precept, that it was ascribed not to any man, but to the Delphic god. [The precept was an old one.]

When a clause depends upon one already dependent, its sequence may be secondary if the verb of that clause expresses past time, even if the main verb is in a primary tense:— sed tamen quā rē acciderit ut ex meīs superiōribus litterīs id suspicārēre nesciō; (Fam. 2.16), but yet how it happened that you suspected this from my previous letter, I don't know.

tantum prōfēcisse vidēmur ut ā Graecīs nē verbōrum quidem cōpiā vincerēmur (N. D. 1.8) , we seem to have advanced so far that even in abundance of words we ARE not surpassed by the Greeks.

So regularly after a Perfect Infinitive which depends on a primary tens (§ 585 . a ).

TENSES OF THE INFINITIVE

Except in Indirect Discourse, only the Present and Perfect Infinitives are used.

The Present represents the action of the verb as in progress without distinct reference to time, the Perfect as completed.

For the Tenses of the Infinitive in Indirect Discourse see § 584.

With past tenses of verbs of necessity, propriety, and possibility (as dēbuī, oportuit, potuī), the Present Infinitive is often used in Latin where the English idiom prefers the Perfect Infinitive:— numne, sī Coriolānus habuit amīcōs, ferre contrā patriam arma illī cum Coriolānō dēbuērunt (Lael. 36) , if Coriolanus had friends, ought they to have borne arms with him against their fatherland?

pecūnia, quam hīs oportuit cīvitātibus prō frūmentō darī (Verr. 3.174) , money which ought to have been paid to these states for grain.

cōnsul esse quī potuī, nisi eum vītae cursum tenuissem ā pueritiā; (Rep. 1.10), how could I have become consul had I not from boyhood followed that course of life?

With verbs of necessity, propriety, and possibility, the Perfect Infinitive may be used to emphasize the idea of completed action:— tametsī statim vīcisse dēbeō; (Rosc. Am. 73), although I ought to win my case at once (to be regarded as having won it).

bellum quod possumus ante hiemem perfēcisse (Liv. 37.19.5) , a war which we can have completed before winter.

nīl ego, sī peccem, possum nescīsse (Ov. H. 16.47) , if I should go wrong, I cannot have done it in ignorance (am not able not to have known).

With the past tenses of these verbs the perfect infinitive is apparently due to attraction:— quod iam prīdem factum esse oportuit (Cat. 1.5) , (a thing) which ought to have been done long ago.

haec facta ab illō oportēbat (Ter. Haut. 536) , this ought to have been done by him.

tum decuit metuisse (Aen. 10.94) , then was the time to fear (then you should have feared).

In archaic Latin and in legal formulas the Perfect Active Infinitive is often used with nōlō or volō in prohibitions:— Chaldaeum nēquem cōnsuluisse velit (Cato R. R. 5.4) , let him not venture to have consulted a soothsayer.

nōlītō dēvellisse (Pl. Poen. 872) , do not have them plucked.

nēquis humāsse velit Âiācem (Hor. S. 2.3.187) , let no one venture to have buried Ajax.

NEIQVIS EORVM BACANAL HABVISE VELET (S. C. de Bac. 1), let no one of them venture to have had a place for Bacchanalian worship.

With verbs of wishing Volō , and less frequently nōlō , mālō , and cupiō . the Perfect Passive Infinitive (commonly without esse ) is often used emphatically instead of the Present: domesticā cūrā tē levātum volō; (Q. Fr. 3.9.3), I wish you relieved of private care.

illōs monitōs volō; (Cat. 2.27), I wish them thoroughly warned.

quī illam [patriam] exstīnctam cupit (Fin. 4.66) , who is eager for her utter destruction.

illud tē esse admonitum volō; (Cael. 8), I wish you to be well advised of this.

quī sē ab omnibus dēsertōs potius quam abs tē dēfēnsōs esse mālunt (Caecil. 21) , who prefer to be deserted by all rather than to be defended by you.

The participle in this case is rather in predicate agreement (with or without esse ) than used to form a strict perfect infinitive, though the full form can hardly be distinguished from that construction.

In late Latin, and in poetry (often for metrical convenience), rarely in good prose, the Perfect Active Infinitive is used emphatically instead of the Present, and even after other verbs than those of wishing:— nēmō eōrum est quī nōn perīsse tē cupiat (Verr. 2.149) , there is no one of them who is not eager for your death.

haud equidem premendō alium mē extulisse velim (Liv. 22.59.10) , I would not by crushing another exalt myself.

sunt quī nōlint tetigisse (Hor. S. 1.2.28) , there are those who would not touch.

commīsisse cavet (Hor. A. P. 168) , he is cautious of doing.

nunc quem tetigisse timērent, anguis erās (Ov. M. 8.733) , again you became a serpent which they dreaded to touch.

frātrēsque tendentēs opācō Pēlion imposuisse Olympō; (Hor. Od. 3.4.51), and the brothers striving to set Pelion on dark Olympus.

After verbs of feeling the Perfect Infinitive is used, especially by the poets, to denote a completed action.

So also with satis est , satis habeō , melius est , contentus sum , and in a few other cases where the distinction of time is important:— nōn paenitēbat intercapēdinem scrībendī fēcisse (Fam. 16.21) , I was not sorry to have made a respite of writing.

pudet mē nōn praestitisse (id. 14.3), I am ashamed not to have shown.

sunt quōs pulverem Olympicum collēgisse iuvat (Hor. Od. 1.1.3) , some delight to have stirred up the dust at Olympia.

quiēsse erit melius (Liv. 3.48) , it will be better to have kept quiet.

ac sī quis amet scrīpsisse (Hor. S. 1.10.60) , than if one should choose to have written.

id sōlum dīxisse satis habeō; (Vell. 2.124), I am content to have said only this.

NOUN AND ADJECTIVE FORMS OF THE VERB

The several Noun and Adjective forms associated with the verb are employed as follows:— For the Syntax of the Infinitive, see §§ 451 ff. 486.

PARTICIPLES

The Participle expresses the action of the verb in the form of an Adjective, but has a partial distinction of tense and may govern a case. Thus the participle combines all the functions of an adjective with some of the functions of a verb. As an Adjective, it limits substantives and agrees with them in gender, number, and case (§ 286 ). As a Verb, it has distinctions of time (§ 489 ) and often takes an object.

Distinctions of Tense in Participles

Participles denote time as present, past, or future with respect to the time of the verb in their clause.

Thus the Present Participle represents the action as in progress at the time indicated by the tense of the verb, the Perfect as completed, and the Future as still to take place.

The Present Participle has several of the special uses of the Present Indicative. Thus it may denote—

An action continued in the present but begun in the past (§ 466): quaerentī mihiiam diū certa rēs nūlla veniēbat in mentem (Fam. 4.13) . though I had long sought, no certain thing came to my mind.

Attempted action (§ 467):— C. Flāminiō restitit agrum Pīcentem dīvidentī (Cat. M. 11) , he resisted Flaminius when attempting to divide the Picene territory.

Rarely (in poetry and later Latin) futurity or purpose, with a verb of motion:— Eurypylumscītantemōrācula mittimus (Aen. 2.114) , we send Eurypylus to consult the oracle. [Cf. § 468.]

The Perfect Participle of a few deponent verbs is used nearly in the sense of a Present.

Such are, regularly, ratus , solitus , veritus; commonly, arbitrātus , fīsus , ausus , secūtus , and occasionally others, especially in later writers:— rem incrēdibilem ratī (Sall. Cat. 48), thinking the thing incredible.

īnsidiās veritus (B. G. 2.11) , fearing an ambuscade.

cohortātus mīlitēs docuit (B. C. 3.80) , encouraging the men, he showed.

īrātus dīxistī; (Mur. 62), you spoke in a passion.

ad pūgnam congressī (Liv. 4.10) , meeting in fight.

The Latin has no Present Participle in the passive.

The place of such a form is supplied usually by a clause with dum or cum :— obiēre dum calciantur mātūtīnō duo Caesarēs (Plin. N. H. 7.181), two Cæsars died while having their shoes put on in the morning.

mēque ista dēlectant cum Latīnē dīcuntur (Acad. 1.18) , those things please me when they are spoken in Latin.

These constructions are often used when a participle might be employed:— dīc, hospes, Spartae nōs tē hīc vīdisse iacentīs, dum sānctīs patriae lēgibus obsequimur (Tusc. 1.101) , tell it, stranger, at Sparta, that you saw us lying here obedient to our country's sacred laws. [Here dum obsequimur is a translation of the Greek present participle peiqo/menoi.]

dum [Ulixēs] sibi, dum sociīs reditum parat (Hor. Ep. 1.2.21) , Ulysses, while securing the return of himself and his companions. [In Greek: a)rnu/menos.]

The Latin has no Perfect Participle in the active voice. The deficiency is supplied—

In deponents by the perfect passive form with its regular active meaning:— nam singulās [nāvīs] nostrīcōnsectātīexpūgnāvērunt (B. G. 3.15) , for our men, having overtaken them one by one, captured them by boarding.

The perfect participle of several deponent verbs may be either active or passive in meaning (§ 190 . b ).

In other verbs, either by the perfect passive participle in the ablative absolute (§ 420. N.) or by a temporal clause (especially with cum or postquam):— itaqueconvocātīs centuriōnibusmīlitēs certiōrēs facit (B. G. 3.5) , and so, having called the centurions together, he informs the soldiers (the centurions having been called together).

cum vēnisset animadvertit collem (id. 7.44), having come (when he had come), he noticed a hill.

postquam id animum advertit cōpiās suās Caesar in proximum collem subdūcit (B. G. 1.24) , having observed this (after he had observed this) Cæsar led his troops to the nearest hill.

Uses of Participles

The Present and Perfect Participles are sometimes used as attributives, nearly like adjectives:— aeger et flagrāns animus (Tac. Ann. 3.54) , his sick and passionate mind.

cum antīquissimam sententiam tum comprobātam (Div. 1.11) , a view at once most ancient and well approved.

sīgna numquam ferē mentientia (id. 1.15), signs hardly ever deceitful.

auspiciīs ūtuntur coāctīs (id. 1.27), they use forced auspices.

Participles often become complete adjectives, and may be compared, or used as nouns:— quō mulierī esset rēs cautior (Caec. 11) , that the matter might be more secure for the woman.

in illīs artibus praestantissimus (De Or. 1.217) , preëminent in those arts.

sibi indulgentēs et corporī dēservientēs (Legg. 1.39) , the self-indulgent, and slaves to the body (indulging themselves and serving the body).

rēctē facta paria esse dēbent (Par. 22) , right deeds (things rightly done) ought to be like in value (see § 321. b).

male parta male dīlābuntur (Phil. 2.65) , ill got, ill spent (things ill acquired are ill spent).

cōnsuētūdō valentis (De Or. 2.186) , the habit of a man in health.

Participles are often used as Predicate Adjectives. As such they may be joined to the subject by esse or a copulative verb (see § 283):— Gallia est dīvīsa (B. G. 1.1) , Gaul is divided.

locus quī nunc saeptus est (Liv. 1.8) , the place which is now enclosed.

vidētis ut senectūs sit operōsa et semper agēns aliquid et mōliēns (Cat. M. 26) , you see how busy old age is, always aiming and trying at something.

nēmō adhūc convenīre mē voluit cui fuerim occupātus (id. 32), nobody hitherto has [ever] wished to converse with me, to whom I have been “engaged.”

From this predicate use arise the compound tenses of the passive,—the participle of completed action with the incomplete tenses of esse developing the idea of past time: as, interfectus est , he was (or has been ) killed , lit. he is having-been-killed (i.e. already slain).

The perfect participle used with fuī etc. was perhaps originally an intensified expression in the popular language for the perfect, pluperfect, etc.

At times these forms indicate a state of affairs no longer existing:— cōtem quoque eōdem locō sitam fuisse memorant (Liv. 1.36.5) , they say that a whetstone was (once) deposited in this same place. [At the time of writing it was no longer there.]

arma quae fīxa in parietibus fuerant, humī inventa sunt (Div. 1.74) , the arms which had been fastened on the walls were found upon the ground.

But more frequently they are not to be distinguished from the forms with sum etc.

The construction is found occasionally at all periods, but is most common in Livy and later writers.

The Present and Perfect Participles are often used as a predicate, where in English a phrase or a subordinate clause would be more natural.

In this use the participles express time, cause, occasion, condition, concession, characteristic (or description), manner, means, attendant circumstances:— volventēs hostīlia cadāvera amīcum reperiēbant (Sall. Cat. 61), while rolling over the corpses of the enemy they found a friend. [Time.]

paululum commorātus, sīgna canere iubet (id. 59), after delaying a little while, he orders them to give the signal. [Time.]

longius prōsequī veritus, ad Cicerōnem pervēnit (B. G. 5.52) , because he feared to follow further, he came to Cicero. [Cause.]

quī scīret laxās dare iussus habēnās (Aen. 1.63) , who might know how to give them loose rein when bidden. [Occasion.]

damnātum poenam sequī oportēbat (B. G. 1.4) , if condemned, punishment must overtake him. [Condition.]

salūtem īnspērantibus reddidistī; (Marc. 21), you have restored a safety for which we did not hope (to [us] not hoping). [Concession.]

Dardanius caput ecce puer dētēctus (Aen. 10.133) , the Trojan boy with his head uncovered. [Description.]

nec trepidēs in ūsum poscentis aevī pauca (Hor. Od. 2.11.5) , be not anxious for the needs of age that demands little. [Characteristic.]

incitātī fugā montīs altissimōs petēbant (B. C. 3.93) , in headlong flight they made for the highest mountains. [Manner.]

mīlitēs sublevātī aliī ab aliīs māgnam partem itineris cōnficerent (id. 1.68), the soldiers, helped up by each other, accomplished a considerable part of the route. [Means.]

hōc laudāns, Pompêius idem iūrāvit (id. 3.87), approving this, Pompey took the same oath. [Attendant Circumstance.]

aut sedēns aut ambulāns disputābam (Tusc. 1.7) , I conducted the discussion either sitting or walking. [Attendant Circumstance.]

These uses are especially frequent in the Ablative Absolute (§ 420 ). A coördinate clause is sometimes compressed into a perfect participle:— īnstrūctōs ōrdinēs in locum aequum dēdūcit (Sall. Cat. 59), he draws up the lines, and leads them to level ground.

ut hōs trāductōs necāret (B. G. 5.6) , that he might carry them over and put them to death.

A participle with a negative often expresses the same idea which in English is given by without and a verbal noun: as, —miserum est nihil prōficientem angī (N. D. 3.14) , it is wretched to vex oneself without effecting anything. Acceptum and expēnsum as predicates with ferre and referre are bookkeeping terms: as,—quās pecūniās ferēbat eīs expēnsās (Verr. 2.170) , what sums he charged to them.

A noun and a passive participle are often so united that the participle and not the noun contains the main idea:— Compare the participle in indirect discourse in Greek (Goodwin's Greek Grammar, § 1588 ); and the English “'T was at the royal feast for Persia won” (Dryden), i.e. for the conquest of Persia. ante conditam condendamve urbem (Liv. Pref.), before the city was built or building.

illī lībertātem imminūtam cīvium Rōmānōrum nōn tulērunt; vōs ēreptam vītam neglegētis (Manil. 11) , they did not endure the infringement of the citizens' liberty; will you disregard the destruction of their lives?

post nātōs hominēs (Brut. 224) , since the creation of man.

iam ā conditā urbe (Phil. 3.9) , even from the founding of the city.

The perfect participle with a noun in agreement, or in the neuter as an abstract noun, is used in the ablative with opus, need (cf. § 411. a):— opus factō est viāticō (Pl. Trin. 887) , there is need of laying in provision.

mātūrātō opus est (Liv. 8.13.17) , there is need of haste.

The perfect participle with habeō (rarely with other verbs) has almost the same meaning as a perfect active, but denotes the continued effect of the action of the verb:— The perfect with have , in modern languages of Latin stock, has grown out of this use of habeō . fidem quam habent spectātam iam et diū cōgnitam (Caecil. 11) , my fidelity, which they have proved and long known.

cohortīs in aciē LXXX cōnstitūtās habēbat (B. C. 3.89) , he had eighty cohorts stationed in line of battle.

nefāriōs ducēs captōs iam et comprehēnsōs tenētis (Cat. 3.16) , you have now captured the infamous leaders and hold them in custody.

A verb of effecting or the like may be used in combination with the perfect participle of a transitive verb to express the action of that verb more forcibly:—

praefectōs suōs multī missōs fēcērunt (Verr. 3.134) , many discharged their officers (made dismissed).

hīc trānsāctum reddet omne (Pl. Capt. 345) , he will get it all done (restore it finished).

adēmptum tibi iam faxō omnem metum (Ter. Haut. 341) , I will relieve you of all fear (make it taken away).

illam tibi incēnsam dabō (Ter. Ph. 974) , I will make her angry with you.

Similarly volō (with its compounds) and cupiō , with a perfect participle without esse (cf. § 486 . d ).

After verbs denoting an action of the senses the present participle in agreement with the object is nearly equivalent to the infinitive of indirect discourse (§ 580), but expresses the action more vividly: ut eum nēmō umquam in equō sedentem vīderit (Verr. 5.27) , so that no one ever saw him sitting on a horse. [Cf. Tusc. 3.31.]

The same construction is used after faciō , indūcō , and the like, with the name of an author as subject: as, —Xenophōn facit Sōcratem disputantem (N. D. 1.31) , Xenophon represents Socrates disputing.

Future Participle (Active)

The Future Participle (except futūrus and ventūrus) is rarely used in simple agreement with a noun, except by poets and later writers.

The future participle is chiefly used with the forms of esse (often omitted in the infinitive) in the Active Periphrastic Conjugation (see § 195):— morere, Diagorā, nōn enim in caelum adscēnsūrus es (Tusc. 1.111) , die, Diagoras, for you are not likely to rise to heaven.

spērat adulēscēns diū sē vīctūrum (Cat. M. 68) , the young man hopes to live long (that he shall live long).

neque petītūrus umquam cōnsulātum vidērētur (Off. 3.79) , and did not seem likely ever to be a candidate for the consulship.

With the past tenses of esse in the indicative, the future participle is often equivalent to the pluperfect subjunctive (§ 517. d). For futūrum fuisse , see § 589. b.

By later writers and the poets the Future Participle is often used in simple agreement with a substantive to express—

Likelihood or certainty:— rem ausus plūs fāmae habitūram (Liv. 2.10) , having dared a thing which would have more repute.

Purpose, intention, or readiness:— ēgreditur castrīs Rōmānus vāllum invāsūrus (Liv. 3.60.8) , the Roman comes out of the camp with the intention of attacking the rampart.

dispersōs per agrōs mīlitēs equitibus invāsūrīs (id. 31.36), while the horse were ready to attack the soldiers scattered through the fields.

sī peritūrusabīs (Aen. 2.675) , if you are going away to perish.

Apodosis:— dedit mihi quantum maximum potuit,datūrus ampliussī potuisset (Plin. Ep. 3.21.6) , he gave me as much as he could, ready to give me more if he had been able. [Here datūrus is equivalent to dedisset .]

Gerundive (Future Passive Participle)

The participle in -dus , commonly called the Gerundive, has two distinct uses:— (1) Its predicate and attribute use as Participle or Adjective (§ 500).

(2) Its use with the meaning of the Gerund (§ 503). This may be called its gerundive use.

The Gerundive when used as a Participle or an Adjective is always passive, denoting necessity, obligation, or propriety.

In this use of the Gerundive the following points are to be observed:—

The gerundive is sometimes used, like the present and perfect participles, in simple agreement with a noun:— fortem etcōnservandum virum (Mil. 104) , a brave man, and worthy to be preserved.

gravis iniūria facta est et nōn ferenda (Flacc. 84) , a grave and intolerable wrong has been done.

The most frequent use of the gerundive is with the forms of esse in the Second (or passive） Periphrastic Conjugation (see § 196):— nōn agitandarēs erit (Verr. 5.179) , will not the thing have to be agitated?

The neuter gerundive of both transitive and intransitive verbs may be used impersonally in the second periphrastic conjugation. With verbs that take the dative or ablative, an object may be expressed in the appropriate case; with transitive verbs, an object in the accusative is sometimes found:— temporī serviendum est (Fam. 9.7.2) , one must obey the time.

lēgibus pārendum est, the laws must be obeyed.

ūtendum exercitātiōnibus modicīs (Cat. M. 36) , we must use moderate exercis

agitandumst vigiliās (Pl. Trin. 869) , I have got to stand guard.

via quam nōbīs ingrediendum sit (Cat. M. 6) , the way we have to enter.

After verbs signifying to give, deliver, agree for, have, receive, undertake, demand, Such verbs are accipiō , adnōtō , attribuō , condūcō , cūrō , dēnōtō , dēposcō , dō , dīvidō , dōnō , ēdīcō , ēdoceō , ferō , habeō , locō , mandō , obiciō , permittō , petō , pōnō , praebeō , prōpōnō , relinquō , rogō , suscipiō , trādō , voveō . a gerundive in agreement with the object is used to express purpose:— redēmptor quī columnam illam condūxerat faciendam (Div. 2.47) , the contractor who had undertaken to make that column. [The regular construction with this class of verbs.]

aedem Castoris habuit tuendam (Verr. 2.1.150) , he had the temple of Castor to take care of.

nāvīs atque oneraadservanda cūrābat (id. 5.146), he took care that the ships and cargoes should be kept.

GERUND

The Gerund is the neuter of the Gerundive, used substantively in the Genitive, Dative, Accusative, and Ablative.

The Gerund expresses an action of the verb in the form of a verbal noun.

As a noun the gerund is itself governed by other words; as a verb it may take an object in the proper case:— ars bene disserendī et vēra ac falsa dīiūdicandī (De Or. 2.157) , the art of discoursing well, and distinguishing the true and the false.

The Nominative of the gerund is supplied by the Infinitive. Thus in the example above, the verbal nouns discoursing and distinguishing , if used in the nominative, would be expressed by the infinitives disserere and dīiūdicāre .

The Gerund is the neuter of the gerundive used impersonally, but retaining the verbal idea sufficiently to govern an object. It may therefore be regarded as a noun (cf. mātūrātō opus est , § 497. a) with a verbal force (cf. istanc tāctiō , p. 240, footnote).

GERUND AND GERUNDIVE

When the Gerund would have an object in the Accusative, the Gerundive The gerundive construction is probably the original one. is generally used instead. The gerundive agrees with its noun, which takes the case that the gerund would have had:— parātiōrēs ad omnia perīcula subeunda (B. G. 1.5) , readier to undergo all dangers. [Here subeunda agrees with perīcula , which is itself governed by ad . The (inadmissible) construction with the gerund would be ad subeundum perīcula; ad governing the gerund, and the gerund governing the accusative perīcula .] For details, see §§ 504-507.

In this use the gerund and the gerundive are translated in the same way, but have really a different construction. The gerundive is a passive participle, and agrees with its noun, though in translation we change the voice, just as we may translate vigiliae agitandae sunt ( guard must be kept ) by I must stand guard. In the gerundive construction the verbs ūtor , fruor , etc., are treated like transitive verbs governing the accusative, as they do in early Latin (§ 410 . a. N. 1): as, —ad perfruendās voluptātēs (Off. 1.25) , for enjoying pleasures.

The following examples illustrate the parallel constructions of Gerund and Gerundive:— GEN. cōnsilium urbem capiendī urbis capiendae a design of taking the city.

DAT. dat operam agrōs colendō agrīs colendīs he attends to tilling the fields.

ACC. veniunt ad mihi pārendum pācem petendam they come to obey me. to seek peace.

ABL. terit tempus scrībendō epistulās scrībendīs epistulīs he spends time in writing letters.

The gerund with a direct object is practically limited to the Genitive and the Ablative (without a preposition); even in these cases the gerundive is commoner. The gerund or gerundive is often found coördinated with nominal constructions, and sometimes even in apposition with a noun:— (1) in forō, in cūriā, in amīcōrum perīculīs prōpulsandīs (Phil. 7.7) , in the forum, in the senate-house, in defending my friends in jeopardy.

(2) ad rēs dīversissimās, pārendum atque imperandum (Liv. 21.4) , for the most widely different things, obeying and commanding.

Genitive of the Gerund and Gerundive

The Genitive of the Gerund and Gerundive is used after nouns or adjectives, either as subjective or objective genitive:— vīvendī fīnis est optimus (Cat. M. 72) , it is the best end of living. [Subjective.]

neque cōnsilī habendī neque arma capiendī spatiō datō; (B. G. 4.14), time being given neither for forming plans nor for taking arms. [Objective.]

nōn tam commūtandārum quam ēvertendārum rērum cupidōs (Off. 2.3) , desirous not so much of changing as of destroying the state. [Objective.]

In these uses the gerund and the gerundive are about equally common. In a few phrases the Infinitive is used with nouns which ordinarily have the genitive of the gerund or gerundive: as ,— tempus est abīre , it is time to go.

The genitive of the gerund sometimes takes a direct object, especially a neuter pronoun or a neuter adjective used substantively:— nūlla causa iūsta cuiquam esse potest contrā patriam arma capiendī; (Phil. 2.53), no one can have a just cause for taking up arms against his country.

artem vēra ac falsa dīiūdicandī; (De Or. 2.157), the art of distinguishing true from false.

The genitive of the gerund or gerundive is used (especially in later Latin) as a predicate genitive. When so used it often expresses purpose:— quae postquam glōriōsa modo neque bellī patrandī cōgnōvit (Iug. 88) , when he perceived that these were only brilliant deeds and not likely to end the war.

Aegyptum proficīscitur cōgnōscendae antīquitātis (Tac. Ann. 2.59) , he sets out for Egypt to study old times.

The genitive of the gerund or gerundive with causā or gratiā expresses purpose (§ 533. b):— pābulandī aut frūmentandī causā prōgressī; (B. C. 1.48), having advanced for the purpose of collecting fodder or supplies.

vītandae suspīcionis causā; (Cat. 1.19), in order to avoid suspicion.

simulandī grātiā; (Iug. 37), in order to deceive.

exercendae memōriae grātiā; (Cat. M. 38), for the sake of training the memory.

The genitive of the gerund is occasionally limited by a noun or pronoun (especially a personal pronoun in the plural) in the objective genitive instead of taking a direct object:— rêiciendī trium iūdicum potestās (Verr. 2.77) , the power of challenging three jurors (of the rejecting of three jurors).

suī colligendī facultās (B. G. 3.6) , the opportunity to recover themselves.

Dative of the Gerund and Gerundive

The Dative of the Gerund and Gerundive is used in a few expressions after verbs:— Such are praeesse , operam dare , diem dīcere , locum capere . diem praestitit operī faciendō (Verr. 2.1.148) , he appointed a day for doing the work.

praeesse agrō colendō (Rosc. Am. 50) , to take charge of cultivating the land.

esse solvendō, to be able to pay (to be for paying).

The dative of the gerund with a direct object is never found in classic Latin, but occurs twice in Plautus .

The dative of the gerund and gerundive is used after adjectives, Such are accommodātus , aptus , ineptus , bonus , habilis , idōneus , pār , ūtilis , inūtilis . But the accusative with ad is common with most of these (cf. § 385 . a ). especially those which denote fitness or adaptability:— genus armōrum aptum tegendīs corporibus (Liv. 32.10) , a sort of armor suited to the defence of the body.

reliqua tempora dēmetendīs frūctibus et percipiendīs accommodāta sunt (Cat. M. 70) , the other seasons are fitted to reap and gather in the harvest.

perferendīs mīlitum mandātīs idōneus (Tac. Ann. 1.23) , suitable for carrying out the instructions of the soldiers.

This construction is very common in Livy and later writers, infrequent in classical prose.

The dative of the gerund and gerundive is used in certain legal phrases after nouns meaning officers, offices, elections, etc., to indicate the function or scope of the office etc.:— comitia cōnsulibus rogandīs (Div. 1.33) , elections for nominating consuls.

triumvir colōniīs dēdūcundīs (Iug. 42) , a triumvir for planting colonies.

triumvirī reī pūblicae cōnstituendae (title of the Triumvirate), triumvirs (a commission of three) for settling the government.

Accusative of the Gerund and Gerundive

The Accusative of the Gerund and Gerundive is used after the preposition ad , to denote Purpose (cf. § 533):— mē vocās ad scrībendum (Or. 34) , you summon me to write.

vīvis nōn ad dēpōnendam sed ad cōnfīrmandam audāciam (Cat. 1.4) , you live not to put off but to confirm your daring.

nactus aditūs ad ea cōnanda (B. C. 1.31) , having found means to undertake these things.

Other prepositions appear in this construction; inter and ob a few times, circā , in , ante , and a few others very rarely: as, inter agendum , while driving. The Accusative of the gerund with a preposition never takes a direct object in classic Latin.

Ablative of the Gerund and Gerundive

The Ablative of the Gerund and Gerundive is used (1) to express manner, In this use the ablative of the gerund is, in later writers nearly, and in mediæval writers entirely, equivalent to a present participle: as,— cum ūnā diērum FLENDŌ sēdisset , quīdam mīles generōsus iūxtā eam EQUITANDŌ vēnit (Gesta Romanorum , 66 [58]), as one day she sat weeping , a certain knight came riding by (compare § 507 , fourth example). Hence come the Italian and Spanish forms of the present participle (as mandando , esperando ), the true participial form becoming an adjective in those languages. means, cause, etc.; (2) after Comparatives; and (3) after the propositions ab , dē , ex , in, and (rarely) prō :— (1) multa pollicendō persuādet (Iug. 46) , he persuades by large promises.

Latīnē loquendō cuivīs pār (Brut. 128) , equal to any man in speaking Latin.

hīs ipsīs legendīs (Cat. M. 21) , by reading these very things.

obscūram atque humilem conciendō ad sē multitūdinem (Liv. 1.8) , calling to them a mean and obscure multitude.

(2) nūllum officium referendā grātiā magis necessārium est (Off. 1.47) , no duty is more important than repaying favors.

(3) in rē gerendā versārī (Cat. M. 17) , to be employed in conducting affairs.

The Ablative of the Gerund and Gerundive is also very rarely used with verbs and adjectives: as, —nec continuandō abstitit magistrātū (Liv. 9.34) , he did not desist from continuing his magistracy. The ablative of the gerund rarely takes a direct object in classic prose.

SUPINE

The Supine is a verbal abstract of the fourth declension (§ 94. b), having no distinction of tense or person, and limited to two uses. (1) The form in -um is the Accusative of the end of motion (§ 428. i). (2) The form in -ü is usually Dative of purpose (§ 382), but the Ablative was early confused with it.

The Supine in -um is used after verbs of motion to express purpose. It may take an object in the proper case:— quid est, īmusne sessum? etsī admonitum vēnimus tē, nōn flāgitātum (De Or. 3.17) , how now, shall we be seated? though we have come to remind, not to entreat you.

nūptum dare (collocāre), to give in marriage.

vēnērunt questum iniūriās (Liv. 3.25) , they came to complain of wrongs.

The supine in -um is especially common with eō , and with the passive infinitive īrī forms the future infinitive passive:— fuēre cīvēs quī rem pūblicam perditum īrent (Sall. Cat. 36), there were citizens who went about to ruin the republic.

sī scīret sē trucīdātum īrī (Div. 2.22) , if he (Pompey) had known that he was going to be murdered. [Rare except in Cicero. For the more usual way of expressing the future passive infinitive, see § 569. 3. a.]

The supine in -um is occasionally used when motion is merely implied.

The Supine in -ū The only common supines in -ū are auditū , dictū , factū , inventū , memorātū , nātū , vīsū . In classic use this supine is found in comparatively few verbs. It is never followed by an object-case. is used with a few adjectives and with the nouns fās , nefās , and opus , to denote an action in reference to which the quality is asserted:— rem nōn modo vīsū foedam, sed etiam audītū (Phil. 2.63) , a thing not only shocking to see, but even to hear of.

quaerunt quid optimum factū sit (Verr. 2.1.68) , they ask what is best to do.

sī hōc fās est dictū (Tusc. 5.38) , if this is lawful to say.

vidētis nefās esse dictū miseram fuisse tālem senectūtem (Cat. M. 13) , you see it is a sin to say that such an old age was wretched.

The supine in -ū is thus in appearance an Ablative of Specification (§ 418 ). The supine in -ū is found especially with such adjectives as indicate an effect on the senses or the feelings, and those which denote ease , difficulty , and the like. But with facilis , difficilis , and iūcundus , ad with the gerund is more common:— nec vīsū facilis nec dictū adfābilis ūllī; (Aen. 3.621), he is not pleasant for any man to look at or address.

difficilis ad distinguendum similitūdō; (De Or. 2.212), a likeness difficult to distinguish.

With all these adjectives the poets often use the Infinitive in the same sense: as,—facilēs aurem praebēre (Prop. 2.21.15) , indulgent to lend an ear. The supine in -ū with a verb is extremely rare: as, —pudet dictū (Tac. Agr. 32) , it is a shame to tell. [On the analogy of pudendum dictū .]

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

The Conditional Sentence differs from other complex sentences in this, that the form of the main clause (APODOSIS) is determined in some degree by the nature of the subordinate clause (PROTASIS) upon the truth of which the whole statement depends. Like all complex sentences, however, the Conditional Sentence has arisen from the use of two independent sentence-forms to express the parts of a thought which was too complicated to be fully expressed by a simple sentence. But because the thoughts thus expressed are in reality closely related, as parts of a single whole, the sentences which represent them are also felt to be mutually dependent, even though the relation is not expressed by any connecting word. Thus, Speak the word: my servant shall be healed is a simpler and an earlier form of expression than If thou speak the word, etc.

The Conditional Particles were originally pronouns without conditional meaning: thus, sī, if, is a weak demonstrative of the same origin as sīc, so (sī-ce like hī-ce, see § 215. 5), and had originally the meaning of in that way, or in some way. Its relative sense (if) seems to have come from its use with sīc to make a pair of correlatives: thus ... thus (see § 512. b).

In its origin the Conditional Sentence assumed one of two forms. The condition was from the first felt to be a condition, not a fact or a command; but, as no special sentence-form for a condition was in use, it employed for its expression either a statement of fact (with the Indicative) or a form of mild command (the Subjunctive). From the former have come all the uses of the Indicative in protasis; from the latter all the uses of the Subjunctive in protasis. The Apodosis has either (1) the Indicative, expressing the conclusion as a fact, and the Present and Perfect Subjunctive, expressing it originally as future—and hence more or less doubtful—or (2) the Imperfect and Pluperfect Subjunctive expressing it as futūrum in praeteritō , The futūrum in praeteritō is a tense future relatively to a time absolutely past. It denotes a future act transferred to the point of view of past time , and hence is naturally expressed by a past tense of the Subjunctive: thus dīxisset , he would have said = dictūrus fuit , he was about to say [but did not]. As that which looks towards the future from some point in the past has a natural limit in present time, such a tense (the imperfect subjunctive) came naturally to be used to express a present condition purely ideal, that is to say, contrary to fact. and so unfulfilled in the present or past. Thus, rīdēs , mâiōre cachinnō concutitur, you laugh, he shakes with more boisterous laughter, is the original form for the Indicative in protasis and apodosis; sī rīdēs originally means merely you laugh in some way or other, and so, later, IF you laugh. So rogēs Aristōnem , neget, ask Aristo, he would say no, is the original form of the subjunctive in protasis and apodosis; sī rogēs would mean ask in some way or other. In sī rogāres , negāret , the Imperfect rogārēs transfers the command of rogēs to past time, Compare potius dīceret , he should rather have said (§ 439 . b ). with the meaning suppose you had asked, and sī would have the same meaning as before; while negāret transfers the future idea of neget to past time, and means he was going to deny. Now the stating of this supposition at all gives rise to the implication that it is untrue in point of fact,—because, if it were true, there would ordinarily be no need to state it as a supposition: for it would then be a simple fact, and as such would be put in the indicative. There are, however, some cases in which this implication does not arise: as,— deciēns centēna dedissēs , nīl erat in loculīs (Hor. S. 1.3.15) , if you'd given him a million , there was nothing in his coffers. Such a condition or conclusion

was originally past, meaning suppose you had asked [yesterday], he was going to deny) it came to express an unfulfilled condition in the present: suppose (or if) you were now asking, he would [now] deny—just as in English ought, which originally meant owed, “There was a certain lender which ought him five hundred pieces.”— Tyndale's New Testament. has come to express a present obligation.

For the classification of Conditional Sentences, see § 513.

PROTASIS AND APODOSIS

A complete Conditional Sentence consists of two clauses the Protasis and the Apodosis.

The clause containing the condition is called the PROTASIS the clause containing the conclusion is called the APODOSIS:— sī quī exīre volunt [PROTASIS], cōnīvēre possum [APODOSIS] (Cat. 2.27) , if any wish to depart, I can keep my eyes shut.

sī est in exsiliō [PROTASIS], quid amplius postulātis [APODOSIS] (Lig. 13) , if he is in exile, what more do you ask?

It should be carefully noted that the Apodosis is the main clause and the Protasis the dependent clause.

The Protasis is regularly introduced by the conditional particle sī, if, or one of its compounds. These compounds are sīn , nisi , etiam sī , etsī , tametsī , tamenetsī (see Conditional and Concessive Particles, p. 138). An Indefinite Relative, or any relative or concessive word, may also serve to introduce a conditional clause: see Conditional Relative Clauses (§§ 519 , 542); Concessive Clauses (§ 527 ).

The Apodosis is often introduced by some correlative word or phrase: as, ita , tum (rarely sīc ), or eā condiciōne etc.:— ita enim senectūs honesta est, sī sē ipsa dēfendit (Cat. M. 38) , on this condition is old age honorable, if it defends itself.

sī quidem mē amāret, tum istuc prōdesset (Ter. Eun. 446) , if he loved me, then this would be profitable.

sīc scrībēs aliquid, sī vacābis (Att. 12.38.2) , if you are (shall be) at leisure, then you will write something.

The Apodosis is the principal clause of the conditional sentence, but may at the same time be subordinate to some other clause, and so appear in the form of a Participle, an Infinitive, or a Phrase:— sepultūrā quoque prohibitūrī, nī rēx humārī iussisset (Q. C. 8.2.12) , intending also to deprive him of burial, unless the king had ordered him to be interred.

quod sī praetereā nēmō sequātur, tamen sē cum sōlā decimā legiōne itūrum [esse] (B. G. 1.40.14) , but if no one else should follow, he would go with the tenth legion alone.

sī quōs adversum proelium commovēret, hōs reperīre posse (id. 40.8), if the loss of a battle alarmed any, they might find, etc.

When the Apodosis itself is in Indirect Discourse, or in any other dependent construction, the verb of the Protasis is regularly in the Subjunctive (as in the above examples, see § 589 ).

CLASSIFICATION OF CONDITIONS

Conditions are either (1) Particular or (2) General.

A Particular Condition refers to a definite act or series of acts occurring at some definite time.

A General Condition refers to any one of a class of acts which may occur (or may have occurred) at any time.

The principal or typical forms of Conditional Sentences may be exhibited as follows:—

PARTICULAR CONDITIONS

A. SIMPLE CONDITIONS (nothing implied as to fulfilment)

Present Time

Present Indicative in both clauses:— sī adest , bene est, if he is [now] here, it is well.

Past Time

Imperfect or Perfect Indicative in both clauses:— sī aderat , bene erat, if he was [then] here, it was well.

sī adfuit , bene fuit, if he has been [was] here, it has been [was] well.

B. FUTURE CONDITIONS (as yet unfulfilled)

More Vivid

a. Future Indicative in both clauses:— sī aderit , bene erit, if he is (shall be) here, it will be well.

b. Future Perfect Indicative in protasis, Future Indicative in apodosis:— sī adfuerit , bene erit, if he is (shall have been) here, it will [then] be well

Less Vivid

a. Present Subjunctive in both clauses:— sī adsit , bene sit, if he should be (or were to be) here, it would be well.

b. Perfect Subjunctive in protasis, Present Subjunctive in apodosis:— sī adfuerit , bene sit, if he should be (should have been) here, it would [then] be well.

C. CONDITIONS CONTRARY TO FACT

Present Time

Imperfect Subjunctive in both clauses:— sī adesset , bene esset, if he were [now] here, it would be well (but he is NOT here).

Past Time

Pluperfect Subjunctive in both clauses:— sī adfuisset , bene fuisset, if he had [then] been here, it would have been well (but he was NOT here).

The use of tenses in Protasis is very loose in English. Thus if he is alive now is a PRESENT condition, to be expressed in Latin by the Present Indicative; if he is alive next year is a FUTURE condition, expressed in Latin by the Future Indicative. Again , if he were here now is a PRESENT condition contrary to fact, and would be expressed by the Imperfect Subjunctive; if he were to see me thus is a FUTURE condition less vivid, to be expressed by the Present Subjunctive; and so o, if you advised him, he would attend may be future less vivid. In most English verbs the Preterite (or Past) Subjunctive is identical in form with the Preterite Indicative. Thus in such a sentence as if he loved his father, he would not say this , the verb loved is really a Preterite Subjunctive, though this does not appear from the inflection. In the verb to be , however, the Subjunctive were has been preserved and differs in form from the indicative was.

D. GENERAL CONDITIONS

General Conditions do not usually differ in form from Particular Conditions (A, B, and C), but are sometimes distinguished in the cases following:—

Present General Condition (Indefinite Time)

a. Present Subjunctive second person singular (Indefinite Subject) in protasis, Present Indicative in apodosis:— sī hōc dīcās , crēditur, if any one [ever] says this, it is [always] believed.

b. Perfect Indicative in protasis, Present Indicative in apodosis: sī quid dīxit , crēditur, if he [ever] says anything, it is [always] believed.

Past General Condition (Repeated Action in Past Time)

a. Pluperfect Indicative in protasis, Imperfect Indicative in apodosis:— sī quid dīxerat , crēdēbātur, if he [ever] said anything, it was [always] believed.

b. Imperfect Subjunctive in protasis, Imperfect Indicative in apodosis:— sī quid dīceret , crēdēbātur, if he [ever] said anything, it was [always] believed (= whatever he said was always believed).

Cf. the Greek forms corresponding to the various types of conditions:—

PARTICULAR CONDITIONS

Simple Present and Past Conditions—Nothing Implied

In the statement of Present and Past conditions whose falsity is NOT implied, the Present and Past tenses of the Indicative are used in both Protasis and Apodosis:— sī tū exercitusque valētis, bene est (Fam. 5.2) , if you and the army are well, it is well. [Present Condition.]

haec igitur, sī Rōmae es; sīn ades, aut etiam sī ades, haec negōtia sīc sē habent (Att. 5.18) , this, then, if you are at Rome; but if you are away—or even if you are there—these matters are as follows. [Present Condition.]

sī Caesarem probātis, in mē offenditis (B. C. 2.32.10), if you favor Cæsar, you find fault with me. [Present Condition.]

sī quī māgnīs in eō genere exstitērunt, nōn satis Graecōrum glōriae respondērunt (Tusc. 1.3) , if any have shown themselves of great genius in that department, they have failed to compete with the glory of the Greeks. [Past General Condition, not distinguished in form from Particular.]

accēpī Rōmā sine epistulā tuā fasciculum litterārum in quō, sī modo valuistī et Rōmae fuistī, Philotīmī dūcō esse culpam nōn tuam (Att. 5.17) , I have received from Rome a bundle of letters without any from you, which, provided you have been well and at Rome, I take to be the fault of Philotimus, not yours. [Mixed: Past condition and Present conclusion.]

quās litterās, sī Rōmae es, vidēbis putēsne reddendās (id. 5.18), as to this letter, if you are at Rome, you will see whether in your opinion it ought to be delivered. [Mixed: Present and Future.]

sī nēmō impetrāvit, adroganter rogō (Lig. 30) , if no one has succeeded in obtaining it, my request is presumptuous. [Past and Present.]

In these conditions the apodosis need not always be in the Indicative, but may assume any form, according to the sense:— sī placet ... videāmus (Cat. M. 15) , if you please, let us see. [Hortatory Subjunctive, § 439.]

sī nōndum satis cernitis, recordāminī (Mil. 61) , if you do not yet see clearly, recollect. [Imperative.]

sī quid habēs certius, velim scīre (Att. 4.10) , if you have any trustworthy information, I should like to know it. [Subjunctive of Modesty, § 447. 1.]

Although the form of these conditions does not imply anything as to the truth of the supposition, the sense or the context may of course have some such implication:— nōlīte, sī in nostrō omnium flētū nūllam lacrimam aspexistis Milōnis, hōc minus ei parcere (Mil. 92) , do not, if amid the weeping of us all you have seen no tear [in the eyes] of Milo, spare him the less for that.

petimus ā vōbīs, iūdicēs, sī qua dīvīna in tantīs ingeniīs commendātiō dēbet esse, ut eum in vestram accipiātis fidem (Arch. 31) , we ask you, judges, if there ought to be anything in such genius to recommend it to us as by a recommendation of the gods, that you receive him under your protection.

In these two passages, the protasis really expresses cause: but the cause is put by the speaker in the form of a non-committal condition. His hearers are to draw the inference for themselves. In this way the desired impression is made on their minds more effectively than if an outspoken causal clause had been used.

Future Conditions

Future Conditions may be more vivid or less vivid.

In a more vivid future condition the protasis makes a distinct supposition of a future case, the apodosis expressing what will be the logical result.

In a less vivid future condition, the supposition is less distinct, the apodosis expressing what would be the result in the case supposed.

In the more vivid future condition the Future Indicative is used in both protasis and apodosis:— sānābimur, sī volēmus (Tusc. 3.13) , we shall be healed if we wish.

quod sī legere aut audīre volētis, ... reperiētis (Cat. M. 20) , if you will [shall wish to] read or hear, you will find.

In English the protasis is usually expressed by the Present Indicative, rarely by the Future with SHALL. Often in Latin the Present Indicative is found in the protasis of a condition of this kind (cf. § 468 ):— sī vincimus, omnia nōbīs tūta erunt; sīn metū cesserimus, eadem illa advorsa fīent (Sall. Cat. 58), if we conquer, all things will be safe for us; but if we yield through fear, those same things will become hostile.

sī pereō, hominum manibus perlisse iuvābit (Aen. 3.606) , if I perish, it will be pleasant to have perished at the hands of men.

In the less vivid future condition the Present Subjunctive is used in both protasis and apodosis:— haec sī tēcum patria loquātur, nōnne impetrāre dēbeat (Cat. 1.19) , if your country should thus speak with you, ought she not to prevail?

quod sī quis deus mihi largiātur, ... valdē recūsem (Cat. M. 83) , but if some god were to grant me this, I should stoutly refuse.

The Present Subjunctive sometimes stands in protasis with the Future (or the Present) Indicative in apodosis from a change in the point of view:— It often depends entirely upon the view of the writer at the moment, and not upon the nature of the condition, whether it shall be stated vividly or not; as in the proverbial “If the sky falls, we shall catch larks” the impossible condition is iron ieally put in the vivid form, to illustrate the absurdity of some other supposed condition stated by some one else. sī dīligenter attendāmus, intellegēmus (Inv. 2.44) , if we attend (should attend) carefully, we shall understand.

nisi hōc dīcat, “iūre fēcī,” nōn habet dēfēnsiōnem (id. 1.18), unless he should say this, “I acted justifiably,” he has no defence.

If the conditional act is regarded as completed before that of the apodosis begins, the Future Perfect is substituted for the Future Indicative in protasis, and the Perfect Subjunctive for the Present Subjunctive:— sīn cum potuerō nōn vēnerō, tum erit inimīcus (Att. 9.2A. 2), but if I do not come when I can, he will be unfriendly.

sī ā corōnā relictus sim, nōn queam dīcere (Brut. 192) , if I should be deserted by the circle of listeners, I should not be able to speak.

The Future Perfect is often used in the apodosis of a future condition: as,—vehementer mihi grātum fēceris , sī hunc adulēscentem hūmānitāte tuā comprehenderis (Fam. 13.15) , you will do (will have done) me a great favor, if you receive this young man with your usual courtesy.

Any form denoting or implying future time may stand in the apodosis of a future condition. So the Imperative, the participles in -dus and -rus, and verbs of necessity, possibility, and the like:— alius fīnis cōnstituendus est, sī prius quid maximē reprehendere Scīpiō solitus sit dīxerō; (Lael. 59), another limit must be set, if I first state what Scipio was wont most to find fault with.

sī mē praecēperit fātum, vōs mandāsse mementō (Q. C. 9.6.26) , if fate cuts me off too soon, do you remember that I ordered this.

nisi oculīs vīderitis īnsidiās Milōnī ā Clōdiō factās, nec dēprecātūrī sumus nec postulātūrī (Mil. 6) , unless you see with your own eyes the plots laid against Milo by Clodius, I shall neither beg nor demand, etc.

nōn possum istum accūsāre, sī cupiam (Verr. 4.87) , I cannot accuse him, if I should (so) desire

Rarely the Perfect Indicative is used in apodosis with a Present or even a Future (or Future Perfect) in protasis, to represent the conclusion rhetorically as already accomplished:— sī hōc bene fīxum in animō est, vīcistis (Liv. 21.44) , if this is well fixed in your minds, you have conquered. [For you will have conquered.]

sī eundem [animum] habueritis, vīcimus (id. 21.43), if you shall have kept the same spirit, we have conquered.

A future condition is frequently thrown back into past time, without implying that it is contrary to fact (§ 517). In such cases the Imperfect or Pluperfect Subjunctive may be used:— nōn poterat, nisi dēcertāre vellet (B. C. 3.44) , he was not able, unless he wished to fight.

tumulus appāruit, ... sī lūce palam īrētur hostis praeventūrus erat (Liv. 22.24) , a hill appeared ... if they should go openly by daylight, the enemy would prevent. [The first two appear like Indirect Discourse, but are not. An observer describing the situation in the first example as present would say nōn potest nisi velit (see d), and no indirect discourse would be thought of.]

Caesar sī peteret, ... nōn quicquam prōficeret (Hor. S. 1.3.4) , if even Cæsar were to ask, he would gain nothing. [Here the construction is not contrary to fact, but is simply sī petat , nōn prōficiat , thrown into past time.]

Conditions Contrary to Fact

In the statement of a supposition impliedly false, the Imperfect and Pluperfect Subjunctive are used in both protasis and apodosis. The implication of falsity, in this construction, is not inherent in the subjunctive; but comes from the transfer of a future condition to past time. Thus the time for the happening of the condition has, at the moment of writing, already passed; so that, if the condition remains a condition , it must be contrary to fact. So past forms of the indicative implying a future frequently take the place of the subjunctive apodosis in this construction (see c , d , below, and § 511 ). The Imperfect refers to present time, the Pluperfect to past:— sī vīveret, verba êius audīrētis (Rosc. Com. 42) , if he were living, you would hear his words. [Present.]

nisi tū āmīsissēs, numquam recēpissem (Cat. M. 11), unless you had lost it, I should not have recovered it. [Past.]

sī meum cōnsilium valuisset, tū hodiē egērēs, rēs pūblica nōn tot ducēs āmīsisset (Phil. 2.37) , if my judgment had prevailed [as it did not], you would this day be a beggar, and the republic would not have lost so many leaders. [Mixed Present and Past.]

In conditions contrary to fact the Imperfect often refers to past time, both in protasis and apodosis, especially when a repeated or continued action is denoted, or when the condition if true would still exist: sī nihil litterīs adiuvārentur, numquam sē ad eārum studium contulissent (Arch. 16) , if they had not been helped at all by literature, they never would have given their attention to the study of it. [Without the condition, adiuvābantur .]

hīc sī mentis esset suae, ausus esset ēdūcere exercitum (Pison. 50) , if he were of sane mind, would he have dared to lead out the army? [Here esset denotes a continued state, past as well as present.]

nōn concidissent, nisi illud receptāculum classibus nostrīs patēret (Verr. 2.3) , [the power of Carthage] would not have fallen, unless that station had been [constantly] open to our fleets. [Without the condition, patēbat .]

In the apodosis of a condition contrary to fact the past tenses of the Indicative may be used to express what was intended, or likely, or already begun. In this use, the Imperfect Indicative corresponds in time to the Imperfect Subjunctive, and the Perfect or Pluperfect Indicative to the Pluperfect Subjunctive:— sī licitum esset, mātrēs veniēbant (Verr. 5.129) , the mothers were coming if it had been allowed.

in amplexūs fīliae ruēbat, nisi līctōrēs obstitissent (Tac. Ann. 16.32) , he was about rushing into his daughter's arms, unless the lictors had opposed.

iam tūta tenēbam, nī gēns crūdēlis ferrō invāsisset (Aen. 6.358) , I was just reaching a place of safety, had not the fierce people attacked me.

Here the apodosis may be regarded as elliptical. Thus, mātrēs venièbant ( et vēnissent ), the matrons were coming (and would have kept on) if , etc. With paene (and sometimes prope ), almost , the Perfect Indicative is used in the apodosis of a past condition contrary to fact: as,—pōns iter paene hostibus dedit , nī ūnus vir fuisset (Liv. 2.10) , the bridge had almost given a passage to the foe , if it had not been for one hero.

Verbs and other expressions denoting necessity, propriety, possibility, duty, when used in the apodosis of a condition contrary to fact, may be put in the Imperfect or Perfect Indicative.

Such are oportet , decet , dēbeō , possum , necesse est , opus est , and the Second Periphrastic Conjugation:— Observe that all these expressions contain the idea of futurity (cf. p. 328, footnote). Thus, decet mē [ hodiē ] īre crās , means it is proper for me [to-day] to go to-morrow; and, decēbat mē [ herī ] īre hodiē , it was proper for me [yesterday] to go to-day , usually with the implication that I have not gone as I was bound to do. nōn potuit fierī sapiēns, nisi nātus esset (Fin. 2.103) , he could not have become a sage, if he had not been born.

sī prīvātus esset hōc tempore, tamen is erat dēligendus (Manil. 50) , if he were at this time a private citizen, yet he ought to be appointed.

quod esse caput dēbēbat, sī probārī posset (Fin. 4.23) , what ought to be the main point, if it could be proved.

sī ita putāsset, certē optābilius Milōnī fuit (Mil. 31) , if he had thought so, surely it would have been preferable for Milo.

In Present conditions the Imperfect Subjunctive ( oportēret , possem , etc.) is the rule, the Indicative being rare; in Past conditions both the Subjunctive (usually Pluperfect) and the Indicative (usually Perfect) are common.

For pār erat , melius fuit , and the like, followed by the infinitive, see § 521. N. The indicative construction is carried still further in poetry: as, sī nōn alium iactāret odōrem , laurus erat (Georg. 2.133) , it were a laurel, but for giving out a different odor.

The participle in -ūrus with eram or fuī may take the place of an Imperfect or Pluperfect Subjunctive in the apodosis of a condition contrary to fact:— quid enim futūrum fuit [=fuisset], sī ... (Liv. 2.1) , what would have happened if, etc.

relictūrī agrōs erant, nisi ad eōs Metellus litterās mīsisset (Verr. 3.121) , they would have abandoned their fields, if Metellus had not sent them a letter.

neque ambigitur quīn ... id factūrus fuerit, sī ... (Liv. 2.1) , nor is there any question that he would have done it, if, etc. [Direct: fēcisset .]

adeō parāta sēditiō fuit ut Othōnem raptūrī fuerint, nī incerta noctis timuissent (Tac. H. 1.26) , so far advanced was the conspiracy that they would have seized upon Otho, had they not feared the hazards of the night. [In a main clause: rapuissent , nī timuissent .]

The Present Subjunctive is sometimes used in poetry in the protasis and apodosis of conditions contrary to fact:— nī comes admoneat, inruat (Aen. 6.293) , had not his companion warned him, he would have rushed on. [Cf. tū sī hīc sīs, aliter sentiās (Ter. And. 310) , if you were in my place, you would think differently.]

This is probably a remnant of an old construction (see next note). In old Latin the Present Subjunctive (as well as the Imperfect) is used in present conditions contrary to fact and the Imperfect (more rarely the Pluperfect) in past conditions of the same kind. Thus it appears that the Imperfect Subjunctive, like the Imperfect Indicative, once denoted past time, even in conditional sentences. Gradually, however, in conditional sentences, the Present Subjunctive was restricted to the less vivid future and the Imperfect (in the main) to the present contrary to fact, while the Pluperfect was used in past conditions of this nature. The old construction, however, seems to have been retained as an archaism in poetry.

In Plautus and Terence absque mē ( tē , etc.) is sometimes used to introduce conditions contrary to fact:— absque tē esset, hodiē nusquam vīverem (Pl. Men. 1022) , if it were not for you, I should not be alive to-day.

absque eō esset, rēctē ego mihi vīdissem (Ter. Ph. 188) , if it had not been for him, I should have looked out for myself.

GENERAL CONDITIONS

General Conditions (§ 513. 2) have usually the same forms as Particular Conditions. But they are sometimes distinguished in the following cases:—

The Subjunctive is often used in the second person singular, to denote the act of an indefinite subject (you = any one). Here the Present Indicative of a general truth may stand in the apodosis:— vīta hūmāna prope utī ferrum est: sī exerceās, conteritur; sī nōn exerceās, tamen rōbīgō interficit (Cato de M.), human life is very like iron: if you use it, it wears away; if you don't use it, rust still destroys it.

virtūtem necessāriō glōria, etiamsī tū id nōn agās, cōnsequitur (Tusc. 1.91) , glory necessarily follows virtue, even if that is not one's aim.

sī prohibita impūne trānscenderis, neque metus ultrā neque pudor est (Tac. Ann. 3.54) , if you once overstep the bounds with impunity, there is no fear or shame any more.

In a general condition in present time, the protasis often takes the Perfect Indicative, and the apodosis the Present Indicative. For past time, the Pluperfect is used in the protasis, and the Imperfect in the apodosis:— sī quōs aliquā parte membrōrum inūtilīs nōtāvērunt, necārī iubent (Q. C. 9.1.25) , if they [ever] mark any infirm in any part of their limbs, they [always] order them to be put to death. [Present.]

sī ā persequendō hostīs dēterrēre nequīverant, ab tergō circumveniēbant (Iug. 50) , if [ever] they were unable to prevent the enemy from pursuing, they [always] surrounded them in the rear. [Past.]

In later writers (rarely in Cicero and Cæsar), the Imperfect and Pluperfect Subjunctive are used in protasis, with the Imperfect Indicative in apodosis, to state a repeated or customary action in past time (Iterative Subjunctive):— sī quis ā dominō prehenderētur, concursū mīlitum ēripiēbātur (B. C. 3.110) , if any (runaway) was arrested by his master, he was (always) rescued by a mob of soldiers.

accūsātōrēs, sī facultās incideret, poenīs adficiēbantur (Tac. Ann. 6.30) , the accusers, whenever opportunity offered, were visited with punishment.

sī quis collēgam appellāsset, ab eō ita discēdēbat ut paenitēret nōn priōris dēcrētō stetisse (Liv. 3.36.8) , if any one appealed to a colleague, he [always] came off in such case that he repented not having submitted to the decree of the former decemvir. [Cf. Sōcratēs, quam sē cumque in partem dedisset, omnium fuit facile prīnceps (De Or. 3.60) , in whatever direction Socrates turned himself, he was (always) easily the foremost (if in any. etc.).]

Conditional Relative Clauses

A clause introduced by a Relative Pronoun or Relative Adverb may express a condition and take any of the constructions of Protasis As in the Greek o)\s a)\n, o(/tan , etc.; and in statutes in English, where the phrases if any person shall and whoever shall are used indifferently. (§ 514):— quī enim vitiīs modum adpōnit, is partem suscipit vitiōrum (Tusc. 4.42) , he who [only] sets a limit to faults, takes up the side of the faults. [= sī quis adpōnit . Present, nothing implied.]

quī mentīrī solet, pēierāre cōnsuēvit (Rosc. Com. 46) , whoever is in the habit of lying, is accustomed to swear falsely. [= sī quis solet . Present, nothing implied.]

quicquid potuit, potuit ipsa per sē; (Leg. Agr. 1.20), whatever power she had, she had by herself. [= sī quid potuit . Past, nothing implied.]

quod quī faciet, nōn aegritūdine sōlum vacābit, sed, etc. (Tusc. 4.38) , and he who does (shall do) this, will be free not only, etc. [= sī quis faciet . Future, more vivid.]

quisquis hūc vēnerit, vāpulābit (Pl. Am. 309) , whoever comes here shall get a thrashing. [= sī quis vēnerit . Future, more vivid.]

quō volēs, sequar (Clu. 71) , whithersoever you wish (shall wish), I will follow. [= sī quō volēs . Future, more vivid.]

philosophia, cui quī pāreat, omne tempus aetātis sine molestiā possit dēgere (Cat. M. 2) , philosophy, which if any one should obey, he would be able to spend his whole life without vexation. [= sī quis pāreat . Future, less vivid.]

quaecumque vōs causa hūc attulisset, laetārer (De Or. 2.15) , I should be glad whatever cause had brought you here (i.e. if any other, as well as the one which did). [= sī ... attulisset . Contrary to fact.]

The relative in this construction is always indefinite in meaning, and very often in form.

The special constructions of General Conditions are sometimes found in Conditional Relative Clauses:—

The Second Person Singular of the Subjunctive in the protasis with the Indicative of a general truth in the apodosis (§ 518. a):— bonus tantum modo sēgniorfit ubi neglegās, at malus improbior (Iug. 31.28) , a good man merely becomes less diligent when you don't watch him, but a bad man becomes more shameless. [Present General Condition.]

The Perfect or Pluperfect Indicative in the protasis and the Present or Imperfect Indicative in the apodosis (§ 518. b):— cum hūcvēnī, hōc ipsum nihil agere mē dēlectat (De Or. 2.24) , whenever I come here, this very doing nothing delights me (whenever I have come, etc.). [Present General Condition.]

cum rosamvīderat, tum incipere vēr arbitrābātur (Verr. 5.27) , whenever he saw (had seen) a rose, then he thought spring was beginning. [Past General Condition.]

In later writers (rarely in Cicero and Cæsar) the Imperfect or Pluperfect Subjunctive in the protasis and the Imperfect Indicative in the apodosis (§ 518. c):— ubiimbēcillitās māteriae postulārevidērētur, pīlae interpōnuntur (B. C. 2.16) , wherever the weakness of the timber seemed to require, piles were put between. [Past General Condition: interpōnuntur = interpōnēbantur .]

quōcumque sēintulisset, victōriam sēcum trahēbat (Liv. 6.8) , wherever he advanced, he carried victory with him. [Past General Condition.]

Condition Disguised

In many sentences properly conditional, the Protasis is not expressed by a conditional clause, but is stated in some other form of words or implied in the nature of the thought.

The condition may be implied in a Clause, or in a Participle, Noun, Adverb, or some other word or phrase:— facile mē paterer—illō ipsō iūdice quaerente—prō Sex. Rōsciō dīcere (Rosc. Am. 85) , I should readily allow myself to speak for Roscius if that very judge were conducting the trial. [Present contrary to fact: sī quaereret , paterer.]

nōn mihi, nisi admonitō, vēnisset in mentem (De Or. 2.180) , it would not have come into my mind unless [I had been] reminded. [Past contrary to fact: nisi admonitus essem .]

nūlla alia gēns tantā mōle clādis nōn obruta esset (Liv. 22.54) , there is no other people that would not have been crushed by such a weight of disaster. [Past contrary to fact: sī alia fuisset .]

nēmō umquam sine māgnā spē immortālitātis sē prō patriā offerret ad mortem (Tusc. 1.32) , no one, without great hope of immortality, would ever expose himself to death for his country. [Present contrary to fact: nisi māgnam spem habēret .]

quid hunc paucōrum annōrum accessiō iuvāre potuisset (Lael. 11) , what good could the addition of a few years have done him (if they had been added)? [Past contrary to fact: sī accessissent .]

quid igitur mihi ferārum laniātus oberit nihil sentientī (Tusc. 1.104) , what harm will the mangling by wild beasts do me if I don't feel anything (feeling nothing)? [Future more vivid: sī nihil sentiam .]

incitāta semel prōclīvī lābuntur sustinērīque nūllō modō possunt (id. 4.42), if once given a push, they slide down rapidly and can in no way be checked. [Present General: sī incitāta sunt.]

In several phrases denoting necessity , propriety , or the like, the Imperfect, Perfect, or Pluperfect Indicative of esse is used in the apodosis of a condition contrary to fact, the protasis being implied in a subject infinitive (cf. 517. c ):— quantō melius fuerat prōmissum nōn esse servātum (Off. 3.94) , how much better would it have been if the promise had not been kept! [prōmissum ... servātum=sī prōmissum nōn esset servātum.]

morī praeclārum fuit (Att. 8.2.2) , it would have been honorable to die.

sed erat aequius Triārium aliquid dē dissēnsiōne nostrā iūdicāre (Fin. 2.119) , but it would be more equitable if Triarius passed judgment on our dispute. [Triārium iūdicāre=sī Triārius iūdicāret.]

satius fuit āmittere mīlitēs (Inv. 2.73) , it would have been better to lose the soldiers. [āmittere=sī āmīsisset.]

The condition may be contained in a wish (Optative Subjunctive), or expressed as an exhortation or command (Hortatory Subjunctive or Imperative):— utinam quidem fuissem! molestus nōbīs nōn esset (Fam. 12.3) , I wish I had been [chief]: he would not now be troubling us (i.e. if I had been). [Optative Subjunctive.]

nātūram expellās furcā, tamen ūsque recurret (Hor. Ep. 1.10.24) , drive out nature with a pitchfork, still she will ever return. [Hortatory.]

rogēs enim Aristōnem, neget (Fin. 4.69) , for ask Aristo, he would deny.

manent ingenia senibus, modo permaneat studium et industria (Cat. M. 22) , old men keep their mental powers, only let them keep their zeal and diligence (§ 528. N.). [Hortatory.]

tolle hanc opīniōnem, lūctum sustuleris (Tusc. 1.30) , remove this notion, and you will have done away with grief. [Imperative.]

The so-called Concessive Subjunctive with ut and nē often has the force of protasis (§ 527 . a. N.): as, ut enim ratiōnem Platō nūllam adferret , ipsā auctōritāte mē frangeret (Tusc. 1.49) , even if Plato gave no reasons , [still] he would overpower me by his mere authority.

Rarely the condition takes the form of an independent clause: rīdēs: mâiōre cachinnō concutitur (Iuv. 3.100) , you laugh; he shakes with louder laughter (=if you laugh, he shakes).

commovē: sentiēs (Tusc. 4.54) , stir him up, [and] you'll find, etc.

dē paupertāte agitur: multī patientēs pauperēs commemorantur (id. 3.57), we speak of poverty; many patient poor are mentioned.

For Conditional Relative Clauses, see §§ 519, 520.

Condition Omitted

The Protasis is often wholly omitted, but may be inferred from the course of the argument:— poterat Sextilius impūne negāre: quis enim redargueret (Fin. 2.55) , Sextilius might have denied with impunity; for who would prove him wrong (if he had denied)?

In expressions signifying necessity, propriety, and the like, the Indicative may be used in the apodosis of implied conditions, either future or contrary to fact:— quod contrā decuit ab illō meum [corpus cremārī] (Cat. M. 84) , whereas on the other hand mine ought to have been burnt by him.

nam nōs decēbat domum lūgēre ubi esset aliquis in lūcem ēditus (Tusc. 1.115) , for it were fitting for us to mourn the house where a man has been born (but we do not).

quantō melius fuerat (Off. 3.94) , how much better it would have been.

illud erat aptius, aequum cuique concēdere (Fin. 4.2) , it would be more fitting to yield each one his rights.

ipsum enim exspectāre māgnum fuit (Phil. 2.103) , would it have been a great matter to wait for the man himself?

longum est ea dīcere, sed ... (Sest. 12) , it would be tedious to tell, etc. [Future.]

In this construction, the Imperfect Indicative refers to present time; the Pluperfect to simple past time, like the Perfect. Thus oportēbat means it ought to be [now], but is not; oportuerat means it ought to have been, but was not. In many cases it is impossible to say whether a protasis was present to the mind of the speaker or not (see third example above).

Complex Conditions

Either the Protasis or the Apodosis may be a complex idea in which the main statement is made with expressed or implied qualifications. In such cases the true logical relation of the parts is sometimes disguised:— sī quis hōrum dīxisset ... sī verbum dē rē pūblicā fēcisset ... multa plūra dīxisse quam dīxisset putārētur (Rosc. Am. 2) , if any of these had spoken, in case he had said a word about politics he would be thought to have said much more than he did say. [Here the apodosis of dīxisset is the whole of the following statement (sī ... putārētur), which is itself conditioned by a protasis of its own: sī verbum , etc.].

quod sī in hōc mundō fierī sine deō nōn potest, nē in sphaerā quidem eōsdem mōtūs sine dīvīnō ingeniō potuisset imitārī; (Tusc. 1.63), now if that cannot be done in this universe without divine agency, no more could [Archimedes] in his orrery have imitated the same revolutions without divine genius. [Here sī potest (a protasis with nothing implied) has for its apodosis the whole clause which follows, but potuisset has a contraryto-fact protasis of its own implied in sine ... ingeniō .]

peream male sī nōn optimum erat (Hor. S. 2.1.6) , confound me (may 1 perish wretchedly) if it would n't be better. [Here peream is apodosis to the rest of the sentence, while the true protasis to optimum erat , contrary to fact, is omitted.]

Clauses of Comparison (Conclusion Omitted)

Conditional Clauses of Comparison take the Subjunctive, usually in the Present or Perfect unless the sequence of tenses requires the Imperfect or Pluperfect.

Such clauses are introduced by the comparative particles tamquam , tamquam sī , quasi, ac sī , ut sī , velut sī (later velut ), poetic ceu (all meaning as if), and by quam sī (than if):— tamquam clausa sit Asia (Fam. 12.9) , as if Asia were closed.

tamquam sī claudus sim (Pl. Asin. 427) , just as if I were lame.

ita hōs [honōrēs] petunt, quasi honestē vīxerint (Iug. 85) , they seek them (offices) just as if they had lived honorably.

quasi vērō nōn speciē vīsa iūdicentur (Acad. 2.58) , as if forsooth visible things were not judged by their appearance.

similiter facis ac sī mē rogēs (N. D. 3.8) , you do exactly as if you asked me.

crūdēlitātem horrērent velut sī cōram adesset (B. G. 1.32) , they dreaded his cruelty (they said), as if he were present in person.

hīc ingentem pūgnam cernimus ceu cētera nusquam bella forent (Aen. 2.438) , here we saw a great battle, as if there were no fighting elsewhere. [But sometimes with the indicative in poetry, as id. 5.88.]

magis ā mē abesse vidēbāre quam sī domī essēs (Att. 6.5) , you seemed to be absent from me more than if you were at home.

These subjunctive clauses are really future conditions with apodosis implied in the particle itself. Thus in tamquam sī claudus sim the protasis is introduced by sī , and the apodosis implied in tamquam . The English idiom would lead us to expect the Imperfect and Pluperfect Subjunctive (contrary to fact) with these particles; but the point of view is different in the two languages. Thus the second example above is translated just as if I were lame ,—as if it were a present condition contrary to fact; but it really means just as [it would be] if I should [at some future time] be lame , and so is a less vivid future condition requiring the Present Subjunctive. Similarly quasi honestē vīxerint , as if they had lived honorably , is really as [they would do in the future] if they should have lived honorably and so requires the Perfect Subjunctive (§ 516 . c ).

Even after a primary tense, the Imperfect or Pluperfect Subjunctive (contrary to fact) is often used in conditional clauses of comparison:— aequē ā tē petō ac sī mea negōtia essent (Fam. 13.43) , I entreat you as much as if it were my own business.

êius negōtium sīc velim suscipiās ut sī esset rēs mea (id. 7.20.1), I would have you undertake his business as though it were my affair.

The practice differs with the different particles. Thus in Cicero a clause with tamquam or quasi almost always observes the sequence of tenses, but with quam sī the Imperfect or Pluperfect is the rule.

Use of sī and its Compounds

The uses of some of the more common Conditional Particles may be stated as follows:—

Sī is used for affirmative, nisi ( nī ) and sī nōn for negative conditions.

With nisi (generally unless) the apodosis is stated as universally true except in the single case supposed, in which case it is (impliedly) not true:— nisi Conōn adest, maereō, unless Conon is here, I mourn (i.e. I am always in a state of grief except in the single case of Conon's presence, in which case I am not).

With sī nōn (if not) the apodosis is only stated as true in the (negative) case supposed, but as to other cases no statement is made:— sī Conōnnōn adest, maereō, if Conon is not here, I mourn (i.e. I mourn in the single case of Conon's absence, nothing being said as to other cases in which I may or may not mourn).

It often makes no difference in which of these forms the condition is stated.

Sometimes nisi sī, except if, unless, occurs:— nōlī putāre mē ad quemquam longiōrēs epistulās sorībere, nisi sī quis ad mē plūra scrīpsit (Fam. 14.2) , ... except in case one writes more to me.

Nī is an old form surviving in a few conventional phrases and reappearing in poets and later writers.

Nisi vērō and nisi forte regularly introduce an objection or exception ironically, and take the Indicative:— nisi vērō L. Caesar crūdēlior vīsus est (Cat. 4.13) , unless indeed Lucius Cæsar seemed too cruel.

nisi forte volumus Epicūrēōrum opīniōnem sequī; (Fat. 37), unless, to be sure, we choose to follow the notion of the Epicureans.

This is the regular way of introducing a reductio ad absurdum in Latin. Nisi alone is sometimes used in this sense: as, — nisi ūnum hōc faciam ut in puteō cēnam coquant (Pl. Aul. 365) , unless I do this one thing , [make them] cook dinner in the well.

Sīve ( seu ) ... sīve ( seu ), whether ... or, introduce a condition in the form of an alternative. They may be used with any form of condition, or with different forms in the two members. Often also they are used without a verb:— nam illō locō libentissimē soleō ūtī, sīve quid mēcum ipse cōgitō, sīve quid scrībō aut legō; (Legg. 2.1), for I enjoy myself most in that place, whether I am thinking by myself, or am either writing or reading.

Sīve ... seu and seu ... sīve are late or poetic.

Sīn, but if, often introduces a supposition contrary to one that precedes:— accūsātor illum dēfendet sī poterit; sīn minus poterit, negābit (Inv. 2.88) , the accuser will defend him if he can; but if he cannot, he will deny.

Nisi is often used loosely by the comic poets in the sense of only when a negative (usually nesciō ) is expressed, or easily understood, in the main clause:— nesciō: nisi mē dīxisse nēminī certō sciō; (Ter. Ph. 952), I don't know: only I am sure that I have n't told anybody.

CONCESSIVE CLAUSES

The concessive idea is rather vague and general, and takes a variety of forms, each of which has its distinct history. Sometimes concession is expressed by the Hortatory Subjunctive in a sentence grammatically independent (§ 440), but it is more frequently and more precisely expressed by a dependent clause introduced by a concessive particle. The concessive force lies chiefly in the Conjunctions (which are indefinite or conditional in origin), and is often made clearer by an adversative particle (tamen, certē) in the main clause. As the Subjunctive may be used in independ ent clauses to express a concession, it is also employed in concessive clauses, and somewhat more frequently than the indicative.

The Particles of Concession (meaning although, granting that) are quamvīs , ut , licet , etsī , tametsī , etiam sī , quamquam , and cum .

Some of these take the Subjunctive, others the Indicative, according to the nature of the clause which each introduces.

Quamvīs and ut take the Subjunctive:— quamvīs ipsī īnfantēs sint, tamen ... (Or. 76) , however incapable of speaking they themselves may be, yet, etc.

quamvīs scelerātī illī fuissent (De Or. 1.230) , however guilty they might have been.

quamvīs cōmis in amīcīs tuendīs fuerit (Fin. 2.80) , amiable as he may have been in keeping his friends.

ut nēminem alium rogāsset (Mil. 46) , even if he had asked no other.

ut enim nōn efficiās quod vīs, tamen mors ut malum nōn sit efficiēs (Tusc. 1.16) , for even if you do not accomplish what you wish, still you will prove that death is not an evil.

ut ratiōnem Platō nūllam adferret (id. 1.49), though Plato adduced no reasons.

Quamvīs means literally as much as you will. Thus in the first example above , let them be as incapable as you will, still , etc. The subjunctive with quamvīs is hortatory, like that with nē (§ 440 ); that with ut ( ut nōn ) is of uncertain origin.

Licet, although, takes the Present or Perfect Subjunctive:— licet omnēs mihi terrōrēs perīculaque impendeant (Rosc. Am. 31) , though all terrors and perils should menace me.

Licet is properly a verb in the present tense, meaning it is granted. Hence the subjunctive is by the sequence of tenses limited to the Present and Perfect. The concessive clause with licet is hortatory in origin, but may be regarded as a substantive clause serving as the subject of the impersonal verb (§ 565 . N.1).

Etsī , etiam sī , tametsī, even if, take the same constructions as sī (see § 514):— etsī abest mātūritās, tamen nōn est inūtile (Fam. 6.18.4) , though ripeness of age is wanting, yet it is not useless, etc.

etsī numquam dubium fuit, tamen perspiciō; (id. 5.19), although it has never been doubtful, yet I perceive, etc.

etsī statueram (id. 5.5), though I had determined.

etsī nihil aliud abstulissētis, tamen contentōs vōs esse oportēbat (Sull. 90) , even if you had taken away nothing else, you ought to have been satisfied.

etiam sī quod scrībās nōn habēbis, scrībitō tamen (Fam. 16.26) , even if you [shall] have nothing to write, still write.

sed ea tametsī vōs parvī pendēbātis (Sall. Cat. 52.9), but although you regarded those things as of small account.

Tametsī with the subjunctive is very rare. A protasis with sī often has a concessive force: as, ego , sī essent inimīcitiae mihi cum C. Caesare , tamen hōc tempore reī pūblicae cōnsulere ... dēbērem (Prov. Cons. 47) , as for me, even if I had private quarrels with Cæsar , it would still be my duty to serve the best interests of the state at this crisis.

Quamquam, although, introduces an admitted fact and takes the Indicative:— omnibus—quamquam ruit ipse suīs clādibus—pestem dēnūntiat (Phil. 14.8) , though he is breaking down under his disasters, still he threatens all with destruction.

Quamquam more commonly means and yet , introducing a new proposition in the indicative: as, quamquam haec quidem iam tolerābilia vidēbantur , etsī , etc. ( Mil. 76 ), and yet these, in truth, seemed now bearable, though , etc.

The poets and later writers frequently use quamvīs and quamquam like etsī , connecting them with the Indicative or the Subjunctive, according to the nature of the condition:— quamquam movērētur (Liv. 36.34) , although he was moved.

Polliō amat nostram, quamvīs est rūstica, mūsam (Ecl. 3.84) , Pollio loves my muse, though she is rustic.

quamvīs pervēnerās (Liv. 2.40) , though you had come.

Ut, as, with the Indicative, may be equivalent to a concession: vērum ut errāre potuistī, sīc dēcipī tē nōn potuisse quis nōn videt (Fam. 10.20.2) , suppose you could have been mistaken, who does not see that you cannot have been deceived in this way?

For cum concessive, see § 549; for quī concessive, see § 535. e. For concession expressed by the Hortatory Subjunctive (negative nē ), see § 440.

CLAUSES OF PROVISO

Dum , modo , dummodo, and tantum ut , introducing a Proviso, take the Subjunctive. The negative with these particles is nē : ōderint dum metuant (Off. 1.97) , let them hate, if only they fear.

valētūdō modo bona sit (Brut. 64) , provided the health be good.

dummodo inter mē atque tē mūrus intersit (Cat. 1.10) , provided only the wall (of the city) is between us.

tantum ut sciant (Att. 16.11.1) , provided only they know.

modo nē sit ex pecudum genere (Off. 1.105) , provided [in pleasure] he be not of the herd of cattle.

id faciat saepe, dum nē lassus fīat (Cato R. R. 5.4) , let him do this often, provided he does not get tired.

dummodo ea (sevēritās) nē variētur (Q. Fr. 1.1.20) , provided only it (strictness) be not allowed to swerve.

tantum nē noceat (Ov. M. 9.21) , only let it do no harm.

The Subjunctive with modo is hortatory or optative; that with dum and dummodo , a development from the use of the Subjunctive with dum in temporal clauses, § 553 (compare the colloquial so long as my health is good , I don't care ).

The Hortatory Subjunctive without a particle sometimes expresses a proviso:— sint Maecēnātēs, nōn deerunt Marōnēs (Mart. 8.56.5 ) , so there be Mœcenases, Virgils will not be lacking.

The Subjunctive with ut (negative nē ) is sometimes used to denote a proviso, usually with ita in the main clause:— probāta condiciō est, sed ita ut ille praesidia dēdūceret (Att. 7.14.1) , the terms were approved, but only on condition that he should withdraw the garrisons.

This is a development of the construction of Characteristic or Result.

For a clause of Characteristic expressing Proviso, see § 535. d.

CLAUSES OF PURPOSE (FINAL CLAUSES)

The Subjunctive in the clause of Purpose is hortatory in origin, coming through a kind of indirect discourse construction (for which see § 592). Thus, mīsit lēgātōs quī dīcerent means he sent ambassadors who should say, i.e. who were directed to say; in the direct orders the verb would be dīcite , which would become dīcant in the Indirect Discourse of narrative (§ 588) or dīcerent in the past (cf. hortatory subjunctive in past tenses, § 439. b). The Subjunctive with ut and nē is, in general, similar in origin.

A clause expressing purpose is called a Final Clause.

Final Clauses take the Subjunctive introduced by ut ( utī ), negative nē ( ut nē ), or by a Relative Pronoun or Adverb.—

Pure Clauses of Purpose, with ut ( utī ) or nē ( ut nē ), express the purpose of the main verb in the form of a modifying clause:— ab arātrō abdūxērunt Cincinnātum, utdictātor esset (Fin. 2.12) , they brought Cincinnatus from the plough that he might be dictator.

ut sint auxiliō suīs, subsistunt (B. C. 1.80) , they halt in order to support (be an aid to) their own men.

nē mīlitēs oppidum inrumperent, portās obstruit (id. 1.27), he barricaded the gates, in order that the soldiers might not break into the town.

scālās parārī iubet,nē quam facultātem dīmittat (id. 1.28), he orders scalingladders to be got ready, in order not to let slip any opportunity.

ut nē sit impūne (Mil. 31) , that it be not with impunity.

Sometimes the conjunction has a correlative ( ideō , idcircō , eō cōnsiliō , etc.) in the main clause (cf. § 561 . a ):— lēgumidcircō servī sumus,ut līberī sīmus (Clu 146), for this reason we are subject to the laws, that we may be free.

cōpiās trānsdūxit eō cōnsiliō, utcastellum expūgnāret (cf. B. G. 2.9), he led the troops across with this design—to storm the fort.

Ut nōn sometimes occurs in clauses of purpose when nōn belongs to some particular word: as, — ut plūra nōn dīcam (Manil. 44) , to avoid unnecessary talk.

Relative Clauses of Purpose are introduced by the relative pronoun quī or a relative adverb ( ubi , unde , quō , etc.). The antecedent is expressed or implied in the main clause:— mittitur L. Dēcidius Saxaquī locī nātūram perspiciat (B. C. 1.66) , Lucius Decidius Saxa is sent to examine the ground (who should examine, etc.).

scrībēbat ōrātiōnēsquās aliī dīcerent (Brut. 206) , he wrote speeches for other men to deliver.

eō exstīnctō fore unde discerem nēminem (Cat. M. 12) , that when he was dead there would be nobody from whom (whence) I could learn.

huic nē ubi cōnsisteret quidem contrā tē locum relīquistī; (Quinct. 73), you have left him no ground even to make a stand against you.

habēbam quō cōnfugerem (Fam. 4.6.2) , I had [a retreat] whither I might flee.

In this construction quī = ut is (etc.), ubi = ut ibi , and so on (§ 537 . 2).

The ablative quō (= ut eō ) is used as a conjunction in final clauses which contain a comparative:— comprimere eōrum audāciam, quō facilius cēterōrum animī frangerentur (Fam. 15.4.10) , to repress their audacity, that the spirit of the others might be broken more easily (by which the more easily).

lībertāte ūsus est, quō impūnius dicāx esset (Quinct. 11) , he took advantage of liberty, that he might bluster with more impunity.

Occasionally quō introduces a final clause that does not contain a comparative: as,—L. Sulla exercitum , quō sibi fīdum faceret , lūxuriōsē habuerat (Sall. Cat. 11 ), Lucius Sulla had treated the army luxuriously, in order to make it devoted to him.

For quōminus (= ut eō minus ) after verbs of hindering, see § 558. b.

The principal clause, on which a final clause depends, is often to be supplied from the context:— ac nē longum sit ... iussimus (Cat. 3.10) , and, not to be tedious, we ordered, etc. [Strictly, in order not to be tedious, I say we ordered.]

sed ut ad Dionȳsium redeāmus (Tusc. 5.63) , but to return to Dionysius.

sed ut eōdem revertar, causa haec fuit timōris (Fam. 6.7.3) , but, to return to the same point, this was the cause of fear.

satis incōnsīderātī fuit, nē dīcam audācis (Phil. 13.12) , it was the act of one rash enough, not to say daring.

By a similar ellipsis the Subjunctive is used with nēdum (sometimes nē ), still less, not to mention that: — nēdum salvī esse possīmus (Clu. 95) , much less could we be safe.

nēdum istī nōn statim conquīsītūrī sint aliquid sceleris et flāgitī; (Leg. Agr. 2.97), far more will they hunt up at once some sort of crime and scandal.

nēdum in marī et viā sit facile (Fam. 16.8) , still less is it easy at sea and on a journey.

quippe secundae rēs sapientium animōs fatīgant; nē illī corruptīs mōribus victōriae temperārent (Sall. Cat. 11), for prosperity overmasters the soul even of the wise; much less did they with their corrupt morals put any check on victory.

With nēdum the verb itself is often omitted: as, aptius hūmānitātī tuae quam tōta Peloponnēsus , nēdum Patrae (Fam. 7.28.1) , fitter for your refinement than all Peloponnesus , to say nothing of Patræ.

For Substantive Clauses involving purpose, see §§ 563-566.

The Purpose of an action is expressed in Latin in various ways; but never (except in idiomatic expressions and rarely in poetry) by the simple Infinitive as in English (§ 460).

The sentence, they came to seek peace, may be rendered— (1) vēnērunt ut pācem peterent. [Final clause with ut (§ 531. 1).]

(2) vēnērunt quī pācem peterent. [Final clause with Relative (§ 531. 2).]

(3) [vēnērunt ad petendum pācem.] Not found with transitive verbs (§ 506, N.2), but cf. ad pārendum senātuī . [Gerund with ad (§ 506).]

(4) vēnērunt ad petendam pācem. [Gerundive with ad (§ 506).]

(5) vēnērunt pācem petendī causā (grātiā). [Gen. of Gerund with causā (§ 504. b).]

(6) vēnērunt pācis petendae causā (grātiā). [Gen. of Gerundive with causā (§ 504. b).]

(7) vēnērunt pācem petītūrī. [Future participle (§ 499. 2); in later writers.]

(8) vēnērunt pācem petītum. [Supine in -um (§ 509).]

These forms are not used indifferently, but—

The usual way of expressing purpose is by ut (negative nē ), unless the purpose is closely connected with some one word, in which case a relative is more common:—

lēgātōs ad Dummnorīgem mittunt, ut eō dēprecātōre ā Sēquanīs impetrārent (B. G. 1.9) , they send envoys to Dumnorix, in order through his intercession to obtain (this favor) from the Sequani.

mīlitēs mīsit ut eōs quī fūgerant persequerentur (id. 5.10), he sent the soldiers to follow up those who had fled.

Cūriō praemittit equitēs quī prīmum impetum sustineant (B. C. 2.26) , Curio sends forward cavalry to withstand the first attack.

The Gerund and Gerundive constructions of purpose are usually limited to short expressions, where the literal translation, though not the English idiom, is nevertheless not harsh or strange.

The Supine is used to express purpose only with verbs of motion, and in a few idiomatic expressions (§ 509).

The Future Participle used to express purpose is a late construction of inferior authority (§ 499. 2).

For the poetical Infinitive of Purpose, see § 460. c. For the Present Participle in a sense approaching that of purpose, see § 490. 3.

CLAUSES OF CHARACTERISTIC

The relative clause of Characteristic with the Subjunctive is a development peculiar to Latin. A relative clause in the Indicative merely states something as a fact which is true of the antecedent; a characteristic clause (in the Subjunctive) defines the antecedent as a person or thing of such a character that the statement made is true of him or it and of all others belonging to the same class. Thus,— nōn potest exercitum is continēre imperātor quī sē ipse nōn continet (indicative) means simply, that commander who does not (as a fact) restrain himself cannot restrain his army; whereas nōn potest exercitum is continēre imperātor quī sē ipse nōn contineat (subjunctive) would mean, that commander who is not such a man as to restrain himself, etc., that is, who is not characterized by self-restraint.

This construction has its origin in the potential use of the subjunctive (§ 445) Thus, in the example just given, quī sē ipse nōn contineat would mean literally, who would not restrain himself (in any supposable case), and this potential idea passes over easily into that of general quality or characteristic. The characterizing force is most easily felt when the antecedent is indefinite or general. But this usage is extended in Latin to cases which differ but slightly from statements of fact, as in some of the examples below.

The use of the Subjunctive to express Result comes from its use in Clauses of Characteristic. Thus, nōn sum ita hebes ut haec dīcam means literally, I am not dull in the manner (degree) in which I should say this, hence, I am not so dull as to say this. Since, then, the characteristic often appears in the form of a supposed result, the construction readily passes over into Pure Result, with no idea of characteristic; as,— tantus in cūriā clāmor factus est ut populus concurreret (Verr. 2.47) , such an outcry was made in the senate-house that the people hurried together.

A Relative Clause with the Subjunctive is often used to indicate a characteristic of the antecedent, especially where the antecedent is otherwise undefined:—

neque enim tū is es quī nesciās (Fam. 5.12.6) , for you are not such a one as not to know. [Here is is equivalent to such, and is defined only by the relative clause that follows.]

multa dīcunt quae vix intellegam (Fin. 4.2) , they say many things which (such as) I hardly understand.

pācī quae nihil habitūra sit īnsidiārum semper est cōnsulendum (Off. 1.35) , we must always aim at a peace which shall have no plots.

A Relative Clause of Characteristic is used after general expressions of existence or non-existence, including questions which imply a negative.

So especially with sunt quī, there are [some] who; quis est quī, who is there who?— sunt quī discessum animī ā corpore putent esse mortem (Tusc. 1.18) , there are some who think that the departure of soul from body constitutes death.

erant quī cēnsērent (B. C. 2.30) , there were some who were of the opinion, etc.

erant quī Helvidium miserārentur (Tac. Ann. 16.29) , there were some who pitied Helvidius. [Cf. est cum (N.3, below).]

quis est quī id nōn maximīs efferat laudibus (Lael. 24) , who is there that does not extol it with the highest praise?

nihil videō quod timeam (Fam. 9.16.3) , I see nothing to fear.

nihil est quod adventum nostrum extimēscās (Fam. 9.26.4) , there is no reason why you should dread my coming.

unde agger comportārī posset nihil erat reliquum (B. C. 2.15) , there was nothing left from which an embankment could be got together.

After general negatives like nēmō est quī , the Subjunctive is regular; after general affirmatives like sunt quī , it is the prevailing construction, but the Indicative sometimes occurs; after multī ( nōn nūllī , quīdam ) sunt quī , and similar expressions in which the antecedent is partially defined, the choice of mood depends on the shade of meaning which the writer wishes to express:— sunt bēstiae quaedam in quibus inest aliquid simile virtūtis (Fin. 5.38) , there are certain animals in which there is something like virtue.

But,—inventī multī sunt quī vītam prōfundere prō patriā parātī essent (Off. 1.84) , many were found of such a character as to be ready to give their lives for their country.

Characteristic clauses with sunt quī etc. are sometimes called Relative Clauses with an Indefinite Antecedent, but are to be carefully distinguished from the Indefinite Relative in protasis (§ 520 ). The phrases est cum , fuit cum , etc. are used like est quī , sunt quī : as,— ac fuit cum mihi quoque initium requiēscendī fore iūstum arbitrārer (De Or. 1.1) , and there was a time when I thought a beginning of rest would be justifiable on my part.

A Relative Clause of Characteristic may follow ūnus and sōlus : nīl admīrārī prope rēs est ūna sōlaque quae possit facere et servāre beātum (Hor. Ep. 1.6.1) , to wonder at nothing is almost the sole and only thing that can make and keep one happy.

sōlus es cûius in victōriā ceciderit nēmō nisi armātus (Deiot. 34) , you are the only man in whose victory no one has fallen unless armed.

A clause of Result or Characteristic with quam ut , quam quī (rarely with quam alone), may be used after comparatives:— Canachī sīgna rigidiōra sunt quam ut imitentur vēritātem (Brut. 70) , the statues of Canachus are too stiff to represent nature (stiffer than that they should).

mâiōrēs arborēs caedēbant quam quās ferre mīles posset (Liv. 33.5) , they cut trees too large for a soldier to carry (larger than what a soldier could carry).

This construction corresponds in sense to the English too ... to.

A relative clause of characteristic may express restriction or proviso (cf. § 528. b):— quod sciam, so far as I know (lit. as to what I know).

Catōnis ōrātiōnēs, quās quidem invēnerim (Brut. 65) , the speeches of Cato, at least such as I have discovered.

servus est nēmō, quī modo tolerābilī condiciōne sit servitūtis (Cat. 4.16) , there is not a slave, at least in any tolerable condition of slavery.

A Relative Clause of Characteristic may express cause or concession:— peccāsse mihi videor quī ā tē discesserim (Fam. 16.1) , I seem to myself to have done wrong because I have left you. [Causal.]

virum simplicem quī nōs nihil cēlet (Or. 230) , O guileless man, who hides nothing from us! [Causal.]

egomet quī sērō Graecās litterās attigissem, tamen complūrēs Athēnīs diēs sum commorātus (De Or. 1.82) , I myself, though I began Greek literature late, yet, etc. (lit. [a man] who, etc.). [Concessive.]

In this use the relative is equivalent to cum is etc. It is often preceded by ut , utpote , or quippe :— nec cōnsul, ut quī id ipsum quaesīsset, moram certāminī fēcit (Liv. 42.7) , nor did the consul delay the fight, since he had sought that very thing (as [being one] who had sought, etc.).

Lūcius, frāter êius, utpote quī peregrē dēpūgnārit, familiam dūcit (Phil. 5.30) , Lucius, his brother, leads his household, inasmuch as he is a man who has fought it out abroad.

convīvia cum patre nōn inībat, quippe qui nē in oppidum quidem nisi perrārō venīret (Rosc. Am. 52) , he did not go to dinner parties with his father, since he did not even come to town except very rarely.

The Relative of Cause or Concession is merely a variety of the Characteristic construction. The quality expressed by the Subjunctive is connected with the action of the main verb either as cause on account of which (SINCE) or as hindrance in spite of which (ALTHOUGH).

Dīgnus , indīgnus , aptus , idōneus take a subjunctive clause with a relative (rarely ut ). The negative is nōn :— dīgna in quibus ēlabōrārent (Tusc. 1.1) , (things) worth spending their toil on (worthy on which they should, etc.).

dīgna rēs est ubi tū nervōs intendās tuōs (Ter. Eun. 312) , the affair is worthy of your stretching your sinews (worthy wherein you should, etc.).

idōneus quī impetret (Manil. 57) , fit to obtain.

indīgnī ut redimerēmur (Liv. 22.59.17) , unworthy to be ransomed.

This construction is sometimes explained as a relative clause of purpose , but it is more closely related to characteristic. With dīgnus etc., the poets often use the Infinitive:— fōns rīvō dare nōmen idōneus (Hor. Ep. 1.16.12) , a source fit to give a name to a stream.

aetās mollis et apta regī (Ov. A. A. 1.10) , a time of life soft and easy to be guided.

vīvere dīgnus erās (Ov. M. 10.633) , you were worthy to live.

CLAUSES OF RESULT (CONSECUTIVE CLAUSES)

The Subjunctive in Consecutive Clauses is a development of the use of that mood in Clauses of Characteristic (as explained in § 534).

Clauses of Result take the Subjunctive introduced by ut, so that (negative, ut nōn ), or by a relative pronoun or relative adverb.

Pure Clauses of Result, with ut or ut nōn , express the result of the main verb in the form of a modifying clause:— tanta vīs probitātis est ut eam in hoste dīligāmus (Lael. 29) , so great is the power of goodness that we love it even in an enemy.

pūgnātur ācriter ad novissimum agmen, adeō ut paene terga convertant (B. C. 1.80) , there is sharp fighting in the rear, so (to such a degree) that they almost take flight.

multa rūmor adfingēbat, ut paene bellum cōnfectum vidērētur (id. 1.53), rumor added many false reports, so that the war seemed almost ended.

Relative Clauses of Result are introduced by the relative pronoun quī or a relative adverb ( ubi , unde , quō , etc.). The antecedent is expressed or implied in the main clause.

The Relative in this construction is equivalent to ut with the corre sponding demonstrative: quī = ut is (etc.), ubi = ut ibi , and so on:

nam est innocentia affectiō tālis animī quae noceatnēminī; (Tusc. 3.16), for innocence is such a quality of mind as to do harm to no one.

sunt aliae causae quaeplānē efficiant (Top. 59) , there are other causes such as to bring to pass.

nūlla est celeritāsquae possit cum animī celeritāte contendere (Tusc. 1.43) , there is no swiftness which can compare with the swiftness of the mind.

quis nāvigāvitquī nōn sē mortis perīculō committeret (Manil. 31) , who went to sea who did not incur the peril of death?

Since the relative clause of Result is a development from the relative clause of Characteristic (§ 534 ), no sharp line can be drawn between the two constructions. In doubtful cases, it is better to attempt no distinction or to describe the clause as one of Characteristic. Clauses of Result are often introduced by such correlative words as tam , tālis , tantus , ita , sīc , adeō . ūsque eō , which belong to the main clause. A Negative Result is introduced by ut nōn , ut nēmō , quī nōn , etc., not by nē :— multīs gravibusque volneribus cōnfectus ut iam sē sustinēre non posset (B. G. 2.25) , used up with many severe wounds so that he could no longer stand.

tantā vī in Pompêī equitēs impetum fēcērunt ut eōrum nēmō cōnsisteret (B. C. 3.93) , they attacked Pompey's cavalry with such vigor that not one of them stood his ground.

nēmō est tam senex quī sē annum nōn putet posse vīvere (Cat. M. 24) , nobody is so old as not to think that he can live a year.

When the result implies an effect intended (not a simple purpose), ut nē or nē is sometimes used as being less positive than ut nōn :—[ librum ] ita corrigās nē mihi noceat ( Caecina , Fam. 6.7.6 ), correct the book so that it may not hurt me.

Frequently a clause of result or characteristic is used in a restrictive sense, and so amounts to a Proviso (cf. § 535. d):— hōc ita est ūtile ut nē plānē inlūdāmur ab accūsātōribus (Rosc. Am. 55) , this is so far useful that we are not utterly mocked by the accusers (i.e. useful only on this condition, that, etc.).

nihil autem est molestum quod nōn dēsīderēs (Cat. M. 47) , but nothing is troublesome which (= provided that) you do not miss.

The clause of result is sometimes expressed in English by the Infinitive with TO or SO AS TO or an equivalent:— tam longē aberam ut nōn vidērem, I was too far away to see (so far that I did not see; cf. § 535. c).

Result is never expressed by the Infinitive in Latin except by the poets in a few passages (§ 461 . a ).

The constructions of Purpose and Result are precisely alike in the affirmative (except sometimes in tense sequence, § 485. c); but, in the negative, Purpose takes nē , Result ut nōn etc.:— cūstōdītus est nē effugeret, he was guarded in order that he MIGHT not escape.

cūstōdītus est ut nōn effugeret, he was guarded so that he DID not escape.

So in negative Purpose clauses nē quis , nē quid , nē üllus , nē quō , nē quandō , nēcubi , etc. are almost always used; in negative Result clauses, ut nēmō , ut nihil , ut nūllus , etc.:— (1) cernere nē quis eōs, neu quis contingere posset (Aen. 1.413) , that no one might see them, no one touch them. [Purpose.]

nē quandō līberīs prōscrīptōrum bona patria reddantur (Rosc. Am. 145) , lest at some time the patrimony of the proscribed should be restored to their children.

ipse nē quō inciderem, revertī Formiās (Att. 8.3.7) , that I might not come upon him anywhere, I returned to Formiœ.

dispositīs explōrātōribus nēcubi Rōmānī cōpiās trādūcerent (B. G. 7.35) , having stationed scouts here and there in order that the Romans might not lead their troops across anywhere.

(2) multī ita sunt imbēcillī senēs ut nūllum officī mūnus exsequī possint (Cat. M. 35) , many old men are so feeble that they cannot perform any duty to society. [Result.]

quī summum bonum sīc īnstituit ut nihil habeat cum virtūte coniūnctum (Off. 1.5) , who has so settled the highest good that it has nothing in common with virtue.

For clauses of Result or Characteristic with quīn , see § 559. For Substantive Clauses of Result, see §§ 567-571.

CAUSAL CLAUSES

Causal Clauses take either the Indicative or the Subjunctive, according to their construction; the idea of cause being contained, not in the mood itself, but in the form of the argument (by implication), in an antecedent of causal meaning (like proptereā ), or in the connecting particles.

Quod is in origin the relative pronoun (stem quo-) used adverbially in the accusative neuter (cf. § 214. d) and gradually sinking to the position of a colorless relative con junction (cf. English that and see § 222). Its use as a causal particle is an early special development. Quia is perhaps an accusative plural neuter of the relative stem qui-, and seems to have developed its causal sense more distinctly than quod , and at an earlier period. It is used (very rarely) as an interrogative, why? (so in classical Latin with nam only), and may, like quandō , have developed from an interrogative to a relative particle.

Quoniam (for quom iam ) is also of relative origin ( quom being a case-form of the pronominal stem quo-). It occurs in old Latin in the sense of when (cf. quom, cum), from which the causal meaning is derived (cf. cum causal). The Subjunctive with quod and quia depends on the principle of Informal Indirect Discourse (§ 592).

Quandō is probably the interrogative quam (how?) compounded with a form of the pronominal stem do- (cf. dum, dō-nec). It originally denoted time (first interrogatively, then as a relative), and thus came to signify cause. Unlike quod and quia , it is not used to state a reason in informal indirect discourse and therefore is never followed by the Subjunctive.

The Causal Particles quod and quia take the Indicative, when the reason is given on the authority of the writer or speaker; the Subjunctive, when the reason is given on the authority of another:—

Indicative:— cum tibi agam grātiās quodmē vīvere coēgistī (Att. 3.3) , when I may thank you that you have forced me to live.

cūr igitur pācem nōlō? quia turpis est (Phil. 7.9) , why then do I not wish for peace? Because it is disgraceful.

ita fit ut adsint proptereāquod officium sequuntur, taceant autem quia periculum vītant (Rosc. Am. 1) , so it happens that they attend because they follow duty, but are silent because they seek to avoid danger.

Subjunctive:— mihi grātulābāre quod audīssēs mē meam prīstinam dīgnitātem obtinēre (Fam. 4.14.1) , you congratulated me because [as you said] you had heard that I had regained my former dignity.

noctū ambulābat Themistoclēs quod somnum capere nōn posset (Tusc. 4.44) , Themistocles used to walk about at night because [as he said] he could not sleep.

mea māter īrāta est quianōn redierim (Pl. Cist. 101) , my mother is angry because I did n't return.

Quod introduces either a fact or a statement , and accordingly takes either the Indicative or the Subjunctive. Quia regularly introduces a fact; hence it rarely takes the Subjunctive. Quoniam , inasmuch as, since , when now, now that , has reference to motives, excuses, justifications, and the like and takes the Indicative. Under this head what the speaker himself thought under other circumstances may have the Subjunctive (§ 592 . 3. N.): as, ego laeta vīsa sum quia soror vēnisset ( Pl. Mil. 387 ), I seemed (in my dream) glad because my sister had come. So with quod even a verb of saying may be in the Subjunctive: as, —rediit quod sē oblītum nesciō quid dīceret (Off. 1.40) , he returned because he said he had forgotten something.

Nōn quod , nōn quia , nōn quō , introducing a reason expressly to deny it , take the Subjunctive; but the Indicative sometimes occurs when the statement is in itself true, though not the true reason. In the negative, nōn quīn (with the Subjunctive) may be used in nearly the same sense as nōn quod nōn . After a comparative, quam quō or quam quod is used:— pugilēs ingemēscunt,nōn quod doleant, sed quia profundendā vōce omne corpus intenditur (Tusc. 2.56) , boxers groan, not because they are in pain, but because by giving vent to the voice the whole body is put in a state of tension.

nōn quia rēctior ad Alpīs via esset, sed crēdēns (Liv. 21.31.2) , not because the route to the Alps was more direct, but believing, etc.

nōn quīn parī virtūte et voluntāte aliīfuerint, sed tantam causam nōn habuērunt (Phil. 7.6) , not that there were not others of equal courage and good-will, but they had not so strong a reason.

haec amōre magis impulsus scrībenda ad tē putāvī, quam quōtē arbitrārermonitīs et praeceptīs egēre (Fam. 10.3.4) , this I thought I ought to write to you, rather from the impulse of (prompted by) affection than because I thought that you needed advice and suggestion.

Quoniam and quandō, since, introduce a reason given on the authority of the writer or speaker, and take the Indicative:— locus est ā mē, quoniam ita Murēna voluit, retrāctandus (Mur. 54) , I must review the point, since Murena has so wished.

quandō ita vīs, dī bene vortant (Pl. Trin. 573) , since you so wish, may the gods bless the undertaking.

quandō ad mâiōra nātī sumus (Fin. 5.21) , since we are born for greater things.

The Subjunctive with quoniam is unclassical. Quandō , since , in the causal sense, is mostly archaic or late. Quandō , when , is used as interrogative, relative, and indefinite: as, quandō ? hodiē , when? to-day; sī quandō , if ever.

Causal clauses introduced by quod , quia , quoniam , and quandō take the Subjunctive in Indirect Discourse, like any other dependent clause (see § 580).

A Relative, when used to express cause, regularly takes the Subjunctive (see § 535. e).

Cum causal takes the Subjunctive (see § 549).

For Substantive Clauses with quod , see § 572.

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

Temporal Clauses are introduced by particles which are almost all of relative origin. They are construed like other relative clauses, except where they have developed into special idiomatic constructions. With all temporal particles the Subjunctive is often found depending on some other principle of construction. (See Intermediate Clauses. § 591 .)

For list of Temporal Particles, see p. 138.

Temporal Clauses may be classified as follows:—

I. Conditional Relative Clauses: ubi , ut , cum , quandō, in Protasis (§ 542).

II. Clauses with postquam , ubi , etc. (Indicative), (§ 543).

III. Clauses with cum 1. Cum temporal (§§ 545-548). 2. Cum causal or concessive (§ 549).

IV. Clauses with antequam and priusquam (Indicative or Subjunctive) (§ 551).

V. Clauses with dum , dōnec , and quoad (Indicative or Subjunctive) (§§ 552-556).

Conditional Relative Clauses

The particles ubi , ut , cum , quandō , either alone or compounded with -cumque, may be used as Indefinite Relatives (in the sense of whenever), and have the constructions of Protasis (cf. § 514):— cum id malum negās esse, capior (Tusc. 2.29) , whenever you (the individual disputant) deny it to be an evil, I am misled. [Present general condition.]

quod profectō cum mē nūlla vīs cōgeret, facere nōn audērem (Phil. 5.51) , which I would surely not venture to do, as long as no force compelled me. [Present, contrary to fact: cf. § 517.]

cum videās eōs dolōre nōn frangī, dēbeās exīstimāre, etc. (Tusc. 2.66) , when you see that those are not broken by pain, you ought to infer, etc. [Present general condition: cf. § 518. a.]

cum rosam vīderat, tum incipere vēr arbitrābātur (Verr. 5.27) , whenever he saw a rose he thought spring had begun. [Past general condition: cf. § 518. b.]

id ubi dīxisset, hastam in fīnīs eōrum ēmittēbat (Liv. 1.32.13) , when he had said this, he would cast the spear into their territories. [Past General Condition, repeated action: see § 518. c.]

Temporal Clauses with postquam, ubi, etc.

The particles postquam ( posteāquam ), ubi , ut ( ut prīmum , ut semel ), simul atque ( simul ac , or simul alone), take the Indicative (usually in the perfect or the historical present):— mīlitēs postquam victōriam adeptī sunt, nihil reliquī victīs fēcēre (Sall. Cat. 11), when the soldiers had won the victory, they left nothing to the vanquished.

posteāquam forum attigistī, nihil fēcistī nisi, etc. (Fam. 15.16.3) , since you came to the forum, you have done nothing except, etc.

ubi omnīs idem sentīre intellēxit, posterum diem pūgnae cōnstituit (B. G. 3.23) , when he understood that all agreed (thought the same thing), he appointed the next day for the battle.

Catilīna, ubi eōs convēnisse videt, sēcēdit (Sall. Cat. 20), when Catiline sees that they have come together, he retires.

Pompêius ut equitātum suum pulsum vīdit, aciē excessit (B. C. 3.94) , when Pompey saw his cavalry beaten, he left the field.

ut semel ē Pīraeeō ēloquentia ēvecta est (Brut. 51) , as soon as eloquence had set sail from the Pirœus.

nostrī simul in āridō cōnstitērunt, in hostīs impetum fēcērunt (B. G. 4.26) , our men, as soon as they had taken a position on dry ground, made an attack on the enemy.

simul atque intrōductus est, rem cōnfēcit (Clu. 40) , as soon as he was brought in, he did the job.

These particles less commonly take the Imperfect or Pluperfect Indicative. The Imperfect denotes a past state of things; the Pluperfect, an action completed in past time:— postquam strūctī utrimque stābant, ducēs in medium prōcēdunt (Liv. 1.23) , when they stood in array on both sides, the generals advance into the midst.

P. Āfricānus posteāquam bis cōnsul et cēnsor fuerat (Caecil. 69) , when Africanus had been (i.e. had the dignity of having been) twice consul and censor.

postquam id difficilius vīsum est, neque facultās perficiendī dabātur, ad Pompêium trānsiērunt (B. C. 3.60) , when this seemed too hard, and no means of effecting it were given, they passed over to Pompey.

post diem quīntum quam iterum barbarī male pūgnāverant [= victī sunt], lēgātī ā Bocchō veniunt (Iug. 102) , the fifth day after the barbarians were beaten the second time, envoys come from Bocchus.

haec iuventūtem, ubi familiārēs opēs dēfēcerant, ad facinora incendēbant (Sall. Cat. 13), when their inherited resources had given out, etc.

ubi perīcula virtūte prōpulerant (id. 6), when they had dispelled the dangers by their valor.

For the use of ubi , ut , either alone or compounded with -cumque as Indefinite Relatives, see § 542.

USES OF CUM

The conjunction cum ( quom ) is a case-form of the relative pronoun quī . It inherits from quī its subordinating force, and in general shares its constructions. But it was early specialized to a temporal meaning (cf. tum, dum), and its range of usage was therefore less wide than that of quī; it could not, for example, introduce clauses of purpose or of result.

With the Indicative, besides the simple expression of definite time (corresponding to simple relative clauses with the Indicative), it has a few special uses,—conditional, explicative, cum inversum —all easily derived from the temporal use.

With the Subjunctive, cum had a development parallel to that of the quī-clause of Characteristic,—a development not less extensive and equally peculiar to Latin. From defining the time the cum-clause passed over to the description of the time by means of its attendant circumstances of cause or concession (cf. since, while).

In particular, cum with the Subjunctive was used in narrative (hence the past tenses, Imperfect and Pluperfect) as a descriptive clause of time. As, however, the present participle in Latin is restricted in its use and the perfect active participle is almost wholly lacking, the historical or narrative cum-clause came into extensive use to supply the deficiency. In classical writers the narrative cum-clause (with the Subjunctive) has pushed back the defining clause (with the Imperfect or Pluperfect Indicative) into comparative infrequency, and is itself freely used where the descriptive or characterizing force is scarcely perceptible (cf. the quī-clause of Characteristic, § 534).

Cum Temporal

A temporal clause with cum, when, and some past tense of the Indicative dates or defines the time at which the action of the main verb occurred:— eō [lituō] regiōnēs dīrēxit tum cum urbem condidit (Div. 1.30) , he traced with it the quarters [of the sky] at the time he founded the city.

cum occīditur Sex. Rōscius, ibīdem fuērunt servī; (Rosc. Am. 120), when Roscius was slain, the slaves were on the spot. [ occīditur is historical present.]

quem quidem cum ex urbe pellēbam, hōc prōvidēbam animō; (Cat. 3.16), when I was trying to force him (conative imperfect) from the city, I looked forward to this.

fulgentīs gladiōs hostium vidēbant Deciī cum in aciem eōrum inruēbant (Tusc. 2.59) , the Decii saw the flashing swords of the enemy when they rushed upon their line.

tum cum in Asiā rēs māgnās permultī āmīserant (Manil. 19) , at that time, when many had lost great fortunes in Asia.

This is the regular use with all tenses in early Latin, and at all times with the Perfect and the Historical Present (as with postquam etc.). With the Imperfect and Pluperfect the Indicative use is (in classical Latin) much less common than the Subjunctive use defined below (§ 546 ). This construction must not be confused with that of cum , whenever , in General Conditions (§ 542 ).

When the time of the main clause and that of the temporal clause are absolutely identical, cum takes the Indicative in the same tense as that of the main verb:— maximā sum laetitiā adfectus cum audīvī cōnsulem tē factum esse (Fam. 15.7) , I was very much pleased when I heard that you had been elected consul.

A temporal clause with cum and the Imperfect or Pluperfect Subjunctive describes the circumstances that accompanied or preceded the action of the main verb:— cum essem ōtiōsus in Tusculānō, accēpī tuās litterās (Fam. 9.18.1) , when I was taking my ease in my house at Tusculum, I received your letter.

cum servīlī bellō premerētur (Manil. 30) , when she (Italy) was under the load of the Servile War.

cum id nūntiātum esset, mātūrat (B. G. 1.7) , when this had been reported, he made (makes) haste.

cum ad Cybistra quīnque diēs essem morātus, rēgem Ariobarzānem īnsidiīs līberāvī; (Fam. 15.4.6), after remaining at Cybistra for five days, I freed King Ariobarzanes from plots.

is cum ad mē Lāodicēam vēnisset mēcumque ego eum vellem, repente percussus est atrōcissimīs litterīs (id. 9.25.3), when he had come to me at Laodicea and I wished him to remain with me, he was suddenly, etc.

This construction is very common in narrative, and cum in this use is often called narrative cum . Cum with the Imperfect or Pluperfect Indicative does not (like cum with the Imperfect or Pluperfect Subjunctive) describe the time by its circumstances; it defines the time of the main verb by denoting a coëxistent state of things (Imperfect Indicative) or a result attained when the action of the main verb took place (Pluperfect). Thus the construction is precisely that of postquam etc. (§ 543 . a ). The distinction between the uses defined in §§ 545 , 546, may be illustrated by the following examples: (1) He had a fever when he was in Spain (Shakspere). Here the when -clause defines the time when Cæsar had the fever,—namely, in the year of his Spanish campaign (B.C. 49). In Latin we should use cum with the Imperfect Indicative. (2) Columbus discovered America when he was seeking a new route to India; here the when -clause does not define or date the time of the discovery; it merely describes the circumstances under which America was discovered,—namely, in the course of a voyage undertaken for another purpose. In Latin we should use the Imperfect Subjunctive. The distinction explained in Note 3 is unknown to early Latin. In Plautus quom always has the Indicative unless the Subjunctive is required for some other reason.

When the principal action is expressed in the form of a temporal clause with cum , and the definition of the time becomes the main clause, cum takes the Indicative.

Here the logical relations of the two clauses are inverted; hence cum is in this use called cum inversum:—

diēs nōndum decem intercesserant, cum ille alter fīlius īnfāns necātur (Clu. 28) , ten days had not yet passed, when the other infant son was killed. [Instead of when ten days had not yet passed, etc.]

iamque lūx appārēbat cum prōcēdit ad mīlitēs (Q. C. 7.8.3) , and day was already dawning when he appears before the soldiers.

hōc facere noctū apparābant, cum mātrēs familiae repente in pūblicum prōcurrērunt (B. G. 7.26) , they were preparing to do this by night, when the women suddenly ran out into the streets.

Present time with cum temporal is denoted by the Present Indicative; future time, by the Future or Future Perfect Indicative:— incidunt tempora, cum ea, quae maximē videntur dīgna esse iūstō homine, fīunt contrāria (Off. 1.31) , times occur when those things which seem especially worthy of the upright man, become the opposite.

nōn dubitābō dare operam ut tē videam, cum id satis commodē facere poterō (Fam. 13.1) , I shall not hesitate to take pains to see you, when I can do it conveniently.

longum illud tempus cum nōn erō (Att. 12.18) , that long time when I shall be no more.

cum vēneris, cōgnōscēs (Fam. 5.7.3) , when you come (shall have come), you will find out.

Cum, whenever, takes the construction of a relative clause in a general condition (see § 542).

For present time, either the Present or the Perfect Indicative is used; for past time, regularly the Pluperfect Indicative.

For est cum etc., see § 535. a. N.3.

Cum Causal or Concessive

Cum causal or concessive takes the Subjunctive:— id difficile nōn est, cum tantum equitātū valeāmus (B. C. 3.86) , this is not difficult since we are so strong in cavalry. [Causal.]

cum sōlitūdō īnsidiārum et metūs plēna sit, ratiō ipsa monet amīcitiās comparāre (Fin. 1.66) , since solitude is full of treachery and fear, reason itself prompts us to contract friendships. [Causal.]

cum prīmī ōrdinēs concidissent, tamen ācerrimē reliquī resistēbant (B. G. 7.62) , though the first ranks had fallen, still the others resisted vigorously. [Concessive.]

brevī spatiō legiōnēs numerō hominum explēverat, cum initiō nōn amplius duōbus mīlibus habuisset (Sall. Cat. 56), in a short time he had filled out the legions with their complement of men, though at the start he had not had more than two thousand. [Concessive.]

Cum causal may usually be translated by since; cum concessive by although or while; either, occasionally, by when. Cum in these uses is often emphasized by ut , utpote , quippe , praesertim ; as, nec reprehendō : quippe cum ipse istam reprehēnsiōnem nōn fūgerim ( Att. 10.3 A), I find no fault; since I myself did not escape that blame. These causal and concessive uses of cum are of relative origin and are parallel to quī causal and concessive (§ 535 . e ). The attendant circumstances are regarded as the cause of the action, or as tending to hinder it. In early Latin cum ( quom ) causal and concessive usually takes the Indicative: as, quom tua rēs distrahitur , utinam videam (Pl. Trin. 617) , since your property is being torn in pieces , O that I may see , etc.

Cum with the Indicative frequently introduces an explanatory statement, and is sometimes equivalent to quod, on the ground that:— cum tacent, clāmant (Cat. 1.21) , when they are silent, they cry out (i.e. their silence is an emphatic expression of their sentiments).

grātulor tibi cum tantum valēs apud Dolābellam (Fam. 9.14.3) , I congratulate you that you are so strong with Dolabella.

This is merely a special use of cum temporal expressing coincident time (§ 545 . a ).

Cum ... tum, signifying both ... and, usually takes the Indicative; but when cum approaches the sense of while or though, the Subjunctive is used (§ 549):— cum multa nōn probō, tum illud in prīmīs (Fin. 1.18) , while there are many things I do not approve, there is this in chief. [Indicative.]

cum difficile est, tum nē aequum quidem (Lael. 26) , not only is it difficult but even unjust.

cum rēs tōta ficta sit puerīliter, tum nē efficit quidem quod vult (Fin. 1.19) , while the whole thing is childishly got up, he does not even make his point (accomplish what he wishes). [Subjunctive; approaching cum causal.]

Antequam and Priusquam

Antequam and priusquam, before, introduce Clauses of Time which resemble those with cum temporal in their constructions. Priusquam consists of two parts (often written separately and sometimes separated by other words), the comparative adverb prius, sooner (before), which really modifies the main verb, and the relative particle quam, than, which introduces the subordinate clause. The latter is therefore a relative clause, and takes the Indicative or the Subjunctive (like other relative clauses) according to the sense intended. The Subjunctive with priusquam is related to that of purpose (§ 529) and is sometimes called the Anticipatory or Prospective Subjunctive. Antequam , like priusquam , consists of two words, the first of which is the adverb ante, before, modifying the main verb. Its constructions are the same as those of priusquam , but the latter is commoner in classic prose.

Antequam and priusquam take sometimes the Indicative sometimes the Subjunctive.

With antequam or priusquam the Perfect Indicative states a fact in past time:— antequam tuās lēgī litterās, hominem īre cupiēbam (Att. 2.7.2) , before I read your letter, I wished the man to go.

neque ante dīmīsit eum quam fidem dedit adulēscēns (Liv. 39.10) , and she did not let the young man go till he pledged his faith.

neque prius fugere dēstitērunt quam ad flūmen pervēnērunt (B. G. 1.53) , nor did they stop running until they reached the river.

The Perfect Indicative in this construction is regular when the main clause is negative and the main verb is in an historical tense. The Imperfect Indicative is rare ; the Pluperfect Indicative, very rare. The Perfect Subjunctive is rare and ante-classical, except in Indirect Discourse.

With antequam or priusquam the Imperfect Subjunctive is common when the subordinate verb implies purpose or expectancy in past time, or when the action that it denotes did not take place:— ante pūgnārī coeptum est quam satis īnstruerētur aciēs (Liv. 22.4.7) , the fight was begun before the line could be properly formed.

priusquam tū suum sibi vēnderēs, ipse possēdit (Phil. 2.96) , before you could sell him his own property, he took possession of it himself.

priusquam tēlum abicī posset aut nostrī propius accēderent, omnis Vārī aciēs terga vertit (B. C. 2.34) , before a weapon could be thrown or our men approached nearer, the whole line about Varus took flight.

The Pluperfect Subjunctive is rare, except in Indirect Discourse by sequence of tenses for the Future Perfect Indicative (§ 484 . c ): as, — antequam hominēs nefāriī dē meō adventū audīre potuissent , in Macedoniam perrēxī (Planc. 98) , before those evil men could learn of my coming , I arrived in Macedonia. After an historical present the Present Subjunctive is used instead of the Imperfect: as, —neque ab eō prius Domitiānī mīlitēs discēdunt quam in cōnspectum Caesaris dēdūcātur (B. C. 1.22) , and the soldiers of Domitius did (do) not leave him until he was (is) conducted into Cæsar's presence. So, rarely, the Perfect Subjunctive (as B. G. 3.18 ).

Antequam and priusquam , when referring to future time, take the Present or Future Perfect Indicative; rarely the Present Subjunctive: priusquam dē cēterīs rēbus respondeō, dē amīcitiā pauca dīcam (Phil. 2.3) , before I reply to the rest, I will say a little about friendship.

nōn dēfatīgābor antequam illōrum ancipitēs viās percēperō (De Or. 3.145) , I shall not weary till I have traced out their doubtful ways.

antequam veniat litterās mittet (Leg. Agr. 2.53) , before he comes, he will send a letter.

The Future Indicative is very rare. In a few cases the Subjunctive of present general condition is found with antequam and priusquam (cf. § 518 . a ): as,—in omnibus negōtiīs priusquam aggrediāre , adhibenda est praeparātiō dīligēns (Off. 1.73) , in all undertakings, before you proceed to action, careful preparation must be used.

Dum, Dōnec, and Quoad

As an adverb meaning for a time, awhile, dum is found in old Latin, chiefly as an enclitic (cf. vixdum, nōndum). Its use as a conjunction comes either through correlation (cf. cum ... tum, sī ... sīc) or through substitution for a conjunction, as in the English the moment I saw it, I understood. Quoad is a compound of the relative quō, up to which point, with ad . The origin and early history of dōnec are unknown.

Dum and quoad, until, take the Present or Imperfect Subjunctive in temporal clauses implying intention or expectancy:— exspectās fortasse dum dīcat (Tusc. 2.17) , you are waiting perhaps for him to say (until he say). [ Dum is especially common after exspectō .]

dum reliquae nāvēs convenīrent, ad hōram nōnam exspectāvit (B. G. 4.23) , he waited till the ninth hour for the rest of the ships to join him.

comitia dīlāta [sunt] dum lēx ferrētur (Att. 4.17.3) , the election was postponed until a law should be passed.

an id exspectāmus, quoad nē vestīgium quidem Asiae cīvitātum atque urbium relinquātur (Phil. 11.25) , shall we wait for this until not a trace is left of the states and cities of Asia?

Epamīnōndās exercēbātur plūrimum luctandō ad eum fīnem quoad stāns complectī posset atque contendere (Nep. Epam. 2) , Epaminondas trained himself in wrestling so far as to be able (until he should be able) to grapple standing and fight (in that way).

Dōnec is similarly used in poetry and later Latin: as, et dūxit longē dōnec curvāta coīrent inter sē capita ( Aen. 11.860 ), and drew it (the bow) until the ourved tips touched each other. Dum , until , may be used with the Present or Future Perfect Indicative to state a future fact when there is no idea of intention or expectancy; but this construction is rare in classic prose. The Future is also found in early Latin. Dōnec , until , is similarly used, in poetry and early Latin, with the Present and Future Perfect Indicative, rarely with the Future:— ego in Arcānō opperior dum ista cōgnōscō (Att. 10.3) , I am waiting in the villa at Arcæ until I find this out. [This is really dum, while.]

mihi ūsque cūrae erit quid agās, dum quid ēgeris scierō (Fam. 12.19.3) , I shall always feel anxious as to what you are doing, until I actually know (shall have known) what you have done.

dēlicta mâiōrum luēs dōnec templa refēceris (Hor. Od. 3.6.1) , you shall suffer for the sins of your ancestors until you rebuild the temples.

ter centum rēgnābitur annōs, dōnec geminam partū dabit Īlia prōlem (Aen. 1.272) , sway shall be held for thrice a hundred years, until Ilia shall give birth to twin offspring.

Dōnec and quoad, until, with the Perfect Indicative denote an actual fact in past time:— dōnec rediit silentium fuit (Liv. 23.31.9) , there was silence until he returned.

ūsque eō timuī dōnec ad rêiciendōs iūdicēs vēnimus (Verr. 2.1.17) , I was anxious until the moment when we came to challenge the jurors.

Rōmae fuērunt quoad L. Metellus in prōvinciam profectus est (id. 2.62), they remained at Rome until Lucius Metellus set out for the province.

Dum , until , with the Perfect Indicative is rare: as, —mānsit in condiciōne ūsque ad eum fīnem dum iūdicēs rêiectī sunt (Verr. 1.16) , he remained true to the agreement until the jurors were challenged.

Dum , dōnec , and quoad, as long as, take the Indicative:— dum anima est, spēs esse dīcitur (Att. 9.10.3) , as long as there is life, there is said to be hope.

dum praesidia ūlla fuērunt, in Sullae praesidiīs fuit (Rosc. Am. 126) , so long as there were any garrisons, he was in the garrisons of Sulla.

dum longius ā mūnītiōne aberant Gallī, plūs multitūdine tēlōrum prōficiēbant (B. G. 7.82) , so long as the Gauls were at a distance from the fortifications, they had the advantage because of their missiles.

dōnec grātus eram tibī, Persārum viguī rēge beātior (Hor. Od. 3.9.1) , as long as I enjoyed thy favor, I flourished happier than the king of the Persians.

quoad potuit fortissimē restitit (B. G. 4.12) , he resisted bravely as long as he could.

Dōnec in this use is confined to poetry and later writers. Quam diū , as long as , takes the Indicative only: as, sē oppidō tam diū tenuit quam diū in prōvinciā Parthī fuērunt (Fam. 12.19.2) , he kept himself within the town as long as the Parthians were in the province.

Dum, while, regularly takes the Present Indicative to denote continued action in past time.

In translating, the English Imperfect must generally be used:— dum haec geruntur, Caesarī nūntiātum est (B. G. 1.46) , while this was going on, a message was brought to Cæsar.

haec dum aguntur, intereā Cleomenēs iam ad Elōrī lītus pervēnerat (Verr. 5.91) , while this was going on, Cleomenes meanwhile had come down to the coast at Elorum.

hōc dum nārrat, forte audīvī; (Ter. Haut. 272), I happened to hear this while she was telling it.

This construction is a special use of the Historical Present (§ 469 ).

A past tense with dum (usually so long as) makes the time emphatic by contrast; but a few irregular cases of dum with a past tense occur where no contrast is intended: nec enim dum eram vōbīscum, animum meum vidēbātis (Cat. M. 79) , for while I was with you, you could not see my soul. [Here the time when he was alive is contrasted with that after his death.]

coörta est pūgna, pār dum cōnstābant ōrdinēs (Liv. 22.47) , a conflict began, well matched as long as the ranks stood firm.

But,—dum oculōs hostium certāmen āverterat (id. 32.24), while the struggle kept the eyes of the enemy turned away.

dum ūnum adscendere gradum cōnātus est, vēnit in perīculum (Mur. 55) , while he attempted to climb one step [in rank] he fell into danger.

In later writers, dum sometimes takes the Subjunctive when the classical usage would require the Indicative, and dōnec , until , is freely used in this manner (especially by Tacitus):— dum ea in Samniō gererentur, in Etruriā interim bellum ingēns concītur (Liv. 10.18) , while this was being done in Samnium, meanwhile a great war was stirred up in Etruria.

illa quidem dum tē fugeret, hydrum nōn vīdit (Georg. 4.457) , while she was fleeing from you she did not see the serpent.

dum per vīcōs dēportārētur, condormiēbat (Suet. Aug. 78) , while he was being carried through the streets he used to fall dead asleep.

Rhēnus servat nōmen et violentiam cursūs (quā Germāniam praevehitur) dōnec Ōceanō misceātur (Tac. Ann. 2.6) , the Rhine keeps its name and rapid course (where it borders Germany) until it mingles with the ocean.

temporibusque Augustī dīcendīs nōn dēfuēre decōra ingenia dōnec glīscente adūlātiōne dēterrērentur (id. 1.1), for describing the times of Augustus there was no lack of talent until it was frightened away by the increasing servility of the age.

For dum, provided that, see § 528.

CLAUSES WITH QUĪN AND QUŌMINUS

The original meaning of quīn is how not? why not? ( quī-nē ), and when used with the Indicative or (rarely) with the Subjunctive it regularly implies a general negative. Thus, quīn ego hōc rogem? why should n't I ask this? implies that there is no reason for not asking. The implied negative was then expressed in a main clause, like nūlla causa est or fierī nōn potest . Hence come the various dependent constructions introduced by quīn .

Quōminus is really a phrase ( quō minus ), and the dependent constructions which it introduces have their origin in the relative clause of purpose with quō and a comparative (see § 531. a).

A subjunctive clause with quīn is used after verbs and other expressions of hindering, resisting, refusing, doubting, delaying, and the like, when these are negatived, either expressly or by implication:— nōn hūmāna ūlla neque dīvīna obstant quīn sociōs amīcōs trahant exscindant (Sall. Ep. Mith. 17) , no human or divine laws prevent them from taking captive and exterminating their friendly allies.

ut nē Suessiōnēs quidem dēterrēre potuerint quīn cum hīs cōnsentīrent (B. G. 2.3) , that they were unable to hinder even the Suessiones from making common cause with them.

nōn posse mīlitēs continērī quīn in urbem inrumperent (B. C. 2.12) , that the soldiers could not be restrained from bursting into the city.

nōn recūsat quīn iūdicēs (Deiot. 43) , he does not object to your judging.

neque recūsāre quīn armīs contendant (B. G. 4.7) , and that they did not refuse to fight.

praeterīre nōn potuī quīn scrīberem ad tē; (Caesar ap. Cic. Att. 9.6A), I could not neglect to write to you.

Trēverī tōtīus hiemis nūllum tempus intermīsērunt quīn lēgātōs mitterent (B. G. 5.55) , the Treveri let no part of the winter pass without sending ambassadors. [Cf. B. G. 5.53; B. C. 1.78.]

nōn cūnctandum exīstimāvit quīn pūgnā dēcertāret (B. G. 3.23) , he thought he ought not to delay risking a decisive battle.

paulum āfuit quīn Vārum interficeret (B. C. 2.35) , he just missed killing Varus (it lacked little but that he should kill).

neque multum āfuit quīn castrīs expellerentur (id. 2.35), they came near being driven out of the camp.

facere nōn possum quīn cotīdiē ad tē mittam (Att. 12.27.2) , I cannot help sending to you every day.

fierī nūllō modō poterat quīn Cleomenī parcerētur (Verr. 5.104) , it was out of the question that Cleomenes should not be spared.

ut efficī nōn possit quīn eōs ōderim (Phil. 11.36) , so that nothing can prevent my hating them.

Quīn is especially common with nōn dubitō, I do not doubt, nōn est dubium, there is no doubt, and similar expressions:— nōn dubitābat quīn eī crēderēmus (Att. 6.2.3) , he did not doubt that we believed him.

illud cavē dubitēs quīn ego omnia faciam (Fam. 5.20.6) , do not doubt that I will do all.

quis īgnōrat quīn tria Graecōrum genera sint (Flacc. 64) , who is ignorant that there are three races of Greeks?

nōn erat dubium quīn Helvētiī plūrimum possent (cf. B. G. 1.3), there was no doubt that the Helvetians were most powerful.

neque Caesarem fefellit quīn ab iīs cohortibus initium victōriae orīrētur (B. C. 3.94) , and it did not escape Cæsar's notice that the beginning of the victory came from those cohorts.

Dubitō without a negative is regularly followed by an Indirect Question; so sometimes nōn dubitō and the like:— nōn nūllī dubitant an per Sardiniam veniat (Fam. 9.7) , some doubt whether he is coming through Sardinia.

dubitāte, sī potestis, ā quō sit Sex. Rōscius occīsus (Rosc. Am. 78) , doubt, if you can, by whom Sextus Roscius was murdered.

dubitābam tū hās ipsās litterās essēsne acceptūrus (Att. 15.9) , I doubt whether you will receive this very letter. [Epistolary Imperfect (§ 479).]

quālis sit futūrus, nē vōs quidem dubitātis (B. C. 2.32) , and what it (the outcome) will be, you yourselves do not doubt.

nōn dubitō quid sentiant (Fam. 15.9) , I do not doubt what they think.

dubium illī nōn erat quid futūrum esset (id. 8.8.1), it was not doubtful to him what was going to happen.

Nōn dubitō in the sense of I do not hesitate commonly takes the Infinitive, but sometimes quīn with the Subjunctive:— nec dubitāre illum appellāre sapientem (Lael. 1) , and not to hesitate to call him a sage.

dubitandum nōn exīstimā vit quīn proflcīscerētur (B. G. 2.2) , he did not think he ought to hesitate to set out.

quid dubitās ūtī temporis opportūnitāte (B. C. 2.34) , why do you hesitate to take advantage of the favorable moment? [A question implying a negative.]

Verbs of hindering and refusing often take the subjunctive with nē or quōminus (= ut eō minus ), especially when the verb is not negatived:— plūra nē dīcam tuae mē lacrimae impediunt (Planc. 104) , your tears preveni me from speaking further.

nec aetās impedit quōminus agrī colendī studia teneāmus (Cat. M. 60) , nor does age prevent us from retaining an interest in tilling the soil.

nihil impedit quōminus id facere possīmus (Fin. 1.33) , nothing hinders us from being able to do that.

obstitistī nē trānsīre cōpiae possent (Verr. 5.5) , you opposed the passage of the troops (opposed lest the troops should cross).

Some verbs of hindering may take the Infinitive:— nihil obest dīcere (Fam. 9.13.4) , there is nothing to prevent my saying it.

prohibet accēdere (Caec. 46) , prevents him from approaching.

A clause of Result or Characteristic may be introduced quīn after a general negative, where quīn is equivalent to quī ( quae , quod ) nōn :—

Clauses of Result:— nēmō est tam fortisquīn [= quī nōn] reī novitāte perturbētur (B. G. 6.39) , no one is so brave as not to be disturbed by the unexpected occurrence.

nēmō erat adeō tardus quīn putāret (B. C. 1.69) , no one was so slothful as not to think, etc.

quis est tam dēmēnsquīn sentiat (Balb. 43) , who is so senseless as not to think, etc.?

nīl tam difficilestquīn quaerendō investīgārī possiet (Ter. Haut. 675) , nothing's so hard but search will find it out (Herrick).

Clauses of Characteristic:— nēmō nostrum estquīn [= quī nōn] sciat (Rosc. Am. 55) , there is no one of us who does not know.

nēmō fuit mīlitum quīn vulnerārētur (B. C. 3.53) , there was not one of the soldiers who was not wounded.

ecquis fuit quīn lacrimāret (Verr. 5.121) , was there any one who did not shed tears?

quis est quīn intellegat (Fin. 5.64) , who is there who does not understand?

hōrum nihil estquīn [= quod nōn] intereat (N. D. 3.30) , there is none of these (elements) which does not perish.

nihil est illōrumquīn [= quod nōn] ego illī dīxerim (Pl. Bac. 1012) , there is nothing of this that I have not told him.

Quīn sometimes introduces a pure clause of result with the sense of ut nōn : as, numquam tam male est Siculīs quīn aliquid facētē et commodē dīcant (Verr. 4.95) , things are never so bad with the Sicilians but that they have something pleasant or witty to say. For quīn in independent constructions. see § 440

SUBSTANTIVE CLAUSES

A clause which is used as a noun may be called a Substantive Clause, as certain relative clauses are sometimes called adjective clauses. But in practice the term is restricted to clauses which represent a nominative or an accusative case, the clauses which stand for an ablative being sometimes called adverbial clauses.

Even with this limitation the term is not quite precise (see p. 367, footnote 1). The fact is rather that the clause and the leading verb are mutually complementary; each reinforces the other. The simplest and probably the earliest form of such sentences is to be found in the paratactic use (see § 268) of two verbs like volō abeās , dīcāmus cēnseō , adeam optimum est . From such verbs the usage spread by analogy to other verbs (see lists on pp. 363, 367, footnotes), and the complementary relation of the clause to the verb came to resemble the complementary force of the accusative, especially the accusative of cognate meaning (§ 390).

A clause used as a noun is called a Substantive Clause.

A Substantive Clause may be used as the Subject or Object of a verb, as an Appositive, or as a Predicate Nominative or Accusative. Many ideas which in English take the form of an abstract noun may be rendered by a substantive clause in Latin. Thus , he demanded an investigation may be postulābat ut quaestiō habērētur . The common English expression for with the infinitive also corresponds to a Latin substantive clause: as,— it remains for me to speak of the piratic war , reliquum est ut dē bellō dīcam pīrāticō . When a Substantive Clause is used as subject, the verb to which it is subject is called impersonal , and the sign of the construction in English is commonly the so-called expletive IT.

Substantive Clauses are classified as follows:—

Subjunctive Clauses ( ut , nē , ut nōn , etc.). a. Of purpose (command, wish, fear） (§§ 563, 564). b. Of result (happen, effect, etc.) (§ 568).

Indicative Clauses with quod : Fact, Specification, Feeling (§ 572).

Indirect Questions: Subjunctive, introduced by an Interrogative Word (§§ 573-576).

Infinitive Clauses a. With verbs of ordering, wishing, etc. (§ 563). b.Indirect Discourse (§ 579 ff.).

The Infinitive with Subject Accusative is not strictly a clause, but in Latin it has undergone so extensive a development that it may be so classed. The uses of the Infinitive Clause are of two kinds: (1) in constructions in which it replaces a subjunctive clause with ut etc.; (2) in the Indirect Discourse. The first class will be discussed in connection with the appropriate subjunctive constructions (§ 563 ); for Indirect Discourse, see § 579 ff.

Substantive Clauses of Purpose

Substantive Clauses of Purpose with ut (negative nē ) are used as the object of verbs denoting an action directed toward the future.

Such are, verbs meaning to admonish, ask, bargain, command, decree, determine, permit, persuade, resolve, urge, and wish:— Such verbs or verbal phrases are id agō, ad id veniō, caveō (nē), cēnseō,cōgō, concēdō, cōnstituō, cūrō, dēcernō, ēdīcō, flāgitō, hortor, imperō, īnstō, mandō, metuō (nē). moneō, negōtium dō, operam dō, ōrō, persuādeō, petō, postulō, praecipiō, precor, prōnūntiō. quaerō, rogō, scīscō, timeō (nē), vereor (nē), videō, volō . monet ut omnēs suspīciōnēs vītet (B. G. 1.20) , he warns him to avoid all suspicion.

hortātur eōs nē animō dēficiant (B. C. 1.19) , he urges them not to lose heart.

tē rogō atque ōrō ut eum iuvēs (Fam. 13.66) , I beg and pray you to aid him.

hīs utī conquīrerent imperāvit (B. G. 1.28) , he ordered them to search.

persuādet Casticō ut rēgnum occupāret (id. 1.3), he persuades Casticus to usurp royal power.

suīs imperāvit nē quod omnīnō tēlum rêicerent (id. 1.46), he ordered his men not to throw back any weapon at all.

With any verb of these classes the poets may use the Infinitive instead of an object clause:— hortāmur fārī (Aen. 2.74) , we urge [him] to speak.

nē quaere docērī (id. 6.614), seek not to be told.

temptat praevertere (id. 1.721), she attempts to turn, etc.

For the Subjunctive without ut with verbs of commanding, see § 565. a.

Iubeō, order, and vetō, forbid, take the Infinitive with Subject Accusative:— Labiēnum iugum montis ascendere iubet (B. G. 1.21) , he orders Labienus to ascend the ridge of the hill.

līberōs ad sē addūcī iussit (id. 2.5), he ordered the children to be brought to him.

ab opere lēgātōs discēdere vetuerat (id. 2.20), he had forbidden the lieutenants to leave the work.

vetuēre [bona] reddī (Liv. 2.5) , they forbade the return of the goods (that the goods be returned).

Some other verbs of commanding etc. occasionally take the Infinitive:— pontem imperant fierī (B. C. 1.61) , they order a bridge to be built.

rēs monet cavēre (Sall. Cat. 52.3), the occasion warns us to be on our guard.

Verbs of wishing take either the Infinitive or the Subjunctive.

With volō (nōlō, mālō) and cupiō the Infinitive is commoner, and the subject of the infinitive is rarely expressed when it would be the same as that of the main verb.

With other verbs of wishing the Subjunctive is commoner when the subject changes, the Infinitive when it remains the same.

Subject of dependent verb same as that of the verb of wishing:— augur fierīvoluī; (Fam. 15.4.13), I wished to be made augur.

cupiō vigiliam meam tibi trādere (id. 11.24), I am eager to hand over my watch to you.

iūdicem mē esse, nōn doctōrem volō; (Or. 117), I wish to be a judge, not a teacher.

mē Caesaris mīlitemdīcīvoluī; (B. C. 2.32.13), I wished to be called a soldier of Cæsar.

cupiō mē esse clēmentem (Cat. 1.4) , I desire to be merciful. [But regularly, cupiō esse clēmēns (see § 457).]

omnīs hominēs, quī sēsēstudent praestārecēterīs animālibus (Sall. Cat. 1), all men who wish to excel other living creatures.

Subject of dependent verb different from that of the verb of wishing: volō tē scīre (Fam. 9.24.1) , I wish you to know.

vim volumus exstinguī (Sest. 92) , we wish violence to be put down.

tē tuāfruī virtūte cupimus (Brut. 331) , we wish you to reap the fruits of your virtue.

cupiō ut impetret (Pl. Capt. 102) , I wish he may get it.

numquam optābōut audiātis (Cat. 2.15) , I will never desire that you shall hear.

For volō and its compounds with the Subjunctive without ut , see § 565.

Verbs of permitting take either the Subjunctive or the Infinitive. Patior takes regularly the Infinitive with Subject Accusative; so often sinō :—

permīsit ut faceret (De Or. 2.366) , permitted him to make.

concēdō tibi ut ea praetereās (Rosc. Am. 54) , I allow you to pass by these matters.

tabernācula statuī passus nōn est (B. C. 1.81) , he did not allow tents to be pitched.

vīnum importārīnōn sinunt (B. G. 4.2) , they do not allow wine to be imported.

Verbs of determining, decreeing, resolving, bargaining, take either the Subjunctive or the Infinitive:— cōnstituerant ut L. Bēstia quererētur (Sall. Cat. 43), they had determined that Lucius Bestia should complain.

proeliō supersedēre statuit (B. G. 2.8) , he determined to refuse battle.

dē bonīs rēgis quae reddī cēnsuerant (Liv. 2.5) , about the king's goods, which they had decreed should be restored.

dēcernit utī cōnsulēs dīlēctum habeant (Sall. Cat. 34), decrees that the consuls shall hold a levy.

ēdictō nē quis iniussū pūgnāret (Liv. 5.19) , having commanded that none should fight without orders.

Different verbs of these classes with the same meaning vary in their construction (see the Lexicon). For verbs of bargaining etc. with the Gerundive, see § 500 . 4. Verbs of decreeing and voting often take the Infinitive of the Second Periphrastic conjugation:—Rēgulus captīvōs reddendōs [ esse ] nōn cēnsuit (Off. 1.39) , Regulus voted that the captives should not be returned. [He said, in giving his formal opinion: captīvī nōn reddendī sunt .]

Verbs of caution and effort take the Subjunctive with ut . But cōnor, try, commonly takes the Complementary Infinitive:— cūrā ut quam prīmum intellegam (Fam. 13.10.4) , let me know as soon as possible (take care that I may understand).

dant operam ut habeant (Sall. Cat. 41), they take pains to have (give their attention that, etc.).

impellere utī Caesar nōminārētur (id. 49), to induce them to name Cæsar (that Cæsar should be named).

cōnātus est Caesar reficere pontīs (B. C. 1.50) , Cæsar tried to rebuild the bridges.

Cōnor sī also occurs (as B. G. 1.8 ); cf. mīror sī etc., § 572 . b. N. Ut nē occurs occasionally with verbs of caution and effort (cf. § 531 ):— cūrā et prōvidē ut nēquid eī dēsit (Att. 11.3.3) , take care and see that he lacks nothing.

For the Subjunctive with quīn and quōminus with verbs of hindering etc., see § 558.

Verbs of fearing take the Subjunctive, with nē affirmative and nē nōn or ut negative.

In this use nē is commonly to be translated by that, ut and nē nōn by that not:— timeō nē Verrēs fēcerit (Verr. 5.3) , I fear that Verres has done, etc.

nē animum offenderet verēbātur (B. G. 1.19) , he feared that he should hurt the feelings, etc.

nē exhērēdārētur veritus est (Rosc. Am. 58) , he feared that he should be disinherited.

ōrātor metuō nē languēscat senectūte (Cat. M. 28) , I fear the orator grows feeble from old age.

vereor ut tibi possim concēdere (De Or. 1.35) , I fear that I cannot grant you.

haud sānē perīculum est nē nōn mortem optandam putet (Tusc. 5.118) , there is no danger that he will not think death desirable.

The subjunctive in nē- clauses after a verb of fearing is optative in origin. To an independent nē- sentence, as nē accidat , may it not happen , a verb may be prefixed (cf. § 560 ), making a complex sentence. Thus, vidē nē accidat ; ōrō nē accidat ; cavet nē accidat ; when the prefixed verb is one of fearing, timeō nē accidat becomes let it not happen , but I fear that it may. The origin of the ut- clause is similar.

Volō and its compounds, the impersonals licet and oportet , and the imperatives dīc and fac often take the Subjunctive without ut :— volō amēs (Att. 2.10) , I wish you to love.

quam vellem mē invītāssēs (Fam. 10.28.1) , how I wish you had invited me!

māllem Cerberum metuerēs (Tusc. 1.12) , I had rather you feared Cerberus.

sint enim oportet (id. 1.12), for they must exist.

querāmur licet (Caec. 41) , we are allowed to complain.

fac dīligās (Att. 3.13.2) , do love! [A periphrasis for the imperative dīlige, love (cf. § 449. c).]

dīc exeat, tell him to go out.

In such cases there is no ellipsis of ut . The expressions are idiomatic remnants of an older construction in which the subjunctives were hortatory or optative and thus really independent of the verb of wishing etc. In the classical period, however, they were doubtless felt as subordinate. Compare the use of cavē and the subjunctive (without nē ) in Prohibitions (§ 450 ), which appears to follow the analogy of fac . Licet may take (1) the Subjunctive, usually without ut ; (2) the simple Infinitive; (3) the Infinitive with Subject Accusative; (4) the Dative and the Infinitive (see § 455 . 1). Thus , I may go is licet eam , licet īre , licet mē īre , or licet mihi īre .

For licet in concessive clauses, see § 527. b. Oportet may take (1) the Subjunctive without ut ; (2) the simple Infinitive; (3) the Infinitive with Subject Accusative. Thus I must go is oportet eam , oportet īre , or oportet mē īre .

Verbs of commanding and the like often take the subjunctive without ut :— huic mandat Rēmōs adeat (B. G. 3.11) , he orders him to visit the Remi.

rogat fīnem faciat (id. 1.20), he asks him to cease.

Mnēsthea vocat, classem aptent sociī; (Aen. 4.289), he calls Mnestheus [and orders that] his comrades shall make ready the fleet.

The subjunctive in this construction is the hortatory subjunctive used to express a command in Indirect Discourse (§ 588 ).

Substantive Clauses of Purpose with Passive Verbs

A Substantive Clause used as the object of a verb becomes the subject when the verb is put in the passive (Impersonal Construction):— Caesar ut cōgnōsceret postulātum est (B. C. 1.87) , Cæsar was requested to make an investigation (it was requested that Cæsar should make an investigation).

sī erat Hēracliō ab senātū mandātum ut emeret (Verr. 3.88) , if Heraclius had been instructed by the senate to buy.

sī persuāsum erat Cluviō ut mentīrētur (Rosc. Com. 51) , if Cluvius had been persuaded to lie.

putō concēdī nōbīs oportēre ut Graecō verbō ūtāmur (Fin. 3.15) , I think we must be allowed to use a Greek word.

nē quid eīs noceātur ā Caesare cavētur (B. C. 1.86) , Cæsar takes care that no harm shall be done them (care is taken by Cæsar lest, etc.).

With verbs of admonishing, the personal object becomes the subject and the object clause is retained:— admonitī sumus ut cavērēmus (Att. 8.11D. 3), we were warned to be careful.

cum monērētur ut cautior esset (Div. 1.51) , when he was advised to be more cautious.

monērī vīsus est nē id faceret (id. 56), he seemed to be warned not to do it.

Some verbs that take an infinitive instead of a subjunctive are used impersonally in the passive, and the infinitive becomes the subject of the sentence:— loquī nōn concēditur (B. G. 6.20) , it is not allowed to speak.

With iubeō , vetō, and cōgō , the subject accusative of the infinitive becomes the subject nominative of the main verb, and the infinitive is retained as complementary (Personal Construction):— adesse iubentur postrīdiē; (Verr. 2.41), they are ordered to be present on the following day.

īre in exsilium iussus est (Cat. 2.12) , he was ordered to go into exile.

Simōnidēs vetitus est nāvigāre (Div. 2.134) , Simonides was forbidden to sail.

Mandubiī exīre cōguntur (B. G. 7.78) , the Mandubii are compelled to go out.

Substantive Clauses of Result (Consecutive Clauses)