ro de Amicitia V. 17. page 115, that docti and indocti are very often used as substantives. Hand's remark in his Lehrbuch des lateinischen Stils, p. 160, in which he expressly denies that an adjective is ever used as a substantive, is quite unaccountable. For further evidence compare Cic. pro Sextio XXVII. 58: Multa acerba, multa turpia, multa turbulenta. Also phrases, as, dementis est Cic. de Officiis I. 24. 83: Sunt enim ignorantis Cic. Tusculan. I. 33. 80. A collection of all the passages in Caesar and Cicero where adjectives are employed substantively, is much needed.

§ 365. The former too great restriction of the use of the adverb in connection with esse is relinquished. Yet the rule is not now sufficiently comprehensive. It is well known that satis est occurs very frequently. Cf. Cic. ad Famill. IX. 14. 2: quam satis est; and in a great many other places: Parumne est. Cic. pro Sext. XIV. 32.

§ 366. In the example taken from Cic. pro Archia XII: qui est ex eo numero, etc. the preposition ex is to be stricken out; for it is not to be found, even as a doubtful reading, in that passage; but it is erroneously retained in all the editions of this Grammar.

§ 367. It is true that with Cicero the singular of the verb follows uterque, quisque, etc. But the author should have noticed such passages as Cic. de Finn. III. 2. 8. quod quum accidisset, ut alter alterum necopinato videramus statim. Cic. ad Fam. III. 13, uterque nostrum-devinctus est, as the singular always must be used after uterque in connection with the genitive plural, and never, as one might suppose, can the form uterque nostrum devincti sumus be used. Exceptions; the Codex Erfurtensis has in Cic. pro 1. Man. II. init. after alter-alter arbitrantur, which also according to Bennecke on this passage and according to Wunder in Varr. lectt. Cod. Erfurt, seems to deserve the preference. De Inventione I. 3. 4. reads quisque cogerentur.

§ 371. With id quod, when it relates to a whole clause, reference is made by Zumpt only to the nominative and accusative. For examples of the ablative, cf. de Invent. I. 26. 39: id quo. Liv. XXI. 10: id de quo.

§ 372. The example haec fuga est, for which Zumpt has given no authority, is found indeed in Liv. II. 38, but Drakenborch has there according to the best Codd. hoc.

§ 373. It should have been mentioned in this section, that the singular always follows pondo. Cf. Liv. XXVL 14. 8: Pondo auri septuaginta fuit. Liv. XXVII. 10. 13.

1847.]

Remarks and Corrections.

421

§ 374. Under the remark upon the singular of the verb after aut-aut, might also have been adduced, Cic. pro Planc. XXIX. 70: aut Metellum Pium aut patrem ejus facturum.

§ 377. A clear example for the neuter of an adjective referring to a masculine or feminine noun, as the name of a thing, is found in Cic. de Ami. XXVII. 100; sive amor sive amicitia. Utrumque enim dictum est ab amando.

380. On videri it ought to have been observed, that it is always used personally, even when found in an intermediate clause with ut, Cic. ad Famill. XVI. 4: teque, ut mihi visus est, diligit. See the examples quoted by the author to show this.

§ 381. There is in this paragraph an omission. We must add, that in such infinitive sentences as can be translated by the indefinite nominative, one, or the word on in French, the common adjective pronoun his is also in Latin expressed by suus. Cic. in Pisonem XX. extr.: Quid est aliud furore, non cognoscere homines; cruentare corpus suum leve est; major haec est vitae, famae, salutis suae vulneratio.

$384. To the verbs here cited should be added legare, Cic. pro Sext. XIV. 33: legatos, quos-legasti. In Vatin. XV. 35: legati -legarentur.

388. Freund in his Latin Lexicon states that profugio was not used with an accusative till after the Augustan age; but this is a mistake; for Cic. pro Sext. XXII. 50, has: Quum vim profugisset. But this is perhaps the only example to be found in Cicero's writings. It would have been better, however, if our author had not inserted, without any further explanation, this with the class of verbs that are commonly followed by the accusative.

389. Rem. 2. Add after the words, rem cum re; e. g. Cic. Brut. XXXVII. 138: cum Graecorum gloria-copiam aequatam.

389. Rem. 3. It should have been remarked here, that aemulare is used with the dative of a person in a bad sense only, as Cicero explains it, Tuscul. IV. 26; in a good sense always with the accusative. Of the former use only a single example is furnished by Cicero, Tusc. I. 19. 44: quod iis aemulemur. The remark that it is used with the dative might better have been omitted.

394. Among the examples cited for this use of the ablative no one is taken from Cicero, so that one might suppose it was unknown to this writer. But cf. Cic. Phil. IX. 7: Quoniam cum Dolabella, hoste decreto, bellum gerendum est; ad Famm. VII.

30: quo mortuo nunciato (renunciato). Further, for the vocative, Propert. II. 15. 2: lectule deliciis facte beate meis.

To the words named in remark 3. of the same paragraph should be added the verb probare. Cic. pro Milone XXIV. 65: mirabar vulnus pro ictu gladiatoris probari. In Verr. V. 29. 78: quem pro illo vellet probare. De Invent. I. 48: pro vero probatur. It stands also elsewhere in the same sense, cf. Cic. pro Sext. XXXVIII. 81: qui pro occiso relictus est.

396. The passage: Eodem castra promovit, etc. is not to be found in Caesar de Bello Gallico I. 48, but de Bello Civili I. 48.

410. When the author speaks concerning amicus, inimicus, and familiaris, which are used as adjectives as well as substantives, passages might have been quoted where both usages are combined, cf. Cic. pro Sext. VII. 15: multo acrius otii et salutis inimici.

411. Sacer should have been noticed here. It is not connected with the dative by Cicero, as it often is by other writers. The genitive is found Cic. in Verr. Act. II. 1. 18. 48: illa insula eorum deorum sacra putatur. The same is true of vicinus.

It is very surprising that the author retains the old distinction in respect to the use of similis and dissimilis founded on the idea of external and internal resemblance. If Cicero be read with a moderate degree of attention the untenableness of this will sufficiently appear. Similis and dissimilis referring to persons (men and gods) are used only with the genitive, cf. Cic. de Rep. L. 43: qui in magistratu privatorum similis esse voluit; referring to things, indiscriminately, with the genitive or dative. Examples are hardly necessary. Still, cf. Cic. de Nat. Deorr. I. 35. 97: canis nonne similis lupo? The passages which seem to contradict this are so few in number that we are compelled to question the correctness of the text. So Cic. in Verr. Act. II. 3. 53. 124: Verri similem futurum. Here the final s of Verris could easily have been absorbed by the following word similis in the manner of writing used by the ancient Romans. From the time of Livy the dative prevails; in the poets of the Augustan age the genitive perhaps never occurs, cf. Madvig ad Cic. de Finn. V. 5. 12.

§ 413. Cedo tibi locum, regnum, mulierem. Never did a Roman of the classical period speak thus. Cicero used only the accusative of an adjective in the neuter, e. g. multa, cf. Cic. de Off. II. 18. 64.

§ 414. For the different meaning of metuo with the dative and

1847.]

Usages of Cicero.

423

the accusative a proof passage is found in Terence Andr. I. 3. 5: Si illum relinquo, ejus vitae timeo; sin opitulor, hujus minas.

416. It is known that inesse is construed by Cicero always with in and the ablative never with the dative. The only passage, de Off. I. 42. 151: quibus autem artibus aut prudentia major inest aut non mediocris utilitas quaeritur, does not prove much, because it is so easy and natural for the following quaeritur to have an influence upon the construction. Incumbere is never

construed with the dative by Cicero but with in, in a figurative sense, with in and ad. To connect assuescere, consuescere and insuescere with the dative or ad is a later use; in the time of Cicero they govern the ablative. The few exceptions cannot affect the rule, e. g. Caes. de B. G. VI. 28: Uri assuescere ad homines ne parvuli quidem possunt.

417. It should be remarked that Cicero rarely used desperare with the dative or with de. He construes the verb regularly with the accusative. Here it is to be observed that the difference of meaning presented by our author does not depend upon the difference of construction. Cic. pro Sext. XL. 89: Desperabat judicii turpitudinem.

$419. As is well known, there are very many examples of the construction probatur a, which might have been noticed; e. g. Cic. pro Mil. XIII. 6: Caussa Milonis a Senatu probata est; de Finn. IV. 8. 19: ab ea non sit probatum.

$ 420. Rem. The Graecism here mentioned, aliquid mihi volenti est, is found not only in Sallust and Tacitus, but also in Livy, XXI. 51: quibusdam volentibus novas res fore.

421. Rem. The name also, with Cicero, stands in the accusative after nomen imponere, Acad. II. 47. 145: etiam nomen est rei, quod ante non fuerat, zaváhηyir imposuit.

§ 423. Taedium is neither a word of Cicero nor of Caesar.

§ 426. In this paragraph it should have been stated, that if the genitive of an attribute stands in apposition, still another substantive is to be added; e. g. Cic. maximi ingenii homo, not merely maximi ingenii. Although the genitive alone is occasionally found in Livy, it is very rare with Cicero. It is found so in Livy, e. g. XXII. 60; XXVIII. 22; XXIX. 31; XXXVII. 7; XXX. 26; XXXV. 31; XLII. 55. With Cicero it occurs Phil. III. 15. 38: quodque provinciam Galliam certeriorum, optimorum et fortissimorum virorum, amicissimorumque reipublicae civium, — retineant; pro Sext. LVI. 126: summus artifex et mehercule partium in republica tamquam in scena, optimarum.

$429. A Graecism should have been mentioned here, which is found, for instance, in Cic. pro Sext. XLIII. 93: quum sciat duo illa reipublicae paene fata, Pisonem et Galbinum, alterum haurire -innumerabile pondus auri,-alterum pacem vendidisse. Cf. Lucian. D. D. 16: οἱ δὲ σοὶ παῖδες ἡ μὲν αὐτῶν ἀῤῥενική, etc. as is very common in Greek.

§ 433. The connection of an adjective of the second and one of the third declension in the genitive used as nouns, occurs even in Cicero, cf. Cic. de Nat. Deor. I. 27. 75: nihil solidi, nihil expressi, nihil eminentis. The use in this example has its ground in concinnity.

§ 434. After tum, temporis should have been added; "but Cicero uses id temporis," e. g. pro Milone X. 28; XX. 54.

§ 435. Here could have been quoted some examples from Cicero; e. g. ad Famm. II. 18, extr. Superioris lustri reliqua; pro lege Man. III. insignia with the genitive; but also de partit. orat. XXI; in Verr. I. 38. II. 59, and Acad. II. 11. 36, insigne; pro Balbo V. Sola terrarum; Lael. IV. 14: extremum disputationis.

437. Rem. 2. The remark concerning plenus and refertus might give the impression that Cicero not only commonly, but al ways, used refertus with the ablative and plenus with the genitive. But this is not true. Cf. ad Attic. III. 14: plenus expectatione; pro Planc. XLI: Cognovi refertam esse Graeciam sceleratissimorum hominum ac nefariorum; pro lege Man. XI. 31: referto praedonum mari. But compare remark 462. To the passages on conscius with the dative might have been added pro Cluent. XX; in Verrem IV. 58.

§ 446. The verb incusare is not Ciceronian; for Cat. Maj. V. 13, is incusem without manuscript authority. Rem. 1. If the prepositions are mentioned, inter should be enumerated with the rest. Cf. Cic. pro Rost. Amer. XXXII. 90: qui inter Sicarios et `de beneficiis accusabant; Phil. II. 4. 8: quo modo sis eos inter sicarios defensurus. Quaestio is to be understood in the simplest way.

451. It should be remarked that natus when used figuratively is always to be put with the preposition. Cic. pro Sext. VII. 15: nefarius ex omnium scelerum colluvione natus; ibid. XXII. 50: Marium-ex iisdem radicibus, quibus nos, natum. The number of passages where this construction is found are extremely numerous; on the other hand the use of natus with ex, though connected with the father, is not rare. Cf. Cic. de Finn. II. 19. 61; Lael. VIII. and others.