장음표시 사용
371쪽
CRITICAL APPENDI IOTHE GERMANIA.
of the spuriousnes of this lauSe ad luee in PH. p. 28 30, should boadde that quoniam qui . . . expulerint, ac nunc Tun9ri, tunc Germani νυν με . . . ore δέ i a iliapossibi in Latin, a sine those who . . . e essed and a re ore callei Tunstri, ut moere then culled Germani, ut irae in Englisti. The ea ling O the Loidensis N ior ac shows that Pontanus seeogniged the intolerable soleeism. ut notuli
5. 8. aut et Asiloria frontis virtuali expresse the sam idonas suus honor Dein meret adde to the Salio iis parer ρfinition, an alternative aut ior et is quite o place have thereiore, ad no
372쪽
hesitation in malain the change in accordane With the consistentusage of TaeitIIS, On hicli spe Introd. p. lXviii. The tW conjunctionsar habituali confounded in Ur MSS.; SO . g. h. 7, 3. 5, 30. Argentum quoque Arstentumque M. Sehittg. And be-8ides, Oreover, is a frequent meaning i initiat que Ii quoque ere Correet, sequuntur quoque arstentum, etc., ould have been callei sor. Q loque anil que are also repentesti confused in Ur SS. p. e. g.
Dial. h. 22, 2 locosque o locos quoque 34, 25, hodie quoquc forhodieque Liv. L 17, 19 XL. 12, 10.
se enim. Halm, Controverse Stellen, etc., in Berichte ter I in h. Aldad. 1864, P. 30 SuggeSte ille transposition o sed It is omitted Deiore apud proceres in ali ut two S S., ne of thos bella o noauthori ty. The partiolo a doubiles writton bove the lino in thoarehelype, an heneo Somo scribes insertet it in the wron place, tho rea majorit overtookin it altogether. Se enim On the therhand is found in ali ili MSS Se also noto ad loci 1O, 25. EXPlorant e lorantur m e loratur ABR. The passivo plura Seem to me referable . Simila varianis, Win toabbreviations of the enclings, are excpse lingi common in SS. In this reatiso, .g the ollowin re adings, eli. 6, 12, distin9uuntur 27, 25 obs natur 44 7, est naut 45, 30 disseruntur, are Untenable.
error a diae to the abbreviation pr. Cp. H. p. 40. 11 9. turtia turbae ῬSS. The conjecture o GronOVius, thougii accepte by many is renuere impossibi by the contexi fili precedin clause. Ut turbae placuit is ut another vitium eae litertate. I this hypotholica chairmat could have callei the greatassembl to ord0r ior illi titi ba placuit e must suppi praesidi)When everte a What appeare to him a Suffcipiati large numbe toe OnStitute a quorum, the phras nec tit iussi conveniunt Ouid involve a contradietion. 11 11 prinCEPA principies Pori ZoniuS p. II. p. 40.
373쪽
13, 6 Ceteri certis Ne PH. P. 3l-33 ceteris NSS. 1g, 28. tueare tuentur AB. On the cliange of subjec sese note ad loe. Wo distinet Statevient are made, ne Oncerning the comites an another abolit the riticeps a potentia subjunctive illitii uidesinite secondierSon is, thereiore, ut Ofilaee.
1B, 22. To egin the cliapter illi Dotem in Halm anu othericlo, rudet clostroy the kilia transition eo note ad loe.1B, 23. I should prefer o reail aut Or t. p. eli. 13, 1, pater vel propinqui an abOVe, ch. 5, 18.19 6. EREPta saeptae mari printe editions. par ironi the rhetorical justification of this reading ns iven in note ad loci, it is confirme by numerous paSSages, in non Oi hiel the participio agrees Witti the ablative of the abStrae noun. E. g. Cie Parad. IV.
1, 27, animus . . . virtutib/t . . . saeptus rut 96, 330, saeptam
Sc eloquentiam liberali custodia Liv. III. 44 4, omnia pudore
saepta. 19, 20 maritum . . . matrimonium matrimonium . . .
maritum this transposition, Se PH. p. 34 f. and note ad loe.22 29. CCupat occupet iraminer. The error arOSe ut foccupi, for ut qui in aditus and eis0Wliere invariabintak0 tho Subjunctive. Halm stranget defend the indicativei referring tolli. 17, 9 here the veri, is omitte i.
23, 17 . Si . . . vinCentur Si . . . vincentur . That this Alior Paragraph anno have been rittent Tacitus lias been hownat longili in PH. p. 34 38. In his place thereiore, a bries enumer ti0 of the rea Sons hicli promptest the deletion may Suffice. 1 Indulseris and ebrietati, o fit into the contexi at ali must beinvested illi meaning Whieli these ord do no appear o have elSeWhere, a mely, t eucotirasse, and love of irin . 2 vitiis Theia ulis hiuli aditus imputos to the Germans are thei laziness, their in ebriely, and thei passion or ambling. ut a theSe were X-hibitest ni in times of eaee, there a Sin re on hy the GermanSshould have been usit for a vigorou defende against the RomaninvaderS, a the theniselves ha been aught Oiten enough. 3 haud minus facile. his litotes no tes eas ity is no here, illier in Tacitu O in ther riters equivalent to the Simple comparatiζe
374쪽
it is, thereiore, equivalent to aeque facile noti facilius; ut his involves an irreconellabi contradiction illi eli. 7, 7. 24. 4 It is psychologicali incredibi illa a uian o Tacitus rank, insigiit, and disposition Ahould have seriousi advisei liis Ountrymen that the est Wanto Subdue thei oli enem Wouldie to star a boer brewery, Witha vie to dispensing the Germanteverage ire os cost, and in uillimit dquantities, implyin a the fame time that the Germans ould gladiyliave acceptet it a no Dein Supplied ire ad Willi quantum concupiscunt, a UrmiSe lati contra dicte D ela. 22. Moreover, this grotesque nil absurdi impracticabie Scheme constitute the onlypolio Whiel the reat iistorian venturpi to Suggest in the sentire
vincentur, S, quit unlike the numerous ther epigrammaticiXPressi Onso this author no oni ulteri inappropriate, ecauSe demonstrahlyialse, ut it also ear a Suspiciolis resemblance to Justin Ι 8 7 prius Scythae ebrietate quam bello vincuntur, here the Sentiment is hoWever, in perio taeeping illi ille conteX and no open to any of thoobjections bove referre tori ut Tacitus a no in ille habit iborroWin epigram O O mi Sapplying thos Oi thers. Tlio nitro passage i cloarly a margina note i Somo ancient reacter Whieli Sub- Sequently was aggedin to the lose of ille hapter, and it a Writtena a time heia triti mphati massis quam victi ch. 37, 24 had ceased to e applicabie to the GermanS, i. e. about therath centur A. D. 25, 32. Ceteris Ceterum Molii. O ille reason gi ven by .ior his emendation, e ma ad that tuntur is incompatibio illi ceteris, O the servi condicionis huius, illa hicli it is contrasted, mere tot se at ali by the ornanias, ither in Germanorim Or
25, 32. isCriptis Dd scriptis ῬSS. No reliance an e place lupon the SS. in the orthographymi compotinus illi di O de, ut describere ministeria incia res, and the like Seem to have been ho
Pam thereiore strongi in line to belleve that Tacitus roto liberti. Thi Would alSO at ne necount so the statem erit ad immediatolybelow, liberti non lutum supra servos sunt, io Tacitus ad re-
375쪽
26, 16. The correct readin can o longer e determine mitti considenuo. I belleve that the corruption roSe ut i inter se in vicesemundum, the Seribe havin by an verSight Written inter se fortis es common sequi valent in vice in , ut noticin his error, he inorde nota spoi the page, rote the eooeet renuin niter it - a Very frequent praetice elSe in vice a an id variant for inter se and was accidentali insertest iter universis, here it telit no SenSe. Some Such proces Oi corruption Seem to me fa more plausibi thantho assumption that tu rices is a dit tograph o universis, O that trepreSent an origina ricis Villages).2B, 11. Helvetii, ulteriora Boii Holvetii citeriora, ueriora Boii Moller, in Zoitsch. f. de uisches Averth. Ol. XXXVIII p. 20, insertest citeriora osore Helvetii, hicli emendation a Paleographi cali improv0clipon by oelmin, ibid. Anzrister, P. 207. SO 2 f. tiattici initium . . . inCotiatur Chatti initium . . . incohan SS. illi ho Xeeption o A. SO 23. urant siqvictem durantes quidem i. e. hile the ills do in ieed, continue there, etc. hi Seem to me a Simple emendation of the SS. than any of the numerous suggestion to remody the passage hieli hau hitherio been made Zo libauer in Serta Hur- te iana, p. 24 ff. 1896) read di rantisque se sedis dum This conjecture is also simple. ut quit unacceptable beenus O the intolerable hyperbaton, unpreeedented even in T. Dor doech elseWhere jo in a participio to a nouia, a the overning Verbii a d ιm clause. 3O. 7. PATETE parare MSS. p. h. 4 4 faustu in orare 2έ, 22, artem paravit Dial. 34, 2 f., famam . . . parari 36, 12;Ann. II. 4; Dd frequently lse here in aditus There is there- fore, o ne sessit for discarding the SS. although victoriam parere
Wol hau promptest a itus to choos the les haekneyed Xpression. See h. 40. 20.31, 23. Visu nova mam, ete. A visu nova i in apposition to the preeeding, semper annot be Supplied, ut Without his, the nam clauso angs eompl0tel in the tr. his dissiculi is done WayWith ii, tali risu as a dative, as in ueret. V. 10 l. or Should thiS
376쪽
archaism thought inadmissibio, ii, writo vis ii se Romanorum), a conjecture hieli careel involve any change re ali visu nova).We thus Secure a perieeti Taeitean asyndeton bimembre. Semperma no be legitimatot supplied, nam etin, potiatin Out that his peculiar attir o ui Chatti as alway a ource of astoni Stiment tolli Romans, ecauserit a rotainest even in time Di Deaee. 33, penitus paene tum Cp. H. p. 38 f. 33, 15. urguentilaus urstentibus. This is demonstrabintho more correet Orthogra Phy. 35 2. ECectit resti MSS. Simpi Because iis parallel usseo recedere in Pomp. Mela III. 1, 8 editor liave Ollowed Heraeus in rejectin a Wholly uia objectionabie or against the unanim Ous testimon Oi lio MSS. ut noto mention that an emendation notcallest io by 0Xtua corruption ex ellent though it e, is ipso facto false, tho Same figurative us o redire is found not ni in Verg. Geory III. 35l, a noteWorth paralipli sui in te of the sextensive indebi0dnses o Tacitus to Vergilian phraseolog se Introd. p. lXX), but it actuali Occur tu ice in non other han Mela iniself. 00
35, 10. The repento collocation in Taeitus o raptus and latrocinia paves no doubi in m minit that he here, alSo a elSeWhere, Wroto et ac not aut. 35 1l ictque, at the eginning iis Sente nee i in more Ommon ilian id in Tacitus. p. sp Hist. IV. 36, idqite praecipuum. Where que is omitted a in Hist. II. 90, id praecum in Germ. 45,7, it is significanti followsed by pr With Whicli u is constanti confused It is, thereiore, hi ghi probabio that me have ore onlyanother instance iis familia haselography. 35, 13. DOACA ENETCituA , plurimum poscat, e cercitus Se est)I Dirimori m. his Simple mendationi the uel molested assagemeret involVe the assumption o an sensit negleelsed solution iis compendium. Thomelotioni exercitus, on the otheria nil, is methodi- catly quit unjustissable, as are ali ho ther etianges bitherio Proposed. Nor an exercitus e alienis the Objectit poscat, or si ut, prout ressos it is a formulate parenthesis i speciali frequent occurrone in
36, 20. Buperiori superioris NSS. A certain instanc of the dative illi nomen though excoeclingi common in the writerS, Aperhapcioiani in Tacitus Only h. 43 27 the s immediatsel tollowingrendering a dogmati decision here, as in Ann. I. 36, SomeWhat haZ-
377쪽
ardous, hil in ther paSSage 'Ne haVe either a nominative or elso indoeisive sirst decien Sion foris. In an eaSe the dative is no Onlynot indispensabie, ut ille Plura nomina Seem Somelio to leni Supporto the readin Oi ou MSS. O the genitive illi nomen, p. Hist. IV. 18 Onu. XIV. 0, 31.37, 4. Caecilio Μetello Et Papirio Cardone Caecilio Metello Papirio Carbone The MSS. var belWeen ac and et, hiel ina herepotiat to the absence of an conjunctiori in the archetype. In nye e the preSent passage ould e the Solitar and ineXplicabie eX00ption to the rule odoWed by Tacitus. p. acke, Die Om. Elye unumenbei Tacitus, Progr. Haderfleben I. 1886 p. 19 Die Konsulat mitD petitamen et gen ais Rege da Asyndeton . . . In de absoluten Construction stetit ei gelegentillelier eitangabe et nur Germ. 37. 37 14. Cassio L. Cassio litter. At ille rest sention o an individual, Tacitus, illi ut se v certain exception in the latostus, ni ny give two ames Thus Carbone immediatet prece ling, ut Papirio Carbone bove l. 6. SB. G. The reading of the SS. retro sequuntur Munintelligibie, but o plausibi emendation has itherio been suggested. I have, neVeriheleSS, ut retorquent, the generali accepte conjecture iMadvig, into the texi, ecauserit gives the sense callo for. 3B. I belleve eo, no ea repreSent the origina reading.
39, 23. pagi iis aditantur passis 3ISS. habitandi Ernesti.
378쪽
grounts. 1 It is paleographicatly ut of the question. 2 Chaptor 44 atroasty loses illi an pigram On the ther haud, it is notprobabi that tho sentire description o Suebia froni ch. 38 44, ould hau sensted ithout one. 3 Such a transposition inust consistent lyincludo the claus Hic Suebiae suis, ut his out be absurdinitor h. 44, 24, a the Suebi Aestillare subsoquently discusssed, and a thesam time h. 46 ould Open to abruptly Without an hin belliggi ven that the folio in tribes are non-Suebic. 4 Hic Suebiae nis
6 An finalty tho advocates of the transposition re compelle tochango Suionas ch. 45, 25 to Sitonas a prolestur Onitseli sussicientio vindicat ille S. tradition. g5 32. Hic uolaiae finis has hitherio been alien a the egin ning of h. 46. I seem to me hoWeVer, to e more appropriatelyplaco a the lose of the long account of the Suebi. Αε, . torpor ora ToCerum torpor procerum ISS. See PH. p. 44 ani note a loe. 46 6. EX OrilauA et eae moribus. Conubiis . . . foedanti r Sunquestionabi intende to appl to ille Uenesti no es than to the Peucini, ut the fossoWin is a clearly given a a trait no commonto both. Et , etiam must thereiore be adde l. The omission i
379쪽
an et Defore eri or ex after et is a frequent Scriba error. p. Dralib. on Liv. V, 32 4 an Tae. Diat. 12, 10.εε, 10. Et permiCitate ac pernicitate. his is demande byconsistent Tacitean usage There rei ut three polysyndetic membersjoine by et the ast hein as Suali amplissed, i si ac pernicitate formin a Single independent gro Us. Αε, 14 Cutilli cubile MSS See note ad loe and Zernini p. 108. Φε, 14. spes. The ea ling O th MSS. seem incompatibi mitti