« AnteriorContinuar »
can offer no other apology for such horrid jaw-breakers as bilbere, pubulicottabi, buttubata, and tax-tax *.
Another distinguishing characteristic of the language at this period is the use of the singular of words of which only the plural remains, as moene,the employment of diminutives which subsequently disappeared altogether, as digitulus, diecula,—and particularly the difference in the termination and declension of a great number of substantives, from those which obtained in the Augustan age. Thus we find angustitas, concorditas, differitas, impigritas, epulentitas, tristitias, of the third, and amcities, avarities, luxuries, of the fifth declension instead of the first; duritudo, ineptitudo, miseritudo, moestitudo, and such like, are of frequent occurrence; and many substantives, which now end in us, were then terminated in um of the second,-and vice versa. But the variations were most numerous in the third declension; so much so, indeed, that it would be a hopeless task to exemplify even a small proportion of their number. It appears, however, that the Augustan terminations in al and ar were originally quite regular; thus, animale, sale, exemplare, the elision of the final e being, in our opinion, the very reverse of an improvement.
The varieties, peculiar to this period, in the terminations of the cases of nouns, would seem to warrant a presumption, at least, that, originally, there were only two declensions, the second and the third. Thus we meet with ai and as in the genitive singular of nouns of the first declension, as vitai, familias,-with is in those of the fourth, as senatuis, exercituis,-and, in the fifth, even in its present state, with indications characteristic only of the third. To illustrate this by an example, Let us suppose the word familia declined according to the third, then the regular genitive would be familiais, or, dropping the short i, familias, which still remains in paterfamilias, materfamilias. Instead of the penult, however, the final letter (s) was more frequently dropped. Hence vita, declined in terms of the third, would give in the genitive vitais, which, by dropping the s, would become vitai, the form in which the genitive of all words of the first declension constantly appears in the poem of Lucretius, and sometimes even in Virgil, as auraï simplicis ignem (Æneid. vi. 747.) In the same manner domus, exercitus, senatus, if regularly declined according to the third, would give domuis, exercituis, senatuis, which are of frequent occurrence in the writers of the period under consideration; the dative would be domui, exercitui, senatui, and the ablative senatue, exercitue, or, contracted, senatu, exercitu. If the common, or indeed any example of the fifth declension be taken, and declined according to the third, it will exhibit coincidences precisely similar. The termination of the datives and ablatives plural of a certain class of nouns of the first declension in abus is entirely favourable to this hypothesis, which we give as such, without attempting any farther generalization. It is also deserving of remark, that, during a portion of this period, the masculine nouns of the second declension appear to have had only one form; thus we met with puere as the vocative, from the nominative puerus.
The genders of substantives were still very irregular and indeterminate; thus aerarium is sometimes found in the masculine, as are aetas, grando, stirps, lux, silex, calx, crux; Greek neuters in a, which the writers of the Augustan age invariably declined according to the second form of the third declension, are occasionally met with of the first, e. g. dogmam, schemam, diademam: guttur and murmur are sometimes masculine, metus feminine, and serus neuter. A great number of adjectives in frequent use during this period afterwards disappeared, as alliatus, broncus, (which Varro writes brocchus,) capularis, caudeus, compernis, crepenus, crucius, deliquus, dierectus, elleborosus, exsinceratus, gravastellus, inanilogus, labosus, macellus, malacus, medioximus, munis (whence immunis,) murricidus, ningulus, ocu
The last of these Pagan vocables has long been naturalized in the language of this country, the inhabitants of which enjoy almost daily opportunities of acquiring, experimentally, a correct idea of its import. In this respect they have decidedly the advantage of the ancient Romans.
lissimus, privus, rodus or radus, sollus, stlembus, stultividus, voluptabilis; and some, too, were employed in a sense altogether different from that which they subsequently conveyed, as assiduus signifying rich (ab assibus duendis, non ab sedeo) cupidus desirable, curiosus lean, immemorabilis, in an active signification, he who declines speaking, superstitiosus, denoting a foreteller of future events, a prophet or seer. Several peculiarities likewise existed in the declension and gender of adjectives. Alter, solus, nullus, and others of this class, had not, as in the sequel, the genitive in ius, and the dative in i; while, instead of gracilis, hilaris, infimus, utilis, mansuetus, munificentior, mediocris, potior, quotus, spurcus, subjectus, extensus, we meet with gracila, hilarus, infimas or infimatis, utibilis, mansuas, munificior, mediocriculus, plerus, quotumus, spurcificus, subex, tentus. In the pronouns, too, some striking anomalies may be remarked. For ipse the authors of this period wrote ipsus, for ille ipse ipsipsus, for quis quips, for is ips, for eum em and im, for eundem (eum demum) emem; for hi, hae, haec they wrote hic, haec, istaec, hisce for hi, quojus for cujus, vopte for vos ipsi, sum, sam, sos, sas for suum, suam, suos, suas, &c.
Of the verbs in use, at this period, a goodly number were totally rejected by the Augustan writers; such, for example, as abjugo for separo, adverrunco for averto, alludio for alludo, ambabedo for circumquaque arrodo, betere for ire, calvier for frustrare, causificari for accusare, cette for cedite, cicurare for mansuefacere, concenturiare for colligere, corvitare for circumspicere, depuccere for caedere, dispennere for dispendere, fuo for sum, gnarigo for narro, lamberare for scindere, &c. &c. Several verbs were employed in a sense totally different from that afterwards given to them, as corporare to kill, innubere to pass from one point to another, latrare for poscere, and latrocinari for militare; and not a few of those closely imitated from the Greek, subsequently fell into desuetude, as badizare, clepere, harpagare, imbulbitare (from Bónßitov), patrissare, protelare, &c. Among the elder writers of this period, many of the verbs, which the Augustan authors used as deponents, were employed as actives; thus arbitro, aucupo, auspico, cohorto, congredio, consolo, contemplo, cuncto, digno, elucto, expergisco, frustro, imito, impertio, laeto, lucto, miro, multo, omino, opino, pacisco, perconto, polliceo, proficisco, recordo, refrago, scruto, sortio, vago; and, on the other hand, we meet with the following as deponents: adjutor, bellor, certor, consecror, copulor, emungor, expalpor, manducor, murmuror, nutrior, pigneror, punior (which was sometimes used as a deponent by the writers of the succeeding period; thus Cicero, pro Milone 13, says, Tu inimicissimum multo crudelius etiam punitus es, quam erat meae humanitatis postulare,) sacrificor, spolior. In the conjugation of verbs, these early writers indulged in the utmost license, not unfrequently confounding the first and second, the first and fourth, and the second and third conjugations; for example, they wrote estur for editur, facitur for fit, osus sum (perosus is still in use) for odi, quitus sum for possum, donunt for dant, nequinont for nequeunt, solinunt for solent, scibam for sciebam, exposivit for suit, loquitatus for locutus, morsi for momordi, parsi for peperci, sapivi for sapui, soluerim for solitus sim, &c.
2. PHRASES.-Having dwelt so long upon isolated words, we shall now point out a number of phrases peculiar to this period, without stopping to analyze or explain them. The most remarkable of these are the following: "Adire manum alicui,-gallam bibere ac rugas conducere ventri, caedere sermones,-colere vitam,-quadrupedem constringere,-dapinare victum,dare bibere,-suum defrudare genium,-herbam dare,-follitim ductitare,— peratim ductare,-emungere aliquem argento,-ex aliquo crepitum polentarium exciere,-exporgere frontem,-curculiunculos minutos fabulari,— exepeculiatos fieri,-fraudem frausus est,-mulsa loqui,-datatim ludere,obsiparea quulam,-obtrudere palpum,-ornare fugam,-os occillare,—percutere animum,-sub vitam præliari,-sermonem sublegere-fulmentas suppingere soccis, thermopotro gutturem,-pugilicè et athleticè valere,-asyarebolum venire,-desymbolis esse,-aestivè viaticari," &c.
8. A single word on the subject of ORTHOGRAPHY. The ancients frequently retrenched a vowel from the middle of a word, as defrudo for defraudo,
caldus for calidus, mna for mina, periclum, vinclum, sœclum, for periculum, vinculum, sæculumn; and sometimes from the end, as volup, facul, &c. In the dative of the fourth declension, the final i was frequently dropped, as magistratu, luxu, victu, for magistratui, luxui, victui; and in such words as satis, animus, opus, prius, &c., the terminal letter was often elided, without any apparent advantage or obvious reason. Nay, whole syllables were sometimes lopped off, to the manifest injury both of etymology and perspicuity; thus, they sometimes wrote rabo for arrhabo, conia for ciconia, momem for momentum, dein* (which still remains) for deinde, &c. But if they retrenched in some instances, they added in others; thus we meet with stlis, stlocus, stlatus, for lis, locus, latus,-trabes, merix, nuculeus, for trabs, merx, nucleus, exemplare, sale, &c. &c. Where the letter b was afterwards used, we sometimes meet with du, as duonus for bonus, duellum for bellum ; and one letter or diphthong is frequently substituted for another; but as some of these changes may have been the work of the transcribers and copyists, we shall not stop to particularize them t. The orthography of this period is deserving of the more attention, as it will frequently enable the etymolygist to trace words to their simplest elements, and thus contribute to throw light on some of the nicer and less obvious analogies of the language. But something too much of mere verbal criticism.
Plagiarisms of Virgil.
Many of the finest passages in the Æneid are borrowed, in whole or in part, either from the poem of Lucretius, or the works of Ennius; though it must, at the same time, be said for the bard of Mantua, Nihil tetigit, quod non ornavit. The extent of his obligations to Lucretius are matter of notoriety, and therefore need not be exemplified; the following parallel, which might be easily extended to much greater length, notwithstanding the little that remains of the venerable father of Roman Song, will sufficiently evince how closely he imitated, and how freely he borrowed from Ennius.
Ennius Book 6.
Vertitur interea coelum cum ingentibus signis.
Concidit, et sonitum simul insuper arma dederunt.
Should the reader be desirous of more examples, he is referred to Macrob. Suturnal, vii., 1, 2, and 3.
Character of Ennius.
In the seventh book of his Annals, Ennius has sketched the character of the friend and military adviser of Servilius, and it has been generally believed that the Poet, on this occasion, drew from himself. The supposition is not improbable, and the portrait is certainly a very flattering one-as the reader will perceive.
Hocce locutus vocat, quicum bene saepe libenter
It is probable, however, that dein is only inde transposed.
+ Such as desire further information on this subject may consult Funccius De Adolescentiâ Latinae Linguae, c. 7.
Comiter impertit; magna qum lapsa dies jam
Horace informs us (Epist. I. 19. 7.)
Ennius ipse pater numquam, nisi potus, ad arma
Query, whether were the Calabrae Pierides drunk or sober when the above laudation was indited? With this in his eye, Gellius might well have spared his ill-natured remark concerning the " Campanian arrogance of Naevius.
On the derivation of the word "Italy."
One would naturally expect that a country, whose limits have been so distinctly marked out as those of Italy, would have been always described by a uniform general appellation. History, however, does not follow the course which geography would seem to indicate. For a long series of ages after the whole of it was occupied and colonized, Italy was designated by no general name; but, divided among a number of independent tribes, its different provinces bore the names of their respective inhabitants. As late as the time of Aristotle, six countries are mentioned, which probably comprehended the whole of Italy. These were, Ausonia, Opica, Tyrrhenia, Iapygia, Umbria, Liguria, and Henetia. For example, Thucydides, speaking (VI. 4.) of Cumae, says it was situated in Opica; and Aristotle, cited by Dionysius of Halicarnassus, (Antiq. Rom. I. 72.,) calls Latium a province of Opica. Hesperia, Saturnia, Oenotria, and Latium, though applied by the most ancient of the Greek, and afterwards by the Latin poets, to the whole of Italy, appear to have been originally the names of particular provinces or districts.
The derivation of the word Italy has puzzled the etymologists both of ancient and modern times. Apollodorus (Biblioth. II.), Varro (De Re Rust. II. 5.), Columella (in Proam.), Servius (ad Eneid. I. 536.), and Aulus Gellius (Noct. Att. XI. 1.), agree in thinking that the name Italy is derived from iraños, bos, (whence the Latin word vitulus,) and that it was originally bestowed by the Greek settlers, in consequence of the great numbers of cattle with which the pastures abounded. Others, again, suppose that the country took its name from Italus, the chief or leader of a Sicilian colony which first settled in the Sabine territory and in Latium; and that, in process of time, and by a variety of causes, it superseded all the others. Among the modern derivations, the most whimsical and extravagant is that of Bochart (Chanaan, I. 33.), who imagines that it must have been taken from a Punic vocable (iturgia) signifying pitch, because the district inhabited by the Bruttii, and which abounded in that article, was, in his opinion, the first to which that name was applied. Now, without pretending to give any decided opinion, we may remark, that, as there is no doubt that the term Italy was originally applied to that part of the Peninsula which forms the province of Calabria Ultra, the hypothesis of those who derive it from
the name of the Sicilian prince is thus rendered the more probable, as far as the reason of the thing is concerned, to say nothing of the facility of forming Italia from Italus. It was long before this denomination was applied to any extensive portion of the country. Even towards the fifth century of Rome, it only designated those countries to the south of the Tiber and sis (Esino), or the kingdom of Naples, with a small portion of the States of the Church. Polybius, so far as we know, was the first who gave this general appellation to the whole country south of the Alps, including, of course, Cisalpine Gaul and Venetia ; but it was not till the formation of the second triumvirate that the whole country was politically united, and called by the name of Italy; the ostensible object of which was, that Cisalpine Gaul might no longer be governed as a province by a Proconsul, who, in imitation of Julius Cæsar, might turn the arms of his legions against the Republic.
Identity of the Thracians and Illyrians.
The identity of the Thracians and Illyrians is proved by the ancient writers applying, some the former, and others the latter of these epithets, to one and the same people. Thus the Dardanians, described as Illyrians by Strabo and Appian, are denominated Masians, and, consequently, Thracians, by Dion Cassius; while the Triballi, whom the ancients generally classed among the Thracians, are named Illyrians by Aristophanes and Livy. The Scholiast of Aristophanes, in illustration of a passage in the Clouds, says expressly, that "all the Illyrians are Thracians." Adelung divides the great primitive nation of the Thracians into three principal branches, the Illyrian, the Pelasgic, and the Hellenic.
Strabo (Geor. IX. 273,) says that the Pelasgi were so called did T λávy, ab errando; and Pomponius Festus appears to interpret Aborigines (quasi Aberrigines) in a similar manner. This, however, Dionysius of Halicarnassus (Antiq. Rom. I. 8) considers a distortion of the word; and maintains that the Aborigines and the Pelasgi were distinct tribes, though both of Greek origin; the former having, according to him, sailed from Arcadia, their native country, to Italy, about five centuries before the capture of Troy, while the latter did not enter that country till about a century and a half later. It appears also from a passage in the Antiq. Rom. that Cato, in his work De Originibus, and Caius Sempronius, considered the Aborigines to have been Greeks who emigrated from Achaia many ages before the Trojan war; but that neither of these authors delivered any opinion as to the particular Greek tribe from which they sprung, or the course they followed in entering Italy. The truth is, all the ancient writers agree in one point-that the Pelasgi were Greeks, although there is great difference of opinion as to the particular race from which they sprung; some asserting that they were of Athenian, others of Lacedæmonian, and others again of Thessalian origin, to which last opinion Servius (ad Æneid. VIII. 600). inclines, nam multas in Thessalia Pelasgorum constat esse civitates. Hyginus and Varro, as quoted by Servius, represent the Pelasgi as Tyrrhenians; but this seems to be a mistake, as it appears, from all that we have been able to collect, that the Tyrrhenians were the tribe which afterwards received the name of Etruscans, and arrived in Italy at a period considerable posterior to the immigration of the Pelasgi, with whom, nevertheless, they coalesced. Livy, who represents the Aborigines as readily uniting with Aeneas and his colony of Trojans, in waging war against the circumjacent states, gives no opinion as to their descent, which was probably, even in his time, involved in obscurity. It being admitted, however, that the Aborigines and the Pelasgi were both of Greek origin, and the import of the names, by a slight charge on the former, being nearly identical, we are inclined to think, notwithstanding the authority of Dionysius, that they were one and the same people, and that they were the first who im