sed conjurationes putandae sunt; i. e., such things or connexions cannot be looked upon as friendships, but are conspiracies. So, also, ista quidem vis, surely this is force; haec fuga est, non profectio; ea ipsa causa belli fuit, for id ipsum, &c. This explains the frequent forms of such explanatory sentences as qui tuus est amor erga me; quae tua est humanitas, for with the demonstrative pronoun it would likewise be ea tua humanitas est, this of such is thy kindness.

Levis est animi lucem splendoremque fugientis, justam gloriam, qui est fructu: verae virtutis honestissimus, repudiare, Cic., in Pis., 24.

Omnium artium, quae ad rectam vivendi viam pertinent, ratio et disciplina studio sapientiae, quae philosophia dicitur, continetur, Cic., Tusc., i., 1.

Idem velle et idem nolle, ea demum firma amicitia est, Sallust, Cat., 20.

It must, however, be observed that when a noun is to be explained and to be distinguished from another of the same kind, the relative pronoun follows the general rule, agreeing in gender and number with the substantive to be explained; e. g., Caes., Bell. Gall., v., 11, flumen, quod appellatur Tamesis, i. e., that particular river; Nep., Paus., 3, genus est quoddam hominum, quod Ilotae vocatur; especially when a demonstrative pronoun is added, as in Curt., iii., 20, Dareus ad eum locum, quem Amanicas pylas vocant, pervenit. But when the noun following is a foreign word, the pronoun agrees with the preceding one; as in Cic., de Off., ii., 5, cohibere motus animi turbatos, quos Graeci rúen nominant; Quintil., viii., 3, 16, quum idem frequentissime plura verba significent, quod ovvwvvuía vocatur. Compare Gronov. on Senec., Consol. ad Marc., 19, and Drakenborch on Livy, ii., 35, with the commentators there mentioned.

[§ 373.] 5. When the subject consists of several nouns in the singular, the predicate is generally in the plural, if either all or some of those nouns denote persons; but if they denote things, either the singular or plural may be used. If, however, one of the nouns is in the plural, the predicate must likewise be in the plural, unless it attach itself more especially to the nearest substantive in the singular.

Apud Regillum bello Latinorum in nostra acie Castor et Pollux ex equis pugnare visi sunt, Cic., De Nat. Deor., ii., 2.

Cum tempus necessitasque postulat, decertandum manu est, et mors servituti turpitudinique anteponenda, Cic., De Off, i., 23.

Beneficium et gratia homines inter se conjungunt.

Vita, mors, divitiae, paupertas omnes homines vehementissime permovent, Cic., De Off., ii., 10.

Note 1.-When the subject consists of two nouns denoting things in the singular, the predicate varies between the singular and plural, according as the two nouns constitute, as it were, only one idea, or two different or opposite ones. It may be remarked here that the subject Senatus popu lusque Romanus (but also Syracusanus, Cic., in Verr., ii., 21; Centuripinus, ibid., iii., 45, Saguntinus, Liv., xxviii., 39) is always followed by the pred icate in the singular. A relative pronoun, referring to two singular nouns, is always in the plural, unless it be intended to refer only to the last.

Even when the subject consists of the names of two or more persons, the predicate is not unfrequent's fangel in the singular and that not only

in cases where it may seem that the writer at first thought only of one person and afterward the other, as in Cic., Orat., 12, nam quum concisus e Thrasymachus minutis numeris videretur et Gorgias; or Tusc., i., 1, siquidem Homerus fuit et Hesiodus ante Romam conditam; comp. Brut., 11, init.; but also without this excuse, as Cic., Brut., 8, Sed ut intellectum est, quantam vim haberet accurata et facta quodammodo oratio, tum etiam magistri dicendi multi subito extiterunt. Nam Leontinus Gorgias, Thrasymachus Chalcedonius, Protagoras Abderites, Prodicus Ceus, Hippias Eleus in honore magno fuit, aliique multi temporibus iisdem; de Orat., ii., 12, Qualis apud Graecos Phercydes, Hellanicus, Acusilas fuit aliique permulti, talis noster Cato et Pictor et Piso; de Divin., i., 38, hac ratione et Chrysippus et Diogenes et Antipater utitur; de Fat., 17, in qua sententia Democritus, Heraclitus, Empedocles, Aristoteles fuit; in Verr., i., 30, condemnatur enim perpaucis sententiis Philodamus et ejus filius; ibid., iv., 42, dixit hoc apud vos Zosippus et Ismenias, homines nobilissimi; de Orat., i., 62, haec quum Antonius dixisset, sane dubitare visus est Sulpicius et Cotta; Caes., Bell. Civ., i., 2, intercedit M. Antonius, Q. Cassius, tribuni plebis. It is unnecessary to add passages from the poets, who, especially Horace, frequently use the predicate in the singular, when the subject consists of several nouns denoting persons; e. g., Horat., Carm., ii., 13, in fin., Quin et Prometheus et Pelopis parens dulci laborum decipitur sono. Comp. Bentley on Carm., i., 24, 8. The plural, however, must be considered as the rule in prose. Only the words unus et alter have invariably the predicate in the singular. When the subject consists of nouns denoting persons and things, the plural of the predicate is preferable to the singular; e. g., Cic., ad Att., iv., 15, coitio consulum et Pompeius obsunt ; Liv., xxviii., 18, nec dubitare quin Syphax regnumque ejus jam in Romanorum essent potestate, and so in xxxix., 51, Prusiam suspectum Romanis et receptus Hannibal et bellum adversus Eumenem motum faciebant, is more probable than faciebat.

[§ 374.] Note 2.-When the subject consists of nouns connected by the disjunctive conjunction aut, the predicate is found in the plural as well as in the singular, though it would be more in accordance with our feeling to use the singular;† e. g., Cic., Tusc., v., 9, Si Socrates aut Antisthenes diceret; de Off., i., 28, si Aeacus aut Minos diceret; but de Off., i., 41, nec quemquam hoc errore duci oportet, ut, si quid Socrates aut Aristippus contra morem consuetudinemque civilem fecerint locutive sint, idem sibi arbitretur licere; Liv., V., 8, ut quosque studium privatim aut gratia occupaverunt. In Cicero, de Orat., ii., 4, the reading is uncertain: ne Sulpicius aut Cotta plus quam ego apud te valere videantur. Ernesti, who approves of videatur exclusively, was not struck by the same peculiarity in the preceding passage. With aut-aut the singular is unquestionably preferred, as in Cic., Philip., xi., 11, nec enim nunc primum aut Brutus aut Cassius salutem libertatemque patriae legem sanc tissimam et morem optimum judicavit; with nec-nec we likewise prefer the singular, with Bentley on Horace, Carm., i., 13, 6, but the plural occurs in Pliny, Panegyr., 75, erant enim (acclamationes) quibus nec senatus gloriari nec princeps possent, where posset would certainly be just as good. Comp. Liv., xxvi., 5, in fin. The plural seems to be necessary only when the subject does not consist of two nouns of the third person, but contains a first or second person, as in Terence, Adelph., i., 2, 23, haec si neque ego neque tu fecimus: D. Brutus in Cic., ad Fam., xi., 20, quod in Decemviris neque ego neque Caesar habiti essemus. With seu-seu and tam-quam the predicate is in the plural: Frontin., de Aquaed., Praef. and § 128 (ut proprium jus tam res publica quam privata haberent).

* [In these and similar passages it will always, we think, appear, on close examination, that some greater degree of activity, or some particular importance, or superiority, is to be connected with the subject to which the verb immediately refers in number.]-Am. Ed.

[In these constructions the predicate refers to all the subjects equally at the sain fine, and in the same manner, and therefore the plural is em ployed. (Kuliner, G., vol. ii., p. 17, 8, ed. Jelf.)]—Am. Ed.

[$375.] Note 3.-When the subject is a singular noun joined to another (either plural or singular) by the preposition cum, the grammatical construction demands that the predicate should be in the singular, as in Cic., ad Att., vii., 14, tu ipse cum Sexto scire velim quid cogites; ad Quint. Frat., iii., 2, Domitius cum Messala certus esse videbatur; Ovid, Fast., i., 12, tu quoque cum Druso praemia fratre feres. But the plural is more frequent, the subject being conceived to consist of more than one person; Liv., xxi., 60, ipse dux cum aliquot principibus capiuntur; Sallust, Cat., 43, Lentulus cum ceteris constituerant; Jug., 101, Bocchus cum peditibus-invadunt; Nep., Phoc., 2, ejus consilio Demosthenes cum ceteris, qui bene de rep. mereri existimabantur, populiscito in exilium erant expulsi; and to judge from these and other instances quoted by Corte on the passages of Sallust, it seems that the plural is preferred, when the main subject is separated from the predicate by intermediate sentences, so that the plurality spoken of is more strongly impressed on the writer's mind than the grammatical subject. Even in reference to gender (of which we shall speak hereafter), nouns connected with each other by cum are treated as if they were connected by et. Ovid, Fast., iv., 55, Ilia cum Lauso de Numitore sati; Liv., xlv., 28, filiam cum filio accitos; Justin, xiv., 16, filium Alexandri cum matre in arcem Amphipolitanam custodiendos mittit.

[§ 376.] 6. With regard to the gender, which the predicate (an adjective, participle, or pronoun) takes when it belongs to several nouns, the following rules must be observed:

(a) When the nouns are of one gender, the predicate (adjective, participle, or pronoun) takes the same.

(b) When they are of different genders, the masculine (in case of their denoting living beings) is preferred to the feminine, and the predicate accordingly takes the masculine. When the nouns denote things, the predicate takes the neuter, and when they denote both living beings and things mixed together, it takes either the gender of the living beings or the neuter.

Jam pridem pater mihi et mater mortui sunt, Ter.

Labor voluptasque, dissimilia natură, societate quadam inter se naturali juncta sunt, Liv., v., 4.

Jane, fac aeternos pacem pacisque ministros! Ovid, Fast. Romani, si me scelus fratris, te senectus absumpserit, rcgem regnumque Macedoniae sua futura sciunt, Liv., xl., 1ọ.

Or the predicate (adjective, participle, or pronoun) agrees only with one of the nouns, and is supplied by the mind for the others; this is the case, especially, when the subject consists of nouns denoting living beings and things. Thrasybulus contemptus est primo a tyrannis atque ejus solitudo, Nep., Thras., 2.

L. Brutus exulem et regem ipsum, et liberos ejus, et gentem
Tarquiniorum esse jussit, Cic., De Re Publ., ii.
Hominis utilitati agri omnes et maria parent, Cic.

Nunc emergit amor, nunc desiderium ferre non possum, nun mihi nihil libri, nihil litterae, nihil doctrina prodest: it dies et noctes tamquam avis illa, mari prospecto, evolar cupio, Cic., ad Att., ix., 10, 2.

[377] Note.-We have not mentioned the case of a subject consisting of living beings of the feminine and neuter genders; e. g., soror tua et ejus mancipium. No instance of such a combination occurs, but we should be obliged to make the predicate; e. g., inventae or inventi sunt, according as mancipium may denote a male or female slave. The grammatical preference of the masculine gender to the feminine is clear, also, from the fact of the mascul. words filii, fratres, soceri, reges, comprising persons of both sexes; as in Livy, legati missi sunt ad Ptolemaeum Cleopatramque reges; Tac., Ann., xii., 4, fratrum incostoditum amorem, in speaking of a brother and his sister. The following examples of the predicate being in the neuter gender, when the subject consists of nouns denoting things, may be added to those already quoted. Sallust, divitiae, decus, gloria in oculis sita sunt; Livy, Formis portam murumque de coelo tacta esse; Merico urbs et ager in Sicilia jussa dari; and so, also, with the relative pronoun; Sallust, otium atque divitiae, quae prima mortales putant. The neuter is farther not unfrequently used when the two nouns of the subject (denoting things) are of the same gender; e. g., Liv., xxxvii., 32, postquam ira et avaritia imperio potentiora erant; Cic., de Nat. Deor., iii., 24, fortunam nemo ab inconstantia et temeritate sejunget, quae digna certe non sunt deo. Those passages, on the other hand, in which the subject consists of names of things of different gender, and the predicate agrees in gender with a more distant masc. or femin., must be considered as exceptions; but in such cases the noun with which the predicate agrees is usually the more prominent, the other or others being considered as dependant or subordinate; e. g., Plancus in Cic., ad Fam., X., 24, Amor tuus ac judicium de me utrum mihi plus dignitatis an voluptatis sit allaturus, non facile dixerim; i. e., thy love, and thy favourable opinion of me, which is the result of it; Cic., de Leg., i., 1, Lucus ille et haec Arpinatium quercus agnoscitur, saepe a me lectus in Mario, the oak being only a part of the grove. See the commentators (Wesenberg) on Cic., p. Sext., 53, and on Suet., Caes., 75.

[§ 378.] 7. When the personal pronouns ego, tu, nos, vos, combined with one or more other nouns, form the subject of a proposition, the predicate follows the first person in preference to the second and third, and the second in preference to the third.

Si tu et Tullia, lux nostra, valetis, ego et suavissimus Cicero valemus, Cic., ad Fam., xiv., 5.

Quid est quod tu aut illa cum Fortuna hoc nomine queri possitis, Sulpic. in Cic., ad Fam., iv., 5.

per

Note. So, also, Cic., in Verr., i., 45, hoc jure et majores nostri et nos semusi sumus; in Rull., i., 7, Errastis, Rulle, vehementer et tu et nonnulli collegae tui. But in this case, also, the predicate frequently agrees with one of the subjects, and is supplied by the mind for the others; e. g., Cicero, Vos ipsi et senatus frequens restitit; et ego et Cicero meus flagitabit. With re gard to the relative pronoun, the above rule remains in force, and we must accordingly say, tu et pater, qui in convivio eratis; ego et tu, qui eramus.

II. ON THE USE OF CASES.

CHAPTER LXX.

NOMINATIVE CASE.

ts 379.] 1. THE subject of a proposition is in the nominative (see § 362), and the noun of the predicate only when it is connected with the subject by the verb esse and similar verbs: apparere, appear; existere, fieri, evadere, come into existence, become; videri, seem, appear; manere, remain; or the passives of the actives mentioned in § 394, viz., dici, appellari, existimari, haberi, &c.; e. g., justus videbatur, he appeared just; rex appellabatur, he was called king. The personal pronouns ego, tu, ille, nos, vos, and illi are implied in the terminations of the verb, and are expressed only when they denote emphasis or opposition.

(In) rebus angustis animosus atque fortis appare, Horat., Carm., ii., 10, 21.

Appius adeo novum sibi ingenium induerat, ut plebicola repente omnisque aurae popularis captator evaderet, Liv., iii., 33.

Ego reges ejeci, vos tyrannos introducitis; ego libertatem, quae non erat, peperi, vos partam servare non vultis, says L. Brutus in the Auct., ad Herenn., iv., 53.

Note 1.-The construction of the accusative with the infinitive is the only case in which the subject is not in the nominative, but in the accusative. (See § 599.) In this case the predicate, with the above-mentioned verbs, is likewise in the accusative.

[$380.] Note 2.-Videri is used throughout as a personal verb, as (ego) videor, (tu) videris, &c., vir bonus esse; videmur, videmini viri boni esse, or hoc fecisse. The impersonal construction is sometimes found, as in Cic., Tusc., v., 5, Non mihi videtur, ad beate vivendum satis posse virtutem, (compare Davis's remark), but much more rarely than the personal one.* When connected with the dative of a person, it is equivalent to the English "to think or fancy" e. g., amens mihi fuisse videor; fortunatus sibi Damocles videbatur (esse); si hoc tibi intellexisse videris, or even in connexion with videre; e. g., videor mihi videre imminentes reipublicae tempestates, &c. It should, however, be observed that the dative of the first person is sometimes omitted; e. g., Cic., de Nat. Deor., ii., 61, satis docuisse videor ibid., i., 21, saepe de L. Crasso videor audisse; de Fin., ii., 5, cum Graece, ut videor, luculenter sciam, i. e., as it seems to me, or as I think.

[§ 381.] 2. The nominative is sometimes not expressed

* [The so-called impersonal construction of videor will be found, on closer inspection, to be merely the verb joined to a subject-nominative or clause taken as a nominative.]—Am. Ed.