LIBRARY OF THE University of California. GIF-T OF- ^;..3■Wy<^^ Y^.. .iP«l/S.s-^vfe '^^AAA.^r' Class 7<^04 ■J>\^'6 THE CONSTRUCTION WITH lUBEO A Portion of a Dissertation treating of the Construction with Verbs of Commanding PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF UNIVERSITY STUDIES OF THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY, 1898, BY WILLIAM BERNEY SAFFOLD. BALTIMORE: JOHN MURPHY COMPANY, 1902. Digitized by» the int^Viet Archive in 2007 with(\fiinding from l\/licroso|t Corporation http://www.archive.org/details/constructionwithOOsaffrich CONTENTS. PAGE. Introduction 5 Accusative and Infinitive 7 Simple Infinitive 9 Subjunctive with Ut or Ne 22 Simple Subjunctive 33 Tables 41 117632 THE CONSTRUCTION WITH lUBEO, INTRODUCTION. The object of this investigation has been to ascertain the facts with regard to the mood of the clause depending upon iuheo^ i. e., whether this is an infinitive with subject accusative, an infinitive with omitted subject (simple infinitive), a subjunctive with ut or ne, or a simple subjunctive, and the reasons, where there are any, for the use of the same. With this end in view, the works of a number of authors,^ representing different periods and different departments of literature have been examined and their usage given. In the case of the simple infinitive, the subjunctive with ut or ne, and the simple subjunctive, the results obtained by this exami- nation have been stated both generally and specifically, that is, general observations, conclusions, and statistics are given, and then each author's use of the construction in question, together with quotations of the more important examples, critical and explana- tory notes, etc. These details were not thought necessary in the case of the accusative and infinitive. Tables giving a compre- hensive view of the range of each construction will be found on p. 41 ff. Etymology of iubeo. An etymology of iubeo which has found much favor is that which derives it from ius-habeo. So Breal and Bailly, Diet. Etymol. Lat. s. v. On trouve iovbeatis dans le S^natus-consulte des Bacchanals. Nous en pouvons conclure que la premiere syllable €tait longue h Forigine. "^Joubeo est pour *joy>sbeo, qui lui-m^me * The order in which these authors have been arranged in the following pages is in the main chronological. 5 6 The Construction with lubeo, vient de jous-habeo. La premiere syllable du second term a et§ supprim^e, comme dans pergo pour per-rigo. Pour la difference de conjugaison entre habeo et son compost jubeo, cf. lego et intellego. See also Wolfflin, Archiv f. Lat. Lexikog. 6, 434, where, speak- ing of the disputed reading at Bell. Hisp. 27. 4, he says : " Wenn Terenz in der Hec. 243 sagen konnte Etsi scio ego, PhiMmena, meum ius esse ut te cogam Quae ego Imperem facere, 6go tamen patrio animo victus fdciam So konnte man natiirlich auch sagen iubeo (= ius habeo) ut facial quae imperem. " So oft in der Formel velitis iubeatis ut, Cic. de domo 44, 47, Pis. 72, Verr, 2. 161 Senatus decrevit populusque iussit ut statuaa Yerris quaestores demoliendas locarent.'* However well this may apply to the particular cases mentioned, it does not meet all demands, for an examination of a large number of examples has failed to show that iubeo has different meanings according as it is followed by the infinitive or subjunctive. Be- sides, jy^ habeo would more probably have yielded "^juribeo. A more probable etymology is that which derives this word from yUrdh-eyo, from the root yeu- with the formative suffix -dh-. See Lindsay, Lat. Lang., 481. Authors whose Works have been Examined. Plautus (Goetz and SchoelP), Terence (Dziatzko), Enniu» (Baehrens), Lucretius (Munro), Catullus (L. Miiller), Caesar Corpus (Hoffmann), Cicero (Miiller), Auc. ad Herenn. (Miiller), Sallust (Jordan), Nepos (Dietsch), Yergil (Ribbeck), Tibullus (Hiller), Propertius (Baehrens), Horace (Keller and Holder),. Livy (Weissenborn), Vitruvius (Rose and Miiller-Striibing), Ovid (Merkel-Ehwald), Phaedrus (L. Miiller), Persius (Jahn-Buecheler),^ Curtius (Yogel), Petronius (Buecheler), Lucan (Hosius), Pliny the Elder (Jan), Martial (Gilbert), Tacitus (Halm), Juvenal (Jahn- Buecheler), Florus (Halm), Suetonius (Roth), Gellius (Hertz), ^ The names in the parentheses indicate that these texts were used as a rule itt the inyestigation. The Construction with lubeo, 7 Ampelius (Wolfflin), Tertullian (Corp. Script. Eccles. Lat. xx. i^), Arnobius (Corp. Script. Eccles. Lat.), Scriptores Historiae Au- gustae (Peter), F. Maternus (Corp. Script. Eccles. Lat.), Lactantius (Corp. Script. Eccles. Lat. xix^), Juvencus (Corp. Script. Eccles. Lat.), Eutropius (Dietsch), Dictys (Meister), Ammianus Mar- cellinus (Gardthausen), S. Severus (Halm), Aurelius Victor, Pseudo-Aurelian (De Origine, Sepp — De Viris Illastribus, Keil), Augustine (Corp. Script. Eccles, Lat. xxv 1 and 2*), Porphyrio (Meyer), Macrobius (Eyssenhardt), Orosius (Corp. Script. Eccles. Lat. v), Sedulius (Corp. Script. Eccles. Lat. x), Dares (Meister), Vulgate (Loch). THE ACCUSATIVE AND INFINITIVE. The prevailing construction with iuheo is, as is well known, the accusative and infinitive when iubeo is active and the passive and infinitive (or nominative and infinitive) when it is passive. In proof of this, if proof is needed, it will be sufficient to state that the number of instances of this construction in the authors whose works have been examined is three thousand eight hundred and forty-one, while the combined total of all the other possible con- structions (simple infinitive, subjunctive with ut or we, simple subjunctive) is but four hundred and eight. The construction that comes next is the simple infinitive with two hundred and ninety-four, then the subjunctive with ut or ne with seventy-seven, and last the simple subjunctive with thirty-seven. This predominance is limited neither in period nor department of literature, for it is found in prose and verse, in anteclassical, classical, and post-classical writers, in history and theology, in biography, and oratory. In fact, not one of these authors uses any other construction so often. For the statistics showing the use of this construction, see the ^ This contains De spectaculis, De idolatria, De oratione, De ieiunio adversus psychichos, De baptismo, De pudicitia, De anima, Ad nationes, Scorpiace. ^ This contains Institutiones Divinae and the Epitome. ' This contains De util. credendi, De duabus animabus, De nat. boni, Contra Fortunatum, Contra Faustum, Contra Felicem, Contra Adimantum, Contra Epist. Fund., Contra Secund. 8 The Construction with Ivheo. table on page 41, and for the authors and passages, where some other construction is employed instead, see the appropriate sections in the following pages. Dative and Infinitive. At Catullus 66, 140 Ellis finds an instance of the dative and infinitive with iuheo. He punctuates thus : At non haec quondam nobis promissa dedisti Voce : mihi non haec miserae sperare iubeo. And adds, mihi, dative with iuheo as in Cicero, Caesar, and other good authors. Riese, however, correctly makes the dative depend upon dedisti, placing a comma after mihi, and in doing this he is in accord with Baehrens, Schmalz and others. See Riese's note to the passage. At Tacitus Ann. 4, 72 Nipperdey cites Curtius 5, 6, 8 and 10, 8, 4 as instances of the dative with iuheo. In both places the accusative is now read. See the text of Vogel. Instances of this construction, however, are to be found at Juvencus 2, 11 ; 3, 93 Discipulis tunc inde iubet conscendere navem : Am. Marcel. 26, 8, 12; 26, 8, 5; 27, 11, 4; Dares Phrygius 37 iubet eis dicere; Vulgate II Mach. 5, 12; I Mach. 1, 54; Act. 24, 23 iussitque Centurioni custodire eum. Passive and Infinitive. The infinitive is as much the rule when iuheo is passive as when it is active. It is somewhat surprising, however, that some authors make little or no use of it. Compare for instance ACC, AND INPIN. PASS. AND INPIN. Plautus 179 instances. No instances. Terence 30 " 1 " Caesar 168 '' 4 '* Nepos 20 " 2 " Petronius 50 " 2 " The Construction with lubeo, AGO. AND INFIN. Lactantius 24 instances. Juvencus 35 " with PASS. AND INFIN, 1 instance. 1 ti 301 41 10 8 12 42 Livy 713 Am. Marcel 82 " Juvenal 21 " Horace 20 " Lucan 37 " Cicero 304 " SIMPLE INFINITIVE. To determine what is a simple infinitive is a matter of very- great difficulty, for in every instance where the accusative has been omitted it is possible with more or less difficulty to supply it. It is therefore largely a matter of individual opinion as to whether in any given instance the omission of the subject is sufficiently striking to entitle the construction to be regarded as an instance of the simple infinitive. To prove this, one has but to compare the statistics that are given by any two scholars as to the number of times this construc- tion is found in an author. An examination of the lexicons to Csesar by Meusel and Merguet will show this quite clearly. More than this, the same scholar often does not seem to be altogether consistent in his own classification. Take for examina- tion Meusel again. It will be seen, if an examination is made, that there is no hard and fast line of demarcation between what he considers an accusative and infinitive and a simple infinitive. This is true to even a greater extent of Eger in his " De Infin. Curt." Compare for example 3, 13, 8, qui intentiora cura suos quasi ad iustum proelium panels adhortatus equis calcaria iubet subdere et acri impetu in hoetem evehi, which he calls a simple infinitive with 9, 6, 16, itaque singulos familiarius am plexus con- «idere iubet, which he does not so classify. Again, in such expressions as signa canere inhere, it is often a matter for each investigator to decide whether signa is to be taken 10 The Construction with luheo, as subject or object. See, for example Sallust C. 59, 1 haec ubi dixit, paululum conmoratus signa canere iubet and Kritz ad loc, who says that signa here is the subject. Compare with this, how- ever, another passage from the same author, where signa is unde- niably the object, i. e., J. 99, 1, item cohortium turmarum legionum tubicines simul omnis signa canere . . . iubet. The difficulty is even greater in the case of Livy, who uses, apparently at will, cornicines (or tubicines) canere e. g. 2, 64, 10; 37, 29 etc. ; signa canere 10, 20, 9 ; 10, 19, 12 etc. ; receptui canere 29, 7, 6 ; 30, 34, 11 etc. ; cani receptui 26, 6, 7 ; 32, 42, 1. In such cases little more can be done than to endeavor to find what is the prevailing practice of the author under consideration^ and to classify accordingly. Further, the text is often in doubt with reference to pronuntiare and similar words. If the passive is read, all claims for the simple infinitive vanish at once. See Caes. B. G. 5, 33, 3 y 5, 34, 1 ; B. C. 2, 25, 6 (pronuntiare or pronuntiari ?) : B. G. 5, 50, 5 ; 2, 5, 6 ; B. C. 3, 65, 4 (munire or muniri) : B. C. 3, 13, 3 (metare or metari ?) etc. In instances like these the best text, where there is one, has been followed. Since it is then so largely a matter of individual judgment a& to what is a simple infinitive, it becomes necessary to state what system has been employed in this investigation. This statement will of necessity be quite general in character, since there are but few instances in which the subject is omitted under exactly the same circumstances. The omission of the subject in the following cases has been regarded as entitling the constructions to be called an example of the simple infinitive. I. When the identity of the subject is revealed by the nature of the command e. g. praecones by iubet pronuntiare Caes. B. G. 5, 33, 3 ; B. C. 2, 25, 6 : tubicines by signa canere iubet Sail. C. 59, 1 ; Livy 10, 19, 12. II. When the subject is indefinite. See the Elder Pliny 18, 303 ; 28, 11 ; 30, 137, and the philosophical writings of Cicero, e. g. L. 1, 19 itaque arbitrantur prudentiam esse legem, cuius ea vis sit, ut recte facere iubeat, vetet delinquere. The Construction mith lubeo, 11 III. When the subject, though expressed in a preceding sentence^ does not appear in the one under consideration. Tac. H. 3, 80, 4, eo successu studia populi aucta ; vulgus urbanum arma cepit. Paucis scuta militaria, plures raptis quod cuique obvium telis sig- nura pugnae exposcunt. Agit grates Vitellius et ad tuendam urbem prorumpere iubet. IV. When the subject must be inferred from the connection e. g. Ovid. M. 14, 113-116, Dixit, et auro Fulgentem ramum silva lunonis Avernae Monstravit, iussitque suo divellere trunco. Paruit Aeneas, H. 4, 10 — Ter tecum conata loqui ter inutilis haesit Lingua, ter in primo destitit ore sonus. Qua licet et sequitur, pudor est miscendus amori. Dicere quae puduit, scribere iussit amor. V. Where the subject, usually a personal pronoun, is omitted in dialogue. See the instances cited under Plautus and Terence. As examples may be cited Plautus Most. 377 Tuos venlt pater ? lube abire rdrsum. Mil. 1268 Erdm meam eduxl foras. PY. Vide6. MI lube ergo adlre. YI. Numerous instances which cannot be classified. Having stated thus in a general way what has been considered a simple infinitive, it remains to be added what has not been so considered. I. Those cases where two or more infinitives, joined by a par- ticle, have a common subject, which is expressed with one verb and not with the other or others. II. Those cases in which the subject of the infinitive, having^ been expressed in a preceding clause, is not repeated e. g. Livy 1, 27, 8 equitem clara increpans voce, ut hostes exaudirent, redire in proelium iubet. Caes. B. C. 1, 8, 1 reliquas legiones ex hibernis evocat et subsequi iubet. III. Those cases in which there is an adjective or participle in agreement with the unexpressed subject, e. g. Florus 1, 10, 8 et rex 12 The Construction with lubeo, quidem tot tantisque virtutum territus monstris valere liberosque esse iussit. According to this system of classification there are in the authors examined two-hundred and ninety-four examples of the simple infinitive. The infinitive in the majority of the cases is active, the proportion being a : p : 219 : 75. This proves that there is not, as has been sometimes asserted, greater freedom in omitting the subject when the verb is passive. With reference to the matter of distribution, it is observed that it is of more frequent occurrence in the earlier authors. A glance at the table on p. 43 will show that the construction nearly dies away as the late periods of Roman literature are reached. It is used with great freedom in colloquial speech. Note the fifty-one instances in Plautus and Terence. It occurs frequently in Ovid, who furnishes some of the best examples which have been found. The Scriptores Historiae Augustae seem to make a special effort to avoid it, expressing the accusative even when it is not necessary. See p. 20. Compare also Vergil, 20 instances, "j Ovid, 23 " Vwith Juvenal, 1 instance. Horace, 9 " J ^ n • X -i f Tacitus, 1 instance. Cffisar, 9mstances,-| j^ ) ^ ,, Curtius 22 " / ) ' ' ^ Am.Marcellinus, no " ^. An ' 2. 'J.U ( Lactantius, no instances. Cicero, 49 instances, with < ^ , . I St. Augustine, no " Studies in Detail of the Authors Using the Simple Infinitive. Plautus — 38 instances (a.^ or d. 25 — p. 13) Most. 377, 420, 426, 618; Persa 269, 303, 314, 790; Mil. 70, 182, 981, 1034, 1268, 1278 ; Men. 225, 776, 797 ; Rud. 332, 659, 1094; St. 248; Trin. 779; Cure. 425, 626; Epid. 69; Aul. 244, ^ a. or d. indicates that the infinitive is active or deponent, p. indicates that the infinitive is passive. The Construction with lubeo, 13 353 ; As. 526, 594, 736 ; True. 444, 556, 582, 583, 585 ; Cas. 280 ; Merc. 777 ; Amph. frag. xii. In most cases the omitted accusative is a personal pronoun. Aul. 353 STA. Quid vis ? STR. H6s ut accipids coquos Tiblcinamque obs6niumque in ntiptias. Megadorus iussit Eticlioni haec mlttere. Rud. 1093 TR,. Sine me ut occepi loqui. SI scelesti illlus est hie qu6ius dico vldulus, Ha6c poterunt novisse : ostendere his iube. Mil. 1268 Eram meam eduxl foras. PY. Vide6. MI. lube ergo adire. Terence — 13 instances (a. or d. 5 — p. 8) And. 546, 687, 741, 955; Phorm. 409, 414; Ad. 416, 429; Haut. 775, 1001 ; Eun. 262, 836 ; Hec. 185. As in Plautus, the omitted subject is nearly always a personal pronoun. And. 687 PA. Mysls. MY. Quis est ? ehem Pdmphile, mihi te 6ptume oflPers. PA. Quid id est? MY. Orare iussit, si se ames, era, idm ut ad sese venias. And. 741 CH. Rev6rtor, postquam quae 6pus fuere ad ntiptias Gnatae paravi, ut itibeam accersi. Eun. 836 TH. tJbi is est? PY. Em ad sinlsteram. Viden ? TH. Video. PY. Conprendl iube, quanttim potest, Caesar — 9 instances (a. or d. 6 — p. 2 — a. and p.^ 1) B. G. 4, 37, 1 ; 5, 7, 7; 7, 60, 1 ; B. C. 1, 61, 4; 2, 20, 7 ; 2, 34, 5 ; 3, 45, 4 ; 3, 69, 4 ; 3, 98, 2. B. G. 5, 7, 7 Caesar .... magnam partem equitatus ad eum insequendum mittit retrahique imperat; si vim faciat neque pareat, interfici iubet. ^ a. and p. indicates that there are two infinitives, one active, the other passive. 14 The Construction with lubeo, B. C. 2, 34, 5 Ille unum elocutus, ut memoria tenerent milites €a, quae pridie sibi confirmassent, sequi sese iubet et praecurrit ante omnes. There are seven other passages which may be regarded as con- taining a simple infinitive, if the active voice is read. In these the subject would be contained in the verb, pronuntiare, munire, etc., being the person or persons whose particular function it is to perform the act expressed by the verb. These are B. G. 5, 33, 3 ; 5, 34, 1 ; B. C. 2, 25, 6 pronuntiare : B. G. 5, 50, 5 ; 2, 5, 6 ; B. 0. 3, 65, 4 munire : B. C. 3, 13, 3 metare. Merguet gives seven other instances of the simple infinitive in Caesar, B. G. 5, 1, 6 ; 7, 40, 3 ; 7, 64, 5 ; B. C. 1, 8, 1 ; 1, 14, 4 ; 1, 37, 1 ; 1, 77, 1. Of these, B. C. 1, 77, 1, an instance of the incorporation of the antecedent in the relative clause, Caesar, qui milites venerant, remitti iubet, has the best claim to be so regarded. Cf. B. G. 5, 1, 6 Eo cum venisset, civitatibus milites imperat cer- tumque in locum con venire iubet, and B. C. 1, 8, 1 reliquas legiones ex hibernis evocat et subsequi iubet. Bellum Gallicum — No instance. Bellum Alexandrinum — 1 instance (a). 68, 4 legionem autem eam, quam ex genere civium suorum Deiotarus armatura disciplinaque nostra constitutam habebat, €quitatumque omnem ad bellum gerendum adducere iussit. Bellum Africanum — 1 instance (a) 34,6. Bellum Hispaniense — 1 instance (a) 3, 6 ita cum ad eum venerunt, iubet binos equos conscendere, et recta per adversariorum praesidia ad oppidum contendunt. Cicero — 49 instances (a. or d. 41 — p. 8) Orations 20 (a. or d. 14— p. 6) Phil. Writings 18 ( " 18—" 0) Ehet. " 7 ( " 6—" 1) Letters 4 ( " 3—" 1) Orations— Quint. 31; Yerr. act. 2, 1. 1, 125; 138; 1. 2, 26; 1. 3, 183; 1.4,66; 1.5,14; 104; Caecin. 54; 88; 102; Cluent. 134; Lex Agr. 2, 28 ; 59 ; Cat. 4, 7 ; Dom. 83 ; 83 ; Ligar. 12 ; Phil. 3,20; 13,6. The Construction with lubeo, 15 Cluent. 134 dixit se scire ilium verbis conceptis peierasse; si quid contra vellet dicere, usurum esse eum suo testimonio : delude cum nemo contra diceret, iussit equum traducere. Yerr. act. 2, 1. 5, 104 poterone eos adficere supplicio, qui Cleomonem secuti sunt, ignoscere Cleomeni, qui secum fugere et se consequi iussit. Philosophical Writings— L. 1, 19 ; 2, 24 ; 3, 11 ; 3, 29 ; 3, 42; D. 1, 20; 1,32; 1,62; 2, 77; 2,80; R. 3,24; F. 2, 1; 3,73; C. 41 ; T. 1, 17 ; 3, 35 ; O. 1, 48 ; 1, 41. The omitted subject is usually indefinite. R. 3, 24 sapientia iubet augere opes, amplificare divitias, pro- ferre finis. D. 1, 32 Tarquinius autem dixit se cogitasse cotem novacula posse praecidi ; turn Attum iussisse experiri. Rhetorical Writings— Brutus 15; De Orat. 1, 102; 1, 181; 2, 80; 2,132; 2,326; Orat. 157. De Orat. 2, 80 alii iubent, antequam peroretur, ornandi aut augendi causa digredi, deinde concludere ac perorare. Letters— Att. 2, 20, 1 ; 10, 12 b, 1 ; 11, 9, 2 ; 13, 17, 1. Att. 10, 12 b, 1 iubes enim de profectione mea providere. Sallust — 3 instances (a. or d. 3) J. 99, 1; 109,3; C. 59, 1. J. 99, 1 is an instance of the accusative and infinitive passive and the simple infinitive active depending upon the same verb, silentium haberi iubet, ne signa quidem .... canere. Kritz, Reisig, and others regard canere at C. 59, 1 as intransitive, having signa as its subject, haec ubi dixit, paululum conmoratus signa canere iubet. Schmalz is of the same opinion with regard to J. 99, 1, but in the same section tubicines signa canere iubet occurs. Nepos — 3 instances (d. 1 — p. 2) 9,4,1; 14,3,4; 18, 11,3. 9, 4, 1 quibus cognitis rex tantum auctoritate eius motus est, ut Tissaphernem hostem indicarit et Lacedaemonios bello persequi iusserit. Vergil — 20 instances (a. 20) E.4, 33; 6,86; A. 1, 648 ; 2,3; 2,37; 2,186; 3,9; 3,88; 16 The Construction with lubeo, 3, 146 ; 3, 261 ; 3, 267 ; 3, 289 ; 3, 472 ; 4, 346 ; 5, 15 ; 5, 385 ; 5,773; 8,498; 8,646; 12,584. It is noteworthy that in every instance the infinitive is active. E. 6, 86 and A. 5, 773 are instances of a simple infin. act. and an accusative and infin. pass, depending upon the same verb. A. 5, 773 tris Eryci vitulos et Tempestatibus agnam caedere deinde iubet solvique ex ordine funem» A. 3, 9 vix prima inceperat aesta& et pater Anchises dare fatis vela iubebat. A. 3, 289 linquere turn portus iubeo et considere transtris. Tibullus — 2 instances (a. 2) 2, 3,39 f.; 2, 4,53 f. 2,4, 53 f quin etiam sedes iubeat si vendere avitas, ite sub imperium sub titulumque, lares. Propertius — 2 instances (a. 1 — p. 1) 2,29, 11; 4,7, 91. 4, 7, 91 ^ Luce iubent leges Lethaea ad stagna reverti. Horace — 9 instances (a. or d. 9) C. 2, 3, 14; 2, 15, 19; 3, 21, 7; 3, 24, 42; Ep. 1, 7, 14; S. 1, 6, 61 ; 1, 6, 93 ; 2, 7, 32. 5. 1, 6, 61 Respondes, ut tuus est mos, pauca ; abeo, et revocas nono post mense iubesque esse in amicorum numero. Livy — 39 instances (a. or d. 35 — p. 4) 1,41,5; 2,12,14; 2,28,8; 2,56,10; 3,17,6; 3,22,6 4, 17, 3 ; 6, 16, 1 ; 8, 32, 16 ; 9, 15, 5 ; 10, 9, 1 ; 10, 19, 12 10, 20, 9 ; 10, 40, 14 ; 23, 5, 4 ; 23, 16, 12 ; 23, 45, 1 ; 24, 21, 8 24, 31, 3 ; 26, 45, 9 ; 26, 50, 12 ; 27, 14, 2 ; 29, 5, 3 ; 29, 7, 6 29, 27, 9 ; 30, 9, 6 ; 30, 34, 11 ; 32, 11, 7 ; 34, 37, 4 ; 34, 38, 5 34, 39, 13 ; 39, 14, 6 ; 35, 34, 8 ; 40, 12, 2 ; 41, 3, 6 ; 42, 25, 9 42,39, 6; 42, 59, 11; 42,66. 3, 17, 6 Romule pater, tu mentem tuam, qua quondam arcem ? The Construction with lubeo. 17 ab his isdem Sabinis auro captam recepisti, da stirpe tiiae, iube banc ingredi viam, quam tu dux, quam tuus ingressus exercitus est. 3, 22, 6 ipse erat medius cum legionibus Romanis, inde siguum observare iussit. From this number a deduction must be made if in the following nine passages canere is regarded as being intransitive; 10, 19, 12; 10, 20, 9 ; 10, 40, 14 ; 23, 16, 12 ; 27, 14, 2 ; where signa canere occurs, 29, 7, 6 ; 30, 34, 11 ; 34, 39, 13 ; 42, 59, 11 where receptui t[e] in subselliis, Et qui esurientes 6t qui saturi ven^rint. Pseud. 1150 H6c tibi erus me itissit ferre P61ymachaerop]dgides, Qu6d deberet, dtque ut mecum mltteres Phoenlcium. Amphit. 205 Con tin uo Amphitruo d6legit vir6s primorum prlncipes. Eos legat ; Telebols iubet sententiam ut dicdnt suam. In the Poenulus and Pseudolus passages the dependence of the subjunctive upon iubeo is indirect, as there is a change of con- struction, from the accusative and infinitive to the subjunctive, the infinitive in each instance coming first. There is also change in the subject of the dependent verbs. In the Poenulus passage Iubet is a variant for iubet. Cicero — 5 instances. Verr. act. 2, 2, 161 ; act. 2, 4, 28 ; Dom. 44 ; 47 ; Pis. 72. Verr. 2, 2, 161 Centuripinorum senatus decrevit populusque iussit, ut, quae statuae C. Verris ipsius et patris eius et filii essent, eas quaestores demoliendas locarent. Verr. 2, 4, 28 hie tibi in mentem non venit iubere, ut haee quoque referret. The Co7istruction with lubeo. 25 Dom. 44 quaero enim quid sit aliud proscribere : velitis iiibeatis ut M. Tullius in civitate ne sit bonaque eius ut mea sint. Dom. 47 At quid tulit legum scriptor peritus et callidus? velitis iubeatis ut M. Tullio aqua et igni interdicatur ? Pis. 72 At hoc nusquam opinor scriptum fuisse in illo elogio, quod te consule in sepulcro rei publicae incisum est : velitis iubeatis, ut, quod M. Cicero versum fecerit, sed quod vindicarit. At Verr. 2, 2, 16 L ; Dom. 44; 47; Pis. 72, the command is an expression of the will of a sovereign people, while in the fifth passage, Verr. 2, 4, 28, it is that of a governor, the representative of a sovereign people. In three of the passages, Dora. 44 ; 47 ; Pis. 72, the formula, velitis iubeatis ut, occurs. Cicero's use of this construction is confined to the orations, though an instance is found by some at Att. 13, 32, 3 by reading iussi instead of misi. Caesar. Corpus — No instance. Merguet, Hoffmann and others cite B. G. viii, 52, 5 as an instance of the subjunctive with we, reading, quod ne fieret, consules amicique Pompei iusserunt. For iusserunt Holder conjectures intercesserunt, and Madvig evicerunt, and the latter is found in Meusel, Kraner, Kubler, Dob. Dint., and has been followed here. Bell. Hisp. 27, 4 is often cited as an instance, the conventional reading being, ita castris motis Ucubim Pompeius praesidium, quod reliquit, iussit ut incenderent et deusto oppido in castra maiora se reciperent. Wolfflin, Arch. 6, 434, attacks the subjunctive, and would insert in its stead the infinitive, which is found in the codex Ashburnhamensis. This, then, is at best a doubtful instance. Vergil — 1 instance. Eel. 5, 15 Tu deinde iubeto ut certet Amyntas. Note the imperative form, and compare the single instance (A. 10, 53) of the simple subjunctive in this author, where the same form is found. 26 The Construction with lubeo. For the accusative and infinitive after imperative forms of iubeo, see A. 7, 430 ; 10, 242, etc. Horace — 1 instance. S. 1, 4, 121 Sic me formabat puerum dictis, et sive iubebat ut facerem quid. This single instance, compare the thirty-seven instances of the infinitive in this author, may be due to metrical convenience. Livy — 8 instances. 1, 17, 11 ; 9, 2, 2; 28, 36, 1 ; 36, 1, 9 ; 38, 35, 9 ; 38, 54, 3 ; 41, 15, 11 ; 43, 12, 9. In five passages (9, 2, 2; 36, 1, 9 ; 38, 35, 9; 41, 15, 11 ; 43, 12, 9) the dependence of the subjunctive upon iubeo is indirect, as there is change of construction, from the infinitive to the subjunc- tive, the infinitive being directly dependent. 9, 2, 2 inde ad Calatiam .... milites decem pastorum habitu mittit, pecoraque .... procul Romanis pascere iubet praesidiis ; ubi inciderint in praedatores, ut idem omnibus sermo constet. 36, 1, 9 Alter consul .... cum Boiis iussus bellum gerere utro exercitu mallet ex duobus, quos superiores consules habuissent, alterum ut mitteret Romam, eaeque urbanae legiones essent paratae quo senatus censuisset. Note the infinitive, then the subjunctive with ut, then the sub- junctive alone. 38, 35, 9 Comparare inter se aut sortiri iussi, et novos exercitus, binas legiones scribere, et ut sociis Latini nominis quina dena milia peditum imperarent. 41, 15, 11 M. Titinius et T. Fonteius proconsules manere .... in Hispania iussi ; et ut in supplementum his tria milia civium Romanorum .... mitterentur. 43, 12, 9 in classem mille socii navales cives Romani libertini ordinis, ex Italia quingenti scribi iussi, totidem ut ex Sicilia scriberentur. In three of these (9, 2, 2 ; 41, 15, 11 ; 43, 12, 9) there is also a change of the subject of the dependent verb. :3ITY The Construction with lubeo, 27 The remaining three instances are : 1, 17, 11 Adeo id gratum plebi fuit ut, ne victi beneficio vide- rentur, id modo sciscerent iuberentque, ut senatus decerneret qui Romae regnaret. 28, 36, 1 Magoni .... paranti traicere in Africam nuntiatum ab Carthagine est iubere senatura ut classem quam Gadibus baberet, in Italiam traiceret ; conducta ibi Gallorum ac Ligurum quanta maxima posset iuventute coniungeret se Hannibali, neu senescere bellum .... sineret. 38, 54, 3 fuit autem rogatio talis, velitis iubeatis, Quirites, .... uti de ea re Ser. Sulpicius .... ad senatum referat. Note the formula, velitis iubeatis ut In each of these eight instances, except 9, 2, 2, the command is the expression of the will of a people or senate. Ovid — No instance. At H. 1, 101 the subjunctive is explanatory of hoc, rather than dependent upon iubeo. Di, precor, hoc iubeant, ut euntibus ordine fatis Ille meos oculos conprimat. Curtius — 2 instances. 6,13, 19; 8,1,38. 6, 13, 19 tria ferme milia resistentia occisa sunt, reliquum agmen pecudum more intactum agebatur iubente rege, ut caedibus absti- neretur. 8, 1, 38 dolorem tamen rex pressit, contentus iussisse, ut con- vivio excederet. Compare with this total of two the three hundred and twenty instances of the infinitive with iubeo in this author. Petronius — No instance. 74 has been cited as an example ; occidi, however, seems necessary. See the texts of Buecheler and Friedlander, dicto citius de vicinia gallus allatus est, quem Trimalchio occidi iussit, ut aeno coctus fieret. Lucan — 1 instance. 9, 896 Natura locorum Iussit, ut inmunes mixtis serpentibus essent. 28 . The Construction with lubeo, Tacitus — 1 instance. A. 13, 40, 10 recepta inter ordines impedimenta, et tergum mille equites tuebantur, quibus iusserat, ut instantibus comminus resisterent. Note the dative, which is probably responsible for this single instance of the subjunctive, and compare the one hundred and forty-eight instances of the infinitive with iubeo in this author. On the dative with iubeo see Draeg. Syn. d. Tac. 23; Nipperdey to Ann. 4, 72, 3 ; Landgraf. n. to Keisig 369. Suetonius — Subjunc. with ut — 1 instance. Tiber. 22. Subjunc. with ne — 1 instance. Fragm. DeVir. Illust. 103. Tiber. 22 hunc tribunus militum custos appositus occidit, lectis codicillis, quibus ut id faceret iubebatur. Note the expression, lectis codicillis, and compare the somewhat similar expressions at lul. Capitol. CI. A. 2, 1 litteras dederat, quibus iusserat; Ael. Lamprid. A. H. 13, 6 litteras quibus iussit; Flav. Vopisc. Aurel. 19, 1 litteras quibus iubetur. Fragm. De Yir. Illustr. 103 Graeci autem et Tusci primum ferro in ceris scripserunt, postea Romani iusserunt, ne graphium ferreum quis haberet. Gellius — 1 instance. 20, 4, 3 Misit ei verba haec ex Aristotelis libro exscripta, qui .... inscriptus est, iussitque, uti ea cotidie lectitaret. In the passage quoted at 5, 19, 9 the formula, velitis iubeatis uti, occurs. Tertullian — 1 instance. De bapt. 18 quern rursus spiritus ut se curriculo eunuchi adiungeret iussit. It is noteworthy that the person receiving the command is expressed in the accusative. The Construction with lubeo. 29 SCEIPTORES HiSTORIAE AUGUSTAE. Ael. Spartianus — Subjunc. with ut — 4 instances. Hadr. 16, 1 ; Sev. 5, 5 ; 23, 6 ; Peso. 10, 6. Subjunc. with ne — 1 instance. Pesc. 10, 7. Hadr. 16, 1 famae .... tarn cupidus fuit ut libros vitae suae ecriptos a se libertis suis litteratis dederit iubens, ut eos suis nominibus publicarent. Sev. 5, 5 legatis .... missis, qui inherent ut ah eo milites senatu praecipiente discederent. Sev. 23, 6 sed cum videret, se perurgueri sub hora mortis, iussisse fertur, ut alternis diebus apud filios imperatores in cubi- culis Fortuna poneretur. Pesc. 10, 6 iussit, ut denorum gallinaceorum pretia provinciali redderent decern. Pesc. 10, 7 idem iussit, ne zona milites ad helium ituri aureos vel argenteos nummos portarent. Julius Capitolinus — 7 instances. Max. Duo 3, 1 ; M. Ant. Phil. 11, 4; 21, 5; CI. Albin. 2, 1 ; Gord. 29, 6 ; M. et B. 10, 2 ; 10, 3. Max. Duo 3, 1 iussitque statim tribuno ut eum coherceret ac Komanam disciplinam inbueret. Note the dative. At M. Ant. Phil. 21, 5 there is a change of construction, subjunctive with ut, then ferenda, then subjunctive with ut again. Iussitque, ut statuae tantummodo filio mortuo decernerentur, et imago aurea circensibus per pompam ferenda, et ut saliari carmini nomen eius insereretur. CI. Albin. 2, 1 litteras dederat, quibus iusserat, ut Caesar esset. M. Ant. Phil. 11, 4 temperavit etiam scaenicas donationes iubens, ut quinos aureos scaenici acciperent. Gord. 29, 6 sed cum milites fame vincerentur, imperium Philippo mandatum est, iussumque a militibus, ut quasi tutor eius Philippus cum eodem Gordiano pariter imperaret. 30 The Construction with lubeo, M. et B. 10, 2 iussum tunc tamen, ut omnia ex agris in civitates colligerentur. M. et B. 10, 3 iussumque, ut quicumque Maxirainum iuuisset in hostium numero duceretur. Aelius Lampridius — Subjunct. with ut — 5 instances. Anton. Heliogab. 13, 5 ; 13, 6 ; 29, 7 ; A.-S. 26, 3 ; 62, 4. Subjunct. with ne — 1 instance. A. S. 22, 8. Anton. Heliogab 13, 5 iussitque, ut trucidaretur iuuenis optimus. A. H. 13, 6 misit et ad milites litteras quibus iussit ut abro- garetur nomen Caesaris Alexandro. A. H. 29, 7 si ins autem displicuisset, iubebat, ut semper id comesset, quamdiu tamen melius inveniret. A. S. 26, 3 postea tamen iussit ut semisses acciperent. A. S. 52, 4 iussitque ut ante tribunum quattuor milites ambu- larent. A. S. 22, 8 sed iussit, ne quis suminatam occideret. Flavins Yopiscus — Subjunct. with ut — 3 instances. Aurel. 14, 7 ; 19, 1 ; Prob. 14, 4. Subjunct. with ne — 1 instance. Saturn. 9, 1. Aurel. 14, 7 iube igitur, ut lege agatur. Note the imperative form of iubeo. Aurel. 19, 1 referimus .... litteras, quibus iubetur ut inspi- ciantur fatales libri. Prob. 14, 4 dicitur iussisse his acrius, ut gladiis non uterentur. Note the dative and compare Jul. Capitol. Max. Duo 3, 1. Saturn. 9, 1 Aurelianus iusserat ne Saturninus Aegyptum uideret. Vulcatius Gallicanus — No instance. Trebellius Pollio — No instance. The number (twenty-two) of instances of the occurrence of this construction in these authors is noteworthy, being nearly one-third of the whole number (seventy-five) found in all the authors that have been examined. The Construction with lubeo, 31 Even here, however, the prevailing construction is the infini- tive, there being one hundred and seventy-four instances of that. The number of instances of ne, too, is quite large, being three out of a total of five. It is somewhat surprising that these authors furnish no example of the simple subjunctive. With regard to the voice of the dependent verb, it is to be observed that when this is a subjunctive the proportion is act. : pass. : 14 : 8, whereas when it is an infinitive it is act. : pass. : 37 : 137. The verb of commanding which comes next in order of fre- quency of occurrence in these authors is praecipio, and their use of it shows a decided departure from the normal construction, the subjunctive with utj there being twenty-one instances of the accusative and infinitive, and but one of the subjunctive. Impero is used almost entirely with the meaning of " to rule " or "to reign,'^ being followed by a dependent clause but three times, whereas there are one hundred and eight instances of its use with the meaning given above. This meaning is found in all of the anthors alike, as is shown by the following figures : Ael. Spartianus — 16 instances. Jul. Capitolinus 28 " Vul. Gallicanus 2 " Fr. Pollio, 31 " Ael. Lampridius 8 " Fl. Vopiscus 23 " Firmicus Maternus — 1 instance of the subjunctive with ne. 28, 11 ne hunc colas, ne hunc supplices .... interdicto vene- randae legis iubetur. Lactantius — 3 instances. Div. Instit. 4, 27, 12 iubeat utriusque sacerdos dei sui nomine ut nocens ille spiritus excedat ex homine. 7, 26, 8 deo iubente ut quieti ac silentes arcanum eius in abdito atque intra nostram conscientiam teneamus. 6, 19, 8 qui iubet uti maledicis et laedentibus non irascamur. Juvencus — 1 instance. 2, 145 Hinc iubet, ut summo tradant gustanda ministro. 32 The Construction with luheo. Dictys Cretensis — 1 instance. 2, 35 quod ubi animadvertit, Hector coactus necessitate militibus ut apud arma essent iubet. Note the dative. St. Augustine — 5 instances. Contra Ep. Fund. V, 14; Contra Faus. xii, 36; xxii, 70; Contra Felix ii, 20. C. E. F. V, 14 infirmabis mihi catholicorum auctoritatem, qui iubent ut tibi non credam. C. Faus. XII, 70 dominus iussit ut ferrum discipuli eius ferrent, sed non iusserat ut ferirent. Macrobius — 2 instances. S. 3, 17, 7 ; C. 2, 1, 10. 5. 3, 17, 7 Licinia lex lata est a P. Licinio Crasso Divite, cuius ferundae probandaeque tantum studium ab optimatibus impensum est, ut consulto senatus iuberetur, ut ea tantum modo promulgata priusquam trinundino confirmaretur. C. 2, 1, 10 quos cum ferientium viribus adscribendos putaret, iubet, ut inter se malleolos mutent. Orosius — 5 instances. Adv. Pag. 4, 18, 9; 4, 22, 2; 6, 18, 24; Lib. Apol. 26, 4; 26,5. Adv. Pag. 4, 18, 9 iussusque a Carthaginiensibus, ut fratri cum copiis iungeretur, magna secum auxilia .... deduceret, 4, 22, 2 Carthaginiensibus evocatis iussisque ut arma et naves traderent. 6, 18, 24 Ventidium Syriae praefecit iussitque ut Antigone bellum in ferret. Vulgate — 11 instances. Gen. 42, 25; I Par. 21, 17; II Par. 29, 27; I Esdr. 5, 17; lud. 13, 11; Esth. 1, 17; 4, 10; 13, 6; Isa. 38, 21; Dan. 3, 20; 13,32. The dative is found at Gen. 42, 25, and Dan. 3, 20. Gen. 42, 25 iussit ministris, ut implerent eorum saccos tritico et reponerent pecunias singulorum in saculis suis. The Construction with lubeo, 33 Dan. 3, 20 Et viris fortissimis de exercitu suo iiissit, ut ligatis pedibus Sidrach, Misach, et AbedDago, mitterent eos in fornacem ignis ardentis. SIMPLE SUBJUNCTIVE. Thirty-seven instances in eleven authors. See table on page 45 and the studies in detail of the various authors, pages 35-41. It is probable that the so-called simple subjunctive with iubeo was not in the beginning dependent upon that verb, but was coordinate in construction and jussive in force. Such a supposi- tion finds support in the fact, that in every instance (in the authors examined) down to Livy, this subjunctive occurs with an impera- tive form of iubeo, iube nine times, iubeto once, and that in a total of thirty-seven instances seventeen, or nearly one-half, follow imperative forms of this verb. In course of time the idea of coordination was lost sight of, and the subjunctive was regarded as being dependent upon iubeo, the construction being further influenced by that which was used with such verbs as impero, praecipio, etc. The seventeen instances referred to are the following : Plautus, Men. 955; Most. 930; Persa 605; Kud. 708; Stich. 396. Five out of a total of five instances in this author. Terence, Haut. 736 ; Eun. 691 ; Ad. 914. Three out of a total of three. Catullus 32, 3. The single instance in the author. Vergil, A. 10, 53. The single instance. Ovid, M. F. 58, A. A. 1, 507, M. 8, 792; 11, 587; 11, 627; A. 1, 4, 29 ; 1, 11, 19. Seven out of a total of eleven occurrences. It is to be noted, however, that these authors use the infinitive also with imperative forms of iubeo ; e. g., Plautus at Most. 467 ^ Mil. 255 ; 1093 ; Pseud. 1054 ; Stich. 335 ; 620, etc. Terence at And. 546 ; Haut. 585, etc. Vergil at A. 7, 430 ; 10, 242, etc. In seven of the remaining twenty instances of this construction the dependence of the subjunctive upon iubeo is indirect, inasmuch as there is a change of construction, from the infinitive to the subjunctive, the infinitive in each instance being the construction that is directly dependent. 3 34 The Construction with lubeo, .These are Livy 3, 27, 3-4; 24, 10, 3; 31, 8, 8; 31, 11, 10; 35, 5, 3 ; 40, 30, 4. Six instances out of a total of seven ^ in this author, and Tacitus, H. 4, 34, 16, one in a total of four. This change in the mood of the dependent verb is in several cases accompanied by a change in the person, i. e., the subjects, which is additional evidence that the dependence is indirect. This is the case at Livy 3, 27, 3-4 ; 24, 10, 3 ; 31, 8, 8. See page 37. In four of the eleven ^ examples in Ovid, the remaining seven occurring after imperative forms of iubeo as has been already stated, the subjunctive is probably due to metrical convenience. These are P. 3, 1, 141; M. 4, 111; F. 4, 259; A. A. 2, 261. See page 38. At Tacitus, Ann. 13, 15, 7, the person receiving the command is in the dative case. See page 40, and compare the single instance (Ann. 13, 40, 10) in this author of ut and the subjunctive with iubeo, where also the dative occurs. For details with regard to the remaining seven instances of this construction in the authors examined (Tac. Ann. 12, 49, 14; H. 2, 46, 4; Persius 5, 161 ; Curt. 6, 4, 1 ; 9, 4, 23; Suet. Yitell. 14 ; Tertul. De idol. 14), see the special studies of those authors. The dependent subjunctive is usually in the third person, there being thirty instances of this, as compared with two of the first and five of the second. It is to be observed also that in every instance it is in the active voice, and that the form of iubeo is active thirty-one times. The simple subjunctive is used less widely than the subjunctive with ut (so far as the authors that have been examined are con- cerned), occurring as it does only thirty-seven times, as compared with seventy-seven instances of the latter, and in eleven authors as compared with twenty-three. Besides being of less frequent occurrence, it disappears earlier, TertuUian being the last of these authors to use it. See page 44 for table showing the use of the subjunctive with ut. An idea of the range of the two constructions may be obtained from the following : ^At 42, 37, 2, the remaining example, the text is in doubt. See page 37. 'If the subjunctive is to be read at A. 1, 4, 60, a twelfth example is found. See page 39. Ihe Consi7'uction with lubeo. 35 Authors that use both; Plautus, Vergil, Livy, Curtius, Tacitus, Suetonius, Tertullian. Authors that use the subjunctive with ut or ne, but not the simple subjunctive : Cicero, Horace, Lucan, Gellius, Aelius Sparti- anus, Julius Capitolinus, Aelius Lampridius, Flavins Vopiscus, F. Maternus, Lactantius, Juvencus, Dictys, St. Augustine, Macro- bius, Orosius, Vulgate. Authors using the simple subjunctive, but not the subjunctive with ut or ne; Terence, Catullus, Ovid, Persius. Studies in Detail of the Authors using the Simple Subjunctive. Plautus — 5 instances. Men. 955 ; Most. 930 ; Persa 605 ; Rud. 708 ; Stich. 396. Men. 955 tu seru6s iube / Htinc ad me ferdnt. Most. 930 Ctirriculo iube in tirbem ueniat idm simul tectim. Persa 605 Itibedum ea hoc acc6dat ad me. Rud. 708 iiibe modo accedat prope. Stich. 396 I intro, Pinacitim, iube famulos rem diuinam mi Apparent. It will be observed at once that an imperative form, iube, occurs in each instance, indicating that the subjunctive is coordinate rather than dependent. For instances of the accusative and infinitive after imperative forms of iubeo, see Most. 467; Mil. 255; 1093; Pseud. 1054; Stich. 335 ; 620, etc. Tu seruos iube, etc.. Men. 955, by anticipation for iube serui tui ferant. Cf. Stich. 396, where also the person receiving the command is in the accusative. For remarks upon the use of the subjunctive at these places, see Brix to Men. 955 ; Sonnens. to Rud. 708 ; Lorenz to Most. 918 ; Wag. to Men. 955. Terence — 3 instances. Haut. 737; Eun. 691; Ad. 914. H. 737 Bacchis, mdne, mane : quo mittis istam qua^so lube mdneat. 36 The Construction with luheo, Eun. 691 Eho tu, emin ego te? Do. Emisti. Py. lube mi denuo Resp6ndeat. Ad. 914 Ego lepidus ineo gratiam iube ntinciam Dintimerel ille Babylo uiginti minas. As was the case in Plautus, it is an imperative form of iubeo that occurs in each instance. The accusative and infinitive after imperative forms of iubeo occur at And. 546 ; H. 586, etc. At And. 914 iube dinumeret = dinumerato. Cf. Rud. 708, iube modo accedat = just let him, and Haut. 737 iube maneat = tell her she must stay. Bentley found a fourth instance of the simple subjunctive at And. 412, reading obseruarem for obseruare. For remarks upon the use of the subjunctive at these places, see Spengl. to Ad. 914; Bentley to Ad. 914; Dziat. to Ad. 914, who compares the use of the subjunctive with fac, facito, sine. Catullus — 1 instance. 32, 3 Meae deliciae, mei lepores, lube ad te ueniam meridiatum. Caesar. Corpus — No instance. Bellum Alex. 73, 3 has frequently been cited as an instance, hue omnem comportatum aggerem ex castris seruitia agerent iussit, but the correct reading is yet a matter of doubt. The codices have agerentur, Nipperdey, agerent. Madvig proposed gererent, while others have an infinitive, e. g.. Winter, who reads agere, and Hoffmann, who has aggerere. The passage is cited by Draeger, H. S. 2, p. 287, as an example of the simple subjunctive in the Caesarean corpus. Since there is so much doubt, it has been considered best not to regard this as an instance of the simple subjunctive. Yergil — 1 instance. A. 10, 53 Magna dicione iubeto Karthago premat Ausonian. The Construction with lubeo. 37 Compare the single instance (E. 5, 15) of the subjunctive with u in this author, where the same form, iubeto, is found. Livy — 7 occurrences. 3, 27, 3-4; 24, 10, 3; 31, 8, 8 ; 31, 11, 10; 35, 5, 3 ; 40, 30, 4 ; 42, 37, 2. 3, 27, 3-4 tum quicumque aetate militari essent, armati cum cibariis in dies quinque coctis vallisque duodenis ante solis occa- sum martio in campo adessent ; quibus aetas ad militandum gravior esset, vicino militi, dum is arma pararet vallumque peteret, cibaria coquere iussit. 24, 10, 3 iussique in provinciis manere, Ti. Gracchus Luceriae, . . . . C Terentius Varro in agro Piceno, M. Pomponius in Gallico, et praetores prioris anni pro praetoribus Q. Mucins obtineret Sardiniam, M. Valerius ad Brundisium orae maritimae intentus ad versus omnes motus Philippi Macedonum regis praeesset. 35, 5, 3 equites earum extra aciem in locum patentem Q. et P. Minucios tribunos railitum educere iussit, unde, cum signum dedisset, impetum ex aperto facerent. 42, 37, 2 Decimius missus est ad Gentium regem Illyriorum, quem si aliquem respectum amicitiae cum populo Romano habere cerneret, temptaret(?) aut etiam ad belli societatem perliceret (?) iussus. In all of these seven passages except 42, 37, 2, where it is uncertain whether the infinitive or subjunctive should be read, the dependence of the subjunctive upon iubeo is indirect, inas- much as there is a change of construction, subjunctive with infinitive, the infinitive in each instance being the construction that is directly dependent. In some of the passages, the force of iubeo has practically been lost sight of. At 3, 27, 3-4 ; 24, 10, 3 ; 31, 8, 8 there is also a change in the subject of the dependent verbs. As to the reading at 42, 37, 2, whether infinitive or subjunctive, see Weissenborn's critical note ad loc. 30, 19, 2 ; 32, 16, 8; 42, 39, 16 ; 44, 2, 5 which have some- times been regarded as instances of this construction, have not been so regarded in this investigation. See Weissenborn's text and critical notes. 38 The Construction with lubeo, Ovid — 11 instances. M. F. 58 ; A. A. 1, 507 ; 2, 261 ; M. 4, 111 ; 8, 792 ; 11, 587 ; 11, 627 ; A. 1, 11, 19 ; 1, 4, 29 ; P. 3, 1, 141 ; F. 4, 259. In seven of these an imperative form of iubeo occurs, iube at M. F. 58 ; A. A. 1, 507 ; M. 8, 793 ; 11, 587 ; 11, 627 ; iubeto at A. 1,4, 29; 1,11,19; M. F. 58 Haec ubi ventosas fuerint siccata per auras, Lenta iube scabra frangat asella mola : A. A. 1, 507 Ista iube faciant, quorum Cybeleia mater Concinitur Phrygiis exululata modis. M. 8, 792 Ea se in praecordia condat Sacrilegi scelerata, iube. A. 1, 4, 29 Quod tibi miscuerit, sapias, bibat ipse, iubeto : A, 1, 11, 19 Nee mora, perlectis rescribat multa, iubeto : M. 11, 587 Vise soporiferam Somni velociter aulam, Exstinctique iube Ceycis imagine mittat Somnia ad Alcyonen veros narrantia casus. M. 11, 627 Somnia, quae veras aequent imitamine formas, Herculea Trachine iube sub imagine regis Alcyonen adeant. In the remaining four instances (P. 3, 1, 141 ; M. 4, 111 ; F. 4, 259 ; A. A. 2, 261) the subjunctive is the last word in the verse, m in the second person, and is probably used for metrical convenience, P. 3, 1, 141 Nee rursus iubeo, dum sit vacuissima, quaeras. The Construction with lubeo, 39 M. 4, 111 Ego te, miseranda, peremi, In loca plena metus qui iussi nocte venires. F. 4, 259 " Mater abest ; Matrem iubeo, E-omane, requiras. A. A. 2, 261 Nee domiuam iubeo pretiosa munere dones : A. 1, 4, 60, Separor a domina nocte iubente mea, is another instance if separer instead of separor is read. If the subjunctive is read, it differs from the other eleven instances in that it neither depends upon an imperative form of iubeo, nor is it used for metrical convenience. Moreover, the person receiving the com- mand is in the accusative. The dependent verb too, is in the first person, whereas it is invariably in the third or second in the other instances. Instances of the subjunctive without ut after other verbs of commanding are to be found e. g. M. 1, 670 and 13, 658, where impero is the verb ; M. 14, 23 and A. 1, 11, 17, where mando is used, etc. Persius — 1 instance. 5, 161 "Dave, cito, hoc credas iubeo, finire dolores praeteritos meditor " crudum Chaerestratus unguem adrodens ait etc. Curtius — 2 instances. 6, 4, 1 summa militum alacritatem iubentium, quocumque velle duceret, oratio excepta est. 9, 4, 23 non alias tam alacer clamor ab exercitu est redditus iubentium, duceret dis secundis aequaretque gloria, quos aemu- laretur. At 6, 4, 1 ducere is a variant reading. It is a coincidence that iubentium is the form in each of the two instances. Tacitus — 4 instances. H. 2, 46, 4 ; 4, 34, 16; Ann. 12, 49, 14; 13, 15, 7. H. 2, 46, 4 non expectavit militum ardor vocem imperatorem ; bonum haberet animum iubebant ; 40 The Construction with lubeo. H. 4, 34, 16 in conspectu castrorum constitui signa fossamque et vallum circumdari Vocula iubet : depositis inpediHaentis sarcin- isque expediti certarent. The dependence of the subjunctive is indirect, following as it does the accusative and infinitive, which is directly dependent. Ann. 12, 49, 14 igitur propere montem Taurum transgressus moderatione plura quam vi composuerat, cum rediret in Suriam iubetur. Redire is a variant reading for rediret. See Halm's critical note ad loc. Ann, 13, 15, 7 ubi Britannico iussit exsurgeret progressusque in medium cantum aliquem inciperet. Note the dative, and compare the single instance of the sub- junctive with ut (Ann. 13, 40, 10) after iubeo in this author, where also the dative is found. Suetonius — 1 instance. Yitell. 14 exacerbatus, quod post edictum suum, quo iubebat intra Kl. Oct. urbe Italiaque mathematici excederent. It is possible that the subjunctive is due to the words, edictum suum. Compare the seventy-one instances of the infinitive with iubeo in this author. Vesp. 23 has not been considered an instance, ponere et being a better reading than poneret or ponerent, nuntiantis legatos, decretam ei publice non mediocris summae statuam colosseam, iussit vel continuo ponere, et cavam manum ostentans et paratam basim dicens. Tertullian — 1 instance. De idol. 14 sed idem alibi iubet, omnibus placere curemus, where the subjunctive may be taken as being wholly independent of iubet. Scriptores Historiae Augustae — No instance. At Ael. Spartianus Hadr. 25, 1, iussam iterum Hadriano eadem dicerGt(?), which has sometimes been cited, dicere is to be pre- ferred. See Peter's text. At Ael. Lampridius, A. S. 26, 3 ut should be read, postea tamen iussit ut semisses acciperent. See Peter's text. The Construction with luheo. 41 n. Vopiscus, Tac. 6, 1, though sometimes cited, is not an instance, as the subjunctive is independent of iubeo. "Ecquis melius quam senex imperat ? " dixerunt decies. " Imperatorem te, non militem facimus," dixerunt vicies. "Tu iube, milites pugnent," dixerunt tricies. When compared with their rather liberal use of the subjunctive with ut after iubeo, the absence of the simple subjunctive in these authors is surprising. TABLE Showing the Use of Iubeo with the Accusative and Infinitive and with the Passive and Infinitive. ACCUSATIVE AND INFINITIVE. Plautus 179 instances Terence 30 " Ennius 1 '' Lucretius " Oatullus 2 Caesar 168 B. G. VIII 3 " B.Alex 15 B.Afr 37 B. Hisp 5 Cicero 304 Auct. ad Heren 5 " Sallust 38 Nepos 20 Vergil 40 Tibullus 9 Propertius 17 '' Horace 20 Livy 713 " Vitruvius 9 '' Ovid 98 " Phaedrus 14 " Persius 2 " PASSIVE AND INFINITIVE. No instance 1 it <( iC (i 4 a (( t( a « 42 ((