For p. 4359. Niebuhr (loc. cit., p. 4431, end) section entitled “The Beginning of the Republic and the Treaty with Carthage,” note 1078, pp. 456–57.1 “This play” (the Brutus of L. Attius) “was a praetextata, the noblest among the three kinds of the Roman national drama; all which assuredly, and not merely the Atellana, might be represented by well-born Romans without risking their franchise. [4459] The praetextata merely bore an analogy to a tragedy: it exhibited the deeds of Roman Kings and generals (Diomedes, 3, p. 487, Putsch); and hence it is self-evident, that at least it wanted the unity of time of the Greek tragedy; that it was a history, like Shakspeare’s. I have referred above (p. 431) to a dialogue between the King” (Tarquinius Superbus) “and his dream interpreters in the Brutus” (dialogue quoted by Cicero, De divinatione 1, 22), “the scene of which must have lain before Ardea: the establishment of the new government” (of the Republican government of Rome), “which must have been the occasion of the speech, ‘qui recte consulat, consul siet’” [‘whoever takes counsel wisely, let him be consul’] (in Brutus: speech cited by Varro, De lingua latina 4, 14, p. 24),1 “occurs at Rome: so that the unity of place is just as little observed. The Destruction of Miletus by Phrynichus and the Persians of Aeschylus were plays that drew forth all the manly feelings of bleeding or exulting hearts, and not tragedies: for the latter the Greeks, before the Alexandrian age, took their plots solely out of mythical story. It was essential that their contents should be known beforehand: the stories of Hamlet and Macbeth were unknown to the spectators: at present parts of them might be moulded into tragedies like the Greek; if a Sophocles were to rise up.” (8 Feb., Sunday, 1829.)
Albinus, ancient author, in Macrobius 2, 16.2 “Stultum sese brutumque faciebat” [“Made himself stupid and bestial”]. (Brutus the ancient)3 Si faceva [made himself], that is, si fingeva [feigned]. Very old Italianism from Latin. See Forcellini, etc. (8 Feb., Sunday, 1829.)
Stories and tales transferred from one nation to another. See the previous page, lines 10–17. (8 Feb., Sunday, 1829.)
[4460] The very Greek way in which we use many neuter adjectives to take the meaning of abstract nouns: lo scarso (τὸ σπάνιον) for la scarsità [scarcity], il caro for la carestia [famine] or la carezza, and so forth. This usage is entirely Italian, so far as I recall, that is, not shared by its sister languages; nor can it be derived from Latin, which would be ill suited for such usage by reason of its lack of articles. (11 Feb. 1829.)
Svariato for vario [various].
GnaiVus for Gnaeus. See p. 4454, line 4—AchiVus for Achaeus (ἀχαῖος) is certainly from ᾿Αχεῖος, as is Argivus from ᾿Αργεῖος.
Synizeses. Diphthongs, etc. Elision of the final m in Latin. See p. 4454, line 17ff. See p. 4465.
The early ancients wrote fut, fusse for fuit, fuisse [was, to have been]. See page 4454, line 20. Thus also fussem, etc., for fuissem [I had been]. And they certainly also pronounced it in this way. This early ancient pronunciation is preserved in the Italian: fu (fut. Also in French fut) fusti, fuste, fummo (fumus for fuimus: French fûtes, fûmes), fussi, etc., the pronunciation of our early writers, and today of people in many parts of Italy, and invariably in Tuscany. (15 Feb., Sunday, 1829.)
For p. 4356. Dionysius of Halicarnassus (see p. 4451, line 9), calls the ancient epic songs of the Romans in praise of their heroes hymns.
For the same page, last line. The ancient epic poems of the Romans consisted just of pieces, songs, on different subjects, though these subjects coincided up to a certain point. The same with the ancient German national epic poem, “the lay of the Niebelungen.”1 See the thought above which begins at p. 4450, last paragraph, and especially pp. 4455–56.
[4461] For p. 4413. And see, in this respect, particularly p. 4356, paragraph 1. The ancient national songs and epic poems of the Romans, epic in subject and form, were in lyric meters. See the thought on the previous page, last paragraph, and especially p. 4455 and the following. The poem by Naevius on the Punic War (Libri or Carmen belli Punici) was also in lyric verses of various measures, as can be seen in the fragments of this poem in Hermann, Elementa doctrinae metricae 3, 9, 31, pp. 629ff. (Niebuhr, Roman History, p. 162, note 507, p. 176, note 535). (16 February 1829.)
In rational speculation as to the nature of things, it is necessary always to keep in view this extremely important axiom: that when it is observed that certain qualities are born easily and frequently (or even always) from certain dispositions which nature has placed in certain beings; that certain qualities, also given by nature, easily and frequently undergo certain modifications; that certain causes easily and often produce certain effects; when these things, I repeat, are observed, we cannot deduce that this follows naturally; that those qualities, those modifications, those effects are willed by nature; that it was nature’s intention that those effects should occur, when it placed those dispositions, qualities, or causes in those beings. If someone makes a sword and someone else uses it to slice bread, it does not follow that the maker’s intention was for that instrument to be used for slicing bread, even though that sword can be used, and even though it is actually used, for this purpose. There are an infinite number of disorders in the course of things, and they are not only possible but occur with great ease; many occur so easily [4462] that they are almost certain and inevitable. Nevertheless they are clearly disorders, and they cannot be attributed to the intention of nature. One of a thousand examples. Nothing is easier nor more frequent in certain species of animals than to see mothers or fathers eating their own offspring, drinking their own eggs or those of their companion. This horrible disorder, which makes us shudder, tends directly and more effectively than anything else toward the destruction of the species. It is impossible to attribute it to an intention on the part of nature, whose continual tendency toward the preservation of existing species is one of the surest things that can be stated in its regard, and that seem to reveal an intention on its part; impossible, I repeat, to attribute to nature a disorder thanks to which the producer itself destroys the product, the generator destroys the object generated. If nature were to proceed intentionally in such a way, the world would have already ended long ago. From these considerations, it follows that however much the phenomenon of the civilization of man has the possibility of coming about; however much, considering the dispositions and qualities placed in us by nature and forming part of our being, such a phenomenon might seem easy, inevitable; however common it is; we have no right to judge it to be natural, something that nature willed intentionally. The greatest and most far-reaching occurrences, producing an extraordinary number of very important consequences, can take place, so to speak, in spite of nature.1 (16 Feb. 1829.) See pp. 4467, 4491.
The anonymous author of the life of Isocrates published by Moustoxydes in Συλλογὴ Ἑλληνικῶν ἀνεκδότων [Collection of Unpublished Greek Writings], Venice 1816, τετράδιον (fascicule) 3; and reprinted by Orelli, loc. cit. p. 4431, tome 2, Leipzig 1821.—p. 10 of the τετράδιον [fascicule], ed. Moustoxydes; p. 5, ed. Orelli. —“λέγομεν δὲ ἡμεῖς ἀπολογούμενοι, ὅτι μάλιστα μὲν οὐδὲν [4463] τοῦτο ποιεῖ” (e’ non fa nulla, il ne fait rien) “εἰ εἶχε μετὰ τὴν τελευτὴν τῆς γυναικὸς ταύτην παλλακίδα” (᾿Ισοκράτης) “ἔπειτα λέγομεν, ὅτι κ. τ. λ.” [“in answer, we say that it certainly matters not at all if after his wife’s death” Isocrates “took a concubine. Then we say that, etc.”]. Orelli, loc. cit., p. 523, makes this note: *“ὅτι μάλιστα μὲν οὐδὲν τοῦτο ποιεῖ: i.e., ‘hoc nullius fere vel perquam exigui momenti est’: as we say: ‘es macht nichts’ [‘it doesn’t really matter’] for ‘es hat nichts zu sagen’ [‘it doesn’t say anything to us’], ‘es hat nicht viel auf sich’ [‘it is not a big deal’].”*1 (17 Feb. 1829.)
Moeris, ᾿Αττικιστὴς [The Atticist]. “Γέλοιον [amusing] βαρυτόνως,
ἀττικῶς. γελοῖον, περισπωμένως, Ἑλληνικῶς.” [“Γέλοιον, no accent marked on the last syllable, Attic. γελοῖον, with a circumflex on the last syllable, common Greek.”]2 And thus the ancient grammarians, not only in general, but also in particular cases, used to make a constant distinction between Attic and common Greek, and to recognize the existence of the second. (17 Feb. 1829.)
Rufinus in the Latin version of the Enchiridion or Annulus aureus which bears the name of Sextus or Sixtus, no. 372 ed. Orelli, loc. cit. p. 4431, tome 1, p. 266. “Quod fieri necesse est, voluntarie sacrificato” [“what has to be done, let it be done voluntarily”]. Neither Forcellini nor Du Cange have an example of sacrificare, sacrificium, etc., in this metaphorical sense, which is so common in the daughter languages, especially in French. (17 Feb. 1829.)
St. Nilus, bishop and martyr. Κεφάλαια ἢ παραινέσεις Capita seu Praeceptiones sententiosae [Chapters or Wise Precepts], no. 199, ed. Orelli, ibid., p. 346. “Λύχνῳ πρὸς τὰς πράξεις τῷ συνειδότι” (conscientia) “κέχρησο· τοῦτο γάρ σοι ποίας” (for τινὰς quali–quali: Italianism) “μὲν ἐν βίῳ ἀγαθὰς” (i.e., πράξεις), “ποίας δὲ πονηρὰς ὑποδείκνυσιν” [“in your actions use your conscience like a lantern: it is this in fact which in life shows you which actions are good and which bad”]. (17 Feb. 1829.)
The same in John of Damascus, Parallela sacra. Opera, ed. Lequien, tome 2, p. 419, and in Orelli, ibid., p. 362, line 6: (σαρκίον for σάρκα, flesh, that is, body (σωμάτιον, in the Stoic manner). (17 Feb. 1829.)
[4464] Lysis in “Epistola ad Hipparchum,” p. 52, ed. of the Socratis et Socraticorum, Pythagorae et Pythagoreorum Epistolae by Johannes Conradus Orelli, Leipzig 1815: “῞Οσιον κἀμὲ μνᾶσθαι τοῦ τήνου” (Πυθαγόρου) “θείων καὶ σεμνῶν παραγγελμάτων, μηδὲ κοινὰ ποιῆσθαι τὰ σοφίας ἀγαθὰ τοῖς οὐδ’ ὄναρ” (don’t even dream of it for in no way, not at all) “τὰν ψυχὰν κεκαθαρμένοις [“it would be right for me to remember his” (Pythagoras’s) “venerable and divine precepts and do not even dream of communicating the good points of wisdom to those who have not purified their souls”]. (Orelli, ibid., p. 600.) (18 Feb. 1829.) See p. 4470.
For p. 4165. Likewise Callimachus, “οὕτω καὶ σύ γ' ἰών” [so you too, going {acting} like this] in his famous epigram about taking a wife of equal condition, last line. See it in Orelli, ibid., p. 176, and the notes to that passage, ibid. p. 555, and of Ménage on Laertius, etc., and in the works of Callimachus. The passage of Theon quoted in the thought to which this one refers, confirms the reading of σύ γ' ἰών for σύ Δίων, and here it is very fine and precious. —Thus we also say andamenti, procedimenti, for actions, or for ways of operating, of governing, etc. (18 Feb. 1829.)
Gratari–gratulari [to congratulate]. Trembler (tremulare) [to tremble].
For p. 4431. Thucydides, in the proemium, calls historians λογογράφους.1 Λογογραφέω is used for to write history, narrate, recount; λογογραφία for historiae scriptio; ἡ λογογραφικὴ by Eustathius for prose, soluta oratio; and also λογογράφος is used to mean simply prose writer. Λογοποιὸς for historian by Xenophon. Συγγράφω is also used particularly for διηγεῖσθαι, i.e., in the meanings used above for λογογραφέω. Isocrates in the epilogue of πρὸς Νικοκλέα [To Nicocles], expressly distinguishes τὰ ποιήματα [poems] and τὰ συγγράμματα [works in prose] (“τὰ συμβουλεύοντα καὶ τῶν ποιημάτων καὶ τῶν συγγραμμάτων” [“didactic elements in works in verse and prose,” etc.); and Ammonius, De differentia vocabulorum, defines σύγγραμμα thus: “ὁ δίχα μέτρου λόγος, ὁ προσαγορευόμενος πεζός” [“discourse without meter, prosaic speech”]. Precisely as if τὰ ποιήματα were not συγγεγραμμένα, i.e., written; or as if συγγράφειν were not also equivalent, [4465] as it is, simply to to write, conscribere. Συγγραφεὺς for historian passim: “ποιηταὶ καὶ συγγραφεῖς” poets and writers, i.e., prose writers, passim, and in Laertius 6, 30 συγγραφὴ for history, narration, historic work or composition, in Pausanias: “μέγα οὐδὲν ἐς συγγραφὴν παρεχομένη” (πόλις) [“which (a city) provides nothing remarkable for narration”],1 and especially Arrian (Alexandri Anabasis, preface, 5, συγγραφὴ; 1, 12, 7; 4, 10, 2; 5, 4, 4; 5, 6, 12; 6, 16, 7; 7, 30, 7. Index, 19, 8, ξυγγραφὴ). Καταλογάδην, prosa oratione, prosaice [in prose] Plutarch. “Καὶ τῶν ἐμμέτρων ποιημάτων, καὶ τῶν καταλογάδην συγγραμμάτων” [“whether poems in meter, or compositions in prose”]. Isocrates in the introduction or προοίμιον of Ad Nicocles. (Scapula, Tusanus, Budé: who do not cite Arrian; and only Tusanus cites Ammonius, for another purpose, and does not quote the words.) (19 Feb. 1829.)
For p. 4440. (which, in any case, is also a poetry of imagination, as I have said elsewhere [→Z 725ff.], etc.).2 (19 Feb. 1829.)
φόρτος–φορτίον [load, burden].
Tardivo [late, slow] (Italian)–tardío (Spanish).
Segnalato, señalado, signalé, for worthy of being pointed out, i.e., noted; notable.
For p. 4460. “In the epitaph of L. Cornelius Scipio Barbatus, Lucanaa. The doubling the vowel belongs to the Oscan and old Latin: in the Julian inscription of Bovillae we find leege.”3 Niebuhr, section entitled “The Sabines and Sabellians,” note 248, pp. 72–73. (24 Feb. 1829.)
For p. 4442. Verano [summer] Spanish is none other than vernum: verno for verno tempore [spring] or vere is very frequent also in good Latin (Forcellini). According to Amati, in the Giornale arcadico, tome 39, 3rd of 1828, p. 240: “the name of Preivernum or Privernum” (today Piperno, ancient city of the Volsci), “is held by the most educated to be of Latin construction, from preimum, or primum, and vernum, tempus being understood: because the town, on sunny slopes and not too high, [4466] was ideally positioned for an early spring.” (24 Feb. 1829.)
Primavera [spring], i.e., primum ver or vernum, just to mean ver. This, too, is of very ancient Latin use. See the previous thought, and Forcellini under Ver. (24 Feb. 1829.)
For p. 4437. Examples of this kind are very frequent, not only in words, inflections, and the like, not proper to written language, in popular use only, but also with syntax and wording that is completely ungrammatical, indeed strange, in inscriptions by ordinary people, both in Greek and especially in Latin, such as (among the thousands of examples) the one found at Ostia and recently published by Amati, Giornale arcadico, tome 39, 3rd of 1828, p. 234.1
Hic iam nunc situs est quondam praestantius ille
Omnibus in terris fama vitaque probatus
Hic fuit ad superos felix quo non felicior alter
Aut fuit aut vixit simplex bonus atque beatus
Nunquam tristis erat laetus gaudebat ubique
Nec senibus similis mortem cupiebat obire
Set timuit mortem nec se mori posse putabat
Hunc coniunx posuit terrae et sua tristia flevit
Volnera quae sic sit caro biduata marito
[Here lies one who was once so much more remarkably
Esteemed all over for his reputation and life.
Here he was as prosperous as in heaven, none more prosperous than he
ever was or lived, simple, good and blessed.
He was never sad and gaily he was happy everywhere,
Nor like old men did he desire to go to meet death
But feared death and thought that he could not die.
His wife has placed him in the ground and she weeps for her sad
Wounds, deprived of such a beloved husband].
A living mirror to the writin
g of Democritus, and what were, in all likelihood, the first Greek writings in prose. And that other, published by the same, ibid., pp. 236–37:2 “Dis manibus Meviae Sophes C. Maenius (sic) Cimber coniugi sanctissimae et conservatrici desiderio spiritus mei quae vixit mecum an. XIIX. menses III. dies XIII. quod vixi cum ea sine querella nam nunc queror aput manes eius et flagito Ditem aut et me reddite coniugi meae quae mecum vixit tan concorde [4467] ad fatalem diem. Mevia Sophe impetra si quae sunt manes ni” (i.e., ne) “tam scelestum discidium experiscar diutius. Hospes ita post obitum sit tibe terra levis ut tu hic nihil laeseris aut si quis laeserit nec superis comprobetur nec inferi recipiant et sit ei terra gravis” [“To the Manes of Mevia Sophes, I, C. Maenius Cimber, to my most holy and industrious wife, the desire of my spirit, who lived with me 18 years, 3 months, 13 days. Since I lived with her without complaint, I now complain to her Manes and entreat Dis, rather give me back to her who lived in such concord with me up to the fated day. And you, Mevia Sophes, beg, if the Manes exist, that I should not suffer any longer such a calamitous separation. And therefore you, visitor, may the earth be light to you after death if you have damaged nothing here, or if someone does damage, may he never be acknowledged by the gods above and may the gods below not accept him and may the earth be heavy for him”]. (24 Feb. 1829.)
Zibaldone Page 335
