Latin Punctuation in the Classical Age 9783110805215, 9789027923233

Citation preview

JANUA LINGUARUM STUDIA MEMORIAE N I C O L A I VAN W I J K DEDICATA edenda curat C. H.

SCHOONEVELD

Indiana University

Series

Practica,

133

LATIN PUNCTUATION IN THE CLASSICAL AGE by

Ε.

OTHA

WINGO

1972 MOUTON THE HAGUE · PARIS

© Copyright 1972 in The Netherlands. Mouton & Co. N.V., Publishers, The Hague. No part of this book may be translated or reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publishers.

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOG CARD NUMBER: 79-159474

Printed in Hungary

PARENTIBVS PIEN TISSIMIS ET CARISSIMAE VXORI

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to express my deep appreciation to my adviser, Professor Revilo P. Oliver, for suggesting the problem and for his constant and patient guidance and painstaking assistance throughout the research and writing of the dissertation; to Professors Ben E. Perry, Alexander Turyn, Antonio Tovar, and Gertrude Smith, as well as to Professor Oliver, for the challenging classes and encouraging conferences throughout my graduate work at the University of Illinois; and to Dr. Edith Carrington Jones, who was always generously helpful in locating and using materials in the great Classical Library at the University of Illinois, which was founded and in large part assembled by the late Professor William Abbott Oldfather.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements I. The Problem of Punctuation II. The Testimony of the Grammarians

7 11 20

III. The Res Gestae Augusti

29

IV. Latin Books

50

V. Legal Style

68

VI. Other Styles

83

VII. The Signs of Punctuation

94

VIII. Conclusions

132

Appendix

Papyri Latinae

134

Metrical Punctuation

140

I.

Appendix II. Bibliography

164

I THE PROBLEM OF PUNCTUATION

This treatise is an attempt to answer, insofar as it is possible, the question whether or not the classical writers, such as Cicero or Vergil or Livy, were read by their contemporaries in copies that had punctuation. I shall give, therefore, as complete an account as possible of the types and functions of punctuation in Latin writing of the classical age. Every published inscription, papyrus, and manuscript that antedates the fall of the Roman Empire in the West has been considered, provided that enough of the text remains to be intelligible and thus show the meaning of punctuation where that is used. For this study I have checked every inscription in the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum and in L'Annee Hpigraphique (1944—1961) and every papyrus listed in Cavenaile's Corpus Papyrorum Latinarum, using also such facsimiles as were available in other publications whenever there was reason to believe that the original contained punctuation. As late as the year 1908 so careful a scholar as Ioannes Ferrara knew so little of punctuation in the classical age that he described the marks of punctuation in the fragment of the Carmen de Bello Actiaco as signa "quae quid spectent me plane ignorare fateor". 1 He thus reached the odd conclusion that those signs must mark places which the author intended to revise. I t followed, therefore, that the papyrus was the author's autograph of a poem that had never been completed. Therefore the poem could not be the work of any of the ancient poets known to have composed poems on that subject. Hence it was probably the work of the man who owned the villa in Herculaneum at the time of the eruption in 79 A.D. 2 The manuals of epigraphy and palaeography summarily dismiss the subject of punctuation with brief mention of the interpunctum, or medial point, 1

Poematis Latini Fragmenta Herculanensia (Papiae, 1908), p. 33. This scaffolding of inferences has, of course, long since collapsed. The latest editor of the fragments (Garuti, 1958) returns to the early attribution of the poem to Gaiue Rabirius and supports the attribution with arguments on which he relies so confidently that he places the name of Rabirius on his title page (C. Rabirius: Bellum Actiacum). 1

12

THE PROBLEM OF PUNCTUATION

used as a word-divider. For the sake of completeness, I shall review the meager information given in the standard reference works. James C. Egbert, Introduction to the Study of Latin Inscriptions (1906), says that "from earliest times individual words in inscriptions were separated by marks of punctuation, which regularly occupied a position midway between the upper and lower limits of the letters. These points, as a rule, were not placed at the end of a line, and did not indicate sentences or parts of sentences." After discussing the various forms of the medial point, he remarks that "In carmina the metric lines are marked, and when half-verses are written this also is indicated by punctuation. At times a long space takes the place of the punctuation mark. In one of the Scipio 'Elogia' the ends of the metric lines are indicated by the spacing, while in another the punctuation mark is used, in this case a horizontal line." Rene Cagnat, Cours d'Epigraphie Latine (1914), discusses the shapes of the "points separatifs", but mentions no use of any mark of punctuation to show syntactical relation or sense. John Edwin Sandys, Latin Epigraphy (1927), dismisses the matter of punctuation by stating that the medial points "are not used to denote the termination of a clause or a sentence." Pedro Batlle Huguet, Epigrafia Latina (1946), merely mentions interpuncta as word-dividers, and adds that "son rarisimos los ejemplos con dos ο mas puntos puestos en linea vertical u horizontal". Edward Maunde Thompson, Introduction to Greek and Latin Palaeography (1912), surveys Greek punctuation; his discussion of Latin punctuation is confined to later centuries. "The punctuation of Latin MSS. followed in some respects the systems of the Greeks. In the poem on the Battle of Actium, found at Herculaneum, points are used to mark off the words, a practice borrowed from inscriptions; and in the early MSS. of Virgil in the Vatican Library points are found employed for the same purpose, although they appear to be due to a second, but still early, hand. From the Latin grammarians we know that they adopted the Greek system of punctuation by points (θέσεις, positurae), to which they gave the titles of 'distinctio finalis', 'subdistinctio', and 'distinctio media', but in practice we find that the scribes used the points without consistently adhering to their meaning." He does mention the use of a short space, in some of the more ancient manuscripts, to indicate the conclusion of a passage or paragraph, and a paragraph mark, used to separate paragraphs or divisions of the text, as in the poem on the Battle of Actium. Giulio Battelli, Lezioni di Paleografia (1949), does not consider the use of punctuation before the Eighth Century. Jean Mallon in his Polygraphie Romaine (1952), in which he deliberately sets out to revolutionize the study of early Latin palaeography, strangely

THE PROBLEM OF PUNCTUATION

13

makes no mention of punctuation as an indication of date or type, and even ignores marks other than the interpunct in his transcriptions of some of the examples shown in the plates appended to his work. E, A. Lowe, Codices Latini Antiquiores (1934 — 1963) sums up the situation by repeated statements to this effect: The history of punctuation in Latin manuscripts is a chapter still to be written. He cautions that punctuation "can be studied only by inspecting the original, and even then it is not always easy to determine what is due to the first hand and what to later correctors: facsimiles often give a false impression . . . ," 3 There is no discussion of Latin punctuation in either Müller's Handbuch or in Pauly-Wissowa-Kroll. Aemilius Hübner, Exempla Scripturae Epigraphicae Latinae (1885), mentions points in carmina; the paragraph signs 7 and 3 in the Monumentum Ancyranum; "virgulae ad commata separanda inter litteras interpositae" in the Laudatio Murdiae; and spaces for separation of phrases or paragraphs; as well as various signs placed at the ends of lines. However, he does not discuss the significance of these marks. Only recently has the importance of the use of spacing to indicate divisions of thought and syntax been in any way emphasized—by Joyce S. and Arthur S. Gordon, Contributions to the Palaeography of Latin Inscriptions (1957). However, they do not go into great detail, since their concern is with dating of inscriptions. The Gordons discuss arrangement in paragraph form, and go into details concerning the use, position, and formation of the interpunctum as a simple word-divider—and the omission of it. Their chapter headed "Punctuation" deals almost entirely with the interpunct. They consider other punctuation only in connection with the occurrences of it on the inscriptions published in their Album of Dated Latin Inscriptions (1958). These scholars leave us with little definite information on the subject of punctuation. The impression given by their comments is that Latin writing did not utilize syntactical or sense punctuation at all. It would seem that an understanding or appreciation of the use of punctuation in the classical age is not much more widely diffused among scholars in our day than it was in Ferrara's. Marcel Durry, in what is the latest edition of the text of the so-called Laudatio Turiae (Paris, 1950, with a sheet of addenda and corrigenda, c. 1952), prints in II.2a-3a of the text a restoration (his own) which simply ignores the punctuation that is clearly visible on the stone before the preceding word. The stone shows that a new clause began with the word ornamentis, but Durry's restoration makes the new clause begin after that word, although restorations that would not violate the punctuation

3 L o w e is thinking primarily of the vellum codices in which the occasional points to set o f f words appear usually, if not invariably, to have been added b y a hand later than the scribe's; cf. infra, p. 23 note 11.

14

T H E PROBLEM OF

PUNCTUATION

(e.g. by de Sanctis, reported in Durry's apparatus) are possible. I shall not here attempt to decide what is the correct restoration: I merely point out that it apparently did not occur to Durry that the punctuation had any significance at all. The term 'punctuation,' in the restricted sense in which I shall use it here, refers to the use in writing of certain signs to show the end of a sentence or to indicate its structure or the interrelation of its parts for the sake of clarity to facilitate reading. Marks may also be inserted, again for the sake of clarity, to show pauses in speech even when no syntactical consideration would demand them. In a somewhat broader sense, a system of punctuation includes the arrangement of the material into paragraphs by using spacing and indentation to mark off units of subject matter. And in the broadest sense, any sign that is not a letter of the alphabet is a mark of punctuation. I may therefore delimit the topic by listing related matters which fall outside the scope of this dissertation. 1. The interpunctum as a word-divider. This falls outside our topic because word-division was universally used during the period in which we are interested and is therefore to be taken for granted. Indeed, what will be significant for our purposes will be the absence of interpuncts, which, unless there are contrary indications, will place the text outside the historical period in which we are interested. The division of writing into words is a practice of great antiquity, and appears to have been customary in the writing of various languages in cuneiform characters. The practice may have reached the classical peoples through Crete, for word-division is clear on the Phaistos-disk, which may be as early as 1700 B.C.4 The practice of word-division was carried into Greek when the Cretan characters were used to write that language, for Sterling Dow notes the presence of the interpunct in Linear B, "regularly inserted, as in cuneiform, between words". 5 I t is possible that the practice of word-division somehow survived through the Dark Age that followed the fall of Mycenaean culture and so persisted when the Minoan characters were replaced by the Greek alphabet. M. Lejeune in B.JS.A., LVI (1954), p. 429, remarks: "les plus anciennes inscriptions grecques connaissaient l'usage des interponctions sdparant mots ou groupes de mots, et il est remarquable que les Grecs aient 4

The Phaistos-disk must antedate the oldest specimens of Linear Β (in which an interpunct replaces the vertical line as word-divider). Leonard R. Palmer, Myceneans and Minoans (London, 1961) dates the beginning of Linear Β to c. 1400 B.C. If the Phaistosdisk comes from the period in which Phaistos was the seat of an independent kingdom, its date, according to Palmer's chronology, would be c. 1700-1600 B. C. I t remains to be seen, of course, whether the language of the disk is Luvian. And until the disk has been read, there will always remain the possibility that it is a forgery. lA.J.A. 58 (1954), p. 88, col. 2.

T H E PROBLEM OF

PUNCTUATION

15

cet usage au profit de la 'scriptio continua' de l'äge classique". I t is extremely curious that the same change took place in Latin, but after the classical age. The practice of word-division was standard in Etruscan and it was probably from this source that it entered into Latin, where it is found in the very earliest inscriptions, such as the lapis niger and the fibula Praenestina.e The word-divider is regularly found on all good inscriptions, in papyri, on wax tablets, and even in graffiti7 from the earliest Republican times through the Golden Age and well into the Second Century. As Revilo P. Oliver has pointed out, "that interpuncta were thought to be virtually an element of the Latin alphabet may be seen from PSI 743 (I/II), a curious fragment in which a Greek text has been transliterated in Latin characters, and the words accordingly separated by interpuncta".8 Seneca regarded the use of interpuncts as a characteristic of the normal writing of Latin: "nos etiam cum scribimus, interpungere adsuevimus". 9 The remark is made in passing to point out the contrast between Greek and Latin temperament, i.e. Greeks use scriptura continua, Romans interpungunt, distinguishing their words clearly even in writing. The reference is at least to the use of word-dividers; it is possible that Seneca was also thinking of punctuation for sense. 10 Throughout these periods the word-divider was a dot placed half-way between the upper and the lower edge of the line of writing. That the original form was a vertical line may be inferred from the Phaistos-disk. With alphabets which used the letter I, to avoid confusion with that letter, the vertical line was broken to form three dots arranged vertically, as in the oldest Etruscan inscriptions and on the so-called lapis niger in Latin. The simplification to two dots and then to a single dot was an obvious development. Two dots seem normal on the fibula Praenestina (c. 600 B. C.), with three as an exception. The evolution from two to one is beautifully illustrated by the two parts of the tabulae Iguvinae11 where the two dots divide words in the retrograde abandonne

• The Duenoa-bowl, with its retrograde characters, is an exception, but the words have not yet been satisfactorily read, so that we cannot guess whether the absence of the interpunct could be explained in terms of great antiquity, foreign origin, semi-literacy, or religious convention. 7 Good examples are C. I. L. IV. 1893 and 1894, which cannot be much earlier than the destruction of Pompei. 8 Τ. A. P . Α., L X X X I I (1951), pp. 241-242. »Ep. Mor. IV. 11. 11. 10 The latter meaning is taken for granted by Walter C. Summers in the notes ad loc. in his Select Letters of Seneca (London 1910). 11 The limits of the dating of the tabulae Iguvinae are 300 to 89 B. C., according to Tabulae Iguvinae, editae a Iacobo Devoto (Romae, 1940), pp. 51-52. cf. Poultney, Bronze Tables, pp. 200-289.

16

T H E PROBLEM OF P U N C T U A T I O N

text in the old alphabet, but the single medial point is used in the later text, written left-to-right, with the new alphabet. The single medial point became the normal word-divider in Etruscan (e.g. the Liber Zagrabiensis, c. 50 B. C.-50 A. D.) and became standard in Latin at a very early date, subject only to a few early variations in shape, evidently for decorative purposes. The Gordons have described the shape of the interpuncts in early inscriptions: "Although our collection includes some Republican examples of crosses, crosses within squares, and squares and triangles cut in outline, Part I of the Album has none of these types of punctuation. The regular punctuation exemplified here consists for the most part of cut-out, down-pointed triangles, and a smaller number of cut-out ' c o m m a s ' . . . . Both triangles and commas are generally placed at mid-height, but they show appreciable variation in shape, direction, position, and comparative size, often within the same inscription." 12 As a rule, interpuncta are used simply to divide words, except that prepositions are only rarely separated from the word they govern, if this follows next. Although interpuncta used as word-dividers greatly increase the legibility of the text, they are not punctuation in the sense in which I use the term. In that sense, the medial point cannot be used as a sign of punctuation until it is no longer used to divide words. The regular use of the interpunct as a word-divider continued until sometime in the Second Century, when it began to fall into disuse, and Latin was written with increasing frequency, both in papyrus and on stone or bronze, in scriptum continua. As Professor Oliver states, " I t was evidently during the Second Century that there took place in Latin Buchwesen one of the most astonishing cultural regressions of ancient history. Within that century interpuncta and regular punctuation disappear, apices become rare and sporadic, and lines become solid blocks of scriptura continua. For this amazing and deplorable regression one can conjecture no reason other than an inept desire to imitate even the worst characteristic of Greek books." 13 So far as I know, no study has been made to determine at what dates the scriptura continua was an in12

Contributions, p. 183. Τ. A. P. Α., L X X X I I (1951), p. 242. Professor Oliver further states: "Interpuncta survive in the fragment De Servio Tullio (POxy. 2088) of the Second Century. A good specimen of the new style is PRyl. 473, a relatively luxurious book which was reused for accounts in the Third Century, and is therefore assumed to have been produced in the Second; it has solid lines, no punctuation at all, and only occasional apices. E v e n in a grammatical treatise, PMich. 429 (II/III; cf. Lowe, Codices, §212), in which one might suppose clarity t o have been particularly desirable, punctuation disappears except where it is necessary to distinguish a vowel or diphthong under discussion from the surrounding text. Of course, some sporadic punctuation is to be found in later manuscripts, but, so far as I know, no attempt was ever made to abandon the scriptura continua or to return to the fine lucidity of Augustan standards." 13

T H E P R O B L E M OF

PUNCTUATION

17

novation in good writing, became an accepted fashion, and then became normal. The use of the word-divider appears to decline steadily through the Second Century. It never entirely disappeared, and very late texts can be cited which use the interpunct regularly,14 but there must have been a time at which this usage was recognized as intentional archaism. In this dissertation, my purpose is to deal with the classical period, and hence with the punctuation that was used in texts in which words were divided by interpuncts. I shall use later evidence only where there is some reason to believe that the punctuation is a survival—or deliberate revival—of what was prevalent before the interpunct went out of general use. 2. Hederae distinguentes, which appear only on inscriptions, are normally merely ornamental elaborations of the interpunctum. I shall consider only the rare instances in which they appear with regular interpuncta and seem to indicate a stronger division. 3. The apex and l-longa are, strictly speaking, phonetic signs, but the fact that they are not used for every long vowel15 does make them punctuation in an extended sense, especially when they appear on inflections and so do show syntactical relation. They are not, however, punctuation in the restricted sense, although their use may frequently make clear the meaning that might not otherwise be immediately apparent without a mark of punctuation in the strict sense. I therefore exclude apices as phonetic symbols; an apex—or, if you prefer, a mark exactly like an apex—is used as a sign of punctuation, usually placed above the interpunct, and this, of course, I shall discuss.18 4. A space may be as much a mark of punctuation as a written sign, and was so used in both inscriptions and literary texts.17 This I shall consider, but I shall limit myself to divisions within paragraphs. The common practice of dividing Latin texts into paragraphs according to subject matter, and indicating the paragraphs by beginning them on a new line, usually extended 14 E . g. P. Oxy. 871, which, according to the editors, may be as late as the Fifth Century, and thus later than the great vellum codices of Vergil, regularly uses interpuncta. It is a fragment, perhaps of a treatise or diatribe, that deals with a moral subject. 15 cf. Quint. I. 7. 2: ut longis syllabis omnibus adponere apicem ineptissimum est, quia plurimae natura ipsa verbi, quod scribitur, patent, sed interim necessarium, cum eadem littera alium atque alium intellectum, prout correpta vel producta est, facit. , β I note in passing that the mark of punctuation which exactly resembles an apex is probably the source of some (not all) apices that we find erroneously placed over the first or last syllable of a clause or sentence. This, I think, should be taken into consideration in any future study of the use of apices. 17 cf. Robert Seymour Conway's preface to his edition of Livy (Oxford, 1914), §51: "Vestigium antiquitatis, quod, quoad incorruptum mansit, vix est cur Livio ipsi abnegemus, in Puteano servatum est, cum persaepe intra vola narrationis spatium iv vel plurium (interdum etiam x) litterarum vacuum reliquit."

18

T H E PROBLEM OF P U N C T U A T I O N

into the left margin, is a different topic. And naturally, I shall not go into the division of texts into numbered paragraphs (capita,),1* such as Cicero takes for granted in the text of laws19 and such as are found in the Lex Gallia Cisalpina of 705/49 (C. I. L. I 2 , 592) and the Lex Coloniae Oenetivae of 710/44 (C I. L. I 2 , 594). 5. I shall not be concerned here with the lectionary signs (signa critica) that the Romans borrowed from the Alexandrians. I t will suffice to mention that these may be found in Reifferscheid^ edition 20 of the Reliquiae of Suetonius, and that the most recent listing of them is by Karl Büchner in his contribution to the Atlantis Verlag's Geschichte der Textilberlieferung (Zürich, 1961), Band I, pp. 329f. In this dissertation I shall use the following procedure in reproducing texts. All inscriptions published in the C. I. L. are cited from that work; others from the publication in which they are most readily available (e.g. from the Annie iSpigraphique rather than the original publication, unless there is a difference in the text that is significant for our purpose here). For each inscription I have reproduced or summarized an indication of the object on which the text appears (e.g. "tabula marmorea" or "cippus marmoreus" or "basis quadrata" or "urna marmorea"), but have omitted all details concerning its ornamentation, discovery, and present location. (Inscriptions lost before they were examined by modern epigraphers have been generally disregarded, since early transcriptions can not be relied upon for the details of punctuation.) The volume of the C. I. L. indicates whether a given inscription is Roman, Italian, or provincial; a more precise statement of the place where the inscription was set up would have no significance for the present study. For inscriptions taken from sources other than the Corpus, I have stated the region in which they were found. Where the editors have dated the inscription on the basis of either epigraphic or historical evidence, I have quoted or summarized their dating. Papyri and manuscripts are quoted from the source that contains the most complete reproduction of the text available to me. Except where otherwise noted, I have reproduced the whole of the text under consideration, but I have omitted without comment additions made on the stone at a later time or inscriptions appearing on other sides of the same

18

cf. Gordon, Contributions, pp. 151 — 155. ' E.g. Cie. De leg. Agr. III. 2. 4.: "Caput est legis quadragesimum, de quo ego consulto", implies that the hearers had somehow before them copies in which the paragraphs of the law were clearly numbered for reference. 20 C. Suetoni Tranquilli praeter Caesarum Libros Reliquiae; edidit Augustus Reifferscheid. Lipsiae in aedibus Teubneri, 1860, pp. 137-144. l

T H E PROBLEM OF P U N C T U A T I O N

19

monument and, in the case of papyri and manuscripts, corrections and marginal annotations by later hands. All texts are reproduced line for line as they appear in the original, but it was not feasible to make the right hand margins regular or to show variation in the size of the letters used for each line. I have reproduced all punctuation, apices, and I-longae, but have not attempted to reproduce ligatures or to show letters which are somewhat taller than others for merely decorative reasons (as Τ and Y frequently, and other letters occasionally, appear in some styles of lettering). In the interests of clarity, I have taken no notice of broken letters in inscriptions or partly preserved letters in papyri; where these seemed certain, I have reproduced them as part of the text without indication, and where they were mere traces, as part of the restoration. We are here interested exclusively in punctuation, and any attempt to reproduce such epigraphical and palaeographical details in printed copy would merely confuse the eye unnecessarily. Restorations, which, unless otherwise indicated, are those of the editor of the text, or, where more than one restoration is proposed, the restoration which the editor appears to prefer, are here given in italicized lower-case letters. Square brackets are used only in a few cases where it seemed necessary to show the edge of the preserved stone or papyrus. I n a few instances I have thought it desirable to add a transcription of the text with modern capitalization and punctuation; in these transcriptions, restorations are within square brackets, and corrections are shown by italics.

II

THE TESTIMONY OF THE GRAMMARIANS

I t is difficult to say when the system of punctuation in which we are here interested was introduced or first came into use. As we have said, punctuation to separate words appears in the earliest Latin inscriptions and was standard usage at least from the time of the so-called lapis niger. The practice of dividing words from one another could at any time have suggested the division of a sentence into groups of related words forming a syntactical unit or otherwise so related that they could be set off from the rest. The earliest form of punctuation for sense appears to have been a blank space. Clear instances are found in the well-known Senatus consultum de Bacchanalibus, which can be precisely dated to 186 B. C. Of other marks of punctuation, we can only say that Cicero mentions them in passing1 and that we find them in use in the time of Augustus, evidently as an established practice and with no suggestion that they are a novelty; there are a few examples in short texts which may come from the last years of the Republic, while the paucity of long texts, whether on bronze, stone, or papyrus, from that period prevents us from determining whether or not they were in general use. I t is natural to associate the development of systematic punctuation for sense with the use of apices and other devices to facilitate the reading of Latin texts, which are believed to have come into use about the time of Sulla, i.e. around 80 B. C. This general likelihood is a little supported by the consideration that the most common mark of punctuation, the virgula (/) has the same form, and is sometimes of the same size, as the apex. I t is not likely that punctuation came into use without being discussed ' I n De or. III. 44. 173 he mentions rhythmical clausulae (versus in soluta oratione, explained as numeri quidamJ as a means whereby clausulae are, so to speak, made orally interpwnctae, the rhythm replacing the librariorum notae. This suggests that punctuation for sense was common, if not universal, in Latin books in Cicero's time. But it would be temerity, I think, to argue that the reference proves that punctuation was in common use in Roman books by September of 91 B. C., the dramatic date of the dialogue.

THE TESTIMONY

OF T H E

GRAMMARIANS

21

by some of the authors who concerned themselves with the proper writing of Latin. We are certainly entitled to conjecture that Lucilius ( f l 0 3 B. C.) probably said something about punctuation by blank spaces (which was certainly known to him), if not by special signs (which could have been known to, or even invented by, him, even though no example has survived from his time), in the thirty books of Saturae of which only a thousand lines, or less, have survived.2 We know that he took an extraordinary interest in devices to make Latin writing more perspicuous and immediately intelligible, going so far as to urge that a genitive singular of the second declension (e.g. pueri) be differentiated by spelling from the nominative plural (puerei) to assist the eye, although there was no difference in pronunciation.3 We owe this knowledge to the almost fortuitous preservation of a single fragment, and it is only reasonable to suppose that such a mind would have taken an interest in punctuation for sense as another means of assisting the reader. It is not unlikely, therefore, that he made some reference to it somewhere in the twentynine thousand lines or so that are lost. It is entirely possible that Varro discussed the subject somewhere, if not in the De Lingua Latina, where there appears to have been no place for it according to the necessarily sketchy outline of the contents of the lost books reconstructed by modern scholars,4 then in some other work, for in his De Sermone Latino5 he recommended the use of a special mark (nota I transversa) to call attention to short syllables that occur in verse at points at which the metre leads the reader to expect a long. Lucilius and Varro are the only two writers of the Republic whom we can identify as having discussed subjects closely related to punctuation for sense, but we could expect the subject to have been treated by some, if not by all, of the numerous Latin writers who dealt, more or less professionally, with the orthography and grammar of the Latin language during the late Republic, when such punctuation seems to have come into use, and during the early Empire, when we know that punctuation was regularly used in books and frequently used in long inscriptions. It is true, however, that the comparatively numerous fragments of the grammatical writers of the two periods, collected 2

There are 120 numbered lines in Lachmann's edition (Berlin, 1876), but m a n y of these consist of a single word. 3 Lines 317-19 Lachmann. Lucilius m a y have stipulated that I-longa was to be used in the genitive singular; cf. Velius Longus quoted by Lachmann ad loo. A difference in pronunciation cannot be presumed from 322-23. 4 For such an outline, see Roland G. Kent's introduction to his edition of Varro in the Loeb Library, pp. ix-xi. 5 Frag. 66 Goetz and Schoell ( = 46 Funaioli). I t is not clear whether Varro's discussion of written metrical accents in Greek (Frag. 84 G-S = 282 F) was to have any application to Latin.

22

THE TESTIMONY

OF T H E

GRAMMARIANS

by Funaioli 6 and Mazzarino, 7 contain no reference whatsoever to the subject. Since it is scarcely conceivable that none of these writers mentioned the matter, and is probable t h a t many did, this silence will seem extraordinary until we remember that most of the fragments of these writers were preserved by the later grammarians, such as Diomedes (late Fourth Century), Charisius (late Fourth Century), and Priscian (early Sixth Century), whose works have come down to us more or less intact and are thus, in a sense, responsible for the loss of the far more valuable treatises of the grammarians of the classical age. Our fragments of the earlier writers, therefore, have not been preserved by chance and at random, but by selection on the part of the later writers. I t is a reasonable inference, therefore, t h a t those writers preserved by quotation only passages which they deemed relevant to the 'modern needs' of a decaying civilization, and therefore disregarded as otiose references to a system of punctuation that had become obsolete long before their day. The late grammarians, whose works have been collected and edited by Keil in an edition which is still accepted as the standard 8 and, it appears, is not likely to be superseded in our time, 9 do not by any means neglect the question of punctuation. On the contrary, they lay down, with really astonishing agreement and unanimity, definite rules of punctuation, which, they imply, are, or should be, universally used in the writing of connected Latin discourse. But the rules they give do not pertain to the specifically and distinctively Latin punctuation in which we are here interested; on the contrary, the rules enjoin the use in Latin of a system developed for Greek. Thompson mentions the regular system of Greek punctuation developed in the schools of Alexandria, invented by Aristophanes of Byzantium (260 B. C.), using "the full point with certain values in certain positions (Θέσεις): the high point (στιγμή τελεία), equivalent to a full stop; the point on the line (ύποστιγμή), a shorter pause, equivalent to our semicolon; and the point in a middle position (στιγμή μέση) an ordinary pause, equivalent • Grammaticae Romanae Fragmenta, collegit Hyginus Funaioli. Vol. I. Lipsiae in aedibus B. G. Teubneri, 1907. (This volume is devoted to fragments from the Republican period; the death of the editor prevented continuation of this edition.) 7 Grammaticae Romanae Fragmenta Aetatis Oaesareae, collegit Antonius Mazzarino. Vol. I. Augustae Taurinorum in aedibus Loescheri, 1955. (This volume covers the period from the accession of Augustus to the death of Nero, and includes a few addenda to Funaioli; the second volume has not yet appeared.) 8 Except for Charisius, for whose work an incomparably superior edition b y C. Barwick appeared in the Bibliotheca Teubneriana (1925). 9 Keil's Grammatici Latini is now being reprinted, without change and presumably without addenda or corrigenda, by the Olms Verlag in Hildesheim. With all due respect to Keil, whose great work was published in 1855-79, with a supplement in 1923, it seems extremely improbable that new editions could not effect some improvements in the texts. For one example, see below, p. 24., n. 15.

THE TESTIMONY OF THE GRAMMARIANS

23

to our comma". 10 He stated: "The punctuation of Latin MSS. followed in some respects the systems of the Greeks. . . . From the Latin grammarians we know that they adopted the Greek system of punctuation by points (Θέσεις, positurae), to which they gave the titles of 'distinctio finalis', 'subdistinctio', and 'distinctio media'; but in practice we find that the scribes11 used the points without consistently adhering to their meaning." Of the dozen or more grammarians who discuss the system of punctuation (positurae or distinctio12·), it will suffice here to quote two of the more extensive treatments.

10

Edward Maunde Thompson, Introduction to Greek and Latin Palaeography (1912), p. 69. 11 Thompson's attribution to the scribes of the punctuation in our early parchment codices is certainly wrong in many cases and doubtful in almost all others. I n these codices, beginning with the fragmentary schedae Fulvianae of Vergil and the codex Palatini, which may be the oldest of the complete or approximately complete codices (cf. Oliver, Τ. A. P. Α., L X X X I I (1951), pp. 251-54), the writing is in scriptura continua into which almost all of the punctuation has been fitted. Punctuation in a space left by the scribe is probably his work, but points fitted into scriptura continua probably are not and are, in any case, too small to show differences in ink or style of writing. The subscription to the Mediceus of Vergil, "Turcius Rufius Apronianus . . . legi et distincxi codicem" and, a little later, "distincxi emendans," and other colophons recording t h a t someone "distinxit et emendavit" (see O. Jahn, Berichte . . . der k. Sachs. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, Phil.-Hist., 1851, pp. 327-72), strongly suggest t h a t in the Fifth Century, and perhaps earlier, codices were delivered to their purchasers in scriptura continua with little or no punctuation of any kind, and t h a t the purchaser was expected to supply the distinctiones just as the purchaser of a French broche today is expected to cut the leaves. I n any event, the person who distinxit appears to have been principally concerned with inserting points to show the division of words where the scriptura continua would be most misleading and a few apices to differentiate words. The Mediceus and Palatinus, for example, show no signs of systematic punctuation for sense, whether by the scribe or by a later owner of the book. Codices which do show a system approaching t h a t prescribed by the late grammarians—notably the codex of Juvenal written about 600 A. D. which I mention below—have punctuation which the editors (in this case, C. H. Roberts) positively identify as the work, not of the scribe, but of a second hand. For another example, see the papyrus codex (P. Ryl. 477) of Cicero, Div. in Q. Gaec., written in good halfuncials of the Fifth Century; according to E. A. Lowe (Godd. Lat. Antiq., II, 226), the punctuation is entirely the work of a second hand, although the original scribe may be responsible for some of the few marks over long vowels (e.g. contra me). 12 cf. Sergii De accentibus (in Donatum) (Keil IV, 482): cum distinctio species sit positurae, tamen abusive pro ipsa positura, hoc est pro ipso genere, accipimus distinctionem. nam cum sit codex emendatus distinctione, media distinctione, subdistinctione, dicitur tamen codex esse distinctus.

24

T H E TESTIMONY

Dosithei Ars Orammatica

OF THE

GRAMMARIANS

(Keil V I I , 428):

Distinctio est silentii nota cum sensu terminato. huius autem signum est punctum supra versum positum. 1 3 subdistinetio est diuturnitas quaedam temporis differens orationem ad sententiae qualitatem. 1 1 huius autem signum est punctum sub versu positum, u t est illud, et si f a t a deum, si mens non laeva fuisset, impulerat ferro Argolicas foedare latebras; Troiaque nunc staret, Priamique arx alta maneret. 1 5 non enim similiter u t in distinctione silentium interpositum tacere permisit. media vel mora est silentium legitimae distinctionis subdistinctionisque medium obtinens locum, quae hoc solum servat officium, u t legentis spiritum levissima respiratione refoveat et nutriat. sic enim pronuntiando reticere quia debet, quoad spirat, quia spiritus ipse a defectione vincatur, deinde vires resumat. multae autem causae mediae huius lectionis, primum ne confundantur quae dicola vel tricola ponuntur; deinde u t actus verborum emineat et luceat, qui ex aliquo venit affectu vel indignatione seu misearatione conlata, aut certe quadam artatione sermonis quae emfaticos a poetis * . siquis itaque sine media spiritus suspensione pronuntiaverit aut hoc inclusi in ligno occultantur Achivi aut haec in nostros fabricata est machina muros inspectura domos venturaque desuper urbi aut aliquis latet error equi ne credite Teucri, confunditur ratio compositionis generali nomine ligni machinae equi. et lectumque iugalem, quo perii, super imponam: hoc enim voluit intellegi Dido non esse lectum iugalem, quo perierit. immorandum est ergo et respirandum post 'iugalem' et sic inferendum cum νποκρίοεως affectu 'quo perii.' distinguere autem oportet ante similitudines, quas Graeci parabolas vocant, et ante redditas ανταποδόσεις et siquando a persona da personam transitus erit factus, et ante 'aut' coniunctionem et ante casum vocativum et ante 'sed' et ante 'quoniam' et ante interrogativa, 1 * u t 13

cf. [Sergii] Explanationum in Donaium liber I (Keil IV, 533-534): ubi enim plenus est sensus, hoc est ubi f i t clausula dictionis cuiuslibet, punctum ad caput litterae ponimus. 14 cf. Diomedis Artis Grammaticae liber I I (Keil I, 436-439): subdistinetio est silentii nota legitimi, qua pronuntiationis terminus sensu manente ita suspenditur ut statim id quod sequitur succedere debeat. . . . subdistinguendum enim est pro voluntate dicentis. 15 I quote verbatim from Keil's edition, on which I am necessarily dependent. Dositheus (assuming t h a t he is the author of this work; cf. Schanz-Hosius §836) undoubtedly wrote the quotation with his own punctuation, including, of course, the punctum sub versu positum t h a t he is here illustrating, and the appropriate points in the later quotations. W h a t traces, if any, of this punctuation are preserved in the manuscripts cannot be determined from Keil's edition. 16 As will be obvious from the context, what Dositheus means by interrogativum a moment later is a vocative apostrophe or interjection; if we knew hie punctuation, we could tell whether he means the same thing here or is referring to the interrogatives (in our sense of the word) qui and unde.

T H E TESTIMONY

OF T H E

GRAMMARIANS

25

quis deus, ο Muaae, qui nobis e x t u d i t a r t e m , u n d e n o v a ingressus h o m i n u m experientia oepit? post interrogativa, u t Musa, mihi causae m e m o r a .

Cassiodorii De Orthographien (Keil VII, 145 — 146): Illud e t i a m vos m a g n o p e r e credidi commonendos, u t distinctiones s e n s u u m sollicita m e n t e perquirere ac ponere debeatis, 1 7 sine q u i b u s n e q u e legere q u i c q u a m c o m p e t e n t e r n e q u e intellegere praevalemus. scire a u t e m d e b e m u s D o n a t u m a r t i g r a p h u m de posituris i t a tractasse, u t n o n ibi o r d i n e m sed virtutee e a r u m potius exprimere v i d e a t u r . n a m si distinctionum seriem p e r g r a d u s cognitos sequeretur, p r i m o p l e n a m , deinde m e d i a m n e q u a q u a m ponere potuisset; nec i n d e magis inciperet, ubi p r a e d i c t a e p o s i t u r a e ad f i n e m tendere c o m p r o b a n t u r . sequitur subdistinctio, deinde media, q u a e p l e n a s semper praecedunt p o t i u s q u a m s e q u u n t u r . sed sicut visum constat esse doctissimis h u n c debemus ordinem custodire, u t primo de subdistinctione dicamus, q u a e ibi semper a p p o n i t u r , ubi in c o m m a t e sermo suspensus a d h u c r e d d e n d u s esse cognoscitur, u t a r m a v i r u m q u e cano, ubi totius operis s u m m a conclusa est. a r m a enim (ancilla) Vergilius v i r u m q u e d i c t u r u s est. sed q u o n i a m 'cano' respicit a d u t r u m q u e , hie, id est in ' a r m a , ' subdistinctio recte p o n e n d a est. m e d i a m vero a d f i g e n d a m c o n s t a t in commate, c u m nullus sermo deest, sed g r a d a t i m t e n d i t ad p l e n a m , u t dividimus muros, et moenia p a n d i m u s urbis. plena est a u t e m , ubi f i n i t u r p e r f e c t a sententia, u t est illud, t a n t a e molis erat R o m a n a m condere g e n t e m . subdistinctionem vero vel m e d i a m n o n credas i p s u m ordinem semper t e n e r e q u e m diximus, u t subdistinctio p r a e c e d a t e t m e d i a c o n s e q u a t u r ; sed p r o r a t i o n e s u p r a d i c t a locis congruis a p p o n u n t u r , u t distinctiones istae bene positae sensum n o b i s lectionis evidenter aperiant. n a m si aliter distinguas, sine d u b i t a t i o n e c u n c t a confundis. h a s vero distinctiones seu posituras D o n a t o t e s t a n t e Graeci thesis vocant. periodus est a u t e m p e r l o n g u m plenae sententiae d u c t a pausatio, cuius p a r t e s s u n t cola et c o m m a t a . 1 8

Such, then, is the system prescribed by the grammarians. So far as I know, there is no Latin manuscript which embodies this system of punctuation. There are some approximations to it, of which an interesting example is provided by a page from a parchment codex of Juvenal found at Antinoe in Egypt and published by C. H. Roberts, who assigns the date of c. 500 A. D. 19 This manuscript was written in uncials and scriptum continua; a second, but contemporary, hand supplied punctuation, marks of quantity (macron 17 cf. [Sergii] Explanationum in Donatum liber I (Keil IV, 533-534): o m n i s enim res initium h a b e t , s e q u e n t i a m e t clausulam a u t , u t dicas hie, i n i t i u m a u g m e n t u m s t a t u m (declinationis finis sic est positio). 18 cf. Sergii De Accentibue (in D o n a t u m ) (Keil IV, 482): v e r u m m e m i n e r i m u s in p r o s a cola et c o m m a t a idem esse e t u n u m significare, in versu vero aliud e t diversum. 11 Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, X X I (1935), 199-209 (with plates).

26

T H E TESTIMONY OP THE

GRAMMARIANS

and breve), and word-accents (acute and grave). 20 There are many interlinear and marginal notes in both Latin and Greek, and it is obvious that the codex was a carefully prepared edition for the use of readers whose native language presumably was Greek. With the exception which will be noted below, the punctuation consists of a medial point, as provided by the grammarians, and a point on the line, which serves both as subdistinctio and distinctio. There is no punctum swpra versum positum to serve as full stop. 21 The following examples will show the use. I give first the text as punctuated in modern editions and then the text from Antinoe. VII. 157-164: nosse v o l u n t omnes, m e r c e d e m solvere nemo. "Mercedem appellas? Quid enim scio?" Culpa docentis scilicet arguitur, quod laevae p a r t e mamillae nil salit Arcadio iuveni, cuius mihi s e x t a q u a q u e die m i s e r u m dirus c a p u t H a n n i b a l implet, quidquid id est de quo deliberat, a n p e t a t u r b e m a Cannis, a n p o s t nimbos e t f u l m i n a cautus c i r c u m a g a t tnadidas a t e m p e s t a t e cohortes.

In the manuscript this is: nosseuoluntomnesmercedemsöluerenemö . 3 mercedemappellasquidenimscio · culpadocentis scilicetarguitur · quodlaeuaepartemamillae 3 nllsdlitarcadicöjuueni · cuiusmihisexta quaq-dieimiserumdiruscaputhännubalimplet quidquididestdequodeliberat · a n p e t a t u r b e acannis · a n p o s t n i m b o s e t f u l m i n a c a u t u s circumägatmadidasatempestatecohörtes.

VII. 184-190: Q u a n t i c u m q u e domus, veniet qui fercula docte componit, veniet qui p u l m e n t a r i a condit. H o s inter s u m p t u s sestertia Quintiliano, u t m u l t u m , d u o sufficient: res nulla minoris c o n s t a b i t p a t r i q u a m filius. " V n d e igitur t o t Quintilianus h a b e t s a l t u s ? " E x a m p l a n o v o r u m f a t o r u m transi. Felix e t pulcher e t acer e. q. s. 20 R o b e r t s s t a t e s positively t h a t all these m a r k s are supplied b y t h e second h a n d ; the scribe, however, appears t o h a v e l e f t a little room for t h e p u n c t u a t i o n in m o s t places, a n d a t o t h e r points left, it seems, a slight space where no p u n c t u a t i o n was supplied or needed. 21 Some medial p o i n t s a r e higher t h a n others, b u t it is d o u b t f u l t h a t a distinction between these a n d t h e o r d i n a r y medial p o i n t was i n t e n d e d ; certainly t h e higher points are n o t f u l l stops.

THE TESTIMONY OF THE GRAMMARIANS

27

-

qudnticumq domumu0nietquiferculad0cte conpönit • uenietqiiipulmentariacondit 3 hösintersümptussestertiaquintilidnö utmultumdiiosufficiunt · resnüllaminöris constduitpatriquamfilius · undeigiturtot quintilianushabetsaltus • exemplanouörum fatörumtransi · felixetpulcheretäcer

The dot on the line clearly stands for a full stop; it is also used, however, to separate the two parts of an alternative question (163) and to separate the two parallel clauses that begin with veniet (185). The use of medial points instead of a full stop in 189 and 190, and also in 158, probably indicates that the question and reply were regarded as forming part of the same unit of thought. With these exceptions a point on the line appears where modern editors place a period, except at the end of 185, where it may have been omitted by oversight or have been effaced by damage to the parchment. What makes this particularly interesting is the presence of the two marks "3" in the passages which I have cited. These are regarded by the editor as lectionary signs, but they could also be old punctuation of the kind with which we shall deal below—marks that somehow survived to even this late text. The one in 157 is superfluous unless it was added to emphasize or strengthen the full stop that appears before it, but the one in line 185 may replace the point which, as a sign of the full stop, one would expect to find in that place. One of the few examples of a superior sign that corresponds to the grammarians' full distinctio, may be found in P. Oxy. 1379, written in mixed uncials which may be as early as the end of the Third Century. It contains Livy, I. 5.7-6.1. I give the words that precede and follow the text, so that the sentences may be complete. Romulus non cum globo iuvenum—nec enim erat ad vim apertam par—sed aliis alio itinere iussis certo tempore ad regiamuenirepastoribus adregemimpetumfacit etadomonumitorisalia comparatamanu · adiuuat remus · itaregemoptrun cat > numitorinterpri mumtumultumhostes inuasiseeurbematque adortosregiamdictitans cumpubemalbanamin arcempraesidioarmisque obtinendamauocasset • postquamiuuenesperpetra tacaedepergereadsegra tulantisuidit. extemplo

28

T H E TESTIMONY OP THE

GRAMMARIANS

aduocatoconcilio . scele rainsefratris · originem nepotumutgeniti ut educati, ut cogniti essent, caedem deinoeps tyranni seque eius auctorem ostendit.

Noteworthy are the use of points on the line to set off an ablative absolute construction (though not a similar construction a few lines earlier, perpetrata caede), of medial points to show that Remus is not the subject of obtruncat and to show that both scelera and originem are parallel objects of the verb ostendit. We have already called attention to the full stop after obtruncat. This is the only end of a complete sentence in our fragment (some modern editors place a full stop after Remus, but others use a colon). There are, of course, many other examples of manuscripts from late antiquity that more or less approximate the rules given by the grammarians. These suffice to show that the grammarians' treatment of the subject was not purely theoretical, but they naturally shed no light on the punctuation that was used in the great age of Latin literature and of Rome, for which the testimony of the late grammarians is almost valueless. The testimony of the late grammarians is of some value, to be sure, for their teaching that punctuation marks indicate pauses in speaking is doubtless correct and represents much older teaching on the subject. But the system that they expound obviously can have no connection with the punctuation used in the classical age, for the points of which the grammarians speak cannot have come into use until after the separation of words by interpuncts had been completely abandoned and all texts were presumably written in scriptum continua. The doctrine of the grammarians, therefore, must date from a time when scriptura continua, which appears to have been introduced into Latin in the time of Hadrian or later, had so completely supplanted the older and clearer form of writing that no one any longer thought of using interpuncts to separate words. I t follows, therefore, that since the statements of classical grammarians who mentioned punctuation are lost, and the late grammarians describe a totally different system, our only means of obtaining information about punctuation in classical Latin is to examine the surviving texts and seek to elicit from them the rules or conventions which governed the use of punctuation.

III T H E RES GESTAE

AUOÜSTI

The questions that a systematic study of Roman punctuation must answer, so far as may be possible, may most conveniently be posed by an examination of a celebrated inscription of considerable length which contains a fairly large number of signs that were obviously inserted for the purpose of making the meaning more perspicuous and thereby facilitating the reading of the inscribed text. The Res gestae Augusti, also known as the Monumentum Ancyranum from the site on which an epigraphic copy of the text was first discovered, is certainly one of the most important, if not the most important, Latin inscription when considered from the standpoint of the historical information which it contains, and accordingly, since the time of Mommsen, it has often been called the titulus primarius or "Queen of Inscriptions" in recognition of its value as an historical document. 1 Its place in a study of Latin punctuation 1 Since the edition of the Monumentum Ancyranum that appears in the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum was prepared in 1873 before casts of the original were available to the editor, it may be disregarded. I t was superseded by Mommsen's special publication, Res Gestae Divi Augusti ex monumentis Ancyrano et Apolloniensi iterum edidit Th. Mommsen, Berolini apud Weidmannos, 1883, to which was appended a quarto supplement containing a photographic reproduction of the whole of the Ancyran text. For the subsequently discovered fragments at Antiochia, see David M. Robinson, "The Res gestae Divi Augusti as Recorded on the Monumentum Antiochenum," American Journal of Philology, X L V I I (1926), 1-54 plus plates; and Monumentum, Antiochenum, herausgegeben und erläutert von William Mitchell Ramsay und Anton von Premerstein (Klio, Beiheft X I X ) , Leipzig, Dieterich, 1927. The text of the Res gestae has been repeatedly edited and commented upon, but for the purposes of the present study only the following need be used: Res Gestae Divi Augusti ex monumentis Ancyrano, Antiocheno, Apolloniensi; recensuit Concepta Barini (Scriptores Graeci et Latini iussu Beniti Mussolini editi), Romae, 1937. (The best critical edition; excellent photographic plates of large portions of the Monumentum Ancyranum.) Acta Divi Augusti; pars prior, Romae, ex officina typographica Regiae Academiae Italicae, 1945. (The edition of the Latin text is by the editor of the volume, S. Ricco-

30

THE 'RES GESTAE AUGTTSTi'

is equally conspicuous. It is the longest and most authoritative Latin inscription that contains internal punctuation for sense (i.e. in addition to the interpuncts that divide words) now extant. Given the great contemporary importance of this document, which was written by Augustus himself and served both to exalt him and to provide propaganda for the principate as a political institution, we may assume that the official text, inscribed on two pilae aeneae erected in front of the mausoleum of Augustus shortly after his death in 14 A. D., was, in all respects, as carefully executed and as accurate an inscription as was ever set up in Rome. We have to depend on the fragmentary remains of copies set up in three relatively minor provincial towns of Asia Minor, where the normal language was Greek: Ancyra (modern Ankara), Antiochia Pisidiae (modern Yalvac, not to be confused with the far larger and more famous Antioch on the Orontes in Syria), and Apollonia Pisidiae (modern Oluburlu).2 bono; t h e Greek t e x t was edited b y Niccolo F e s t a , a n d o t h e r scholars collaborated in o t h e r p o r t i o n s of t h e volume. T h e L a t i n t e x t here given is a composite t e x t , a n d so slightly m o r e convenient for our purposes t h a n t h a t given b y Concepta Barini, whose t e x t shows only t h e A n c y r a n readings a n d relegates t o t h e a p p a r a t u s t h e readings of t h e o t h e r inscriptions.) Res Gestae Divi Augusti; t e x t e etabli e t c o m m e n t e p a r J e a n Gage (Publications de la F a c u l t e des L e t t r e s de l'Universite de Strasbourg), Paris, " L e s Belles L e t t r e s , " 1950. (Useful only because t h e t y p o g r a p h y of t e x t enables one t o see a t a glance where t h e A n c y r a n , Antiochene, a n d Apollonian t e x t s overlap.) Wilhelm W e b e r , Princeps, B a n d I, S t u t t g a r t , K o h l h a m m e r , 1936. (Contains, p p . 102-240 a n d 106*-265*, a very extensive c o m m e n t a r y o n t h e Res gestae; although W e b e r is primarily interested in t h e personal a n d political c h a r a c t e r of Augustus, his is t h e only c o m m e n t a r y t h a t considers p u n c t u a t i o n in discussing t h e readings and proposed restorations.) T h e m a n y o t h e r studies of t h e Res gestae (for select bibliographies, see t h e editions b y B a r i n i a n d Riccobono) contain nothing of significance on t h e m a t t e r s which I shall discuss. 1 refer t o t h e t e x t of t h e Res gestae b y t h e p a r a g r a p h s , which a r e indicated in t h e inscriptions a n d a r e n u m b e r e d uniformly in all editions. W h e r e a more precise reference t o t h e A n c y r a n inscription seems desirable, I use t h e usual f o r m which gives t h e n u m b e r of t h e pagina followed b y t h e n u m b e r of t h e line (e.g. I V . 3 — t h e t h i r d line on t h e f o u r t h pagina); m o s t editions show these n u m b e r s also. 2 I t is p r o b a b l y merely coincidental t h a t t h e surviving r e m a i n s of a n inscription presum a b l y set u p t h r o u g h o u t t h e R o m a n world a r e f o u n d in w h a t w a s administratively t h e province of Galatia. Of t h e three, only t h e f i r s t t w o preserve portions of t h e L a t i n t e x t a n d so serve our purposes here. I t h a s been conjectured t h a t in Apollonia only t h e Greek t r a n s l a t i o n of t h e Res gestae was inscribed; it is t r u e t h a t only f r a g m e n t s of t h e Greek h a v e been f o u n d , b u t all these come f r o m three (or n o more t h a n four) of t h e seven paginae t h a t , according t o m o s t calculations (see Barini, op. cit., p p . viii f., Riccobono, op. cit., p p . 13 f.), were needed t o contain t h e Greek t e x t . I t is h a z a r d o u s t o infer f r o m such evidence t h a t t h e L a t i n t e x t was n o t inscribed a t all—all remains of it could h a v e as easily disappeared as r e m a i n s of t h e t h r e e or four Greek paginae of which we h a v e no fragments—

THE 'RES GESTAE ATJGTTSTl'

31

Although there was a great deal of speculation and argument, so long as only the inscription at Ancyra, which is by far the most extensive of the three, was generally known and studied, concerning the possibility t h a t the Greek translation and other characteristics might have been local additions, it is now generally agreed that the inscriptions, both Latin and Greek, were copied from manuscript copies of an official text prepared a t Rome, and that the comparatively minor variations in matters of detail between the three inscriptions must be attributed to unintentional inaccuracy on the part of either the scribes at Rome who presumably prepared many copies of the official text for transmission to provincial governors or the scribes who (whether at Rome or in the provinces) made copies sent to the various towns and cities or the scribes who made the copies that were probably made for the use of the stone-cutters or the designators who presumably sketched in chalk the letters to be incised on the stone or, finally, the stone-cutters themselves. I t is possible, and even probable, t h a t each of the persons who intervened between the official text and the stone made some contribution to the very minor discrepancies t h a t are to be found in the preserved inscriptions, but it seems neither possible to determine, nor profitable to inquire, which hand was responsible for a given difference in orthography, the use of apices, or punctuation. 3 None of the observed differences between the inscribed texts affected the meaning. The most important and conspicuous of them are merely orthographic or insignificant variations of word order. The text of Ancyra, for example, has inpensarum and incohavi while the one at Antiochia has impensarum and inchoavi; the former has quae Marcia appellatur and and we must further allow for the possibility that at Apollonia the Greek and Latin texts need not have been adjacent to one another, as they were at Ancyra; ef. David M. Robinson's discussion of the placement of the inscription at Antiochia, op. cit., pp. 22—25 and Plate V I I - B . 3 A very interesting exception m a y be found in VI. 22-23, where the t e x t reads ClSTeri qui m l H I · QVOQVE . I N MA^wsTRAfV · C 0 N L E G A E · Γuerunt. The stones are so fractured that only the first apex is entirely certain (hence the differences in reporting them by Barini, Riccobono, R a m s a y and von Premerstein, and Weber, p. 164), but it is quite clear that there was no apex above quoque, where one is certainly needed, since the meaning must be quöque in magistratu (i. q. in singulis magistratibus); cf. Riccobono ad loc. and F. E. Adcock, J. B. S., X L I I (1952), pp. 10-12. N o w w e are entitled to infer that the omission of the apex is an inaccuracy that goes back to copies made in Rome, for it is clear that the m a n who prepared the official Greek translation understood the word to be quöque and so ignored it in his translation, thus obscuring a very important point that Augustus was (disingenuously, of course) trying to make. H a d the translator's Latin t e x t read QV0QVE, he could not have misunderstood, and had he grasped the meaning, he would surely have added έκάστοτε to his translation, as Riccobono notes ad XVIII. 8. The quality of the Greek translation as a whole has been much discussed; see, most recently, Riccobono's commentary on the Greek t e x t and Nicolö Festa's animadversiones criticae, appended to Riccobono's edition, pp. 65-75.

32

THE 'RES GESTAE

AUGUSTl'

the latter, quae appellator Marcia.1 There are also some differences in the use of apices, but the two texts generally coincide. Since it would be vain to speculate concerning what punctuation appeared in lost portions of either inscription, I assume that the same punctuation appeared on both and here call attention only to the very few instances in which the punctuation differs in passages preserved in both inscriptions. As is to be expected in every good inscription of the period, the interpunct is used regularly and systematically throughout to divide words from one another. As is usual, the interpunct is frequently omitted between a monosyllabic preposition and the noun that it governs, thus presumably indicating that the preposition was treated as a proclitic. One also finds here, as in other inscriptions, a curious and apparently inconsistent division of compound verbs (e.g. I N T E R • ESSENT [ I I I . 3], P E R · F f i C I [IV. 14], but R E F f i C I [ I V . 11] and P E R F I C I [IV. 16]. I t is in this usage that the two texts most frequently differ; they agree on P R A E T E R · MISSO (IV. 13), but the, Ancyran text has P R O F L I G A T A (IV. 13) and I N T E R F E C T O (V. 30) where the other has P R O · F L I G A T A and I N T E R · FECTO. I feel certain that the interpunct used within compound verbs on the Ancyran text does not differ in any way from the interpunct normally used between words; it would be extremely interesting, if David M. Robinson were correct in identifying on the text from Antiochia a special form of the interpunct in compound verbs,5 but although the interpunct in the word Ε · D I D I 0 is certainly crowded between the letters and very small (if, indeed, it is more than a flaw in the stone), in the two clearest and best preserved occurrences ( P R O · F L I G A T A and I N T E R · FECTO) the interpuncts, as shown on the available photographs and tracings, do not, to my eye, differ perceptibly from interpuncts that separate words. With the exception of proclitics, as noted above, and a very few omissions that were evidently mere oversights, the interpunct is regularly placed after every word, including words that occur at the end of a line or at the end of a paragraph. The interpunct accordingly precedes signs of punctuation for sense wherever these occur. Seven distinguishable signs of punctuation appear in the preserved copies of the Res gestae, viz. (1) a blank space; (2) a diagonal bar (/); (3) a small diagonal (similar to an apex) not much larger than an interpunct (') and placed close to it or even above it; (4) a small diple pointed to the right ( > or occasionally 7 with the top stroke nearly horizontal); (5) a sign that vaguely 4 For a list of the differences between the Latin texts of Ancyra and Antiochia, see Riccobono, pp. 17-18. s Robinson, pp. 31, 33. * Discussed b y Robinson, p. '.13; the placing of this tiny fragment of stone is in any case uncertain.

THE "RES GESTAE AUGUSTI'

3c

resembles two such diplae placed one above the other with the lower one curved (3) — and we may regard the sign ζ , of which a single instance is found in the Antiochene inscription as either a variant of this or as an oddly ornamented > ; (6) a vertical bar with hooks top and bottom (J*) found thrice on the Ancyran inscription and with minor variations that will be noted later; and (7) a sign which is at Ancyra a large inclined stroke curved at the to P ( ^ ) a n d at Antiochia consistently appears in a distinctly different form the only instance of a definite difference in "style" between the two monuments. 7 Editors, following the lead of Mommsen, do not distinguish among these various signs. Some, indeed, including, oddly enough, Sandys in his Latin Epigraphy (pp. 258-276), simply ignore the punctuation of the original; the others adopt the practice of Mommsen, who used [§] to mark a blank space and § to replace indiscriminately any of the six written signs. (The only departure from this procedure that I have noted was made by Kiccobono, who uses ~ to indicate a blank space, but retains § as a substitute for any mark of punctuation. What is more remarkable, Mommsen in his diplomatic edition of the text, although he naturally used a blank space to show a blank space in the original, used a diagonal bar (/) to replace all of the six marks that X have distinguished. Mommsen seems to have taken it for granted that these six marks were all equivalent, and in any case he was not much interested in them: "omnino re non differunt", he says, 8 "pendentque ab arbitrio scribentis notae hae omnes, Eas si qui erit qui curat, tabulas [sc. photographicas] inspiciat omnia ilia plene repraesentantes." Since I did not have access to the complete casts of the Ancyran inscription that are in Berlin (if not destroyed in the European catastrophe of 1945), Rome, and Ithaca, New York, I have had to rely on the complete photographs appended to Mommsen's edition, the photographs of a large part included in Barini's edition, and the casts of a small part of the inscription at the Uni7

The form appears consistently in the Antiochene fragments, as will be seen by inspecting the photographs and tracings. If the epigraphers who believe that they can distinguish in the Antiochene fragments the work of at least four different stone-cutters (see Ramsay and von Premerstein, pp. 19 f.) are correct, it may be significant that all four of these adopted a form of the paragraph-sign that differs very distinctly from the form regularly used in Ancyra. The reader should consult the plates in Ramsay and von Premerstein's edition without permitting himself to be prejudiced by the editors' attempt to suggest the sign on p. 22 by using such type as the printer had in his cases—with the odd result that it there does resemble the sign found in the Ancyran text much more than what is shown on the plates. This may mean that Ramsay and von Premerstein noted the difference between the Antiochene and Ancyran forms and decided that the latter was more "correct," although they say nothing about it and do not mention the difference which I have noted. 8 p. 190.

34

THE

"RES G E S T A E

AXJGUSTl'

versity of Illinois, supplemented by such hints as occasionally appear in the apparatus of Barini and Riccobono and in the commentary of Weber. As will be seen, I have had to remain in doubt at some points where inspection of the stone or a good cast might have removed the uncertainty. For the text at Antiochia, Robinson's photographs and especially the tracings given in Ramsay and von Premerstein seemed to be everywhere sufficient, except for a few fragments of the stone which are said to be now lost. The marks of punctuation that I have listed above may be clearly seen on the stones of the inscriptions, and their shapes are so distinct and different that it could scarcely be argued that one is a scribal variant or whimsical deformation of another. I should remark, however, that all marks of punctuation are more lightly incised than the rest of the inscription. The lines are not so wide as either the vertical or the horizontal bars of the letters, and they are not cut so deeply into the stone as either the letters or the normal interpuncts between words. The marks of punctuation are all thin and shallow marks, resembling in this respect the apices which are placed above long vowels. Marks of punctuation, therefore could be more easily effaced than letters. Slight damage to the surface of the stone could destroy them or enough of each mark to make it uncertain what its full form was. (As will be noted later, I have encountered a number of places where the stone, as shown by the photographs, preserves what are clearly vestiges of some sign but not enough to enable me to say definitely what is was.) It is even possible that some parts of these signs were so lightly scratched on the surface by a lapidary seeking to make a very light and thin mark as to be obliterated by mere weathering. The blank spaces, instead of being a distinct sign, could be merely spaces in which the stone-cutter either forgot to incise a mark of punctuation or scratched it on so lightly that it has now disappeared.9 Although it is possible to regard the small diagonal as merely a variant 9 Professor Oliver believes that he will be able to show in a forthcoming article that all professionally produced inscriptions were the work of at least three specialized artisans, a designator (who sketched the letters in chalk on the stone), a lapicida (who cut them with his chisel), and a miniator (who filled in the varnish, usually red, that made the inscription easily legible from a distance); and that furthermore the miniator frequently corrected with his brush, and without recalling the lapicida with his chisel, small omissions or other errors made by the cutter, e.g. an F cut on the stone could be converted to an Ε by the miniator simply b y painting the bottom stroke on the stone, and likewise an incised Ε could be corrected to F b y simply failing to fill in the horizontal stroke cut in error. Portions of letters painted in rather than cut would probably not be detected by a purchaser, if the total text was of any considerable length and the letters not very large. If this was a common procedure in making inscriptions, the probability of the possible explanation of blank spaces that I have given is considerably increased: the stone-cutter may have made no mark and the miniator may have painted in a slender mark of punctuation which, of course, was eventually washed off the stone.

THE

'RES GESTAE

ATJGUSTl'

35

of the larger one, used when it was necessary to crowd letters together or added as an afterthought when the following letter had been cut and there was no longer space available for the larger sign, and although it is conceivable that the > is merely the upper part of a 3 of which the rest has vanished, it is apparent that we are dealing with at least three basic forms, / , 3, and , ^ (or , if we prefer the Antiochene form of the sign), no one of which could be a mere illusion produced by damage to the stone or the result of a mere oversight by the lapidary. To determine what distinct values, if any, are represented by the various signs that I have listed, we must consider their function in the inscribed text. I shall accordingly proceed to examine the use of punctuation to set off the various units of the text, viz. paragraphs, sentences, and parts of sentences. PARAGRAPHS

The inscribed text of the Res gestae consisted of a title, unmistakably set off by being inscribed in much larger and more formal letters, the text written by Augustus, which is divided into thirty-five capita, or paragraphs, and a summary added at the end by another person and forming four additional paragraphs. The paragraphs are all clearly set off because the first line of each is, in conformity with the common Roman practice, extended into the left margin and begins with a conspicuous capital letter (i.e. littera capitalis, a large letter which marks the beginning of a caput or capitulum). The last line of almost every paragraph, furthermore, ends far short of the right-hand margin, thus further separating the paragraph from the one which follows, since the considerable amount of blank space thus left is quite conspicuous. Although, obviously, the paragraphs are clearly and unmistakably set off by the edentation and large initial letter at the beginning and the area of blank space at the end, so that any further indication of paragraph-divisions is pure supererogation, many of the paragraphs are terminated by the s i g a . ^ , ^ With one possible exception, which I shall discuss below, this sign occurs only at the ends of paragraphs, and must therefore be regarded as a special sign which distinctly and specifically means "end of paragraph". It is normally placed at a considerable distance from the interpunct which follows the last word in the paragraph. The sign is sometimes placed flush with the right-hand margin and sometimes about a third or a half of the way between the last word and the right-hand margin. This variation in its position, incidentally, makes it impossible to be sure that the sign did not appear after a given paragraph, if the stone is mutilated in any place where the sign could have appeared.

36

THE 'BES GESTAE AUGUSTl'

Of the thirty-nine paragraphs (35 plus 4 of the "appendix" of summaries), the last line of nineteen is either lost in both the Ancyran and Antiochene inscriptions or so mutilated that it is impossible to determine whether or not the sign ^ ^ was placed at the end of the paragraph. To these I must add the last paragraph of all, after which Mommsen and the other editors place a §, thus indicating t h a t it is followed by some kind of sign, but I cannot discern on the photographs any vestiges of it and so cannot say what shape it had or where it was placed. On the remaining nineteen paragraphs, the final line of fifteen (8, 10, 12, 14, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 32, 34, Ap. 2) is sufficiently preserved in one or both texts to show the sign which concludes these paragraphs and which is always separated from the last word by a considerable blank space, appearing sometimes on the right margin and sometimes closer to the last word than to the right margin. Of these fifteen paragraphs, both inscriptions preserve the terminal mark of two (21, 26).10 There are also in this group two discrepancies between the two texts to be noted. The terminal mark of paragraphs 15 and 25 is preserved in the Antiochene text, but does not appear in the Ancyran. The reason for this is apparent in 15, where the Ancyran lapidary was just able to complete the words of the last line, with some slight crowding, in the space available, and so had no room for the terminal sign. In paragraph 25, the interpunct following the last word is closely followed by the sign > ; the condition of the stone is such that a could have appeared later in the line. Two paragraphs of which the ends are preserved only at Ancyra end with other marks of punctuation. Paragraph 3, like the 25 just mentioned, has a > placed immediately after the last interpunct. In paragraph 27, the interpunct is followed by a considerable blank space and by the large sign ^ . In the first instance an additional 5 could have been lost, if placed at the right margin. In the second, it seems certain that nothing followed the unusual mark. In the remaining two paragraphs, both in Ancyra, there is no terminal mark. Paragraph 11, like the 15 mentioned above, has a final line that the lapidary was just able to complete at the right margin with no room left for a terminal sign. At the end of 16, however, there is plenty of room and the surface of the stone is fairly well preserved, so that it appears that the terminal sign was simply omitted by an oversight. I t will thus be seen that the terminal sign was apparently regularly employed at the end of paragraphs and intentionally omitted only where there was no room for it. No reason can be found for the two instances of > and the occurrence of ^ , apparently in place of

10

1 have already called attention to the variant form of the sign used at Antiochia

ΤΗ 10 ' r e s g e s t a e

augusti'

37

One further occurrence of ^—— remains to be noted; in the Ancyran text it is used, preceded and followed by a considerable blank space, to divide paragraph 8 into two parts. (The Antiochene fragment has lost the portion of the stone on which this sign, if present, would have appeared.) The use is not an error; it is a very strong mark of punctuation to show a complete change of subject. In the part of the paragraph that precedes the sign, Augustus reports the number of Roman citizens enumerated a t each census. After the sign, he says: "Legibus novis inlatis multa exempla maiorum exolescentia iam ex nostro saeculo reduxi et ipse multarum rerum exempla imitanda posteris tradidi." This is obviously an entirely different subject, unconnected with what precedes. I t could properly have formed a separate paragraph, and indeed, but for the clear evidence of the Antiochene text that it did not, we should infer that the Ancyran lapidary erred when he did not extend Legibus into the left margin. I t seems proper to conclude, therefore, that the paragraph sign could be used to show the kind of change of subject that would normally call for a new paragraph, even when, for some reason (perhaps because the passage would have made a paragraph of only three lines) the division was not marked by edentation and a capital letter.

SENTENCES

The style of Augustus, which has been much discussed by the commentators, 11 is simple and direct. He used comparatively short sentences, and the only room for serious doubt concerning what constitutes a sentence in our text is found where two parallel clauses are connected by et. There is, however, some little difference between modern editors in this respect, and I shall follow Riccobono, who recognizes a few more sentences than does Barini. In the text as punctuated by Riccobono there are 120 sentences, viz. one in the title, 115 in the thirty-five paragraphs by Augustus, and four in the four appended paragraphs. Now since the title is set off by its style of lettering, thirty-nine of these sentences end with paragraphs, and one, which I have just mentioned, ends with a paragraph sign, there are in the total text seventynine sentences which should have a full stop as a mark of punctuation to separate them from the sentences which follow. Of the seventy-nine places in the text at which we would expect to find punctuation showing the end of a sentence, twenty-two occur at points at which both inscriptions are defective, i.e. the stone is either missing or so mutilated that it is impossible to determine whether or not punctuation was present. Four others (in paragraphs 23, 26 bis, 30) occur at points where the "Especially Weber, op. cit., pp. 102-240.

38

THE 'EES GESTAE ATJGUSTl'

editors can evidently identify the traces of letters, b u t the photographs available to me do not show these clearly. The ends of forty-four sentences are clearly marked by punctuation of one kind or another. And at nine points where Riccobono (who does not differ greatly from other modern editors in this) places a full stop, the text shows no punctuation, thus suggesting that the writer's conception of what constitutes a sentence may not always have corresponded to Riccobono's. To this question I shall return presently. Of the forty-four instances of punctuation corresponding to a full stop, seven appear to be merely blank spaces, although in four of these seven instances the stone is so roughened t h a t I am not certain that some lightly incised mark of punctuation could not have been present at one time. The three instances where the blank space seems certain occur in paragraph 8 after tria millia, separating t h a t sentence from the following one, which begins "Tum iterum consulari cum imperio . . ."; in paragraph 27 after privignus erat, separating this from the following sentence, " E t eandem gentem. . . " and in the same paragraph after Artavasdi, separating the sentence there ending from the following "Quo interfecto T i g r a n e < m > . . .in id regnum misi." Of the thirty-seven places where marks were certainly present (and further set off by a generous allowance of space before or on both sides of them), in seven the traces on the stone (at least so far as they can be seen in photographs) are not sufficiently complete to enable me to determine with any certainty what the mark was. At sixteen places the end of the sentence is marked by a diagonal bar, and for one of these we have fortunately both inscriptions available and in accord: paragraph 20,12

RIVOS · AQVARVM · COMPLtfRIBVS · LOCIS · V E T V S T l T E · LABENTES · R E F i l C I · E T · AQVAM · QVAE · MÄRCIA · APPELLÄTVR · DVPLICAVI · FONTE · NOVO · I N R I W M · EIVS · INMISSO • I FORVM · iVLIVM · ET · BASILICAM · QVAE · FVIT · I N T E R · AEDEM · CASTORIS · E T · AEDEM · SATVRNI · . . . P E R F f i C I · e. q. s. 13

12

I n these quotations, since we are interested only in t h e punctuation, I do n o t attempt to indicate w h a t letters are mutilated or missing in one or t h e other inscription, and in the present quotation I e v e n disregard the fact t h a t t h e order of the words Marcia appellatur differs. I do n o t show the division into lines since this differs in t h e t w o inscriptions. 13 The marks of suspension in m y quotations, I need scarcely remark, show portions of t h e t e x t t h a t I h a v e omitted to concentrate t h e reader's attention on t h e essential grammatical structure in question.

THE

'RES GESTAE

39

AUGUSTl'

In eight instances, the full stop is indicated by the symbol > , and here again we have one instance in which the symbol is preserved in both inscriptions, 11 paragraph 5: ... .quAM · ITA · ADmmlSTram ut INira · D l f i s · PAVCOS · METV · E T · PERICLO · PrAESENTI · CIVITÄTEM · VNIVersam liberarem impensa et • CVRA · MEÄ · > CONSVLaiwm QVOQVe · TVM · ANNVVM · Et perpetuum mihi DELAiwra non recepi. There are two instances in which the two texts differ. In paragraph 15, the Ancyran has: . . . . HOMINVM · CIRCITER · CENTVM · ET · V I G I N T I · MILLIA · / CONSVL · TERTIVM · DECiMVM · S E X A G E N 0 S · D E N Ä R I 0 S · P L E B E I · QVAE · TVM · F R ^ M E N T V M · PVBLICVM · ACCIPIEBAT · D E D I • e. q. s. The Antiochene text divides the sentences with a > . I n paragraph 8, the Ancyran has: . . . IN · CONSVLÄTV" · SEXTO · SfiNSVM · POPVLI • CONLEGÄ · Μ · AGRIPPÄ · fiGI · I LVSTRUM • POST • ANNVM · ALTERVM · E T · QVADRAGENSIMVM · FfiCi e. q. s. The Antiochene text uses the curious symbol £ , which appears only a t this point, and may be only a reversal of the symbol 3, which appears as a full stop on the Ancyran stone in paragraph 29: SIGNA · M I L I T A R I A · COMPLVRa per A L I O S · D m C E S · DEVICTls hostibuS • REcipeRAVl · E X · HISPANIA · E T et a cWraATEIS · 3 PARTHOS · TRIVM · E X E R C I T ^ M SPOLIA · ET · SIGNA · REddere MIHI · SVPPLICESQVE P O P V L I · ROMANI • P E T E R E · COEGI ·

ÄMIssa • gallia · ROMANORVM · · AMICITIAM ·

The sign obviously marks a full stop. There is nothing, however, which would indicate that the division between the two sentences was either stronger or weaker than the division marked by / or > . The Ancyran inscription, furthermore, contains a marking which may, perhaps, be regarded as a vertical line with small hooks at top and bottom to distinguish it from an I. There are three instances of this mark, and it will be noted that each differs quite perceptibly from the others; it is also curious t h a t they occur in three successive paragraphs. 11

Stin Chapters VI and VII for other inscriptions in which this eign is used.

40

THE

'RES GESTAE

AUGUSTl'

25: I V R A V I T · I N • ME A · V E R B A · T O T A · I T A L I A . S P O N T E · S V Ä E T · M E · B E Hi QVO · V I C I · A D · A C T I V M · D V C E M · D E P O S C I T · I V R A V E R V N T · I N · E A D E M · VERöa pnwiNCIAE · G A L L I A E H I S P A N I A E e.q.s. 26: . . . E T · E I V S D E M · T R A C T ^ S · A L I I · G E R M Ä N O R V M · POPV/I · P E R · LEGÄTÖS · A M I C I T I A M · M E A M · ET · P O P V L I · R O M Ä N I · P E T I E R V N T • I MEO IVSSV • E T · A V S P I C I O · DVCTI · S V N T · duo • E X E R C I T V S e. q. s. 27: A E G Y P T V M · I M P E R I O · P O P V L I r o M A N I · A D I E C I X A R M E N I A M · M A I O R E M • I N T E R F E C T O · REGE · EIVS · A R T A X E p. η. s.

/

The three signs obviously serve as full stops. There is no perceptible difference in value between the three slightly different forms of this sign, or between this sign and / or > , where these are used to make the ends of sentences. W e now come to the nine sentences in the text as punctuated by Riccobono which are not terminated by an indication of a full stop on the stone. In one of these ( I I . 9 of the Ancyran text), inspection of the stone will show that the failure to put a mark of punctuation before the third occurrence of quo lüstro in paragraph 8 is explained by the fact that the mark of punctuation would have had to come at the end of a line which is so crowded that there was no room for it. Of the remaining instances, four can be eliminated by reducing Riccobono's two sentences to a single sentence composed of two parallel clauses joined by et. Here is Riccobono's text of the four: 8. Senatum ter legi. Et in consulätü sexto censum populi conlegä Μ. Agrippä egi. 14. Filios meos.. .senatus populusque Romanus annum quin tum et decimum agentls consules designävit, ut eum magisträtum inirent post quinquennium. E t ex eo die, quo deducti sunt in forum, ut Interessent consiliis publicis decrevit senatus. 16. I d primus et solus omnium, qui dedüxerunt colonias militum in Italia aut in provincis, ad memoriam aetatis meae feci. E t postea Ti. Nerone et Cn. Pisone consulibus.. . militibus.. . praemia numerato persolvi. 17. Quater pecuniä meä iuvi aerärium, ita ut sestertium milliens et quingenties ad eos qui praerant aerärio detulerim. E t Μ. Lepido et L. Arruntio cos. in aerarium militare. . . HS milliens et septingentiens ex patrimonio meo detuli. I t will be obvious that in each of these cases the two sentences distinguished by Riccobono deal with the same subject and could have been treated as a

THE 'RES GESTAE

AUGUSTl'

41

single compound sentence having two principal members joined by et. Augustus was noted for the impatience with which he regarded the subtleties of grammarians and for writing very much as he spoke. The loose junction of such clauses may be a stylistic weakness, but I am inclined to believe that the texts justify the tentative conclusion—in the absence of evidence to the contrary — that the copy of Augustus's work treated the four passages above as composed of single sentences rather than as composed of two. There remain, however, four instances in which no such explanation can be found to account for the omission of a full stop, viz.: 15.

. . .consul undecimum duodecim frümentätiönes frümento privatim coempto emensus sum, et tribuniciä potestäte duodecimum quadringenös nummös tertium viritim dedi. Quae mea congiaria pervenerunt ad hominum millia numquam minus quinquäginta et ducenta.

16. Pecuniam pro agris.. . solvi münicipiis. Ea summa sestertium circiter sexiens milliens fuit, quam pro Italicis praedis numeravi... 25. Mare pacävi ä praedonibus. Eö bello servörum, qui fugerant ä dominis suis et arma contra rem publicam ceperant, triginta fere millia capta dominis ad supplicium sumendum tradidi. 26. Omnium provinciarum populi Romani, quibus finitimae fuerunt gentes quae ηδη pararent imperio nostro, fines auxi. Gallias et Hispaniäs prövinciäs, item Germaniam qua includit Öceanus a Gädibus ad ostium Albis flüminis pacavi. I n the first of these passages, the quae congiaria, which refers to the whole series of previously enumerated "benevolences", could in modern writing be tacked onto the sentence by some device such as a dash, but it is clearly disconcerting to find no indication of a break between it and the preceding words. I n the other examples, we are clearly dealing with two separate, though not unrelated, thoughts, each syntactically complete in itself, and we are left to choose between omission by the lapidary and negligence by the writer as an explanation. The former is a little the more probable, since the inscriptions are not letter-perfect: the Ancyran stone has aede for aedem, and the Antiochene shows memoria for memoriam. I f a necessary letter could be omitted by the designator or ignored by the mason, a mark of punctuation could be omitted in the same way.

42

THE 'RES GESTAE AUGüSTl' I N T E R N A L PUNCTUATION

Disregarding punctuation noted by editors but of which I can discern no clear traces in the photographs, and, of course, disregarding editors' restorations,15 there are in the inscription forty-six clear examples of punctuation within sentences.16 The only mark that is limited to internal punctuation is a very short diagonal bar (') which is not much larger than an interpunct and occupies no more space, being placed immediately beside it or, in two instances, over it. The other marks of internal punctuation are all found also at the ends of sentences: I > 3 (one instance). I note however a definite tendency to allow less space for the I as an internal mark and to place the > above the mid-point in the line. In addition, a blank space on the stone is also used. One use of internal punctuation is to separate items in an enumeration. The two longest series in the inscription will incidentally suggest that the various symbols were regarded as equivalents: 19. CURIAM · ET · CONTINENS · EI · CHALCIDICVM · TEMPLVMQVE · APOLLINIS · IN PALATIO · CVM · PORTICIBVS · AEDEM · DIVI · IVLI · LVPERCAL · PORTICVM · AD · CIRCVM FLÄMINIVM · QVAM · SVM · APPELLÄRI · PASSVS · EX · Ν0ΜΙΝΕ · EIVS · QVI · PRI0REM · E0DEM · IN · SOLO · FECERAT · OCTAVIAM · /PVLVINAR · AD · CIRCVM · MAXIMVM · AEDÖS · IN · CAPITOLIO · IOVIS · FERETRI · 'ETTONANTIS · AEDEM · QVIRINI · /AEDfiS · MINERVAE · > ET · I ONONIS • REGINAE · > ET · IOVIS · LIBERTATIS · IN · AVENTINO · / AEDEM· LARVM · IN · SVMMÄ · SACRÄVIÄ · / AEDEM · DEVM · PENÄTIVM · IN · VELIA · I AEDEM · IWENTÄTIS · / AEDEM · MÄTRIS · MAGNAE · IN · PALÄTIO · FECI · 15 An interesting case m a y be found in 1.39, where Weber (p. 162*, note 598) includes a mark of punctuation in his restoration, partly because he thinks indication of a mora is needed to facilitate understanding of the sentence, and partly because a mark of punctuation appears a t the corresponding point in the Greek version, which has ΧΕΙΡΟΤΟΝΗΘΩ ' Α Ρ Χ Ε Ν Ο Υ Δ Ε Μ Ι Α Ν e. q. s. This, of course, is no proof t h a t a mark appeared in the Latin text, and, if it were, it would still be impossible to determine what kind of mark it was. I need scarcely observe t h a t in dealing with t h e Ancyran and Antiochene inscriptions, the presence of punctuation in lost portions could not be determined by measurements of space. When editors still disagree as to whether or not there is room for the restored mihi in 1.36 (see Barini's apparatus, Riccobono's note, and Weber, p. 169) measurements of space are not sufficiently accurate (since the letters vary in width) to indicate the presence or absence of a mark of punctuation. 16 Of course, I continue to follow Riccobono. The amount of internal punctuation could be increased, a t the expense of the external, by recognizing fewer sentences than does Riccobono; for example, in paragraph 8, Riccobono treats the three statements beginning with quo lustro as separate sentences, while Barini treats them as relative clauses annexed to the preceding sentence. I t seems pointless to argue about such matters here.

T H E ' R E S GESTAE ATJGTJSTl'

43

Αρ. 2. OPERA · FECIT · NOVA ·' AEDEM · MARTIS iovis tonantis et feretri apollinis D I V I I ^ L I · 'QVIRINI ·' MINERVAE iunonis reginae iovis libertatis LARVM · 'DEVM PENÄTIVM · TWentatis matris magnae lupercal pulvinaR · AD · CIRCVM · CVRIAM · CVM · CHalcidico forum augustum basilicaM. · IVLIAM · THEATRVM · MARCELLI · PORficwm octaviam nemus trans i l B E R l M · CAESARVM · One is at first sight tempted to distinguish between the three functions of the punctuation: to introduce a series (·' in Ap. 2), to separate the different items of the series when they are separated at all ( / and blank space in 19, blank space in Ap. 2), and to separate the names in the genitive in a series depending on aedes ( ' and > in 19,' and blank space in Ap. 2). But given the inconsistency found even here and the great variations found elsewhere, the partial specialization of the signs in this enumeration is probably fortuitous. A somewhat similar enumeration, this time of dates, is found in paragraph 16:

POSTEA · TI · NERONE · ET · CN • PISONE · CONSVLIBVS · ITEMQVE · C · ANTISTIO · ET · D · LAELIO · COS · ET · C · CALVISIO · ET · L · PASIENO · CONSVLIBUS · ET · L · LEwiVLO · ET · Μ · MESSALLA · CONSVLIBVS · 3 ET · L · CÄNINIO · ET • Q · FABRICIO · COe MILITiBVS... PRAEMiA.. .PERSOLVI. The space after Cäninio is clearly an error; it should have been put either after one of the earlier groups or after the final COS. The symbol 3 clearly means nothing more than a blank space. (There is no grouping of years indicated, for the years after item are 748, 750, 751, and 752 Α. V. C.). Consistency would have required the same punctuation after each pair of consuls. The other uses of internal punctuation may be classified thus: to set off ablative absolute phrases, to set off certain relative clauses, to distinguish between parallel clauses in a compound sentence, to show that two or more statements are governed by the same verb or that several genitives depend on one noun although they are separated by intervening phrases or clauses, to mark a collective apposition, and to perform some miscellaneous functions which we cannot state positively since only one example of each use is available in our text. There are four examples of the ablative absolute, including two statements of date, viz.: 8. tertiuM • CONSVLÄRI · CVM · IMPERIO · L^STRVM · CONLEGÄ · TIB · CAE.sare filio Μeo feci • /SEX · POMPEIO · ET · SEX · APVLEIO · COS. (We should note that punctuation does not appear in the precisely parallel construction earlier in this paragraph: LVSTRVM · CVNCTA · E X · ITALIA · ad comitia mea CONFLVENie mwLTITVDINE · . . .RECEPi Here, perhaps, the intention was to divide two successive ablative absolutes or perhaps to mark the end of the relative clause depending on the first. Our last example depends on an emendation of the punctuation, but this is fairly certain. The text reads: 4. Laurum de /ASCiBVS · DEPOSVI · /IN · CKPltolio votis quae QV0QVE · BELLO · NVNCVPAVERAM soZVTIS · Since Augustus did deposit the laurel in the Capitol and since he simply could not have discharged all his vows in that place,17 we are surely justified in assuming that the punctuation was mistakenly put before, instead of after, the phrase in Gapitolio. Relative clauses: 1. . . . EXERCITVM · PRIVÄTO · CONSILIO · ET · PRIVATÄ · IMPENSÄ · I COMPARÄVI · > P E R · QVEM · REM · PVBLICAM... INLIBERTÄTEM · VINDICÄm (Traces of the punctuation after comparavi are clearly seen in the photographs, although Mommsen in his edition marks a blank space at the point. 12.

. . . P A R S praetorum e T · T R I B V N O R V M plebi.. .O&VIAM · M I H I · M I S S A · Ε st in campanlAM • Q V I · H O N O S · ad hoc • T E M P V S · N E M I N I · P R A E T E R TOE · ES< decretus

(The space, which obviously serves to set off the relative clause, is clearly seen in the Antiochene text.) 16. . . . PRAEMiA · NVMERATO · PERSOLVI · QVAM · IN · REM · SESTERTIVM • quater mILLIENS • QWlcitell • IMPENDI · 21. DON«.. .CONSECRlVI · > QVAE · MIHI · CONSTITERVNT · HS CIRCITER • MILLIENS 17

See especially Weber, op. r,it., p. 13G*, note 580.

T H E ' R E S GESTAE A U G U S T l '

45

26. CLAssis mEA. . . A D · Fines cimbroruM • N A V I G A V I T · / Q V 0 ·

NEQVE · TERRA · NEQVE · MARI · QVISQVAM · ROMANVS · ANTE · ID · TEMPVS · ADIT · / CIMBRIQVE · ET · CHARYDES... AMICITIAM · ME AM. . . PETIERVNT The second diagonal either marks the end of the relative clause or the beginning of the second half of the compound sentence. In paragraph 17 a space marks the end of a series of three relative clauses, each depending on the word preceding it. Parallel clauses of a compound sentence: 15. . . . IN · CONSVLÄTV · DECIMO... HS QVADRINGENOS. . . PERNVMERaVI · /ET · CONSVL · VNDECIMVM · DVODECIM · FRVMENTÄTIÖNES · .. . EMENSVS · SVM · > ET · TRIBVNICIÄ · POTESTÄTE · DVODECIMVM · QVADRINGEN0S · NVMMÖS. . .DEDI · 20. RIVOS · AQVARVM. . . R E F ß C l · ET · AQVAM · QVAE · MÄRCIA · APPELLÄTVR · DVPLICAVI · 20. FORVM • IVLIVM · ET · BASILICAM. . .PERFECI · > ET · EANDEM · BASILICAM · CONSVMPTAM · INCENDIO.. . iNCOHAVI · ET · SI · VIVVS · NON · PERFECISSEM · PERFICI · A B · H E R E D I B V S meis iusSl ·

24. STATVAE .. .QVAS · IPSE · SVSTVLI · EXQVE · EÄ • PECVNIÄ · DONA · .. .POSVI · A somewhat similar use is found in paragraph 16: . . . sVmma sESTERTIVM · CIRCITER · SEXIENS · MILLIENS · FVIT · QVAM i>R0 · ITALIC IS · PRAEDIS · NVMERAVI · /ET · CIrCITER · BIS · MILLENS · ET · SESCENTIENS · QVOD · P R 0 · AGRIS · PRÖVINCIALIBVS · SOLVI · A principal use of punctuation is to set off two or more phrases that depend on the same noun or verb from which one is separated by a subordinate clause or other fairly long series of words. This is the kind of construction that is sometimes explained grammatically as involving an "understood" repetition of the noun or verb, e.g. the following could be explained as two parallel clauses with a repetition of tradidi "understood" in the second: 27. EANDEM · GENTEM · . . .REGI · ARIOBARZANI · .. .REGENDAM· TRADIDI · ET · POST · EIVS · MORTEM FILIO · EIVS · ARTAVASDI ·

46

THE 'EES GESTAE Α π β υ β Τ ΐ '

Similarly: 22. LVDOS · F E C I · Meo noMine QVATER · ALIORVM · AVTEM · MAGISTRÄTWM · VICEM · TER • ET · VICIENS · In paragraph 32, the punctuation (a blank space18 and two diagonal bars, all clearly having the same function, with the fourth and fifth signs probably lost in the lacuna) takes the place of a repetition of the word reges as an additional subject of the verb: AD · Mfi · SVPPLICES · CONFVGenmi REGES · PARTHORVM · TIRIDAieS · ET · POSTea · PHRÄTes REGIS · PHRATIs FILIVs MEDORVM · ARtavasdes adiabenorum ARTAXARES · / BRITANNORVM · DVMNOBELLANVS · ET · TINcommius sugambrORVM. • MAELO · /MARCAMAN0RVM · SVEBORVM «egrimeRVS · Paragraph 33: A · ME -GENTES · PARTH0RVM · ET · MEDÖRVm per legatos PRINCIPES · EARVM · GENTIVM · RfiGfiS · PETiTÖS · ACCfiPERVNT ·' PARthi vononem regis phrkTIS · FILIVM · RßGIS · OR0DIS · ΝΕΡ0ΤΕΜ · > MEDI · ARIOB Arzawem e. q. s. In this classification we must place what is, of course, the most conspicuous mark of punctuation in the entire inscription, which stands in the title to show that the two genitive plurals are parallel and depend on exemplar: RfiRVM · GESTÄRVM • D l V l · AVGUSTI · QVIBVS · ORBEM · T E R R A n m - IMPERIO · POPVLI · ROM SVBlfiCIT · /ETINPENSARVM · QVAS · IN · REM · PVBLICAM · POPULVMQVE · ROmaNVM · FECIT · I N C I S A R V M 7 INDVABVS · AHENEIS · P I L I S · QVAE · SVrcT · ROMAE · POSITAE · EXEMPLAR · SBViECTVM · I t is possible that the punctuation at the end of the second line (not reported by the editors, but clearly visible) was intended to show that the participle modifies both of the nouns in the genitive plural, but of this we can scarcely be certain without other examples of such use. Comparable uses are: 15. PLEBEI · ROMÄNAE · VIRITIM · HS TRECENOS · NVMERAVI · EX · TESTAMENTO · PATRIS · ME I · Έ Τ · NOMINE · MEO · HS QVADRINGENOS.. .DEDI · 18

Or possibly a diagonal bar; the surface of the Ancyran stone is somewhat damaged, and the Antiochene is missing at this point.

THE 'RES GESTAE AUGUSTl'

47

23. . . . CAVATO sOLO · I N · LONGITVDINEM · MILLE · ET · OCTINGENT0S · PEDflS · I N · LÄTITVDINEm mille et DVCENT In one instance, punctuation seems to set off an appositive that agrees with two antecedents: 20. FORVM · i t L I V M · ET · BASILICAM · QVAE · FVIT · INTER · AEDEM · CASTORIS · ET · AEDEM · SATVRNI · COEPTA · PROFLIGATAQVE · OPERA · A • PATRE · Μ Ε 0 · P E R F f i C I e. q. s. There remain to be noted five other instances of punctuation, viz.: 15. . . .VIRITIM · MILLIA · NVMMVM · SINGVLA • D E D I · ' ACCEPEVERINT · ID • TRIVMPHALE · CONGIÄRIVM · IN · COLONIS · HOMINVM · CIRCITER · CENTVM · ET · VIGINTI · MILLIA · The punctuation with the short virgula (·') appears in the Ancyran text; the Antiochene has D E D I • /ACCEPERVNT. What follows the punctuation can be regarded as either an explanatory addition, such as would be set off by a dash or perhaps a colon in modern writing, or as the second half of a compound sentence, which a modern writer would set off with a semicolon. 34. . . . REM · PVBLICAM · E X · MEÄ · POTESTÄTE · populique romANI aRBITRIVM · TRANSTVLI ·

IN

· SENATwä

The punctuation (space on either side of the interpunct) differs from t h a t observed elsewhere in this inscription. 25. SERV0RVM.. .TRIGINTA · F E R E · MILLIA · CAPTA · > DOMINIS · AD · SVPPLICIVM · TRADIDI · The punctuation does serve to set off the indirect object and perhaps to refer the reader from the neuter plural participle back to the servorum on which it depends and from which it is separated by the intervention of a long relative clause. Our feeling that no punctuation is called for at that point is perhaps a little conditioned by the fact that the relative clause would be set off by commas at both beginning and end in most texts, or, at least, by a comma at the end (it could be treated as a restrictive clause in English). 1. . . . EXERCITVM · PRIVÄTO · CONSILIO · ET · PRIVATÄ · IMPENSÄ · I COMPARÄVI · > P E R · QVEM · e. q. s. Since a mark of punctuation for syntactical reasons is clearly not required after impenso, the use of the diagonal at this point seems to force a pause

48

THE

'RES GESTAE

AUGUSTf

to call attention to the preceding two ablatives of means, just as a speaker would stop briefly for emphasis. A P . 4.

. . .oppidis

T E R R A E · M O T V •' I N C E N D I O Q V E · C O N S V M P T m

We cannot draw conclusions from a single example, but it is interesting to note that since the passage refers to the total of Augustus's "benefactions" to cities that had suffered disasters, the meaning of the passage is precisely of the kind that now gives great difficulty to writers of English, some of whom resort to the expedient of writing "cities destroyed by earthquake and/or conflagration," to make the precise meaning clear. I t is not inconceivable that the punctuation may have been suggested by a perception that the two causes of disaster connected by -que represent alternatives as well as a combination. 18

CONCLUSIONS

Our examination of the Res gestae as preserved in the copies set up in two cities of Asia Minor shows that: (1) Punctuation was at this time employed to expedite comprehension of the text by a reader. (2) This punctuation was probably intended to be used systematically to mark the end of complete units of thought, i.e. sentences, since the few cases in which sentences are not so marked could be the result of negligence by the inscribers. (3) Punctuation was used irregularly within sentences to show syntactical relatons and to set off clauses, but the use here appears to have depended on the feeling of the writer rather than fixed rules. (We cannot, for example, postulate that all relative clauses were to be set off by punctuation without assuming that the inscribers were more often negligent than not.) This sporadic use of punctuation seems analogous to the use of apices and I-longae to mark long vowels in this inscription and other inscriptions of the late Republic and early Principate. Although these signs were freely used and greatly faclitated reading, the Romans, for some reason not clear to us, undoubtedly felt that it was, as Quintilian said, 20 ineptissimum to mark all long vowels, and, while theoretically placing the apex only where it served to distinguish between different words or cases,21 in practice they sometimes failed to write 19

There is no suggestion of sueh a feeling in the Greek version, which has Γ10ΛΕΣΙΝ. . . ΣΕΙΣΜΩΙΚΑΙΕΝΠΥΡΙΣΜΟΙΣΠΕΙΙΟΝΗΚΥΙΑΙΣ. 20 Inst. I. 7. 2. 21 Such is the rule given by Quintilian (loc. cit.) and Scaurus (Keil VII, 33); cf. Jacobus Christiansen, De Apicibus et I Longis Inscriptionum Latinarum (1889), p. 12 et passim.

THE 'RES GESTAE AUOUSTl'

49

it where the length of the vowel affects the meaning, and frequently wrote the apex where we can see no possible distinction to be made or purpose to be served.22 Romans evidently did not seek, and certainly never attained in any extended specimen of their writing known to us, strict consistency in the use of the apex, whence it would be reasonable to conclude that their use of punctuation, at least within sentences, was equally flexible.23 (4) With the exception of the paragraph mark, the inscribed texts of the Res gestae employ a variety of symbols (including blank space), no one of which appears to have a specific and specialized force that clearly distinguishes it from the others. Each appears in constructions grammatically identical with constructions in which other symbols are used to punctuate. Y e t it seems improbable that the Romans had a rule that "to indicate punctuation, make any kind of mark that is not a letter". On the other hand, it seems unlikely that the inscribers of our texts deliberately altered or ignorantly confused the punctuation found in the copies from which they worked; and it seems equally unlikely that these copies were the work of persons who knew a variety of different symbols but were ignorant of the difference between them. There is, therefore, a need to inquire how these symbols were used in other writing at this time. I t is to answer the question that thus imposes itself that I undertake in the following chapters of this dissertation a survey of all the uses of punctuation that I have been able to find in the unfortunately limited and even exiguous amount of contemporary writing that has come down to us from the Roman world.

32 For example, in the first line of Augustus's text., the apices in P R I V A T A · I M P E N S Ä are obviously useful (but cf. the strictly parallel construction in 1.35, C V R A · M E Ä , where there is only one apex, instead of two), but the apex in P R I V Ä T O · C O N S I L I O surely cannot mean that there was a word priväius or anything like it. 23 W e may in this connection doubt that the rule now observed by all of our literate contemporaries could have become so fixed, rigid, and universal in the absence of printing.

IV LATIN BOOKS

Since we have found so astonishing a variety of marks of punctuation in Augustus' famous inscription, we may next inquire whether a corresponding variety was to be found in the books of that time. As Professor Oliver has pointed out: "The surviving specimens of Latin books [of the Augustan Age and the First Century] are pathetically meager and mutilated—for practical purposes1 they are a fragment of a papyrus roll of 21-14 B. C. which contained the second book of the Secunda actio in Verrem [P. land. 90], the remains of the Carmen de bello Actiaco found in Herculaneum [P. Here. 817], and the historical fragment De bellis Macedonicis [P. Oxy. 30] which is also the earliest vestige of a vellum codex (c. 100 A. D.)—but these by the unanimity of their testimony (supported, of course, by the good inscriptions and carefully written documents of the same period) suffice to show that Latin literary texts were written with careful and elaborate punctuation: words separated by spaces containing interpuncta, clauses set off by two forms of virgulae corresponding roughly to our comma and semicolon, sentences terminated by a stronger mark of punctuation, and long vowels distinguished by apices and I-longae wherever necessary to facilitate comprehension of the text." 2 I shall accordingly examine these three early documents. It must be noted that interpuncta are used throughout all of them to separate words. 1 Of the three fragments of ancient books, the oldest and, in some respects, the most significant is the piece of papyrus (P. land. 90) that contains a few lines from Cicero's In Verrem II. ii.2. This certainly comes from the period ' T h e list which follows is, "for practical purposes", complete, unless one chooses to question the exclusion of the fragment of the Oratio Glaudi that I discuss, infra, pp. 63 ff. I have listed all the known papyri from the period in which we are interested in the appendix of this dissertation. II Τ. A . P . Α., L X X X I I (1951), p. 241.

LATIN

BOOKS

51

21-14 Β. C.,3 and is given, on grounds not entirely clear to me, the specific date of 20 B. C. by P. Collart in his article, "Les papyrus litteraires latines",4 in which he describes it as the "doyen" of Latin papyri; Collart's precise date is adopted by Cavenaile.5 It is certainly the "oldest extant manuscript of Cicero",® and is sometimes described as the oldest extant Latin papyrus.7 It is written in a precise and professional hand, with ample space between lines that have an almost mechanical regularity of alignment,8 and with a right-hand margin that is designed to please the eye, although it could not be made vertically even because the scribe was obviously obeying some rule that forbade him to divide words between lines. It did not belong to a lime de luxe—at least there is no trace of either ornamentation or the regularity in the formation of letters that could be attained by drawing rather than writing them9—but there is every indication (that one could expect to find in so short a passage) that it came from the kind of book that would be produced for persons who wanted a clear and accurate10 text without unnecessary expense. Although we must be cautious in generalizing from so small and unique an example, it is hard to resist the conclusion that chance has preserved for us a specimen of the ordinary professionally produced book of the early Augustan age. The punctuation of this fragment may best be exhibited by writing the words contained in it above the complete text of the passage as printed and punctuated by modern editors,11 thus: 3 See Josef Sprey's commentary to the first publication of the fifth fascicle of Papyri Iandanae (Leipzig, Teubner, 1931). 1 Revue de Philologie, H i e serie, XV (1941), pp. 112-128. 5 Corpus Papyrorum Latinarum (Wiesbaden, 1958), p. 70. 8 Sprey, loc. cit. 7 The one exception is the short letter written by a slave in Egypt under the last of the Ptolemies, if the dating by Schubart and Mallon is correct (see below, Appendix, under No. 246). There is also a fragment of undetermined date (Appendix, No. 103). 8 But for the letters R and Q, which regularly descend below the line, one would suspect that the scribe wrote with the help of a straight-edge. Either the lines were lightly ruled in some way on the papyrus or the scribe had acquired a remarkable ability to keep his lines straight on the bottom. 9 One thinks of the codex Augusteus and other examples of square capitals; these come, of course, from a much later period, but there is no reason why the formal lettering of inscriptions should not have been imitated in de luxe books in Augustan times. 10 Even in a text so short as this papyrus, it may be significant that there are no errors. The correct reading, clauderetur, is also found only in the "best" manuscripts of the Ciceronian text, but one does not know when the corruption, claudebatur, found in the deteriores first entered the tradition. 11 Klotz' latest edition (1) omits the comma between ut, quos and (2) omits the commas between victoriae, mansuetudinis, continentiae. Peterson's Oxford edition (1) adds a dash after the commas that set off the phrase quae cum manu. . . clauderetur and (2) omits the comma between ornatam, ut.

52

LATIN

BOOKS

2. Quäre P. Äfricänus Carthägine deletä Siculörum

Μ · VRBES SIGNIS · urbes signis

MONVMENTISQVΕ monumentisque pulcherrimis exornävit, ut, quös victöriä

PVLI · populi

R · MAXIME · LAETARl · ARBITRABATVR ' R.maxime laetäri arbiträbätur, apud eös monumenta victöriae LOCARETK · DENIQVE · ILLE · IPSE plürima collocäret. Denique ille ipse Μ. Marcellus, cuius in ES/ · MISERICORDIAM · VICTI · ' FIDEM · Siciliä virtütem hostes, misericordiam victi, fidem ceteri Μ • SOCIIS · IN · EO · BELLO · CONSULVIT ·' Siculi perspexerunt, nön sölum sociis in eö bellö consuluit, VERVM · ETIAM · Μ · PVLCHERRVMAM · verum etiam superätis hostibus temperävit. urbem pulcherrimam SYRACVSÄS · QVAE · CVM · MANV Syräcusäs, quae cum manü münitissima esset, tum loci natura RR · AC · MARI · CLAVDERETVR · 'CVM LIOQVE · terra ac mar! clauderetur, cum vi consioliöque cepisset, ηδη EM · PASSVS · EST · ESSE · 'SED · ITA · RELIQVIT · ORNATAM/ sölum incolumem passus est esse, sed ita reliquit ornätam, ut Ε/ esset idem monumentum victöriae, mansuetüdinis, continentiae, cum homines viderent, et quid expugnasset et quibus pepercisset et quae reliquisset. I t will be seen that this papyrus exhibits three distinct marks of punctuation whose significance is evident from the modern text placed below it, viz.: (1) The mark Κ (perhaps representing kaput), which is distinguished from an ordinary letter by being both taller and descending below the line of writing and which clearly marks a full stop at the end of a sentence.12 I t is regrettable 12 One might be tempted to ask whether K, if it is, indeed, taken from the word kaput, is not rather the indication of a paragraph as a unit of text, since such units were, at least in laws, called capita (cf. supra, p. 18), but a glance at the text will show that while a sentence is completed with collocaret, there is no change of subject matter. Since we have mentioned paragraphing, I will add that I do not think it a coincidence that the first line in the papyrus (as shown by the spacing) began with the first word of what is marked chapter 2 in our printed texts. I believe that this was a caput also in the papyrus, indicated by extending the two or three letters into the left margin and perhaps also by making the first of those letters somewhat larger than its normal size.

LATIN

BOOKS

53

that this is the only occurrence of the sign in this or in any other extant text with this significance, but there is, fortunately, evidence which shows that the sign is not a mere accident or eccentricity here, but was a recognized mark showing a strong division.13 We may therefore accept the use of Κ as a full stop. (2) The short diagonal ('), which sets off clauses. (3) The longer diagonal ('), which appears to be distinguished from the shorter by coming well above the line of writing and being a little curved to the right at its upper extremity. It also sets off clauses, but our fragment is not long enough to permit us to say exactly how it differs in significance from the shorter, if, indeed, it is more than a mere variation of that mark. We have only two examples of it. In one it sets off a statement beginning verum, etiam that completes and marks a contrast with a preceding clause that was introduced by non solum,—and we could here assign to it a special value. On the other hand, in the other occurrence of the long diagonal, after virtutem hostes, it is hard to see how it can differ in force from the shorter diagonal that occurs after the next two words, misericordiam vidi, a precisely parallel construction. It is barely possible, of course, that the longer diagonal marked the first in a series of nouns (hostes. . .victi...ceteri) that are all subjects of the following verb (perspexerunt), while a weaker mark of punctuation was suitable after the second in the series, but this seems doubtful. One cannot assume that there is design in the fact that the longer diagonal in its first occurrence precedes, and in the other follows, the interpunct. The fragment therefore shows that there were at least two marks of punctuation in use, one to mark the end of a sentence and the other to set off clauses within the sentence, but it does not show that there were necessarily two marks of internal punctuation that would correspond to the modern comma and semicolon. Given the importance and interest of this fragment, I here show the complete text of the passage as restored (with punctuation) by the distinguished Italian papyrologist, Aristide Calderini (Papiri Latini, no. 3). QVARE · Ρ · AFRICANVS · CARTHAGINE · DELETA · SICVLORVM · VRBES · SIGNIS · MONVMENTISQYE · PVLCHERRIMIS · EXORNAVIT· /VΤ · QVOS · VICTORIA · POPVLI · R · ΜΑΧΙΜΕ · LAETARi · ARBITRABATVR/APVD · EOS · MONVMENTA · VICTORIAE · PLVRIMA · CONLOCARETK · DENIQVE · ILLE · IPSE · Μ · MARCELLVS · CVIVS · IN · SICILIA · VIRTVTEM · HOSTES /· MISERICORDIAM · VICTI · /FIDEM · CETERI · SICVLI · 13

The K, exactly in the form that it has here, is used repeatedly in P. S. I. II. 142 to separate hexameters that are written two to the line. This has been assigned to the Third or Fourth Century; I wonder whether the dating should be reconsidered.

54

L A T I N BOOKS

P E R S P E X E R V N T / · N O N · SOLVM · SOCIIS • I N · EO · B E L L O · CONSVLVIT · /VERVM · ETIAM · SVPERATIS · HOSTIBVS · TEMPERAV I T K · V R B E M · P V L C H E R R V M A M · S Y R A C V S Ä S · Q V A E · CVM · Μ Α Ν Ϋ · MVNITISSIMA · ESSET · TVM · LOCI • NATVRA · T E R R A · A C · M A R t · C L A V D E R E T V R · /CVM · V I · C O N S I L I O Q V E · CEPISSET · / N O N · SOLVM · INCOLVMEM · PASSVS · E S T · E S S E · / S E D · ITA · RELIQVIT · ORNATAM/ · VT · ESSET · IDEM · M O N V M E N T V M · V I C T O R I A E / M A N S V E T V D I N I S · C O N T I N E N T I A E ·/ CVM · H O M I N E S ·

2 Our second example differs in two ways: it contains verse and it may be as much as a hundred years later in time. I t is obviously earlier than the eruption of Vesuvius in 79 A. D., but there is now no way of telling whether it was a copy made shortly before that eruption or a copy that had been preserved for a long time. If it is part of the poem by Rabirius, which was written shortly before 20 B. C.,14 it could conceivably be of the same age as the fragment of Cicero, but Rabirius' poem enjoyed a very high reputation in antiquity 15 and perhaps had something of a vogue in the time of Seneca, who quoted from, and alluded to it, 16 so that copies of it were probably always available and in circulation. I t is, perhaps, safest to think of our copy as probably not many years older than the catastrophe which preserved it. The Carmen de hello Actiaco (P. Here. 817) is the only Latin fragment from Herculaneum that presents more than a word or two of legible text. 17 There are quite a few fragments which contain enough text, usually in the form of two or three words from each of four or five lines, to indicate the subject of the verses, but the only fragments sufficiently long to show the structure of sentences are the eight parts of columns that are shown in the apographs lettered from A to H. 18 I t may be helpful to examine these fragments in order, so that both negative and positive evidence will be shown. 14

See Garuti, op. cit., pp. xxix-xxxiii. Velleius Paterculus (II. 36. 3) lists "Vergilius Rabiriusque" as the ingenia "quae maxime nostri aevi eminent". 16 Ibid., pp. x x v , x x x . " T h e only others, I believe, are P. Here. 1067 and 1475, for which see Lowe, Codd. Lai. Antiq. II, Nos. 386 and 387. They yield only a few words and show that interpuncts were used; the subject matter seems to be oratorical. 18 For the study of this papyrus, I have relied on Hayter's apographs (Oxford) as published in Walter Scott's Fragmenta Heraulanensia (1885), and I use his designation of the columns b y letters. Ioannes Garuti's edition (1958) is helpful for the apparatus criticus and commentary, but shows none of the marks of punctuation seen in the original. Ioannes Ferrara (1908) includes apographs of the smaller fragments as well as the columns, 15

LATIN BOOKS

55

In column A no mark of punctuation (other than the interpunct) occurs in the fragment. It should be noted, however, that every line is mutilated at every point at which we should expect to find punctuation.19

Column A C.. .V» MaXIM cAELesTIA CaESARIS A . . . APvd pHARIAM aRTiiiS · ILLE oppugnATO cVM Ε · . .A PORiw QVEM · I W E N E M · RAN. .AVOS · ERAT · DEfendere cVwcTA BELLA · FIDE · DEXTRAQVE · POfENS · RERVMQVE · PER Vsum CALLIDVS · ADSIDVos iraCTANDO · IN MVNERE martiS · IMwINET · OPSESSIS · ITALuS · IAM · TVRRIBVS · AosTIS · A SA ηEC · DEFVii IMPETVS · ILLIS · Column Β is very mutilated, but shows the end of five of the ten lines. A double mark, like two virgulae, appears at the end of line 4. It can only be conjectured, because of the fragmentary nature of the preceding lines, that this mark is intended to represent more than the end of a sentence—perhaps a complete change in subject matter or tone. The scene seems suddenly to shift from the wholesale destruction and chaos of a captured city to a general (Caesar) who by his command is restoring order.20 but he indicates the location of the punctuation marks only by parallel lines. I have also consulted an unpublished restoration of the poem by Professor Oliver. In my transcriptions, I use Hayter's apographs for the letters and signs in the papyrus, with Professor Oliver's restorations, which, of course, incorporate suggestions of earlier editors. 19 1, e., so far as we can guess from the context, we should expect a full stop after Martis and possibly after Ulis, and perhaps lighter punctuation after portu. At all of these points the papyrus is missing (see Hayter's apograph). Line 5 is scarcely intelligible, but suggests t h a t some clause ends with bella in the next line. Here the papyrus was sufficiently damaged so t h a t the / in jide is only partly preserved. A mark of this kind seen in line 7 of column C would, therefore, have been lost a t t h a t point. I t is even possible t h a t what Hayter took for the upper left angle of the F was t h a t mark. 20 We could perhaps expect punctuation after suorum. (what follows is clearly words uttered by Caesar), and after either the lost words t h a t end the next line or before quondam in the following line. At all of these points the papyrus is defective. However, Caesar's speech may be a question (Quid capitis iarrt capta?) followed by a statement (Quae iacent. . .subruitis); if so, there was no mark after capta. A very curious point is raised by line 5; if the restoration is correct, the hexameter is completed by the word Caesar. This is immediately followed by a hole in the papyrus of three to four letters in extent, beyond which most of the letter A is visible in the apograph. Could this have been the sign ^ t h a t we find in column Ε ?

L A T I N BOOKS

Column Β S · ..QV NT-IPSO RE · EDVNT · P A ® M I A · TerRIS et foedA Ilia mAGIS · QVAM · Si coN^esSTA L A T E R e N T apsolvi impensä mea, arnica tellus lit det ho < s >pitium össibus,

102

THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

and virgulae would mark the beginning of lines of verse and so fall outside the scope of this study. I now give examples of the use of the virgula to divide the items in a series of appositives. The first is taken from a huge and oviously expensive sarcophagus which the Corpus describes as an area gemina ingens. C. I. L. IX. 2845. Ρ · PAQVIVS · SCAEVAE · ET · FLAVIAE • FILIVS · CONSI · ET · D I D I A E · NEPOS · / BARB I • ET · DIRVTIAE · PRO · NEPOS SCAEVA · I QVAESTOR · DECEM · VIR · STLITI · BVS · IVDICANDIS · E X · S · C · POST · · QVAESTVRAM · QVATTVOR - VIR CAPITALIS · E X · S · C · /POST · QVAESTVRAM · ET · DECEM · VIRATVM · STLITIVM · IVDICANDARVM · TRIBVNVS · PLEBIS AEDILIS · CVRVLIS · / IVDEX · QVAESTIONIS · / PRAETOR · A E R A R I I · I PRO · CONSVLE · PROVINCIAM · CYPRVM · OPTINVIT VIAR · CVR · EXTRA · V · R · E X • S · C · I N QVINQ · PRO · COS · ITERVM · EXTRA · SORTEM · AVCTORITATE · AVG · CAESARIS ET · S · C · MISSO · AD · COMPONENDVM · STATVM · I N · R E L I Q W M · PROVINCIAE · CYPRI · FETIALIS · CONSOBRINVS · IDEMQVE · VIR · FLAVIAE · CONSI · F I L I A E · • I BARBI · PRONEPTIS · SIMVL · CVM · EÄ · CONDITVS C. I. L. IX. 2846. FLAVIA · CONSI • ET · SINNIAE · FILIA • / SCAPVLAE · ET · SINNIAE · NEPTIS · /BARBI · ET · DIRVTIAE PRONEPTIS · I CONSOBRINA · EADEMQVE · VXOR · Ρ · PAQVII · SCAEVAE · F I L I I · SCAEVAE · CONSI NEPOTIS · BARBI · PRONEPOTIS · / SIMVL · CVM · E 0 · CONDITA In both inscriptions, the punctuation in the indications of descent was made more or less necessary by the unusual inclusion of the names of the mothers and also by the unusual designation of the father by his cognomen rather than < rogänt > quod omnes [rogant], sed felices impetrant. Nam quid < t a m > egregium quidve cupiendum est magis, quam tibi < t u > lucem [libertatis] acceperis, lasaace >[m] aenectae spiritum ibi depönere, quod innocentis < vitae > signum est mdximum.

THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

103

his praenomen. No mark appears after pronepos in the first part, probably because this comes at the end of the line. That a break is clearly intended is shown by the mark which appears after the parallel proneptis in the second part. The omission of the virgula in the first inscription after filius may be an oversight, or it may have been felt that this part of the name was sufficiently clear without a sign. The diagonals in lines 2, 3, and 4 (ter) of the first inscription again set off items in a series, viz. the various stages of the man's career. Wilmanns7 notes that in line 6 his priesthood is separated from the other offices by a blank space. It may be possible that a virgula was originally intended here, as in the other places. We should have expected a virgula before post in line 2; the meaningless double interpunct after that word may show that the lapidary was confused here. Virgulae were presumably omitted at the ends of lines; hence we do not find punctuation after plebis (line 3), obtinuit (line 4). But surely the omission of a virgula before proconsule iterum in line 5 must be a stone-cutter's error. A somewhat similar, though less perspicuous, use may be observed in the following: C. I.L. X. 1081. Μ · V I R T I 0 · Μ · F / MEN CERAVN0 I l E D I L t · IIVIR • IVRE DICVNDO · PRÄEFECT0 · FABRVM · V · VIR e. q. s. Although again the editor notes "virgulas, quibus commata separantur," this is very vague—in fact, incorrect. The intention probably was to make a name clear which has an unusual cognomen. The abbreviation MEN is, of course Menenia (tribu). One has the impression that the virgula was felt to be only a slightly stronger form of the interpunct. Comparable in that respect is another inscription in which the first two names in a series are set off by virgulae. C. I.L. VI. 10848 (tabula marmorea). AELIA ARSINOE/ ET AELIVS HILARVS/ ET AE LIVS TIMOTHEVS IVNIOR · ET · Ρ · ANTONIVS ARSINOVS · ET • Ρ · ANTONIVS MARINVS e. q. s. I t will be noted that the next three names are set off by points rather than virgulae. From the practice observed in other inscriptions, fairly certain conjectures can be made concerning the use of virgulae in quite fragmentary stones. 'No.

1124.

104

THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

C. I.L. IX. 4133. ]L VOLVsius ] · Τ · MALLius JCAIVS I Q • VOMponius orchesfRAM · STRAVERVNT · PODIVM · ET · TRIBIVNaZ et statuam iVSTITIAE · AVGVSTAE / DECVRIONIBVs ZVDOS · SCAENICOS · QVADRIDVO · ET[ The editor mentions "virgulas quibus commata separantur." But the letters CAIVS must be part of a nomen. Apparently all the names in this list were separated by virgulae. The mark in line 5 is of uncertain meaning. I t could show that a new sentence begins or that a previous verb is inferred. I have left to the last an example of particular interest since it shows the virgula apparently used as a sign of suspension: C. I. L. VI. 16521 (parva urna marmorea). c. 62 A. D. 5-7: D I E · NATAL · I I I · Κ · FEBR Ρ · MARIO I ET · AFINIO · GALLO · COS The virgula apparently indicates that the name of the first consul is not yet complete and that therefore the cognomen Gallus goes with both, as is certain, for P. Marius Gallus and Afinius Gallus were in office at least from January 1, 62, until March 2, perhaps until October 27. 4. VIRGULA GEMINATA

Found only in the Carmen, where it has a force greater than that of a full stop but less than that of a paragraphos. 5. THE SIGN 1)

Found only in the Res gestae, where it indicates a full stop. 0. THE SIGN ^

(i) Full stop after a question (Carmen). (ii) To separate parallel and antithetical phrases (Carmen). I can cite but one other instance of this sign. The Gordons point out a "peculiar mark" which they describe as an "inverted-apostrophe-like mark before

THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

105

the freedwoman's cognomen," 8 and note t h a t previous editors have failed to show the mark. The stroke appears slightly less curved in their plate t h a n the corresponding signs in the Carmen, but it is probably identical, since it is placed just before and a t the top of the letter it precedes. I t separates the cognomen of a liberta from her nomen: CARISIA r NESIS · Ο L · The rest of the inscription records a series of victories by an agitator; the last date in this list is 25 A. D. Presumably the inscription was set up not long thereafter by Carisia, who p u t her name a t the top b u t does not explain her connection with it. If her name was really Carisia Nesis, the use of the sign seems inexplicable.

7. T H E S I O N

(i) Marks (redundantly) the end of a paragraph (Res gestae). (ii) Marks a break, much stronger than a full stop, within a paragraph (Res gestae, Senatus consultum de pretiis gladiatorum). The type used to represent this sign in the Corpus' transcription of the De pretiis gladiatorum is certainly misleading as to its shape. The same type is used, and so the same sign is probably intended, in the transcription of a tiny fragment of what appears to have been a set of regulations for a temple of Iuppiter Behelepharus: C. I. L. VI. 30934 (tabula marmorea). Iovi 6 E H E L E P A R O QVI S[ ]C DEO MORE PÄTRIO S AOCERIT Ρ N I QVID IN ]RASE V E L I T AD I S REBVS Q . . ASTVS ADITO ITEM A SVILI OMNIS G E N E R I S MELLE N I MVNDA TOTVS ANTE D I E M D E T INMOLATVM N I GVST PARTV · ANTE · DIEM X ACCI LEONAS VILIC Although the inscription is fragmentary, it is clear t h a t the sign in line 3, with extra space on both sides, marks at least the end of the sentence. One suspects that it also marks the end of a section or subsection of the regulations. 8

Album,

p. 68.

106

THE SIGNS Ο ι

PUNCTUATION

8. V I R G U L A A N S A T A

This sign ( y or 7) occurs as a full stop in the Carmen. It is not uncommon in inscriptions. It first occurs in a Republican inscription: C. I.L.I2,

1694. Ρ • MAGIVS · Ρ · F · IVNC Q · MINVCIVS · L · F · 7 CES BASILICAM · FAC CVR · DE · SEN · SENT

The sign evidently indicates that the word ce(n)s(ores) applies to both persons. The need for such a mark may have been felt because the cognomen of Magius, Iuncius, is given, but Minucius apparently had no cognomen. The virgula ansata appears with the value of a full stop in a handsome and carefully executed inscription that has regular interpuncts and some apices: G. I. L. VI. 24808 (tabula marmorea). POPILLIA-FELICVLAPIASANCTA CARA · SVIS · ET · MENOPHILO · CONIVGI · ET · COLLIB · SVO · V · A · XIIX HVNC · EGO · NVNC · TITVLVM · STATVO · TIBI · CARISSIMA · CONIVNX L^CTVÖS · MIHI · QVISCIO · QVID · FVERIS · 7 EXTREMVM · OFFICIYM • QVONIAM · TIBI · REDDERE · COGOR · ET · MERITO · HOC · FIERI · TESTIS · ET · IPSE · LOQVOR · 7 NVNC · VOS · CONTESTOR MENS · QVIBVS · OSSA · RELINQVO · TELLVS · HVIC · TVMVLO · NE · GRAVIS ESSE · VELIS There can be no question about the force of the virgulae ansatae in lines 4 and 6. In another inscription the sign appears as a mark of punctuation stronger than the virgula, which also appears, evidently with the force of a full stop.· In a part of the inscription which I do not quote here, a blank space is used to mark the beginning of a quotation.

9 I t should be noted t h a t the reading is somewhat uncertain. One editor placed a virgula where C. I. L. leaves a blank space. The editors of C. I. L. further warn: "Vide n e reliquae quoque virgulae (20, 22) a descriptore additae sint."

THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

107

C. I. L. VI. 10239 (tabula marmorea). 19-23: TANTAM PECVNIAM · DAR I · ET ·^MPLIVS · POENAE · NOMINE HS L · Μ · Ν · STIPVLATV [ SPOPONDIT · Τ · FLAVIVS • AITHALES · LlBERTVS / TVM · HORTVLOS CVM · AEDIFICIO • E[ EMPTI SVNT ET QVAE POSTEA IIS ACCESSERYNT MANCIPIO ACCEPIT Τ FLAVIVS AITHA[ LIBRIPENDE · TI · CLAVDIO · PHILETO 7 ANTESTATVS · EST · Τ · FLAVIVM · THEOPOM[ RVM Q S · S · S · EX • CAVSA · SVPRA SCRIPTA · IRE · AVT · MITTERE · IVSSIT · Τ · FLAVIVS · ST[ The sign here marks the end of a series of transactions, possibly extracted from a will, which was either quoted or reported in resume. The virgula ansata sets off what seems to be a report of the signing and witnessing of the will. In a comparatively late inscription, the virgula ansata is used to separate the verb fecerunt from the compound subject which follows it: C. I.L.Y I. 213. 131 A. D. SIGNVM · GENI · CENTVRIAE · CVM AEDE · MARMORIBVS · EXORNATA • ET ARA · SVA PECVNIA · FECERVNT 7 Q · SOCCONIVS · Q · F · CRV · PRIMVS · TVDER · ET · EVOCATI ET · MILITES · QVORVM · NOMINA · IN · ARA · SCRIPTA · SVNT DEDICAT · KAL · IVNIS IMP · Μ · AVRELIO · COMMODO · ANTONINO · AVG · III · L · ANTISTIO · BVRRO · COS Another example will show the sign used as punctuation not for syntactical reason but in response to some feeling that the libertus who sets up the monument should mark a difference between himself and his family on the one hand and his patron on the other. C. I. L. VI. 28960a (tabella marmorea). DIS · MANIBVS Μ · VINICIVS · FAVSTVS · FECIT • SIBI · POSTE RISQVE · SVIS · 7 ET · Μ • VINICIO · ALLI MO · PATRONO · BENE · MERENTI AEDICLA · C O L V M B A R V M IUI·

108

T H E S I G N S OF P U N C T U A T I O N

It may be worthy of remark that in some late inscriptions 10 the sign 7 appears as an ornate form of the interpunct, possibly through some confusion with the hedera. 9. D I P L A

(i) Twice used, perhaps by error for the sign J , to mark the end of a paragraph in the Res gestae. (ii) When used with a blank space, a full stop (Res gestae, Lex collegi). (iii) With most or all of the functions of the modern comma (and therefore indistinguishable in function from the virgula similarly used): to set off subordinate clauses, phrases that are parallel and governed by the same verb, and syntactically separable phrases (ablative absolute), and to separate items in a series (Res gestae). Among further examples of the use of the dipla is an extremely interesting inscription of the year 114 A. D. which reports the official authorization for the construction in Caere of a phetrium—a structure of unknown nature 11 for the use of the local college of Augustales. As the preamble makes clear, the inscription quotes from the commentarium cottidianum municipi, a daily record kept by some responsible official 12 and reporting the decisions of the local decurions (and, quite possibly, other matters). We learn that this record, which must have been kept on either papyrus or parchment, 13 consisted of a series of volumes (either rolls or codices) 14 with numbered paginae, that each item of " • E . g . C.I.L.II. 4064; I I I . 13972; VI. 20948, 25935; X I I . 2091, 3693. I t obviously h a s n o value as p u n c t u a t i o n in such places, e.g. D · Μ · S7 (C. I. L. V I . 16592). 11 T h e word phetrium, n o t recorded elsewhere, occurs thrice in t h e inscription. I t h a s been conjectured (see Dessau, 5918a, ad loc.) t h a t i t is a m i s t a k e f o r phretrium, a word i m p o r t e d f r o m Greek as a s y n o n y m of schola. B u t t h e s t r u c t u r e w a s built in angulo porticüs basilicae, a n d one wonders whether it could h a v e been large enough for a schola in t h e sense of either a m e e t i n g place or a school. I t would seem b e t t e r t o conjecture phrätrium, on t h e supposition t h a t t h e Augustales regarded themselves as t h e equivalent of a n A t h e n i a n phratria a n d so would w a n t a shrine f o r t h e worship of their t u t e l a r y deities. B u t even this would be q u i t e hypothetical. 12 Dessau a n d , so f a r as I know, all other editors r e a d in line 8 P R A E F (ecto) A E R A R I , t h u s assuming t h a t C. Suetonius Claudianus held t h a t office in addition t o being aedilis iuri dicundo. B u t I wonder w h e t h e r it would n o t be b e t t e r t o r e a d P R A E F (ecti). . . C O M M E N T A R I V M , i.e. t h e record of t h e P r a e f e c t u s Aerarii, w h o could h a v e been a professional employe of t h e municipality a n d hence t h e Cuperius Hostilianus of line 5, who h a d charge of t h e commentaria a n d gave permission t o q u o t e f r o m t h e m , b u t who a p p e a r s n o t t o h a v e been one of t h e decurions (he is n o t n a m e d as h a v i n g been present w h e n t h e decision w a s reached). 13 I t is inconceivable t h a t such voluminous a n d o f t e n trivial records were inscribed on bronze or stone. 14 T h e f i r s t q u o t a t i o n comee f r o m page 26. T h e second, d a t e d four m o n t h s later, comes f r o m " p a g i n a a l t e r a " . This c a n n o t m e a n " n e x t p a g e " , because surely m o r e business m u s t

T H E SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N

109

business was entered in a paragraph or section (kaput), and these kapita were numbered on each page, not continuously throughout the volume. It will be worth while to quote the whole of this inscription, since it gives both positive and negative evidence. It will be noted that punctuation occurs only in the text extracted from the Commentarium; this may be an indication that the punctuation comes from the document itself. C. I.L. XI. 3614 (tabula marmorea). VESBINVS · AVG · L · PHETRIVM · AVGVSTALIBVS MVNICIP · CAERITVM · LOCO · ACCEPTO · A RE · Ρ SVA · IN PENSA · OMNI · EXORNATVM · DONVM · DEDIT DESCRIPTVM · ET · RECOGNITVM · FACTVM · IN · PRONAO · AEDIS · MARTIS EX · COMMENTARIO · QVEM · IVSSIT · PROFERRI · CVPERIVS · HOSTILIANVS · PER · Τ · RVSTIVM · LYSIPONVM SCRIBAM · INQVO · SCRIPTVM · ERAT · IT · QVOD · INFRA · SCRIPTVM · EST L · PVBLILIO · CELSO · II · C · CLODIO · CRISPINO · COS · IDIBVS · APRILIB Μ · PONTIO · CELSO · DICTATORE · C · SVETONIO · CLAVDIANO • AEDILE · IVRI · DICVNDO · PRAEF · AERARI · COMMENTARIVM · COTTIDIANVM · MVNICIPI CAERITVM · INDE · PAGINA • XXVI · KAPITE · VI Μ · PONTIVS · CELSVS · DICTATOR · ET · C · SVETONIVS · CLAVDIANVS · DECVRIONES · IN · TEMPLO · DIVOR · CORROGAVERVNT · VBI · VESBINVS · AVG · LIB · PETIT VT · SIBI · LOCVS · PVBLICE · DARETVR · SVB · PORTICV · BASILICAE · SVLPICIANAE · VTI · AVGVSTALIB · IN · EVM · LOCVM · PHETRIVM · FACERET · VBI · EX CONSENSV · DECVRIONVM · LOCVS · EI · QVEM · DESISERAVERAT · DATVS · EST > PLACVITQ · VNIVERSIS · CVRIATIO · COSANO · CVRATORI · OB · EAM · REM EPISTVLAM · MITTI > IN · CVRIAM · FVERVNT · PONTIVS · CELSVS · DICTAT · SVETONIVS · CLAVDIANVS · AED have been transacted in four months, so it must mean page 2 in the next "volume". The third and last quotation, dated one month later, eomes from page 8, presumably of the same volume. N o w if we assume that a month's business occupied seven to eight pages, and that no volumes intervened between April and August, the first volume, when complete, contained about fifty-eight paginae—which would be neither too long for a volumen nor too short for a codex (14 or 15 sheets of parchment, if a pagina was, as in the mediaeval codices and early printed books, both sides of a leaf). Of course, papyrus could also have been used for a codex.

110

THE SIGNS ΟΓ PUNCTUATION

IVRIDIC · Μ · LEPIDIVS · NEPOS AEDIL · ANNON · POLLIVS · BLANDVS · PESCENNIVS · FLAVIANVS · PESCENNIVS · NATALIS · POLLIVS • CALLIMVS · PETRONIVS · INNOCENS · SERGIVS · PROCVLVS INDE · PAGINA · ALTERA · CAPITE · PRIMO > MAGISTRATVS · ET · DECVRION · CVRIATIO · COSANO · SAL · IDIB · AVG · • DESIDERANTI · A NOBIS VLPIO · VESBINO · CONSILIVM · DECVRION · COEGIMVS · AQVIB · PETIT · VT · SIBI · LOCVS · PVBLICE · IN · ANGVLO · PORTICVS · BASILIC · DARETVR · QVOD · SE · AVGVSTALIB PHETRIVM · PVBLICE · EXORNATVRVM · SECVNDVM • DIGNITAT · MVNICIPI · POLLICERETVR · GRATIAE · HVIC · ACTAE · SVNT · AB · VNIVERSIS · PLACVIT · TAMEN · TIBI SCRIBI · AN · IN · HOC · QVOQVE · ET · TV · CONSENSVRVS · ESSES · QVI · LOCVS · REI · Ρ • IN · VSV · NON · EST · NEC · VLLO · REDITV • ESSE · POTEST · INDE · PAGINA · VIII · KAPITE PRIMO CVRIATIVS · COSANVS · MAG · ET · DEC · CAERETANOR · SAL EGO · NON · TANTVM · CONSENTIRE · VOLVNTATI · VESTRAE · SET · ET · GRATVLARI · DEBEO · SIQVI · REM · P N EXSORNAT · ACCEDO · ITAQ · SENTENTIAE · VESTRAE · NON · TANQVAM · CVRATOR · SED • TANQVAM · VNVS · EXSORDINE · CVM · ΤΑΜ · HONESTA · EXSSEMPLA ETIAM · PROVOCARI · HONORIFICA · EXORNATIONE · DEBEAT > DATA · PRID · IDVS · SEPTEMBR • AMERIAE ACT · IDIB · IVNIS · Q · NINNIO · HASTA · Ρ · MANILIO · VOPISCO · COS DEDICATVM · Κ · AVG · ISDEM · COS No punctuation was needed after the reference, "on page 26, in section 6," since the rest of the centered line was left blank and the quotation starts on the next line (not extended into the margin). The extract consists of three parts separated by diplae with generous spaces on each side, viz. (a) the decision of the decurions, (b) their resolution to write to the curator about it, and (c) a list of decurions present. The page and chapter reference for the second extract is not placed on a separate line; a dipla, therefore, is placed after it. There is no punctuation in the text of the letter other than the blank space which divides the salutation (oddly including the date15) from the body of the letter. 15

That the normal style of placing the date at t h e end of letters was followed a t this time and place is s h o w n b y line 21. One wonders, therefore, whether the notation "Ibid.

T H E SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

111

The letter ends in line 18 and its termination is shown only by a blank space— which suggests that the blank space was here (but not in line 15) regarded as a stronger mark of punctuation than the dipla. It is possible, of course, that the dipla was accidentally omitted by the engraver, and that it could have been supplied in paint by the miniator. The citation of page and chapter for the final quotation follows on the same line. Presumably a dipla following it was omitted because it would have come at the end of a line. In the final quotation, the salutation of the letter is not set off from the body, but the colophon, giving date and place of writing, is set off with a dipla. The failure to use punctuation within units of text thus set off (unless, perchance, the oversize V beginning the subordinate clause of purpose in line 11 was intended to set off that clause16) provides negative evidence of considerable interest.17 A somewhat similar example may be found in a late inscription (c. 168 A. D.) in which interpuncta are used with fair regularity but by no means with the consistency of earlier times. The inscription, of which only the first twenty-four lines are preserved, is a transcription on stone of a threatening letter sent to the magistrates of Saepinum by Bassaeus Rufus and Macrinus Vindex (who are later described as praefecti praeforio, eminentissimi viri), who enclosed a copy of a letter which they had received from an imperial libertus, Cosmus, who in turn had enclosed with his letter to them a copy of a letter which he had received from another imperial libertus, Septimianus. Aug." should have followed or preceded the reference to page and chapter at the beginning of this line as the date of the meeting of the decuriones at which the letter was officially approved. 16 I have considered the possibility of punctuation of this kind, but found no certain evidence of it. Many inscriptions contain some oversize letters (aside from I-longa), but they were obviously so made for aesthetic effect or, occasionally, to help in spacing. 17 Note particularly (1) that a single sentence (lines 10-12) consists of a statement that the decuriones met followed by two parallel relative clauses beginning with vbi (i.e. in eo templo), of which the first (a statement followed by an ut clause on which depends a clause of purpose) states the petition made to the decuriones, while the second records their granting of the petition. Perhaps punctuation in this sentence is not absolutely necessary, but I imagine that most readers of the text as it now stands begin by taking the second vbi as referring to the locum that occurs three words earlier and need a moment of reflection before they see that vbi must go back to the templo in line 10. (2) The names in lines 13 and 14 are not separated by punctuation of any kind; the first three names are sufficiently set off by the titles of office but thereafter the list becomes sadly confusing, particularly since there are no praenomina and multiple cognomina were frequent in this period. (3) The letter (lines 16-18) consists of four distinct sentences (hence full stops are needed after polliceretur, universis, and esses) but these are simply run together. (4) The second letter (lines 19-21) certainly needs punctuation, at least before accedo, but there is none.

112

T H E SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N

I begin my quotation with the last two lines of the prefects' letter and continue only through the first line of Septimianus's. These include all the punctuation to be found in the inscription. Of course, the long blank space in the second line of my quotation was inserted to emphasize the word vindicari (the space has about the effect that printing in bold-face capitals or in red would have today). C. I. L. IX. 2438. 6-14: RVM · CVM · MAGNA · FISCI INIVRIA NE · NECESSE · SIT RECOGNOSCI · DE · HOC ET · IN • FACTVM • SI · ITA · RES · FVERIT VINDICARI · COSMI AVG · LIB · A RATIONIBVS · SCRIPTAE · AD · BASSEVM · RVFVM · ET · AD MACRINVM · VINDIC · PR · PR · Ε · V > EXEMPLVM · EPISTVL · SCRIPTAE · MIHI A · SEPTIMIANO · COLLIBERTO · ET · ADIVTORE · MEO · SVBIECI · ET · PETO · TANTI FACIATIS SCIBERE · MAGG · SAEPIN · ET · BOVIAN · VTI · DESINANT INIVRIAM CONDVCTORIBVS · GREGVM · OVIARICORVM QVI SVNT • SVNT · SVB CVRA · MEA · FACERE VT · BEFICIO VESTRO · RATIO FISCI · INDEMNIS · SIT · SCRIPT • A · SEPRIMIANO · AD CO SMVM · CONDVCTORES · GREGVM · OVIARICORVM · QVI · SVNT · SVB · CVRA · TVA IN RE PRESENTI e. q. s. In the third line of my excerpt, we must, of course, understand the words exemplum epistulae at the beginning of the line. The dipla in the following line therefore marks the beginning of the actual copy, which begins "Exemplum epistulae . . . " The end of the letter is indicated by a fairly wide blank space, after which we must again understand the words exemplum epistulae. But the text of this letter begins with the second word in the next line, "Conductores . . ." It is noteworthy that there is neither dipla nor space to set off the quotation. An example of capricious use of the dipla for subordinate punctuation may be found in a long inscription of which the text is dated 11 A. D., but which is believed to have been inscribed (doubtless as a restoration) much later, probably in the Second Century. So far as can be determined from the Corpus and Hübner (No. 1099), there are only two marks of punctuation in the seventy lines extant. It is quite possible that others were omitted when the inscription was copied in the Second Century.

T H E SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

113

My quotation is part of a long sentence that begins with the statement that the people of Narbonne have set up an altar in honor of the numen of the (living !) Augustus; the statement is followed by a long series of clauses, each beginning with a date, important in the career of Augustus, and prescribing what rites shall be performed on that date by tres equites Bomani a plebe et tres libertini, who are to make certain sacrifices and provide at their own expense incense and wine for the colonists and inhabitants; the lines I quote are part of that series: C. I. L. X I I . 4333 (ara marmoreaj. 23-30: COLONIS · E T • INCOLIS · P R A E S T E N T · V I I · QVOQ IDVS · IANVAR · QVÄ · D I E · P R I M V M · I M P E R I V M O R B I S · T E R R A R V M • AVSPICÄTVS · E S T > T H V R E VINO · S V P P L I C E N T · E T · HOSTIAS · SINGVL I N MOLENT · E T · COLONIS • INCOLISQVE · THVS · V I NVM · E Ä · D I E · P R A E S T E N T V E T · P R I D I E • Κ · IVNIAS · QVOD · EA · D I E · Τ · S T A T I L I O TAVRO · Μ · AEMILIO · L E P I D O · COS · INDICIA e.q.s The dipla in line 25 obviously marks the end of the clause that begins with qua die and states why the date is to be commemorated. Both the paragraphing and the sign in line 28 are odd. As will be seen in line 23, the items in the list of dates are not set off in separate paragraphs, and it is hard to see why an exception should have been made here. On the sign, the editors comment: "28 ex. commatis signum videtur, qualia inveniuntur in Monumento Ancyrano". This is wrong: no sign resembling this one (which I have copied as exactly as possible from Hübner's plate) appears on the Monumentum Ancyranum, nor do I recall having seen a similar sign of punctuation elsewhere. I t is possible, of course, that in the original inscription punctuation was used to separate the items, but it is very far from certain that this sign is punctuation at all. 18 18 The mark looks very much like a letter V—it is, in fact, the same as the other V's in thie inscription, except that the left-hand stroke is just a little more curved. The dates on which sacrifices are to be offered by the equites and libertini are, in order: (1) a. d. I X Kal. Oct. (2) a. d. VIII Kal. Oct. (3) Kal. Ian. (4) a. d. V I I Id. Ian. (5) prid. Kal. Iun. etc. I am inclined to believe that this is not a coincidence.

114

T H E SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N

As a final example of the dipla in a somewhat unusual use, which however may have been common enough in written records, we may cite an inscription from the common sepulchre of a familia of gladiators. I t is worthy of note that the interpunct occurs on both sides of the mark of punctuation. C. I. L. IX. 465. 5-9:

MANDATVS · RAB · I I I • > · I I TR SECVNDVS · POMP · I · > · I I C · MASONIVS · VII · > · I U I PHILEROS · DOM · X I I · > - XI

As the editors remark: " > inter duos numeros pugnarum et victoriarum." That the dipla in this use was simply equivalent to the large sicilicus (see below) is evident from the fact that in another inscription (C. I. L. IX. 466), set up for the same familia, it is used to separate the number of engagements from the number of victories won. 10. SICILICUS MAIOR

The term sicilicus properly designates two distinct marks which have approximately the same shape but differ in size and in meaning. The small form of it, usually called simply sicilicus, is mentioned under that name by Marius Victorinus and Isidore and is called geminationis nota by Velius Longus.19 I t is a small symbol, shaped like the right-hand half or third of a small letter ο or something like a comma ('), that, as the grammarians tell us and as the few inscriptions in which it is found 20 show, was written above a single consonant to indicate that it should be pronounced as a double consonant (e.g. ΟέΑ for ossa); it was used in the late Republic and the Augustan period. The term sicilicus (which simply means 'sickle'21) is also applied to the 18

ViotorinuB ap. Keil VI, p. 8; Isidore, Etym. I. 27. 29; Velius Longus ap. Keil VII, p. 80. E.g. C. I.L.Y. 1361; VI. 21736; X . 3743; X I I . 414. 21 It seems obvious that the name of the sickle-shaped sicilicus is derived from the common Latin word for 'sickle', slcllis, and this derivation is simply taken for granted not only in the latest edition of Georges' Handwörterbuch, but also in the very recent and authoritative revision of the Lateinisches etymologisches Wörterbuch of Α. Walde and J. Β. Hofmann (3d. ed., Heidelberg, 1954), which says (s. h. v.) "von der sichelförmigen Gestalt dieses Zeichens benannt", and thinks further discussion unnecessary. The same view is stated, with a little reservation, b y Ernout and Meillet in the latest (fourth) edition of their Dictionnaire etymologique (1960), s. v. slcllis; "Peut-etre faut-il y rattacher sicilicus (scande sicilicus dans Palemon, de Ponder., temoignage tradif et sans autorite) "48e partie de l'as, 4e partie de l'once", ainsi n o m m e en raison de la forme du Symbole) qui le designe et qui a servi k noter la virgule." Ernout and Meillet's "peut-etre" is pro20

T H E SIGNS OF

PUNCTUATION

115

numerical symbol for 1/48. This symbol, although approximately of the same shape, is larger than the phonetic symbol: it has almost exactly the shape ) and is approximately as tall as the average letter in the line in which it occurs.22 The typewritten symbol ) only very slightly exaggerates the size of the numerical sicilicus and may therefore fairly represent it. The sicilicus that is approximately the size of a letter I call maior to distinguish it from what I call the minor, which was the sign of geminated consonants, since both marks are used as punctuation. As punctuation, the maior is written on the line in the same way as it is written when it designates a fraction; the minor is placed at the top of the line to the right of the last letter in the word that precedes the punctuation. It is quite possible that the Romans in the period in which we are interested called both marks simply sicilicus without distinction. Marius Victorinus, writing in the middle of the Fourth Century, designates as sicilicus a mark of punctuation to which he gives a value approximating that of the modern comma, and it is not impossible that he was thinking of two sizes of it, although his statement (at least in the text as it has been transmitted to us) is not entirely clear: Quando distinguitis, cum erit perfecta oratio et sensus concludetur, inter novissimam verbi litteram et primam insequentis in superiore p a r t e rursus p u n c t u m ponite aliud, q u a m quod librariue bably a reservation m a d e in view of the somewhat astonishing f a c t t h a t the fraction was apparently named f r o m t h e symbol, rather t h a n vice versa; m a n y other R o m a n fractions have names related t o their numerical value, e.g. triens, 1/3, quadrans, 1/4, semuncia, 1/24, sextula, 1/72, b u t scrüpulum, 1/288, and siliqua, 1/1728, have names t h a t clearly have no numerical value. The most likely name for 1/48 was dimidia semuncia, and it is easy to see why, for so common a fraction, the longer expression would have been replaced by the name of t h e symbol. An odd etymology of sicilicus, which neither Walde-Hofmann nor Ernout-Meillet t h o u g h t worthy of mention, was proposed by Viedebantt in PaulyWissowa-Kroll, s. h. v.; he thinks t h a t it m a y come f r o m Greek σικελικός, which m a y in t u r n represent some confusion with t h e Hebrew shekel, a measure of weight which could have been used b y t h e Carthaginians and so come t o t h e knowledge of the R o m a n s via Sicily—hence t h e confusion. If there were any relation between the Hebrew weight and the R o m a n fraction, this might be plausible, b u t it is extremely difficult to see how the Semitic name could have been transferred t o a weight t h a t represented either slightly less t h a n l^f or „ of the Phoenician weight t h a t corresponds t o the shekel. ProitLitA ZÖU.O feasor J o h n L. Heller of t h e University of Illinois informs me t h a t there can be no connection between sicilicus and sicilis, and t h a t t h e derivation of t h e former f r o m t h e latter is emphatically rejected in some edition of E r n o u t and Meillet. I have been unable t o locate this reference, since t h e first edition (1932), second edition (1939), and third edition (1961) all contain—at least in the copies of t h e m in t h e library of t h e University of Illinois—a statement exactly t h e same as t h a t which I h a v e quoted f r o m t h e fourth edition (1960) above. 22 For good examples, see G. I. L. VI. 2059, lines 30, 32 (Gordons, Album, plate 60a).

116

T H E SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N

inter d u o v e r b a posuit. quotiens a u t e m a n t e dist i n c t u m m o r a fuerit necessaria, similiter inter d u a s litteras άπλψ aversam, id est sicilicum, ponite. si vero fuerit h y p e r b a t o n e t longior sensus, a t vos in i m a p a r t e versus inter d u a s similiter, u t s u p r a , litteras d a r u m p u n c t u m ponite, e t si prius q u a m distinctum concluditur, m o r a i t e r u m fuerit necessaria, άπλήν a v e r s a m , id est sicilicum, similiter in ima p a r t e versus ponite. 2 3

The earliest example, so far as I know, of the large sicilicus used as punctuation comes from 17 B. C., the well-known record of the celebration of the Ludi Saeculares (cf. Monumentum Ancyranum, §22; Horace, Carmen Saeculare, 70). Its use corresponds to the short diagonal in C. I. L. VI. 4119 (above, p. 97) and the virgula in C. I. L. X. 1081 (above, p. 103) in distinguishing names. The text follows: 23 Victorinus (ap. Keil V I , p p . 22-23) is evidently i n s t r u c t i n g his pupils t o p u n c t u a t e a t e x t (probably codex) t h a t h a s been copied by a librarius, a n d he r e c o m m e n d s t h e use of t w o m a r k s of p u n c t u a t i o n , viz. (1) a clarum punctum, which is t o differ in some u n s t a t ed w a y f r o m t h e i n t e r p u n c t , a n d which is t o be placed a t t h e t o p t h e line t o m a r k a full stop, a n d (2) a sicilicus, t o m a r k a pause within t h e sentence. So m u c h is clear, b u t unf o r t u n a t e l y he h a s n o t m a d e it clear w h e t h e r t h e sicilicus is t o be placed on t h e line or a t t h e t o p of i t (one could i n t e r p r e t either way, depending o n t h e force t h a t one gives t o t h e a d v e r b similiter), a n d it is f u r t h e r uncertain w h e t h e r his m e n t i o n of t h e i n t e r p u n c t implies t h a t words were separated in t h e t e x t s he h a d in m i n d (a usage t h a t would h a v e been ostentatiously archaic in his day) or implies merely t h e occasional use of t h e interp u n c t t o m a r k abbreviations or a quoted syllable or word (as was c o m m o n enough in his d a y ; e.g. P. Mich. 429). These uncertainties, however, are m i n o r compared t o those which c o n f r o n t us in t h e second p a r t of his instructions, which s t a t e w h a t is t o be done w h e n t h e sentence is a very long one w i t h hyperbaton. This word, despite its n o r m a l m e a n i n g in rhetorical terminology, could here simply m e a n 'oversize' (from a common meaning of t h e Greek adjective ύπερβατός), i.e. a c o m p o u n d sentence, a n d m u s t h a v e t h a t m e a n i n g if distinctum m e a n s " e n d of sentence." B u t it is also possible t h a t t h e hyperbaton is a long clause of some kind, which is t o be set off a t b o t h beginning a n d end b y a clarum -punctum in ima parte versus, so t h a t t h e distinctum is t h e punctum a t t h e end of t h e clause. A t all events, pauses within it are t o be indicated b y a sicilicus which, it is definitely s t a t e d , is t o be placed a t t h e b o t t o m of t h e line. A sicilicus on t h e line would p r e s u m a b l y be as large as t h e sign of t h e fraction, i.e. a maior, whereas i t would be likely t h a t one placed a t t h e t o p or b o t t o m of t h e line would be smaller, i.e. minor. A f u r t h e r difficulty arises f r o m t h e f a c t t h a t t h e a l t e r n a t i v e n a m e f o r t h e sicilicus is twice given in t h e m a n u s c r i p t s as άπλή aversa. T h a t is a n intelligible reading, since t h e sicilicus as a curved m a r k resembling could be called 'simple' in c o n t r a s t t o t h e dipla ( > ) , which is 'double' because it h a s a n angle. T h e r e appears, however, t o be n o other reference t o a m a r k called in Greek άπλή, and some editors (including Keil) accordingly emend t o read διπλην aversam in both places. I n f a v o r of this e m e n d a t i o n it m a y be noted t h a t t h e small sicilicus c a n n o t be readily distingushed f r o m a small diple, since in so small a m a r k , n o m o r e t h a n a f o u r t h as tall as a letter, t h e scribe usually does n o t m a k e either a smooth curve or a s h a r p angle, b u t r a t h e r something " b e t w i x t a n d b e t w e e n . "

T H E SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N

117

0 . 1 . L . VI. 32232 (massa marmorea). 151-153: C · NORBANVS · Μ · COCCEIVS · Μ · LOLLIVS · C · SENTIVS . . . Q · TVBERO · C · REBILVS · ) MESSALLA · MESSALLINVS LVD IS · SCAENICIS · DIMISSIS • Η ora e. q. s. The Gordons comment: "The mark to the right of the point after Rebilus (not shown by Mommsen, CIL, or Dessau) appears made by the stonecutter, whether intentionally or by mistake, rather than a later, accidental cutting. It looks like a major punctuation-mark, intended to make clear that Messalla is not Rebilus' cognomen."24 This is certainly right, for Messalla is a common cognomen (occurring as such earlier in this inscription), and is a cognomen here—the man designated is C. Valerius Messalla Messalinus. Without some mark of punctuation, the reader would naturally assume that these cognomina belonged to Rebilus. An example of 18 A. D. may be found in the first of the six paragraphs of a not very carefully cut inscription which reports somewhat confusedly resolutions of the local decurions concerning celebration of the birthdays of Augustus and Tiberius. G. I. L. XI. 3303 (tabula parva marmorea). TI · CAESARE · TERT · GERMANICO · CAESAR · ITER · COS CN · ACCEIO CN · F · ARN · RVFO · LVTATIO · Τ · PETILLIO · Ρ · F QVI · Π · VIR DECRETA AEDICVLAM ET STATVÄS HÄS HOSTIAM DEDICATION! VICTIMAE NATALIAVG V I I I Κ OCTOBR DVAE QVAE Ρ Ρ INMOLARI ADSVETAF SVNT AD ARAM · QVAE NVMINI AVGVSTO DEDIC EST V i l l i ET VIII Κ OCTOBR INMOLENTVR ) ITEM NATALI TI · CAESARIS PERPETVE ACTVRI DECVRIONES ET POPVLVS CENARENT ) QVAM INPENSAM Q · CASCELLO LABEONE IN PERPETVO POLLICENTI VT GRATIAE AGERENTVR MVNIFICENTIAE EIVS EOQVE NATALI VT QVOTANNIS VITVLVS INMOLARETVR

" Album,

p.

30.

118

THE SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N

The sicilici separate the three clauses of resolutions, all presumably dependent on some understood verb, such as decernimus or decreverunt. The last clause, of course, is incoherent—possibly eoque is a mistake for eiusque. The space before ad ararn in line 5 probably marks the end of the relative clause that describes the victimae duae who were thereafter to be immolated at what was presumably a new altar. One sicilicus of the same shape appears in the small fragment, G. I. L. VI. 31194a: anteqYAM · P E R LE^es liceret, interesset consiliiS · PVBLICIs ) [ drusO • FRÄTRE · SVo [ senatuS • DECRfiVIT · Vti Here, apparently, it marks the end of a sentence. The other fragment of the same stone has a sentence terminated by a virgula. This sicilicus is used more frequently than the dipla in the records of gladiators to separate the number of fights from the number of victories, e.g. C. I. L. IX. 466 (a companion to the inscription containing diplae we quoted above): 25 DONATVS · NER · X I I · ) · VIII e. q. s.

11. SICILICUS MINOR

This small mark, placed at the top of the line and not larger than half the height of a letter, can scarcely be distinguished from a very small dipla in the same position. The forms that one sees are neither perfectly round nor perfectly angular, and a distinction between the two possible types would scarcely have been feasible. (i) Full stop (De bellis Macedonicis; cf. P. Oxy. 1379 discussed above, p. 27). (ii) Possibly with the meaning "or" (one very doubtful occurrence, Lex Antonia). 12. SICILICUS GEMINATUS

The sign 3 is quite rare. (Cf. the papyrus from Antinoe discussed above, p. 26) (i) When written very large, it seems to mark the end of a paragraph (one occurrence, Res gestae). 85

Other examples of the same usage are: IV. 4179; VI. 33952; XII. 5836.

THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

119

(ii) Full stop (Res gestae). (iii) Apparently with the function of a comma in dividing elements in a series (Res gestae). 13. THE SIGN One occurrence as a full stop in the Antiocherie text of the Res gestae, corresponding to a virgula plus space in the Ancyran text.

14. THE SIGN

^

Only two occurrences noted; apparently a full stop in C.I.L.VI. 30562 (see page 73) and perhaps a weaker form of punctuation in the Lex Antonia.

15. THE SIGN^y^ Marks the ends of paragraphs in the Antiochene text of the Res gestae.

16. PARAGRAPHOS The paragraphos (>—) marks major divisions within a book in the Carmen. This, of course, is a sign used with the same meaning in Greek, e.g. in the papyrus of Bacchylides to separate strophes. It is to be distinguished from the diple obelismene (>—) used to athetize spurious verses (two of these are found in the papyrus copy of Juvenal that we mentioned on p. 25 above). 17. Κ Full stop (Cicero). 18. J I have noted in two inscriptions a sign of punctuation that very closely resembles a large letter J inclined slightly to the right. Although in one of these inscriptions the sign is used to show metrical structure (C. I. L. VI. 5767), the two support one another as evidence that the sign was not an accidental or capricious variation. It is noteworthy that in both inscriptions the sign is itself set off by an interpunct on either side.

120

THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

In the following, the sign J seems to have a specialized function as punctuation: C. I. L. VI. 13498. BAEBIA · TROPHIME M O N I M E N T V M · F E C I T • S I B I · ET L · ΒΑΕ ΒI Ο · PISTOPATRONO SVO · BENE · MERENTI · ET L · BAEBIO · PISTO · ET · BAEBIAE · PHOEBE F I L I I S · SVIIS · ET PHOEBO · LIBERTO · SVO · ET · CETERIS LIBERTIS · LIBERTABVSQVE • SVIIS POSTERISQVE · EORVM · J · PRAETER EPITYNCHANVM · ET · FORTEM I N · FRONTE · Ρ · X I I I I · IN AGRO · Ρ · X I I I I The sign must be intended to indicate or emphasize that the exception praeter Epitynchanum etc. does not refer to posteris but goes back to libertis. 19. B I N A

INTERPUNCTA

The interpunct, of course, cannot be used to punctuate for sense in the period in which we are interested (cf. supra, pp. 14, 16), but two interpuncts placed one after the other shows that more than division between words is intended and so can be used as punctuation. Such punctuation appears once in the Lex Antonia to set off a relative clause. There are a very few examples of this form of punctuation, and I can cite only two.28 The first is a Republican inscription from Capua, C. I. L. I2, 679, which ends with the date (104 B. C.) stated thus: c. /ZAVIO · C · F · · C · MARIO · C · F · COS The punctuation obviously serves to separate the two names. An unnumbered papyrus in the Erzherzog Rainer's collection27 is a fragment of a roll in which a man named Macedo evidently transcribed letters that he 26

I h a v e seen an inscription in which t h e t w o points serve to m a k e clear the relation liberti libertus, but m y notes on this inscription were somehow lost and I h a v e n o t been able to locate it again among t h e m a n y thousands in the C. I. L. The double point is used in P. Mich. V I I . 456 (see Appendix, No. 231), which appears to h a v e been a kind of legal form-book, but there is n o t enough context to indicate its value. The same papyrus also has t h e points arranged vertically, thus producing the modern colon (:). " See t h e plates in Wessely's Aelteste latein. Pap. (pi. I V - V I I ) and in Mallon-MarichalPerrat (No. 11).

THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

121

received before 14 B. C. Our fragment is thought to have contained three letters in the two columns that are partly preserved; there are at least two, since the second column ends with a short letter that is virtually complete. The copies presumably follow the originals: the interpunct is used systematically throughout, but the last letter contains numerous (phonetic) apices and Ilongae, while neither is found in the letter or letters that precede it. Macedo's correspondents were obviously not persons of any great education or literary pretensions, and must have been of modest social position. 28 The copies are certainly not the work of a professional scribe. So the usage represented is presumably that of moderately literate persons. The letter of Paconius is punctuated with spaces. The first column contains one clear instance of an apex used as punctuation, although there is no marking of long vowels: ET DE · FILIO · MEO · QVI · HOC · moliTVS · EST ·' Vt VTROSQVE · CA®EAS In what, so far as I can see, may be a continuation of the same letter in the second column, the writer (whose learning may be estimated from his use of mihi for vocative mi) writes: 29 11-19: HIC · NIAIL · EST · NISI · MI SERIA · MAGNA · ITAQVE · PVTA Bo · ME · E X · NAVFAGIO · EFFVGISSE NVC · SI AT · VOS · PERVENERO ' ^ A L E · MIHI · MACEDO · · ET · ME MOR · NOSTRI · ESTO · ET • FILIO · MEO · BENEVOLENTIAM · EAM · PRAESTA · QVAM · EGO · TIBI · PRAE STITI · SALYTEM · DIC · MVSAEO e. q. s. 28

The n a m e s show t h a t neither Macedo nor t h e m a n w h o calls himself his /rater (the writer of t h e last letter, Paconius) were R o m a n citizens; t h e last letter shows t h a t Macedo m u s t conciliate t h e favor of persons named Iucundus, Dido, a n d Nireus, the last a libertus. Other persons mentioned as friends or associates of Macedo are Bassus, Musaeus, Augurinus, Antheus, and Lyciscus. A n d Macedo h a s domini to w h o m he is asked to recommend the son of t h e writer of one letter. 2 · I work, of course, f r o m the plates; the p u n c t u a t i o n (apex, double point, space) is n o t shown in Cavenaile, w h o also begins line 13 thus: e [ t · ] m e . . . B u t t h e first letter is obviously b (exactly like t h e b in line 17), and t o t h e right of t h e hole is visible t h e edge of a letter t h a t could be ο b u t could n o t be t, and this is followed b y a clear interpunct. The reading therefore is w h a t both sense and s y n t a x require, putabo, n o t puta et. I n m y transcription I h a v e not shown t h a t the g in ejjugisse w a s written above the line as a correction.

122

T H E SIGNS OF

PUNCTUATION

The space in line 19 obviously serves as a full stop. I believe that the apex at the beginning of line 15 and the elongation of the interpunct after pervenero (which could be fortuitous, but may show that the transcriber's pen hesitated for a moment in uncertainty) may come from punctuation by apex over interpunct such as was seen in the first column. 30 With the other indications of punctuation in the letter before us, we are entitled to regard the double point in line 15 as intentional, either calling attention to the vocative that precedes it or indicating, as would a dash in modern punctuation, an addition that is somewhat in the nature of an afterthought.

20. HEDERAE

Hederae, or "ivy leaves", appear first near the beginning of the First Century, and become fairly common near the end of that century. 31 For the most part, these hederae distinguentes are certainly nothing more than variant and decorative forms of the interpunct. 32 But the hedera, obviously, could be used with a special value in an inscription in which the interpunct is the usual worddivider, and it seems that it does have such value in the inscription from Cirta which is the oldest inscription in which the mark appears. 33 C. I. L. VI. 5197 (tabula marmorea). MVSIC0 · TI · CAESARIS · AVGVSTI SCVRRAN0 · DISP • AD FISCVM · GALLICVM PROVINCIAE · LVGVDVNENSIS E X · VICARIIS · EIVS · QVI · CVM · EO · ROMAE · CVM DECESSIT · FVERVNT ν BENE · MERITO e. q. s.34 30 The transcriber need not have copied line for line. If he saw in his original PERVENERO · VALE—or, even more, if he saw PERVENERO · 'VALE—he could have thought that the apex went with the v. 31 Hübner (p. LXXXVI) says: "Forma ilia hederacea a liberae rei publicae titulis abest; vetuetissima eius exampla videntur praebere tituli aliquot Gallici. . ., Hispanus. . ., Mantuanus. . ., Germanici.... Frequentiora deinde paullo fiunt inde a saeculo primo exeunte." 3i E.g. G.I.L. VIII. 6982, which has ten "hederae distinguentes". 33 According to the Gordons, Contributions, p. 183, this is the earliest occurrence of the leaf. They found only two in the First Century, but mention one other published in Notizie degli Scavi di Antichitä (Atti della Accademia dei Lincei), 1915, pp. 158ff. The editor, G. Cultera, identifies the leaf as a regular mark of punctuation after Ti. In the other inscription, C. I. L. VI. 1348, the hedera is merely a word-divider. 34 In the transcription I omit the list of sixteen names.

THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

123

35

Regular interpuncts are used, except the hedera after fuerunt, line 5, where, I think, it marks the end of the clause describing the persons who set up the monument ("those of his administrative assistants who were with him in Rome when he died") and so prepares the reader for bene merito, which, of course, goes with Music6 Scurran6 in lines 1 and 2. There are other inscriptions in which hederae, used with regular interpuncts, serve as punctuation. C. I. L. XI. 4815 (tabula marmorea). C · TORASIVS · C · F · HOR · SEVERS · Ι Ϊ Ϊ Ϊ · VIR I D AVGVR · SVO · ET · Ρ · MECLONI · PROCVLI · TORASIANI · PONTIF FILI · SVI · NOMINE · LOCO · ET · PECVNIA · SVA · FECIT Q $ IDEM AD CELEBRANDVM • NATALEM FILI · SVI · IN PVBLICVM • DEDIT HS-CCL EX QVORVM • REDITV · III · Κ , SEPT · OMNIBVS · ANNIS DECVRIONES · IN PVBLICO CENARENT · ET · MVNICIPES · PRAESENTES - ACCIPERENT · AERIS OCTONOS · ITEM DEDIT • VI · VIRIS · AVG · ET · COMPIT · LARVM · AVG · ET · MAG VICORVM · HS · CXX · VT · E X · REDITV EIVS · SVMMAE · EODEM · DIE · I N · PVBLICO · VESCERENTVR HVNC · OB · MERITA · EIVS ERGA · REM · PVBLICAM · ORDO · DECVRIONVM · PATRONVM · MVNICIPI · ADOPTAVIT The hedera in line 3 marks the end of the sentence. We might expect a similar mark before item in line 6, but there the break is one that could be shown by a semicolon in modern punctuation whereas a full stop is needed before idem. In line 8 the end of the sentence is indicated by the extra space on each side of the regular interpunct. If we could expect absolute consistency, we could conclude that the space shows a stronger division than the hedera.3* The same use of the hedera as punctuation is found in the mutilated inscription which sets forth the regulations governing the leasing of space in public granaries.37 Note that apices and I-longae are used, and that the interpunct 35

N o t e t h a t t h e f o r m here is n o t the usual heart-shaped leaf. I.e. there are three principal statements: (1) Torasius built t h e m o n u m e n t t o honor his son, (2) m a d e provision for celebration of this son's birthday, and (3) w a s m a d e honorary patron of t h e municipality in recognition of his services to it. Clearly the connection between (1) and (2) is m u c h closer than between (2) and (3), where there is no connection a t all, unless t h e b a n q u e t s provided in (2) were counted a m o n g t h e merita of Torasius. 37 A large part of t h e stone o n the l e f t is lost. For s o m e suggested restorations, see Dessau, 5914. 36

124

THE SIGNS OP PUNCTUATION

appears regularly except in two places (line 6 before qui, line 7 before non) where it was omitted by the negligence of the lapidary. 3 8 I t will be obvious t h a t the hedera is here used, like the dipla in the Lex collegia and the blanks in the Lex metalli,i0 to separate the various regulations. C. I. L. VI. 33747 (tabula magna marmorea). 5-12: LflX · HORRE0RVM · QVID · A N T E · IDVS · DEC · P f i N S I Ö N E · S O L ^ T A · RENVNTIET^Vl · Ν 0 Ν · -iNSEQVENTE · A N N 0 N O N · T R A N S f i G E R I T · TANTI · H A B f i B I T · QVANTI · E I V S · G E N E R · « O N · E R I T · Φ QVISQVIS · I N · H I S · H O R R E I S · CONDVCTVM · HABET·ELOCANDI·ET· cwSTODIA · Ν 0 Ν · P R A E S T A B I T V R 0 QVAE · I N · H I S · H O R R E I S ·

aliuBVE

INVECTA · INLATA ]VS- SATIS EI non /eceRIT · C^ QVISQVIS · IN HIS · HORREIS · W E R · VÜNIA quisquis

habens

CONDVCTVM · H A B E T · E T · SVA quiSQVIS · I N · H I S · H O R R E I S · CONDVCT · H A B E T P E N S I 0 N E · SOLVTA · C H I R O G R · conductuΜ

· H O R R E V M · SVA

ibi

RELIQVER ·

E T · CVSTODI · N O N · ADSIGNAVER · H O R R E A R I V S · S I N E · CVLPA · E R I T Another hedera was obviously lost in the lacuna before [quijsgm's in line 11. I think t h a t we can also see a trace of subordinate punctuation in the apex over Q in line 6; the cutter has clearly been negligent in omitting the interpunct after renuntiet, and the apex must belong over t h a t omitted interpunct. His copy must have read R E N V N T I E T ·' QVI, and the punctuation must have been the equivalent of a modern colon, since the one provision requires t h a t a lessor in certain circumstances (possibly if he wishes to renew his lease) should give notice before the Ides of December and then proceeds to state what will happen if he does not do so. With supplements intended only to suggest the grammatical structure, 4 1 the regulation would run: a t . . . a n t e ldua Dec. pensions soluta renuntiet: qui n o n [renuntiaverit pensione soluta quive c u m horreario pro i]nsequente anno n o n transegerit, tanti habebit e. q. s. 38 I t is also omitted, probably for the same reason, before the hedera t h a t begins t h e provision "Quae in his horreis inveeta inlata [ e r u n t . . . Since t h e point does appear before the hederae in lines 8 and 10, w e m a y assume t h a t it should have been used here. 39 Supra, p. 79. 40 Supra, p. 81. 41 1 h a v e added t h e words pensione soluta quive cum horreario to the restoration in Dessau, where no a t t e m p t is made to fill out t h e line.

T H E SIGNS OP P U N C T U A T I O N

125

In a long inscription of the Second Century, hederae mark the ends of each item in the enumeration of the persons to whom the stone is dedicated. C . / . L . VIII. 211. Τ · FLAVIVS SE CVNDVS FILIVS · FECIT Τ · FLAVIO ·SECVN DO · PATRI · PIO • MIL · AN · X X X I I I / VIX · A N · C X · Η · S · Ε ψ FLAVIAE VRBANAE · MATRI · PIAE · VIX · AN · CV · Η · S · E/Z> FL · SECVNDAE SO RORI Ρ · V · A · XX • Η • S · Ε Τ · FL · MARCELLO · FRA TRI · Ρ · V · A · XX · Η · S · Ε e. q .s. The hedera as a mark of punctuation survived even in the time in which the use of the interpunct and word-division was being abandoned. In the following fragment, hederae set off the date, which is also the only part of the inscription in which interpuncts are used. C.I.L.

VI. 31982 (fragmentum tabulae marmoreae).

jAIESTATE PERPETVA CERTVM EST ESSE VENERABILEM 1Ε CVSTODIAM DATA DIE · PRIDIAE · KAL · MAIAS ]VCC • CONSS f£> PROSB In the following inscription, which is entirely in scriptum continua (I separate the words for the convenience of the reader) and in which the interpunct serves only to make an abbreviation, a hedera marks the beginning of the quotation (line 2) and another (line 7) marks the end of the long "whereas" clause and the beginning of the actual decision (evidently by the proconsul) concerning the boundaries. C 1 L III. 586. Q, • GELLIO SENTIO AVGVRINO PROCONS · DECRETA EX TABELLIS RECITATA KALENDIS MARTIS—/ CVM OPTIMVS MAX1MVSQVE PRINCEPS TRAIANVS HADRIANVS AVG · SCRIPSER1T MIHI VTI ADHIBITIS MENSO

126

T H E SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N

RIBVS D E CONTROVERSIIS F I N I V M I N T E R LAMIENSES E T HYPATAEOS COGNITA CAVSA T E R M I N A R E M EGOQVE I N R E M P R A E S E N T E M SAEPIVS E T CONTINVIS DIEBVS F V E R I M COGNOVERIMQVE P R A E S E N T I B V S VTRIVSQVE CIVITATIS D E F E N S O R I B V S , A D H I B I T O A ME IVLIO VICTORE EVOCATO AVGVSTI M E N S O R E ^ D PLACET INITIVM FINIVM ESSE AB EO LOCO I N QVO SEDEN FVISSE C O M P E R I QVAE EST I N F R A e. q. s. I n a large fragment, C. I.L. V. 2781, no interpuncts are used to separate words, b u t hederae mark the end of all paragraphs. The signs, like the paragraph sign ( ) of the Monumentum Ancyranum, are added even though the rest of the line is left blank, so t h a t there could have been no doubt where the paragraph ended. W i t h t h e hedera, I conclude my catalogue of marks of punctuation, leaving only t h e blank space to be treated. I t is true t h a t various other marks appear in inscriptions, b u t they are either on fragments so small t h a t one cannot be certain w h a t they are or in inscriptions so late and exhibiting so high a degree of illiteracy t h a t it would be extremely rash to regard them as survivals of an intelligible system of punctuation. Many indeed are obviously mere a t t e m p t s a t decoration. The only other mark t h a t I have observed t h a t m a y have a claim to inclusion in my catalogue will be treated briefly here because it, like the hedera, is usually found only as decorative variant of the interpunct. This sign is supposed to have h a d its origin in hurried writing of the interpunct in cursive. 42 I t appears in a number of inscriptions 43 as a mere word-divider. I n a few inscriptions it has the specialized function of the modern hyphen (or, in German Fraktur, the sign = ) when the latter is used to show t h a t a word has been divided between lines. 44 I t also appears in a very few inscriptions as a kind of punctuation. The two following are the clearest examples: 42

Hübner (p. LXXVI): Pronum erat in cursiva potissimum scriptura, ut puncta in lineolas transirent. Exampia iam praebent scariphata Pompeiana (CIL. IV. 1261. 1896. 1899. 1908. 2203. 2400); inde a saeculo fere altero exeunte forma haee etiam in titulos sculptos transiit. Lineola aut curva est ut in titulo urbano sepulcrali saeculi fere seoundi (CIL. VI. 11890). . . 13 E.g., in addition to the example cited by Hübner in the note above: C. I. L. II. 1168; III. 184(7), 362, 2659, 2664; IV. 4764, 4778; VI. 10632, 12269, 28511, 35860, 37204, 37307; XII. 1781; XIII. 6972, 7121, 8017. 14 Cf. P. Ryl. 477 (Fifth Century), in which words divided between lines are joined by this sign at the end of the line (commise~rari, coepe~rit). For good examples in inscriptions, see C. I. L. VI. 10848 (se~viri, quod~si), 17287 (Criso~mela); XI. 782 (pientis~simi).

THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

127

A. E. 1955, No. 119. D · NEPTVNO o^VARVM i?oTENTI~ ofeiNDVCTVM in TRAGISA räVM~ • AVR • ...LIVS· v. p. A · V · Ρ · v. s. L · L · Μ · 5: [in] Tragisa(mum); 9: [v(ir) p(erfectissimus)] a(gens) v(ices) p(raesidis). The two signs here separate three phrases in the short inscription: (1) the name of the person to whom the stone is dedicated, (2) the location, and (3) the donor. C. I. L. VI. 19253. D Μ ]NNIAE · HELVIDIAE · COIVGI · SAnctissiMAE • ET INCOMPARABILI · EEC it · ~ P. · ARRENIVS · GEMELLINVS DE SE · D · Μ · Ν · Τ · CON QYA · VIXIT · ANNIS · X I · ~ ET · Ρ · AELIO · FILARGVRO · MARITO · VIRGINIO · AEIVS · CO η quo VIXIT · ANNIS · X X I · ~ The editors explain D · Μ · Ν · Τ as an attempt to write bene merenti, as is quite possible when we are dealing with a person who could not spell cum!

21. THE BLANK SPACE

A blank space is, so far as we know, the oldest sign of punctuation in Latin,45 and it is certainly the most frequent. Where written marks of punctuation are 15 Cf. p. 20 above. The Gordons comment (Contr. p. 151): "Among our inscriptions of the period Augustus-Nerva are a few in which extra space has apparently been left for the express purpose of indicating breaks or divisions in thought or syntax, the same kinds of division which in some inscriptions are indicated by different or additional punctuation. . . Whether the use of space to indicate breaks in sense is of significance for dating remains to be seen, but clearly where it is used it is of importance for the correct interpretation of texts and has not always received the attention it merits. To be sure, the number of long, connected texts in which it is likely to occur is comparatively small,

128

T H E SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N

used, a blank space is frequently used to strengthen or at least to emphasize them. A blank space without a mark may have, in the various texts, the force of almost any written mark. Specifically, it serves: (1) To mark division into paragraphs (Senatus consultum de Bacchanalibus, Sententia Minuciorum) ,46 (ii) Stronger than a full stop but less than a paragraph, i.e. the kind of division shown in modern punctuation by period plus dash (Lex metalli Vipascensis; cf. C. I. L. XI. 3614 and 2438, both quoted above in §9 of this chapter, and C. I. L. XI. 4815, quoted in §20). (iii) Full stop (Res gestae, papyrus Oratio Claudi, Lex Antonia, Acta Arvalium). (iv) As equivalent of modern dash to set off parenthetical remarks (Oratio Claudi de civitate Anaunorum). (v) As equivalent of modern semicolon or colon in dividing parallel clauses of a compound sentence (Res gestae, Laudatio Turiae). (vi) As equivalent of modern comma in setting off relative and other subordinate clauses, and in separating items in a series (Res gestae, Oratio Claudi de civitate Anaunorum, Laudatio Turiae, and probably De bellis Macedonicis). (vii) To separate words that are in different cases but have the same caseendings (papyrus Oratio Claudi). Among other examples of the use of blank spaces as punctuation, the following are the most interesting. In one of the early Scipionic epitaphs, the text of the eulogy begins on the first line and is set off from the name of the deceased by a space. C. I.L.I2,

11.

L · CORNELIVS · CN · F · CN · Ν · SCIPIO · MAGNA · SAPIENTIA MVLTASQVE · VIRTVTES · AETATE · QVOM · PARVA e. q. s. In the Fasti Praenestini of 4-10 A.D., a space is used to separate the calendar entry (usually notation of the deities to whom sacrifice is to be made) from the explanations that are sometimes offered, thus:

but their relative importance makes it all the more imperative to bring every aid for understanding to their study. . ." The space appears as punctuation in the Senatus consultum de Bacchanalibus (186 B. C.) and, as we shall note below, continues to be used occasionally to the last age of the Empire. 46 Of course, if one wishes to split hairs, one could say that the blank space normally left on the last line of a paragraph shows that the paragraph ends there.

THE S I G N S ΟΓ P U N C T U A T I O N

C. I.L.I2,

129

p. 231.

3: aescwLAPIO · VEDIOVI · IN · INSVLA · HAE· ET ijnMAE · CALENDAE · APPELLANTVR · QVIA e. q. s. The use of a space as a full stop is not uncommon on inscriptions that record benefactions and then record an official expression of thanks for them, as in C. I. L. XI. 4815, quoted in §20 above. Another example: G. I. L. VI. 9044 (tabula marmorea). C · I V L I V S · AV C · NARCmtw A • SPECVLÄRIS · DECVr · in SACerdotio in aRAM · PVBLICAM Ob CfiRTamma cONTVLIT · IIS X · ET · CENA TICVM DEDIT · SACfiRDÖTIBVS · ET · HON0 raTIS · ET · DECVRIÖNIB • DVPLVM · ITEM ob deDICÄTIÖN • IMÄGINIS · SVAe cenati cmM · DVPLVM · DfiDIT · HVIC · SACER DOTALES · DECVRIÖNES · DECRfiVERVNT VTI · ΙΫΙία eglOGE • C0NTVBERNÄLIS EIVS in numerO • DECVRIONVM RECITareiwr The use of the space especially to make the beginning and the end of quotations continues even when the use of interpuncta becomes irregular: C. I. L. VI. 32329: (a), 10: MAXIMILLA · ET · TERENTIA ZaVOLA t>IRG · VEST · PRAEIT · IN HAEC VERBA IVNO REGINA · AST · QVID · EST[ (b), 13: PRECAMVR · OrAMVS OBSECRAMVSQVE [ m]ATRONAE · FL · POLLITTA e. q. s. The use continues even with scriptura continna, as in these examples in which I divide words for the convenience of the reader: C. I. L. VI. 32374. 118 A.D. CAPITE SVB DIVO CVLMINE CONTRA ORIENTEM CVm collegia SVIS INDIXIT QVOD BONVM FAVSTVM FELix fortu NATVM · SALVTAREQVE SIT IMP · CAESARI e. q. s.

130

THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

The space after indixit, like the modern colon, introduces a quotation. Similarly: C. I.L.Vlll.

15880.

BA INFRA SCRIBTA e. q. s.

. . .CENSVIT I N Ver CVM LICINI PATERNI V I R I DE PRIMORIBw«

Spaces are occasionally used for emphasis, as in C. I. L. I X . 2438, cited in §9 above, in which we pointed out the emphasis given the threatening word VINDICARI. In a great many inscriptions, of course, the arrangement of lines serves, like the use of larger or smaller letters, to emphasize parts of the text.47 Spaces within lines may serve the same purpose. A good example is an inscription of 58 or 59 A. D. first published by A. E. Gordon.48 University of California Publications in Classical Archaeology 2: 5 (1952):49 5-13: resiiiVTIONEM · MOENIVM · REMISSAM · ET · INTERCEPTAM ACERBa · PACAVIT · PROPTER QVAE · AVCTORE JCONSVL · DESIGNATVS · I N CONSVLATV · NOMINATIONE ] N I · AVGVR · CREATVS · I N NVMERVM · PATRICIORVM · ADLECTVS·EST grermANICl · AEDIVM · SACRARVM · ET · OPERVM · LOCORVMQVE oRDO · ET · POPVLVS · ROMANVS · CONSENTIENTE · SENATV · LVD IS pETIERIT · AB AVGUSTO · PRINCIPE · CVIVS · LIBERALITATIS · ERAT · MINISTER ]ICI · PROVINCIAE · BRITANNIAE · I N QVA · DECESSIT e. q. s. The space after pacavit probably shows the end of the sentence, although what follows could also be part of a compound sentence or even, perhaps, a relative clause. In line 7, the words consul designatus seem certainly to end a sentence. In line 10, the relatively small extra space comes after the ablative absolute consentiente senatu, which may be the end of a clause. But in line 12 the wide extra spaces on both sides of the phrase provinciae Britanniae can serve only to set it off from the rest of the sentence and thus make this entry very emphatic. 17 And so also paragraphing. The Gordons comment (Contr., p. 154): "The paragraph form appears sometimes to be used as a device for drawing attention to particular lines rather than for setting off a unit of syntax or sense which we should today consider as constituting a proper paragraph unit." 48 Quintus Veranius, Consul A. D. 49 (Berkeley, 1952). 49 Ibid. The inscription is published again in the Gordons' Album, No. 109, plate 47.

T H E SIGNS OP P U N C T U A T I O N

131

We may transgress the chronological limits we have set ourselves to note that even Christian inscriptions in scriptura continua sometimes use the blank space to mark a full stop, although words, of course, are not separated. For example: C. I.L. VIII. 25045 (tabula marmorea) sancflSSIMORVM PATRIARCHARVM ET VNIVERsae ecclesiae ]PA SANCTITATE VNDE CVM DIV DISCEPTAREiwr ]IMVS DISPOSITIONEM SANCTAE MEMORIAE ]. . .RE VEL PASCERE NEQVE PVBLICE NEQVE APVT SVOs ]DINARVM NON ACCEDANT SET QVONIAM A. . . [ ]SIMVS SED QVIA RES ΤΑΜ GRAVISSIMA A P I R . . .[ quAE APPELLATVR PROTOGAMIA ADEQVE P R I M A . . . [ ]IONEM VENIRE AVSVS FVERIT QVI VINDICAV[ ^moCVMQVE MODO IVBANDOS ESSE PVTABERINT [ ].IS PRIOMISIT IPSE VQOS EIDEM MERCEDI PARTIc^are ]QVE DIE NVPTIARVM QVARTA IERIA IIANT [ Such punctuation is also found in some literary texts, e.g. P. Oxy. 884, a leaf from a papyrus codex of the Fifth Century that contains part of Sallust's Catilinae coniuratio. In the same century was copied the Codex Puteanus of Livy, which occasionally shows comparable punctuation by spacing—even extravagant spacing.50

50 See the photographic reproduction edited by H. Omont, Histoire Romaine de TüeLive (Paris, 1907).

VIII CONCLUSIONS

The foregoing study, I believe, authorizes the following conclusions. (1) During the Classical Age, formally written Latin, in marked contrast with contemporary Greek, was not only separated into words by the use of interpuncts, but was, within each paragraph, divided into sentences and clauses by special signs of punctuation. (2) The available evidence indicates that punctuation for sense within paragraphs was least used in legal texts and in writings that can be classified as memoranda of one kind or another and that the more closely a writing was thought to approach a literary standard, the more frequent was the use of punctuation. (3) We are therefore entitled to assume that our texts of such authors as Cicero, Sallust, and Livy, Lucretius, Vergil, and Ovid, were ultimately derived from copies that were punctuated for sense. Thus in attempts to reconstruct the earlier stages of the manuscript tradition of the Classical authors, punctuation may be as important as styles of handwriting. (4) The evidence indicates that the Classical punctuation for sense was closely associated with, and even a part of, the systematic use of word-division, and that, in general, the ancient punctuation was discarded when scriptum continua replaced the practice of separating words. (5) The extant remains of Latin writing through the First Century exhibit punctuation within paragraphs effected by a total of twenty-one signs, that is to say, blank spaces and twenty distinguishable special marks. (6) The largest number of signs found in any one composition is seven (in the Res gestae of Augustus). Normal practice appears to have called for the use of two, three, or not more than four distinct signs of punctuation by the writer or copyist of a text. (7) Although it is clear that the twenty-one signs were by no means interchangeable, there is a very great overlapping of function in the texts taken as a whole, and in many of the extant texts there appears to be a considerable overlapping of the function of the various signs employed in a single com-

CONCLUSIONS

133

position. Such overlapping is most conspicuous in the Res gestae, where the greatest number of different signs was employed. (8) Despite such overlapping in some texts, there was a general tendency to use signs of three orders of value corresponding approximately to the modern period plus dash (showing a break greater than a full stop within a paragraph), the modern period (a full stop ending a sentence), and the modern comma (used to set off subordinate clauses, to show parallel structure when several clauses, phrases, or words have the same relation to a single verb or noun, and to separate items in an enumeration). There is no certain indication of the use of additional signs with the special functions of the modern semicolon and colon. From the modern point of view, the most remarkable omission was the failure to develop a sign to distinguish interrogations. (9) The degree of consistency in the use of punctuation, i.e. in placing a sign of punctuation wherever it is required by some rule, appears to have varied greatly. Some texts, such as the Res gestae (in the form, several stages removed from the original, that has reached us), not infrequently fail to place punctuation at junctures that seem grammatically and rhetorically indistinguishable from others where punctuation is used. A few texts, unfortunately short, suggest punctuation as consistent as modern usage. (10) An incidental result of this study has been the observation that the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, despite its reputation for phenomenal accuracy, cannot be relied upon implicitly so far as punctuation is concerned, since it sometimes fails to distinguish between manifestly different marks of punctuation, and sometimes fails to report punctuation at all. Further study of ancient punctuation, therefore, so far as the epigraphic evidence is concerned, should be based exclusively on good photographs supplemented wherever necessary with squeezes or by inspection of the stone or bronze itself.

APPENDIX I

PAPYRI LATINAE

It is now generally known that, although Latin papyri are few in comparison with Greek, several hundred have been found and published. It is less well known that the overwhelming majority of Latin papyri now known come from the late Empire and are therefore later than the time of the Antonines, i.e. are much later than the change in the mode of writing Latin that is generally assigned to the time of Hadrian (-f 138). The majority of them, indeed, were written subsequent to what the eminent palaeographer, Jean Mallon, has termed "la grande brisure qu'a connue le monde avec la crise du troisieme siecle, crise apräs laquelle tout s'est trouve change, y compris les institutions, la religion, et aussi l'öcriture."1 It is therefore possible that the reader may be inclined to wonder at the paucity of the papyrological material that I have used in this dissertation. It may not be amiss, then, to list in this appendix what is available. Since the present study was begun, there has become available the Corpus Papyrorum Latinarum compiled and edited by Robert Cavenaile (Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz, 1958 [ = I960?]), which purports to list all Latin papyri known and published before 1958, with the odd exception of those found at Herculaneum, and to give the text of most of them. Cavenaile's texts are worthless for our present purposes, since the attempt to combine a report of what is on the papyrus with modern capitalization and punctuation has necessarily obscured or destroyed most of the details in which we are interested, but his catalogue is, so far as I know, complete, and I know of no Latin papyri relevant to the present study that have been published since 1958. It may be helpful, therefore, to list here all the papyri in Cavenaile's Corpus that are certainly or possibly earlier than the Third Century (as dated by the editors) and contain a text which can be identified as either literary or, at least, connected discourse of some kind (i.e. excluding mere scraps, scrawls, ac-

1

Paldographie

Romaine,

p. 171.

135

APPENDIX I: PAPYRI LATINAE

counts,2 receipts, and memoranda). This will show what available material has not been used in the present study, and why it seemed useless for our purposes. No. in Cavenaile 14

Date Saec. I p. C. n.

Contents Exercise in writing

The information in Cavenaile is to be corrected from E. G. Turner's article in Stvdi in Onore di A. Calderini e R. Paribeni, Milan, 1957, Vol. II, pp. 157-161 (with two plates). On one side, the apprentice scribe copied seven times four words from Vergil; on the other, he copied six times a few words of prose or iambic verse ending -iut (?) velocius and followed by what Turner calls "decorative doodling". The symbols thus repeated, which look something like 7xxxx, are too long to be punctuation, but may be a coronis or stichometric reckoning or, conceivably a symbol meaning "etc." or something like that. 20

20 B.C.

Cie. In Verrem

See above, pp. 50ff. 28

II/III

Sallusti Historiae

Fragments of a volume written after scriptum continua replaced the classical style; there are no interpuncts, no apices, and, naturally, no marks of punctuation. It is unfortunate that the date has not been determined more precisely. 41

II

Fenestella ?

This fragment de Servio Tullio, of which a good reproduction may be found in Mallon, op. cit., PI. X. 1, is a strip from the central part of a column. Interpuncts are used regularly, but there are no apices. We do not have enough of the text to tell whether there is any point in our fragment at which punctuation, if used, should have appeared. Levi, in his attempted restoration, would begin a sentence with the words At Romam, before which there is no punctuation, but Piganiol, in his reconstruction, takes these words as the equivalent of ad Romam. He would have a sentence 2

The military payrolls and tables of soldiers on duty (especially nos. 106 and 109) are interesting for examples of ancient bookkeeping and for other reasons, but I do not regard columnar arrangement as punctuation.

136

APPENDIX ι : PAPYRI

No. inCavenaile

LATINAE

Date

Contents

begin Hae et ceterae; a lacuna immediately precedes these, so that if punctuation was present, it would now be lost. Clearly, the fragment cannot be used for deductions either way. 43

c. 100 A.D.

De bellis Macedonicis

See above, pp. 61ff. 46

II ex.

"Virtus nihil volt humile"

Ed. Mariotti, Athenaeum, 1947, pp. 166-170 (with plate). In this fragment of a few words, no interpuncts are visible on the damaged surface. The restoration of blan[Aa\m before viderint is certain, but the traces of the m could also represent m plus virgida (/) as punctuation. The fragment is chiefly noteworthy for the use of a special mark (') corresponding to our hyphen, at the ends of lines to show that a word is completed on the following line. Since the lines were very short (c. 16 letters), the symbol was used thrice in six lines. Two of these occurrences are now clearly visible; the third was lost by damage to the papyrus at that point. 64

II/III

Catalogue of noteworthy works of art in Egypt?

See R. Marichal, Chartae Latinae Antiquiores, Vol. I, No. 11 (with plate). Has regular interpuncta and some apices. The text is not sufficiently complete to permit the reconstruction of sentencestructure, and although Marichal's photographic plate appears to have been made with the greatest care, it does not show many details that, to judge from the transcription, are visible to the naked eye. There seems to be a mark of punctuation after -spitibus, but it could also be part of the next letter. 65

II/III See above, pp. 96ff.

Dialogue

APPENDIX i : PAPYRI

No. in Cavenaile 103

137

LATINAE

Date ?

Contents Α Marius Valens veteranus quotes an edict by Octavian, 40-37 B.C.

No one seems to have tried to determine how much later the papyrus is than the edict quoted or rather misquoted here. There are no interpuncts or other punctuation; there are many errors in spelling and grammar. 170

45 A. D.

Citizen's declaration

Best reproduction is in Mallon, plate V, 2. Good example of formal document with regular interpuncts and I-longae; there was no need for punctuation, since the opening statement is followed by a tabulation of property. 212

41-68 A. D.

Military judge's decision

P. Mich. III. 159 (with plate). Regular interpuncts, but no punctuation. This is apparently a preliminary draft, since the space left vacant for the date was not filled in. (See Calderini, op. cit., p. 92). 231

I/II

Legal form book?

P. Mich. VII. 456 (with plate). Interpuncts throughout and one mark of punctuation in line 3, which reads: ]EAMIJS: APR[ The next line, to judge from the very clear reproduction, reads: ]ERE · · SUB · EX[ But obviously there is not enough context to show the significance of these marks. 236

41-54 A. D.

Oration of Claudius

See above, pp. 63ff. 237

I/II

Imperial edict

Dated in the Second Century by Van Hoesen on palaeographic grounds; the legal situation is thought better to fit the time of Nero. This is interesting as showing the transition to scriptum

138

APPENDIX I: PAPYRI LATINAE

No. in Cavenaile

Date

Contents

continual Although the surface of the papyrus is much abraded, it seems certain that there are no interpuncts between words, and there certainly were no spaces left for them. But a single medial dot is used as a full stop in lines 14 and 16. 238

I/II

Imperial codicil

Edited by H. Kortenbeutel, Abhandlungen der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1939, Phil.-Hist. XIII (with plate). What is preserved is the middle section of a column headed Exemplar codicillorum. The emperor is supposed to have been Domitian, and the Maximus addressed is thought to have been a Prefect of Egypt. I could discern no punctuation in the photograph, but according to the restoration accepted by Cavenaile, no sentence ends on the preserved part of the papyrus. 246

Late Ptolemies

Letter

This, in the opinion of Mallon, is the oldest Latin papyrus that we are likely ever to find. Written by a slave to his fellow slaves at home, it uses interpuncts religiously. There is no punctuation, but the text of the letter is very short (23 words). 247

21-14 B. C.

Letters

See above, pp. 120ff. 248

I/II

Letter of recommendation

P. Ryl. IV. 608; this short letter has regular interpuncts and some apices, but no punctuation. It consists of two sentences which could be treated as a compound sentence of two principal clauses. 249

II

Letter of recommendation

P. Oxy. I. 32. Words are divided by spaces and, usually, interpuncts. No punctuation, unless, perhaps, by blank spaces, but the writing is too irregular to show what slightly longer spaces were so intended, if any were. 3 This suggests the obvious question raised by the documentary papyri: to what extent do routine copies made in Egypt, presumably by persons who must have known Greek much better than Latin and so have been habituated to the use of scriptum continua, reflect Roman practice? Cf. Nos. 250-265.

139

APPENDIX I: PAPYRI LATINAE

No. in Cavenaile 250-255

Date

Contents

II

Letters

P. Mich. VIII. 467-472. This is the Latin part of the correspondence of a Claudius Terentianus, who, as is clear from the names of his relatives and their activities, was not a Roman or a Greek, but either an Egyptian or, possibly, some kind of hybrid. Latin, in a vulgar form, was presumably his third language, and Professors Winter and Youtie, in their commentary, have pointed out several places where his spelling of Latin words was clearly affected by the spelling of these words in Greek (e.g. OU for v). It is not astonishing, therefore, that the Latin is written in scriptum continua: Claudius was simply writing more Oraeco. 303-307

I/II

Letters

As edited, these letters, now in the Museum of Cairo, show regular interpuncts. No photographic reproduction appears to be available. The many misspellings give us no very high opinion of the writer's learning. Papyri not listed by Cavenaile Herculanensis 817, Carmen de bello Actiaco: see above, pp. 54ff. Herculanenses 1067, 1475, Orations: see above, p. 54, note 17.

APPENDIX II

METRICAL PUNCTUATION

Although we are here interested in the use of punctuation to make meaning more perspicuous, we must notice the use in Latin of the same kinds of punctuation to show metrical structure. In both inscriptions and in texts written with a pen the normal usage in Latin was to show the metrical units of carmina by writing each verse as a separate line. This was, I believe, the invariable practice when verse was transcribed on papyrus and parchment, and it is the usual practice in inscriptions. In the latter, however, limitations of space sometimes made other arrangements of verses necessary or desirable. As a matter of preliminary interest, I give a few examples of such abnormal arrangements in which there is no punctuation to assist the reader. Where verses are too long to be written on a single line, the most common and perspicuous arrangement is that in which one verse is written as two lines with the second line indented under the first. The following is a good and typical example. It will be noted that the interpunctum is used as a worddivider throughout, that the right-hand margin was made even by bringing out to it the last letter in each short line, and that the initial letters of the hexameters form an acrostich.

C. I. L. VI. 20674 (urna marmorea). IAM · DATVS · EST · FINIS · VITAE · IM PAVSSA · MALORY Μ VOBIS · QVAS · HABET · HOC · GNATAM MATREMQ · SEPVLCRV Μ LITORE · PHOCAICO · PELAGI · V I EXANIMATA S ILLIC · VNDE · TAGVS · ET · NOBILE PLVMEN · HIBERV S

A P P E N D I X I i : METBICAL

PUNCTUATION

141

VORSVM · ORTVS · VORSVM · OCCA SVS · FLVIT · ALTER · ET · ALTER STAGNA · SVB • OCEANI · TAGVS · ET TYRRHENICA · HIBERV S SIC · ETENIM · DVXERE · OLLIM PRIMORDIA · PARCA Ε [verso] ET · NEVERE · SVPER · VOBIS · VlTALIA • FILA CVM · PRIMVM · LVCINA · DARE Τ LVCEMQ · ANIMAMQV Ε VT · VITAE · DIVERSA · DIES · FORET · V NAQVE·LET I NOBIS · PORRO · ALIA · EST · TRINO DE NEMINE · FAT I DICTA · DIES · LETI · QVAM · PRO PAGARE · SVOPT Ε VISVM · OLLIS · TACITO · ARBITRIO CVM • LEGE · PERENN I SISTI · QVAE · CVNCTOS · IVBET · AD VADIMONIA · MORTI S As an example of odd and confusing arrangement I quote a metrical inscription, which is, incidentally, disfigured by frequent hiatus and numerous false quantities. It opens with an elegiac distich (in which we must read situ nominative and aeqüälis\): the hexameter and pentameter are run together and the distich is written in a paragraph of three lines, of which the last two are indented under the first. Then follow two hexameters, also run together and similarly written as a paragraph of three lines. A second pair of hexameters is presented in the same way. The metrical part of the inscription is completed by two elegiac distichs, but the verses are now written as separate lines and each pentameter is indented under the hexameter. C. I. L. VI. 7898. HIC · SVM · BASSA · SITA · PIA · FILIA VIRGO · PVDICA · EXCEDENS CVNCTAS · INGENIO · AEQVALIS CVM · MIHI · BIS · QVINOS · ANNOS · MEA FATA · DEDISSENT · VNDECVMVM · ME NON · LICVIT · PERDVCERE · ANNVM

142

APPENDIX

Ii: METRICAL

PUNCTUATION

CVMQVE PATER · MATERQVE DEOS · PRO ME ADVLARENT · AT · SAEVOS · PLVTO · RABVIT ME · AD INFERA · TEMPLA · OPSEDE ME PARCAE · FINEM · FECISSE · VIDENTVR CVM · ANTE · ALIOS · VERNAS · TRES · RAPVERE · MIHI SI QVIS · FORTE · MEA · GAVDET · DE MORTE · INIQVA HVIC · SIT · INIQVA · CERES PERFICIATQVE · FAME CAECINIAE · SEX · F · BASSAE It will be noted that interpuncta are used throughout, but that there is no punctuation for either sense or metre, unless some significance is attached to the interpunctum which appears at the end of line 9, although interpuncta are omitted at the ends of all other lines. If more than a mere inconsistency on the part of the inscriber, the point may mark either the end of a sentence and hence a change in subject or a change to a different metre, but if either significance was intended, interpuncta should also have keen placed after aequalis and fame. The one example we have given will suffice to show the need for some means of marking off verses when they are written in the form of prose. We may accordingly proceed to consider the three distinct uses of punctuation to show metrical structure in Latin inscriptions, viz.: 1. To set off verse from prose; 2. To show change in metre; 3. To separate verses.

1. PUNCTUATION TO SET OFF VERSE FROM

PROSE

I find three kinds of punctuation used for this purpose: a. The beginning of the verse is indicated by a special mark of punctuation ' which, as we have seen, is also used in punctuation for sense in prose (v. pp. 114ff.). In this fragment (C. I. L. XIV. 4195) it will be observed that the hexameter and pentameter are written as separate lines, and that the pentameter is indented under the hexameter, as is usual. Although the stone is fractured near the end of the second line, it seems certain that no mark of punctuation followed the last word. It seems probable that the mark of punctuation was intended to show the beginning of verse, but, particularly since the verses are, as the editor has noted, obscure in their present context, it is quite possible that they are a quotation from some poet or rather versifier now unknown, and that the mark of punctuation was intended to show that they are a quotation.

A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL

PUNCTUATION

143

C. I. L. XIV. 4195 (fragmentum tabulae marmoreae). DIC· [ Μ · MANNEIO · DOMESTICO · MA[ L · OPPVNEIO · AVGVRINO XII Τ · VOLTEDIO INDICTORE · II · QA [ MARCELL0 C LVCILI0 · Ρ Ι 0 ' YNVS ES EX SACRIS · CVI PARENT · DONA · DIANA[e QVOD TRIBVIT · POPVLVS · RESTITVIS · POPYLO [ b. Verse is set off from prose by a space at the beginning and a mark of punctuation at the end. G. I.L.Y I. 6182 (tabula marmorea) D Μ C-VETTIO CAPITOLINO FILIO PIENTIS SIMO PLOTIA C A P I T O L I N A MATER IN FELICISSAMA FECIT VIX ANNIS · XIII Q V I D I E Ν AT A L I SVO H O R A QV A N A T V S EST OBBIIT · TAN CITO PICTOR ACV STY GIA DELATVS AD VMBRAS QVAM PVER INGENIO NOTVS IN ARTE SVA QVOT SI FATA VELINT ALIA PRO SPIRITO VITAM HOC · MATER TITVLO MALVIT ANTE LEGI > SIBI Ε ET S SVIS > POSTERIS · QVE • EORVM ^

(sic) (sic)

It will be observed that the two elegiac distichs (with misspellings and false quantities) are written as prose with no indication of the metrical lines. The long space preceding the verses is undoubtedly intended to set them off, and since interpuncta appear only sporadically in the inscription (they set off abbreviations in lines 1 and 2, numeral in line 4, and, if the point is correctly placed in line 9, show syntactical connection in that line, i.e. that höc goes with spirito rather than titulo, an odd but not impossible construction), the interpunctum in line 6 probably reenforces the space as a warning to the reader that what follows is verse. The punctuation which ends the verses may be called from its shape a diple. It presumably has significance here, although it clearly has none in the last line where the stonecutter, in addition to the meaningless letters Ε and S and two useless interpuncta, has inseited a diple in the middle of the line and placed what seems to be a diple peri zstigmene at the end, presumably as mere ornament.

144

APPENDIX

I i : METRICAL

PUNCTUATION

The following inscription furnishes a curious example of verses separated from prose by blank space. Alternate lines are indented, according to the usual method, but no attempt is made to arrange them by meter. The elegiac distichs end indiscriminately at any point in the line. G. I. L. VI. 27852. CAIVS · TVTILIVS · RVFINVS · NOMI NOR · ILLE · ANNOS · QVI · VITAE · LINQVO NOVEM · ATQVE · DECEM · HEV · SCELVS · HEV CRVDELE · NEFAS • FACINVSQVE · TREMEN DVM · CVMFATIARE · VIDES · QVAM · MISE R · EST · GENITOR · QVI · ME · CONSPEXIT MORIBVNDVM · QVI · MEA · CLAVSIT · LV ΜΙΝΑ · DIVERSIS · AETATIS · VICIBVS QVOS · NON · ILLE • PRIVS · QVA · NON · EGO VOCE · ROGAVI · INFELIX · SVPEROS NEC · VALVERE · PRECES · SED · VIS · MA IOR · AGIT • MORTIS · IAM · IAMQVE PARENS · AVT · MECVM · SEMPER · ERIS AVT · DOLOR · VNA · OBIET HOC SEPVLCHRVM · Τ · FL · EVTYCHIANVS Μ · Μ · RVFINI · ALVMNI · SVI · FEC · c. Verse is distinguished from prose by a horizontal bar, similar to a paragraphia at the beginning and end. The two following inscriptions are excellent examples of this use. In the first, the verses consist of two elegiac distichs; each verse, whether hexameter or pentameter, occupies two lines, and all lines come out to the left-hand margin. Interpuncta are used throughout; the longer spaces between some words within lines obviously have no function other than that of making the right-hand margin more even. The second inscription seems to consist of a septenarius followed by a senarius, each verse occupying two lines. C. I. L. VI. 33904 (cippus). D Μ

Μ

R O M A N I · I ΟV I Ν I ·

RHETORIS · ELOQVII · LATINI · CONDITVS · HAC · ROMANVS EST · TELLVRE · IOVINVS · DOCTA LOQVI · DOCTVS· QVIQVE · LOQVI · DOCVIT •

A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL

145

PUNCTUATION

MANIBVS · INFERNIS · SI VITA · EST · GLORIA · VITAE · VIVIT · ET · HIC · NOBIS · VT · CATO · VEL · CICERO · Μ · IVNIVS · SEVERVS · ET · ROMANIA · MARCIA · HEREDES · BENE · MERENTI · FECERVNT C. I. L. VI. 33905 (cippus).

(urceus)

D · Μ· Μ · ROMANI · IOVINI RESTITVTI RESTITVTVS HOC INFELIX · TEGITVR · IN TVMVLO PVER · SOCIVS · PARENTE GEMINO TVMVLI · FOEDERE Μ · IVNIVS · SEVERVS · ET ROMANIA · MARCIA · HEREDES • BENE · MERENTI FECERVNT

(patera)

2. PUNCTUATION TO SHOW CHANGE OF METER

a. The paragraphos served also to show change of metre. In the extant part of the following inscription, two lines of iambic trimeter (with free substitution), written line for line, are followed by a horizontal line extending in from the left margin. This sign of metrical transition is followed by seven hexameters. The horizontal line now is duplex, one extending in from the left margin and the other from the right. An elegiac distich follows. Again the double paragraphos, and then another elegiac distich. Both pentameters are indented under the hexameters. The separation of the two distichs by a double paragraphos was probably determined by the consideration that the first distich identifies the tomb as that of Laberius, while the second expresses a general sentiment concerning life and death. One suspects that the hexameters are quoted from some work by the defunct vatis, rather than composed especially for the inscription. C. I. L. VI. 13528 (cippus magnus marmoreus). PARATO HOSPITIVM CARA IVNGANT CORPORA HAEC RVRSVM NOSTRAE SED PERPETVAE NVPTIAE

146

A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL

PUNCTUATION

I N SPICA ET CASIAES BENEDORA STRACTA ET AMOMO INDE ORO GRAMENVE N O W M VEL FLOS ORIATVR VNDE CORONEM AMENS ARAM CARMENQVE MEVM ET ME PVRPVREO VARVM VITIS DEPICTA RACEMO QVATTVOR AMPLESAST VLMOS DE PALMITE DVLCI SCAENALES FRONDES DETEXVNT HINC GEMINAM VMBRAM ARBOREAM PROCAERAM ET MOLLIS VINCLA MARITAE HIC CORPVS VATIS L A B E R I NAM SPIRITVS IVIT ILLVS VNDE ORTVS QVAERITE FONTEM ANIMAE QVOD FVERAM N O N SVM SED RVRSVM ERO QVOD MODO N O N SUM ORTVS ET OCCASVS VITAQVE MORSQVE ITIDEST · b. Change of meter is indicated by a special sign (/") in the left margin. In the following inscription, unfortunately badly mutilated on the right and at the bottom, seven hexameters (although obviously something is wrong with lücus inque in the last of these) are followed by seven choriambics addressed to Silvanus, the Fauns, and the Nymphs, and the choriambics are in turn followed by seven verses too mutilated to permit certain restoration, but evidently in a different meter. The changes are shown by the signs, in the margin, the first of which, doubtless by an error of the stone-cutter, was placed opposite line 9 instead of line 8. C. I. L. VIII. 27764 (tabula marmorea). OMNISATA • OMNIGENA · Ε TERRA · [nunc gramina surgunt]1 QVAEQVE · EFFETA · TVLIT · TELLVS · CATA · SOL[e vigescunt] CVNCTA IVB ANT · ANIMANT VIRIDANT NEM[um undique frondes] SOLLICITAE · DE · FLORE · NOVO · DE · VERE · MARIfto] QVARE · CETTE · DEO · PATRIVM · DEDAM[us honorem] SILVANO DE FONTE BOVANT CVI FROND[ea claustra] GIGNITVR Ε SAXO LVCVS INQVE ARB [ore rami]

Γ

HVNC TIBI DE MORE DAMVS DIFFICIL[em. . . ] HVNC TIBI DE VOCE PATRIS FALCITEN[entis haedum] HAEC TIBI DE MORE TVO PINIFERA ES[t corona] SIC MIHI SENIOR MEMORAT SAC[erdos] LVDITE FAVNI DRYADES PVELL[ LVDITE CANITE IAM MEO SACELL[ NAIDES Ε NEMORE MEO COLON[ J — C A N T E T ADSVETA DE FISTVLf

1 Restoration

is by (,'hat.olain, quoted from the. G. I. L.

A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL

PUNCTUATION

147

ADSIT ET LVDO DE MORE PA[ CANTET ET ROSEA DE TIBIA[ ]PREMAT BIIVGES DEVS A[ ]IAT BELLO DEVS HO[ JVENIAS PATER[ ]VLO TV[ 3. PUNCTUATION TO SEPARATE VERSES

The ends of verses are shown in nine different ways in inscriptions—by a space and by eight different symbols. a. When a verse ends within a line, an extended space separates the verse which ends from the verse which begins in that line. One of the well-known elogia of the Scipiones consists of seven verses. The first of these is written as a complete line; the remaining six verses are contained in eight lines, all equally indented under the first. The fourth verse ends with the end of line 5 and there is no sign to show that here the end of the verse and the end of the line coincide. The second, third, fifth, and sixth verses all end within lines, and are accordingly followed by spaces which serve as metrical punctuation.

G. I. L. P .

10.

QVEI · APICE INSIGNE · DIALt's /ZAMINIS · GESISTEI MORS · PERFEcit TVA · VT · ESSENT · OMNIA BREVIA · HONOS · FAMA · VIRTVSQVE GLORIA · ATQVE · INGENIVM · QVIBUS SEI IN · LONGA · LICViSET · T I B E VTIER · VITA FACILE · FACTEIS SVPERASES · GLORIAM MAIORVM QVA · RAE · LVBENS · T E · IN GREMIV SCIPIO RECIPiT · TERRA · PVBLI PROGNATVM · PVBLIO · CORNELI I t will be noted that interpuncta appear consistently except at the ends of lines, and appear, with one exception, after the last word of a verse that ends before a space within a line. The exception, in line 7, seems to have no significance. The same system is used in a well-known inscription that adapts the famous epitaph of Pacuvius. Ο. I. L. I 2 . 1209 (tabula ex lapide Tiburtino). ADVLESCENS · ΤΑΜ · ET · SI · PROPERAS HIC · TE SAXSOLVS · ROGAT · VT SE ASPICIAS · DEINDE · VT · QVOD · SCRIPTVST

148

A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL

PUNCTUATION

LEGAS · HIC · SVNT · OSSA · MAECI · LVCI · SITA PILOTIMI · VASCVLARI · HOC · EGO · VOLEBA NESCIVS · N I · ESSES · VALE · I t is noteworthy that although the first and second iambic trimeters are set off by spaces, no space separates the prose interjection that ends with vasculari from the final trimeter. This is probably a simple oversight. That the writer of the inscription was conscious that the last line is verse is shown by the fact that he has added ego to pad out the verse which in the Pacuvian original had

ossa.

Spaces are likewise used to separate five Saturnians, all of which end within lines: C. I.L.I2.

1531.

Μ · Ρ · VERTVLEIEIS · C · F QVOD · R E · SVA · DIFEIDENS · ASPER AFLEICTA · PARENS · TIMENS · HEIC · VOVIT · VOTO · HOC SOLVTO DECVMA · FACTA POLOVCTA LEIBEREIS · LVBE TES DONV · DANVNT · HERCOLEI · MAXSVME MERETO SEMOL·TE ORANT · SE · VOTI · CREBRO CONDEMNES The first space has a point in the middle of it, two other spaces have no points, and damage to the stone leaves it uncertain whether or not a point appeared in the space that marked the end of the second Saturnian. One cannot discern any meaning in the use or omission of the interpunct at these points. On another inscription, four hexameters are similarly separated by spaces, which, in this case, are emphasized by making the first letter of the verse larger than normal. (The lapidary's errors may have been corrected in paint, i.e. by adding horizontal strokes to convert I to Ε in florere and by placing a sicilicus C. I.L.

above t h e ν of

iuventa.)

2

I . 1603.

CN · TARA CIVS · CN · F VIXIT · A · X X · OSSA · EIVS · HIC · SITA · SVNT EHEV · HEV · TARACEI · VT · ACERBO · ES · DEDITVS · FATO · NON · AEVO E X SACTO · VITAI · ES · TRADITVS · MORTI · SED CVM · TE DECVIT • FLORERI · AETATE IVENTA INTERIEISTI · ET · LIQVISTI IN MAERORIBVS · MATREM

APPENDIX I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION

149

A later inscription, though badly damaged, shows the same separation of verses (supposedly senarii) by spaces, sometimes with interpuncta added. In the part quoted (one of three sections) the ends of verses occur four times within a line and otherwise coincide with the end of the line. (Illegible letters are here indicated by asterisks.) C. I. L. V. 5701 (basis quadrata). SCIS ME HOC SIBI**VI* *ATER · INFELIX · AMBOS · NOS DESIDERAT · ET · TV · VALERIA RARI · EXEMPLI · FEMINA SIC · ME · AMASTI · VT · NATOS DERELINQVERES · NEC • TV •OTVISTI · EOS • ATTENDERE *T · ACERBOS · PARITER · MEO · RE *INQVERES NVNC · ILLE · HAB I* *I HOS SIBI SVPERSTITES HAC · ILLE AC · NOS PATER DES* I*AT ROGO PATER SVAVI* * * * AS ASICIDE QRORIS MEI V*MIHI · PONATVR • OMNE FLOS SVO · TEMPORE It is noteworthy that of the five examples of this type of metrical distinction that we have quoted, four come from the first volume of the C. I. L., i.e. antedate the fall of the Republic. The use of spaces thus appears to have been the earliest form of punctuation, at least for the purpose of marking off verses, and to have been little used in the time of the Empire. b. The hedera, which seems not to have been used before the Augustan age2 is usually an ornamental variation of the interpunct, used especially with tall letters in "title" lines of inscriptions, or sometimes a convenient ornament that serves to balance for the eye lines that would otherwise seem too short or not properly centered. It is, however, a symbol quite different from the interpunct, and we could expect a priori that it would be used at times to mark divisions in a text. It is not astonishing, therefore, to find it occasionally used to mark the ends of verses. The most obvious use for hederae with this meaning is, of course, in texts with regular interpuncta in which verses are written as though they were prose, but it is sometimes found marking the ends of verses where the verse structure is made clear by the arrangement of the lines. 8 The earliest datable e x a m p l e k n o w n to the Gordons is from t h e time of Tiberius; see their Palaeography, pp. 183, 227 (n. 3), 216 (§13).

150

APPENDIX I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION

The following inscription is interesting also because of its Greek verses, which have both interpuncta and hederae. C. I. L. VI. 10971 (urna depositoria). D · Θ Κ · Μ HIC · IACET · EXANIMIS · TVMVLIS • AELIA SABINA CVM · SVA · NATA · SIMVL · ΓΕΤΫ · QVEM PROCREAT·IPSA g f Ο · EORTVNA · PIDEM · QVANTAM MVTASTI · MALIGNE QVEM · GENVIT · GENETRIX · SECVM TENET · IN · LARE · D I T I S ΕΙΚΟΣΙΝΕΣ · ΛΥΚΑΒΑΣΘΝΕΓΩ ΖΗΣΑΣΑ · ΣΑΒΕΙΝΑ f £ ΚΑΙ · ΜΗΣΙΝ · ΤΕΤΡΑΣΙΝ · EITEN ΔΕΚΑΤΟΝΠΑΛΙΝΗΜΑΡ p 6 ΤΗΔΕ · ΣΟΡΩ · KEIMAI · ΘΥΓΑΤΡ0Σ · ΜΕΤΑ HME · ΔΙΩΞΕΝ ( g ΔΙΞΑΜΕΝΗ · ΣΤΟΡΓΗΝ · ΦΙΛΟΜΗΤΟΡΑ Δ0ΓΜΑΣΙ · ΜΟΙΡΩΝ C 6 Like the space used for a similar purpose, the hedera could give trouble to the stone-cutters. A good example is the following, an inscription set up by a Seiius Fundanus whose heirs, if he was indeed buried in the tomb, evidently forgot to inscribe his age in the space left for it. C. 1. L. V I I I . 5370.

SEIIVS FVNDANVS NVTRIVIT · NATOS · DVOJ^IN PRIMA · AETATE · EX · GERMANA • CONIVGA^IN STVDIISQ · MISIT · ET · (sic) HONORES · TRIBVIT 0 POST · TANTOS · SVMPTVS · W RVITVS · . NE φ MINE FVNERAVIT NATOS · ET HANC · COEPIT · OPERA · SENEX · LA BORANS HAEC PERFECIT OMNIA · V · A GERMANA CONIVNX V A LXXX SORORI · CONIVGIS OR (sic) NAVIT · MEMORIA · QVAE · IVLIA · PRIM · V · A · Lxxx. · VALEAS · VIATOR · LECTOR · MEIS · CARMINIS

A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL

PUNCTUATION

151

I t seems t h a t the stone-cutter forgot to insert in line 4 before funeravit and before senex the hederae needed to mark the beginning of the verses; the signs were therefore added in the margins. The right margin is made even by spacing and the short line 6 is made to fit the margins in the same way. The hederae appear frequently in mosaic work. Of the three examples which I give here, the first, unfortunately fragmentary, uses hederae to separate six septenarii. C. I. L. VIII. 1072. ]NC FVND AMENTA ]TEM DEDICAVIMVS ]TIBI D E T E AMICI FLOREM ]DEVM INVOCANTEMpiQVI ]VIT GAVDENTES (6 ]D0MINVS T E EXALTA FASTILANEM INMIN ]CONSVMMAVIT GAVDENS ]EMTEM Another mosaic consists of two elegiac distichs followed by feliciter; each verse is marked off with a hedera. C. I. L. VIII. 8509. INVIDA SIDEREO RVMPANTVR PECTORA VISVC^CEDAT ET IN NOSTRIS LINGVA PROTERVA L O C I S ^ H O C STVDIO SVPERAMVS AVOS GRATVMQVE RENIDETp^AEDIBVS I N NOSTRIS SVMVS A P E X OPERIS pöFELICITER In the following, the hedera is not used when the end of a verse comes a t the end of a line. 0. I. L. VIII. 21510. HING AB AL**** AQVOSOS AMARA CAMPOS£INAR****M INS TRVCTAM CERNIMVS TEC***** DOMORVMpiCLASSES NAVIVM CERTANTVR AEQVORA REMIS AQVARVM MVLTARVM AIIVM TVR MVLIIUDO POMORVM ROMANI PROLES EXVLTAT FAS TIGIA TECTIS

152

A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL

PUNCTUATION

I n the following somewhat obscure sepulchral inscription, the mutilation of the stone a t the right makes it difficult to be certain whether the hedera was used at the end of lines. The right margin is more even on the stone than it appears in this transcription. C. I. L. VIII. 20758. D Μ CAEFALIO Ε X i m i AE LAVDIS Iuue NI R E D D E R E QVOD solum LICVIT POST FATa sepul CHRVM QVI PATnae CASVS MISERANS ci VIVMQVE SVORVm CLAVSIS ITINERIBV« pe NETRAVIT DEVIA CVr.su QVEM NON RESPEcto DEFESSA PARS AETAs NEC SVBOLVM PIETAS po TVIT D E T I N E R E PERiclis QVID SVPEREST haec om NIVM EST CONsciew TIA NOSTRVM CVR F V E R I T TALEm ^ E R PRESSVS MORTE DOlorem DVM CIVIBVS REQVEM TRIBVTORVM F E R R E Vo LEBAT & INCIDII I N F E L I X CONTRARIO MV N E R E MISSV (6 IVL KAPITO · IVL · KAPITO N I · F I L · FEC · VIX · ANN X L I I I I ME V I I I There is some interest in ä very late inscription in wretched hexameters from Mauretania which bears a date anno Provinciae equivalent to 305 A. D. I t seems likely that the lapidary, by an odd haplography, omitted the last three lines of the verse and proceeded to inscribe the prose, set off by a hsdera which was doubtless intended to mark the end of both the passage in verse and the acrostich formed by the initial letters of the verses. When the omission

APPENDIX

I i : METRICAL

PUNCTUATION

153

was noticed, it was necessary to crowd the three verses into the space remaining at the right of the four that had been inscribed, and the hederae were used to show the division. It seems unlikely that the symbols would have been used in the first four lines, had it not been necessary to mark off what is, in effect, a second column. VEL VOS QVOS PIETAS DVXIT MVNERARE PARENTES IAM REQVIEM SVMMVS VBI NOS FORTVNA · REMISIT TALIA QVIS FACIAT NISI VOS QVOS AMOR ADEGIT ACCIPIANT CVNCTI VESTROS ORNASSE PARENTES MVMMICLEA KAMERINA MARITO ET AFLII VITALIS KAMERINVS SERGIANVS VITALI PATRI ET SATVRNINAE AVIAE DIGNISSIMIS PR CCLXVI ET SATVRNINVS The verse squeezed in at the ends of the first four lines, separated from the prose by hederae: Φ ΦΦLAETI TM SVMMVSE**MA P T R I S QVAE SENECTVS Φ ITER AGENS SALVE VERSVS CVMLEGERISISTOS Φ SIA CAPITA EXPLORES INGENIVM NOMENQVE PROBABIS c. The most common mark of punctuation (as distinct from word division) is the diagonal bar, or virgula (/). In a single distich which follows the brief inscription, the two metrical lines are separated by a virgula: C. I. L. VI. 27814 (tabella columbarii). L

· TVRRANIVS · VI X A N N ·

OPTATVS XXXV

Ε · LAPIS · OBTESTOR · LEVITER · SVPER OSSA · RESIDAS / NI · DOLEAT NOSTRI · CONDITVS · OFFICIO The following fragmentary inscription has two virgulae which separate metrical lines: C. I.L.Y I. 14578 (tabula marmorea). DIS L

Μ

· CATELLI

CLODIA

·

·

FLORI

AFRICANA

154

A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL

filio

·

PUNCTUATION

PIISSIMO

]AD HOC · TVMVLVM · DVM · PERLEGIS ]ISTE · /ASPICE QVAM I N DI[ ]VITA · MIHI · /XII · EGO[ ]M · V I X I · DVLCISSIMAE · MATR[i ]M · FATO CITO RAPTVS · INIQ[«o ]RIAS · CELEBRAREM FORTEM L[ ]ATER · ET · GERMANA · SOROR ]TER · FESTA · SACRI · TEMPLA[ TANTVR · AMICI N I · SI QVID · MEA CARMINA[ ] 0 PREOORQVE·ROGO ]VPEROS · VIVAS MVL[ ]IS · F E L I X · S[ Only one elegiac distich, lines 5-8, is sufficiently complete for restoration. The virgulae show the beginnings of verses.3 No other marks are used, except the word-divider. In another inscription, a hexameter and two pentameters are separated by virgulae. Because of the larger letters of the first line, one word of the hexameter had to be carried over and the end of the verse is marked by a virgula. The pentameter also ends after the first word of the next line. C.I.L.YI.

18579 (tabula marmorea).

TERRA · PARENS · T I B I · FORTVNATAE · COMMISIMVS OSSA/QVAE · TANGIS · MATRES · PROXVMITÄTE TVÖS/NVLLVM · ONVS · I N CVMBÄS · SPERRT • VMBRA · CINIS It will be noted that four times an apex marks long vowels, and once shows that, for the sake of the meter, a short syllable is to be considered long (speret). The result is an incorrect substitution for the second hemistich of the pentameter.4

• T h e editor of C.I.L. comments: vv. 6.7. supplevi ex epigrammatibus Campano X 4428 et Venafrano X 5020: Quis quis] ad hoc tumulum dum perlegis [. . . trjiste Aspice quam indigne [sit data] vita mihi. (Doudecim ego [annoru]m vixi dulcissimae matri et segg ' A n o t h e r possibility is that the word et was omitted, thus —

W

W

—

U

V

-

aperat et umbra cinis.

APPENDIX Ii: METRICAL PUNCTUATION

155

d. Another mark, possibly a mere variation of the virquia, that is used to mark off verses has the form / The carmen consists of two elegiac distichs followed by a pentameter. Each distich is arranged in a paragraph of three lines, with the last two indented under the first. Three of the verses are marked by the sign f (two of them with an interpunct). The last two verses are not so marked, possibly because the length of the line leaves little room for a mark.8 It will be noted that the same mark, in the prose portion, with an interpunct on each side of it, indicates the only sentence-end occurring within a line. Ο. I. L. III. 4487. V ΕIΑ ΝIA · HOSPITA ANN · X L V • Η · S · Ε · ET L FABRICIVS CLEMENS · MIL · COH · I · PRAETOR L · FABRICI · EVOC · F · QVI DECESSIT IM PRAET ANN · X X I X · STIP · V I I I / • FABRICIA L · F · MARCELLA · M A T R I · SVAE · ET • F R A T R I POSVIT FELIX · T E R R A · PRECOR · LEVITER · SVPER OSSA · RESIDAS 7 · MATRIS · ET · ET · FRA TRIS • COMPRECOR · ECCE · SOROR 7 PARS · IACET · IPSA · MEI · MAIOR · GEMI NATQVE DOLOREM J • F I L I A MATRI · SIMVL · FRATRE · IACENT · FILIO MPRECOR · VT · VOBIS · SIT · PIA · TERRA LEVIS e. Another mark as the form of a J. Only one sign is used, in line 3, where it marks the end of the hexameter in the middle of the line of beautifully inscribed letters. A similar verse-end occurs in line 6, but is not so marked. G. I.L.N I. 5767 (tabula marmorea litteris pulchris paullo maioribus). DIS · MANIBVS SACRVM HIC · TVMVLVS FRCVTI SACER EST QVEM LAEDERE NOLI J HOSPES SIC · V O T I S · IPSE FRVARE • T V IS LEGIST I MISERATVS ABIS FELIX · TIBI VITA SIT PRECOR (sic) A Τ Q V Ε • O B I T O SID • T I B I TERRA LEVIS • In C. I. L. VI. 19253, the curved mark which is used in prose for punctuation for sense, indicates the ends of verses, although alternate verses are indented. In the seven lines, three such marks occur.

156

APPENDIX

Ii: METRICAL

PUNCTUATION

CN · POMPEIYS · OLYMPICVS · VIVS · FECIT · SIBI · ET · GEGANIAE · PRIMAe coni( ?) FELICITATI · F · FRVCTO · L · DE QVIBVS · DOLVIT NIHIL NISI MORTEto f. Two inscriptions use the mark 7 to set off verses. In the first, the sign, somewhat smaller, is used after every verse of the three elegiac distichs except that no mark is found at the end of the poem. C. I. L. VI. 33903 (cippus marmoreus).

(urceus)

D Μ CL · HIC · IACEO · DIADVME NVS · ARTE · POETA · 7OLIM · CAE SARiEIS · FLORIDVS · OFFICIIS 7 QVEM · NVMQVAM · CVPIDAE POSSEDIT · GLORIA · FAMAE 7 SED · SEMPER · MODICVS · R E X SIT · VBIQVE · TENOR · 'HYLLE PATER · VENI · NOLLO · MOVERE TVMVLTV · 7 HOSPITIVM · NOBIS · SVFFICIT · ISTA · DOMVS ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! CL · FRVCTIANE B M F

(patera)

In the other, very poorly constructed verses7 are written mostly line for line. When this is not possible, the sign*/marks the end of the verse (once, line 4, after the single word of the line; again, in the middle of line 13). C. I. L. VI. 17518. .. .VIRO · POSVIT · CONIVNX · MEMORA. .LIS A . . . DIGNA · PIO · NATO · QVI · CITO · RAPTVS · ABIT MVENERA QVAE DECVIT NATVM PATRIQ MATRIQVE PARARE7 IN . . . NATORVM S E R I E MA SI PIA VOTA MIHI TITVLIS TRISTISSIMA . . . . QVAE SVBOLES OLIM SERVAVIT TEMPORE LONGO A · FABIO · DAPHNO FABIA · PYRALLIS 7 The editor of G. I. L. remarks: Versus inconditi sunt, et tam male coneepti, ut de iusta restitutione desperandum sit.

A P P E N D I X I I : METRICAL

PUNCTUATION

157

CONIVGI · CARISSIMO POSVIT DI TALESQVE DABVNT EPVLAS MERITIS PRO TALIBVS ILLI7 ET NATVM PATRI MATRIS PIETATE PROBABVNT g. Although called hederß by the editor, the mark / is most probably a sign of punctuation, possibly a variant of the foregoing. G. I. L. VIII. 16737 (in lapidibus duobus). HAEC TIBI KARA T W S CONSCRIPT verba MARITVS/O DVLCIS CONICNX DEfuncta leva MEN AMISSAE/ΊΑΜ SINE TE ORBI mo LESTA . . . GVS/ΈΤ CAEL ....LACELL VRASAMABo FVNERE MVI TALES ACCEndere FACES/ITVM RVC NVTRISTIS VIRIS The first two hexameters are clearly separated by this mark. The others are too mutilated for restoration, but two other marks are visible in the extant portion. h. The mark hh, which Varro8 calls an I on its side, marks the end of the first of three elegiac distichs. The end of the second, in line 4, is broken and it cannot be determined whether the mark was used. It was omitted, however, after the third, which concludes the carmen. C. I. L. VIII. 13535 (in fragmentis viginti quinque tabulae). RVRE Opulens caruSQ · SVIS · CALLISTRATws ipse iraTERPRES voluit NOMINIS esSE SVI μ QVI LICET ET cenSV DIVES MANSISSET ET Αuro INVIDIAE NVMQVAm ferVIDA VELA Τulit FORTVNATVS OLIM-V SIBI-VXIT AMIcis αωΧΙΤ CONGESTo pREDIA RVRENOVA IN PACE YixiT ANNos . . . .dePO · SITVS 1 1 1 Κ L D APR lies One of the most well-known elogia of the Scipiones has a similar mark to separate Saturnian verses. •Varro, De sermone Latino

(frag. 66 apud Goetz & Schoell).

158

C. I.L.I2,

A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL

PUNCTUATION

7. (sarcophagus).

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ICORNELIVS · LVCIVS · SCIPIO · BARBATVS · GNAIVOD · PATRE PROGNATVS · FORTIS · VIR · SAPIENSQVE-QVOIVS · FORMA · VIRTVTEI · PARISVMA FVIT—CONSOL · CENSOR · AIDILIS · QVEI · FVIT · APVD V O S TAVRASIA · CISAVNA SAMNIO · CEPIT—SVBIGIT · OMNE · LOVCANAM · OPSIDESQVE · AVDOVCsIT The horizontal mark was not placed after Barbatus, which is the end of the first verse. Another inscription has an inclined, but not transverse, I to mark the ends of verses occurring within a line. The extant portion has two such signs, marking the ends of verses in an elegiac distich. The other two complete verses are hexameters and end at the right margin. It will be noted that the nominative aegregia must be scanned egregiä. C. I. L. V. 6295. SCIRE VOLENS LECTOR QVI SIT IN FVNERE FLETVS I CARMI NA SI RELEGAS DISCERE CVNTA POTES I AEGREGIA CON IVNX NIMIVM DILECTA MARITO BVSTVS MEMBRA TENET MENS CAELI PERGET IN ASTRA SVPERSTEM TENVIT SAECVL***

i. When the interpunct was no longer used as a word-divider, it became available as a mark of punctuation, and accordingly in late inscriptions we find it also used to mark the end of verses. A possible anticipation of this use appears in an inscription in which hexameters written line for line with consistent interpuncta have the point also at the end of each line except the lines (5, 12) in which a considerable space was left at the end of the line. Noteworthy also are the hedera before the last line and what may be intended for a coronis at the end.

A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL

PUNCTUATION

159

C. I. L. VI. 39086 (tabula magna marmorea in quinque partes fracta). HIC · REGINA · SITA · EST · TALI · CONTECTA · SEPVLCRO · QVOD CONIVNX · STATVIT · RESPONDENS · EIVS · Α Μ 0 R I · HAEC · POST · BIS · DENOS · SECVM · TRANS · SEGERAT · ANNVM (sie) ET · QVARTVM · MENSEM · RESTANTIBVS · OCTO · DIEBV S· RVRSVM · VICTVRA/REDIRVRA · AD LVMINA · RVRSVM NAM · SPERARE · POTEST · IDEO · QVOD · SVRGAT · INAEVO MPROMISSVM QVAE · VERA · FIDES · DIGNISQVE · PIISQV E· QVAE · MERVIT · SEDEM · VENERANDI · RVRIS · HABER E· HOC · TIBI · PRAESTITERIT · PIETAS · HOC · VITA · PVDIC A· HOC · ET · AMOR · GENERIS · HOC · OBSERVANTIA · LEGI S· CONIVGII · MERITVM · CVIVS · TIBI · GLORIA · CVRA E· HORVM · FACTORVM · TIBI · SVNT · SPERANDA · FVTVRA 0ΏΕ QVIBVS · ET · CONIVNX · MAESTVS · SOLACIA · QVAERIT«/^ The point is used at the end of trimeters written line for line and without interpuncta : C. I. L. VI. 28941 (fragmenta quatuor tablulae marmoreae).9 Fecere SeiAE VICTORINAe cONIVGI · Seianus, maTRI VICTORINVS FILIVS · tribus sit eaDEM SEDIS AETERNAE DOMVS · Viro peregit AAEC SVO SEMPER COMES · probique castas /eMINAE MORES ERANT · Annos tulit, cum est raPTA VIGINTI ET DVOS · Scias viator: FATA NON PARCVNT BONIS · The point is used in two different ways in another inscription. Two hexameters are marked at the end. Then follow two elegiac distichs, the ends of which are not marked, but the caesurae of both hexametric verses are indicated by a point. C. I. L. XIV. 914. D Μ C DOMITI PRIMI HOC · EGO SV IN TVMVLO PRIMVS NOTISSI MVS ILLE · VIXI LVCRINIS POTABI SAEPE FA LERVM · BALNIA VINA VENVS · MECVM SENVERE PERE ANNOS HEC EGO SI POTVI SIT MIHI TERRA LEBIS SET TAMEN AD MA NES · FOENIX ME SERBAT IN ARA QVI ME CVM PROPERAT SE REPARARE SIBI » Restored

by

Bueoheler.

160

A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL

PUNCTUATION

In a late inscription, dated 551 A. D., three verses ending within a line are marked and one coinciding with the end of the line. Interpuncts are used in the final line, including one at the end. Two other points in the inscription mark the abbreviation of -que and one (line 17) apparently designates a heptamimeral caesura. C. I.L. XI. 312 (tabula magna marmorea). CLAVDITVR HOC TVMVLO BENEDICTI FIDA IVGALIS · QVAE TENVIT CASTAM DEFVNCTO CONIVGE VITAM NOMINE PVLCHERIA FVIT SED NOMINE FORMAM SIGNAVIT MENTEMQ · SIMVL VITAMQ · DECENTEM FILIVS HIS THOMAS ALVIT QVEM BLANDA RELICTAE SIMPLICITER PIETAS CARI POST FATA MARITI · OFFICIVM SVLA EXIBVIT COMMVNE PA RENTVM · IPSIVS HIC COLLO GENETRIX PORTATA QVIES CIT · TALE DECVS MERVIT FVNERIS · PIA MATER HABERE D P · SD I P FB · X · PC · BASIL · I N D · X I I I I · In the following fragmentary inscription, points are used to set off lines of verse, even when the verse ends the line, if there is room for a point. The right margin is fairly even on the stone. Two pentameters are followed by eleven rough hexameters. Only one verse of which the end is extant has no mark, viz., line 3. The last hexameter is divided into two parts by a name in large letters in line 20. C. I. L. VIII. 7759. QVI PROPERAS QVAESO TAR DA VIATOR ITER · VT PAVCIS DISCAS CVM GENVS EXITIVM NON EXTERNA SATVR SCYTHI CA D E GENTE SYRORVM · /VMSATVS AETHNAVIROS VB/ CINGVNT ANSPAGAE MOLES · COGNITVS EST LOCVS AMOENIS

A P P E N D I X I i : METHICAL

PUNCTUATION

161

SIMVS ALBA · IN QVA FRONDICOMA[ ODORATVR AD MARE PINVS · DAPHNE[ PVDICA V I . . . .LI ET LOCO VITREA NA[ DVMSIMI NONATAMV[ ]VBI METVRALES SED[ ]BI SVM CINIS HIC Ο ]TVR · TER DENOS ET BIS QVIN SVMSPERAT ANNO[ AETATE MY/ERO QVE MIHI FVIT VNICA NA[ A · QVOT DEDIT IT PEPETIT NATVRA NON[ /VIA PECCAT · DICERE NE PIGEATf Ρ

· SITTI

MOLLITER

·

OSSA

OPTATI· CVBENT ·

In the following inscription, consisting of crude hexameters, points mark six verse-ends within the line. The remaining seven, written line for line, are not marked except lines 9 and 14 which are somewhat shorter. The worddivider is not used and the right margin is even. C. I. L. VI. 32808 (tabula marmorea litteris satis bonis saeculi fere secundi exeuntis). RESPICE PRAETERIENS VIATOR CONSOBRINI PIETATE PARATA · CVM LACRIMIS STATVI QVAN TO IN MVNERE POSTO VIDETIS · PANNONIA TERRA CREAT TVMVLAT ITALIA TELLVS · ANN XXVI VT SIBI CASTRIS HONOREM ATQVIRERET IPSE · DOLORI MA// NO SVBSTENTAVIT TEMPORE LONGO · POSTEA CVM SPERANS DOLOREM EFFVGISSE NEFANDAM · ANTE DIEM MERITVM HVNC DEMERSIT AT STYGA PLVTON QVOTSI FATA EO SINVISSENT LVCE VIDERE · ISTA PRIUS TRISTE MVNVS POSVI DOLORI REPLETVS MVNVS INANE QVIDEM TERRA NVNC DIVIDIT ISTA OSSVA SVB TITVLO POTIVS TV OPTA VIATOR CVM PIE TATE TVA IPSO TERRA LEVE NOBIS FORTVNA BEATA EX QVA TV POSSIS OBITVS BENE LINOVERE NATO · VAL ANTONIVS ET AVR VICTORINVS HERED VLPIO QVINTIANO EQ SING BEN MER POSVER The ends of nine long verses, rough hexameters, are marked by points, except those ending in lines 1 and 9. The right margin is even.

162

APPENDIX I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION

C. I. L. V. 1703. HIC IACET RESTVTVS P E L E G E R IN PACE FIDELIS E X A F R I C A V E N I T V T ISTAM V R B E V I D E R E T · HEC INVISA TELLVS ISTVM VOLVIT CORPVS HABE R E · HIC QVO NATVS F V E R A T OPTANS E R A T ILLO R E V E R T I · ID MAGIS CRVDELIVS VT NYLLVM SVO RVMQVE V I D E R E T · I N V E N E R A T SATIS AMPLIVS QVAM SVOS IPSE P A R E N T E S · NEC IAM E R A T E X T E R SI CVT PROVENIT V T ESSET A B IPSIS · SED QVO F A T A VOCANT NVLLVS RESISTERE POSSIT HVIC SODALICII MEIOREN SIVM CONTRA VOTVM F E C E R V N T · The writer of this inscription attempted to write Phalaecean verses, the ends of which are marked by points. Several have been restored as shown below the transcription.

C.I.L.

VIII. 11597.

IV L I Ο G A L L O N I O · POST SEPTVAGESIMO NVMERO TEMPVS · POSTQVAE TOTIDEM TRANSACTÖS AVTVMNOS · T R E S N A T I T I B I IAM FIGIMVS P R O B O P A R E N T I · QVOD GRATVM TVMVLVM V I D E T V R ESSE MATER K A R A NOBIS TIBIQVE N V P E R HOr T A T V R F I E R I MORTIS HONOREM · IAM V A L E P A T E R NOBIS RELICTIS · IAM T E NON T a r T A R A C R V D E L E M T E N E b u N T · SET ELYSIVS CAMPVS OCCVPAVIT f 6 V N D///NC II/IYM TIBI R E V E R T FAS ESI V T / / Ο ET PROBO P A R E T I · Η S · Ε figimus tibi iam probo parenti, quod gratum tumulum videtur esse, mater kara tibi nobisque nuper hortatur fieri mortis honorem, iam vale pater [heu] nobis relictis! et seqq. Like apices and other epigraphical devices intended to facilitate reading of the inscription, the signs which indicated the ends of verses were sometimes used by persons who did not understand their function, but presumably thought them elegant and therefore to be imitated. A very good example of this will be used to close this survey. Both hederae and the sign appear, but are meaningless, and the interpunct is also used accurately to separate verses.

APPENDIX I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION

C. I. L. XII. 533 (cippus litteris bonis saeculi fere secundi exeuntis). Ρ AVL Ο SISTE GRADVM IVVENIS P I E QVAESO VIATOR · VI MEA P E R p £ TITVLVM NORIS SIC 1NVIDA FATA · VNO MINVS QVAM BIS DENOS EGO VIXI P E R ANNOS INTEGER INNOCVVS SEMPER PIA MENTE PROBATVS • QVI DOCILI LVSV IVVENVM ( 6 BENE DOCTVS HARENIS.-.PVLCHER ET ILLE FVI VARUS CIRCVMDATVS ARMIS · SAEPE FERAS LVSI MEDICVS TAMEN IS QVOQVE VIXI · ET COMES V VRSARIS COMES HIS QVI VICTIMA SACRIS V CAEDERE SAEPE SOLENT ET QVI NOVO TEMPORE VERIS · FLORIBVS INTEXTIS REFOVENT SIMVLACRA DEORVM · NOMEN SI QVAERIS TITVLVS TIBI VERA FATETVR SEX · I VL · FELICISSIMVS SEX · IVLIVS · FELIX ALVMNO · INCOMPARAöiZi et F E L I C I T A S Fr citri

163

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adcook, F. Ε., "A Note on Res Gestae Divi Augusti, 34, 3", Journal of Roman Studies X L I I (1952), pp. 10-12. Aegyptische Urkunden aus die Königlichen Museen zu Berlin, Griechische Urkunden (Berlin, 1895-1926). L'annie dpigraphique (Paris, 1888-1962). L'annie philologique (Paris, 1933-1962). Baisdon, J . P., "Claudius", The Oxford Classical Dictionary (Oxford, 1949). Barini, Concepta (ed.), Res gestae Divi Augusti ex monumentis Ancyrano, Antiocheno, Apolloniensi (Romae, 1937). Barwick, Karl (ed.), Flavii Sosipatri Charisii artis grammaticae libri V (Lipsiae, 1925). Battelli, Giulio, Lezioni de paleografia, l i l a . ed. (Cittä del Vaticano, 1949). Berger, Adolf, Encyclopedic Dictionary of Roman Law (Philadelphia, 1953). Berliner griechische Urkunden: see Aegyptische. Brune, Karl G. and Otto Gradenwitz (eds.), Fontes iuris Romani antiqui: I I . Simulacra (Tubingae, 1912). Buecheler, Franz (ed.), Carmina Latina epigraphica (Lipsiae, 1895-1897). Büchner, Karl, "Ueberlieferungsgeschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Altertums", Geschichte der Textüberlieferung, Band I (Zürich, 1961). Cagnat, Rene, Cours d'dpigraphie latine (Paris, 1914). Calderini, Aristide (ed.), Papiri Latini (Milano, 1945). Cavenaile, Robert (ed.), Corpus papyrorum Latinarum (Wiesbaden, 1958). Chatelain, iSmile, Paliographie es classiques latins (Paris, 1884-1900). Christiansen, Jacobus. De apinibus et I longis inscriptionum Latinarum (Husuroi, 1889). Collart, P. "Les papyrus littöraires latins", Revue de philologie, I l l e eerie, XV (1941), pp. 112-128. Conway, Robert Seymour and C. F. Walters (eds.), TitiLivi ab urbe condita, (Oxonii, 1914). Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum (Berolini, 1863-1959). della Corte, F., "Lingua e cultura nella Tabula Hebana", La parola del paesato, Fase. X I V (Napoli, 1950). della Corte, F. and M. A. Levi, "Tavola di Heba", La parola del passato, Fase. XIV (Napoli, 1950). Dessau, Hermann (ed.), Inscriptiones Latinae selectae (Berolini, 1916). Devoto, Jacob (ed.), Tabulae Iguvinae (Romae, 1940). Dow, Sterling, "Minoan Writing", American Journal of Archaeology, L V I I I (1954), pp. 77-129. Durry, Marcel (ed.), ]£loge fun&bre d'une matrone romaine (Paris, 1950).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

165

Egbert, James C., Introduction to the Study of Latin Inscriptions, 2nd. ed. (New York, 1908). Epigraphica (Milano, 1939-1960). Ernout, A. and A. Meillet, Dictionnaire etymologique de la langue latine, H i e ed. (Paris, 1951). Fabia, Philippe (ed.), La table claudienne de Lyon (Lyon, 1929). Ferrara, Ioannes (ed.), Poematis Latini reliquiae ex volumine Herculanensi evulgata (Papiae, 1908). Funaioli, Hyginus (ed.), Grammatical Bomanae fragmenta, I (Lipsiae, 1907). Gage, J e a n (ed.). Res gestae Divi Augusti (Parisiis, 1950). Garuti, Ioannes (ed.), C. Rabirius: Bellum Actiacum (Bononiae, 1958). Geschichte der Textüberlieferung: see Büchner. Goetz, Georg and F. Sehoell (eds.), M. Terenti Varronis de lingua Latina (Lipsiae, 1910). Gordon, Arthur Ε., "A New Fragment of the Laudatio Turiae", American Journal of Archaeology, LIV (1960), pp. 223-226, plates 26-27. Gordon, Arthur Ε . and J . S. Gordon (eds.), Album of Dated Latin Inscriptions, I - I V (Berkeley, 1958). Gordon, Joyce S. and A. E. Gordon, Contributions to the Palaeography of Latin Inscriptions (Berkeley, 1957). Grenfell, Bernard P. and Arthur S. H u n t (eds.), The Oxyrhynckus Papyri (London, 1898-1962). Hiibner, Aemilius, Exempla scripturae epigraphicae Latinae (Berolini, 1885). —, "Lex metalli Vipascensis", Ephemeris epigraphica, I I I (1877), pp. 165-187. Huguet, Pedro Batlle, Epigrafia Latina (Barcelona, 1946). Inscriptiones Italicae (Romae, 1936-1953). J a h n , Otto, "Ueber die Subscriptionen in den Handschriften römischer Classiker", Berichte über die Verhandlungen der Königlich sächsischen Oesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, Phil.-hist. Classe, Band I I I (1851), pp. 327-372. Keil, Heinrich (ed.), Grammatici Latini (Lipsiae, 1855-1880). Kent, Roland G. (ed.), M. Terenti Varronis de lingua Latina (Cambridge, 1938). Kenyon, Frederic G. Books and Readers in Ancient Greece and Rome (Oxford, 1951). Klotz, Alfred (ed.), Μ. Tulli Giceronis in C. Verrem actionis secundae (Lipsiae, 1923). Lachmann, Karl (ed.), G. Lucilii saturae (Berolini, 1876). Lejeune, Michel. "Les öpingles votives incrites du sanctuaire d'este," Revue des Hudes anciennes, LVI (1954), pp. 61-89. Lowe, E . A. (ed.). Codices Latini antiquiores (Oxonii, 1934-1963). Mallon, Jean, Paleographie romaine (Madrid, 1952). —/'Quel est le plus ancienexempleconnud'un manuscritlatin en forme de codex?", Emerita, X V I I (1949), pp. 1-8. Mallon, Jean, Robert Marichal, and Charles Perrat, L'ecriture latine de la capitate romaine ά la minuscule (Paris, 1939). de Manteyer, Georges, "L'inscription de Lanuvium λ Rome", Melanges d'archeologie et d'histoire de Vecole fran^aise de Rome, X V I I I (1898), pp. 271-280. Marichal, Robert and Albert Bruckner (eds.), Chartae Latinae antiquiores (Olten, 1954). Mariotti, Adriana, "Testo litterario Latino non identificato", Athenaeum, X X V (1947), pp. 166-170. Mazzarino, Antonius (ed.), Grammatical Bomanae fragmenta aetatis Caesareae (Augustae Taurinorum, 1955). Mommsen, Th. (ed.), Bes gestae Divi Augusti ex monumentis Ancyrano et Apolloniensi, IIa. ed. (Berolini, 1883).

ιββ

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Oliver, James Η. and Robert E. A. Palmer, "Minutes of an Act of the Roman Senate", Hesperia, X X I V (1955), pp. 320-350. Oliver, Revilo P., "The First Medicean MS. of Tacitus and the Titulature of Ancient Books", Transactions of the American Philological Association, L X X X I I (1951), pp. 232-261. —, Review of Arthur E . Gordon and J . S. Gordon's Album of Dated Latin Inscriptions and Contributions to the Palaeography of Latin Inscriptions, in American Journal of Philology, L X X X I (1960), pp. 189-197. Pack, Roger Α., Greek and Latin Literary Teoots from Graeco-Roman Egypt. 2nd. Ed. (Ann Arbor, 1968). Palmer, Leonard R., Myceneans and Minoans (London, 1961). Pauly, August, G. Wissowa, and W. Kroll, Real-Encyclopädie der classiscken Altertumswissenschaft (Stuttgart, 1894-1960). Ponltney, J . W., The Bronze Tables of Iguvium (1959). Peterson, William, M. Tulli Oiceronis Orationes Verrinae (Oxonii, s.a. [1917]). Ramsay, William Mitchell and Anton von Premerstein (eds.), Monumentum Antiochenum (Klio, Beiheft X I X ) (Lipsiae, 1927). Reifferscheid, Augustus (ed.), C. Suetoni Tranquüli praeter Caesarum libros reliquiae (Lipsiae, 1860). Riccobono, S. (ed.), Acta Divi Augusti (Romae, 1945). Ritechl, Friedrich, Priscae Latinitatis monumenta epigraphica (Berolini, 1862). Roberte, C. H., "The Antinoä Fragment of Juvenal", Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, X X I (1935), pp. 199-209. Robinson, David M., "The Res gestae Divi Augusti as Recorded on the Monumentum Antiochenum", American Journal of Philology, X L V I I (1926), pp. 1-54. de Sanctis, Gaetano (ed.), "Noti di epigrafia romana, I. La orazione funebre di Turia", Atti accademia scavi di Torino, X L V I I I (1913), pp. 270-275. Sanders, Henry A. (ed.), Latin Papyri in the University of Michigan Collection (Ann Arbor, 1947). Sandys, John Edwin, Latin Epigraphy (Cambridge, 1927). Schanz, Martin and Carl Hosius, Geschichte der römischen Literatur (München, 1935). Scott, Walter (ed.), Fragmenta Herculanensia (Oxonii, 1885). Smutny, R . J., Greek and Latin Inscriptions at Berkeley (Berkeley, 1966). Sprey, Josef (ed.), Papyri Iandanae, V (Lipsiae, 1931). Steffens, Franz Lateinische paläographie (Berlin, 1929). Summers, Walter C. (ed.), Select Letters of Seneca (London, 1910). Thompson, Edward Maunde, An Introduction to Greek and Latin Palaeography (Oxford, 1912). Turner, Eric G., "Half a Line of Virgil from Egypt", Studi in onore di A. Calderini e R. Paribeni, Vol. II, pp. 157-161 (Milano, 1957). de Visscher, Fernand, F. della Corte, C. Gatti, and M. A. Levi (eds.), "Tabula Hebana", La parola del passato, Fase. X I V (Napoli, 1950). Weber, Wilhelm, Princeps (Stuttgart, 1936). Wessely, Carl, Die ältesten lateinischen und griechischen Papyri (Wiens, 1914). —, Schrifttafeln zur älteren lateinischen Palaeographie (Leipzig, 1898). Wilmanns, Gustav (ed.), Exempla inscriptionum Latinarum (Berolini, 1873). Youtie, Herbert C. and John G. Winter (eds.), Papyri and Ostraca from Karanis (Ann Arbor, 1951).

JANUA

LINGUARUM

STUDIA MEMORIAE NICOLAI VAN WIJK DEDICATA Edited by. Ο. Η. van Schooneveld

SERIES PRACTICA

1. ΜΑΒΠ,ΤΒ CONWELL and ALPHONSE JOTLLAND: Louisiana French Grammar, I: Phonology. Morphology, and Syntax. 1903. 207 pp., 2 maps. Cloth Old. 56.— 3. IRENE GARBELL. The Jewish Neo-Aramalo Dialects of Persian Azerbaijan: Linguistic Analysis and Folkloristic Texts. 19Θ5. 342 pp., map. Cloth. Old. 98.— 4. MORRIS F. GOODMAN A Comparative Study of Creole French Dialect. 1964.143 pp., map. Old. 34.— 5. ROLAND HARWEG Compositum und Katalysatlonstext, vornehmlich im späten Sanskrit. 1βθ4. 104 pp. Old. 8 8 . β. GUSTAV HERDAN The Strnctnralistic Approach to Chinese Grammar and Vocabulary: Two Essays. 1964. 56 pp., 4 figs. Old. 2 6 . 7. ALPHONSB JUILLAND: Dictionnalre Inverse delaLangue Franpalse. 1965.564 pp., 9figs.Cloth. Gld. 120.— 8. A. HOOD ROBERTS: A Statistical Linguistic Analysis of American English. 1965. 487 pp., 11 flgs., 6 tables. Cloth. Old. 78.— 9. VALDIS LEJNIBKS. Morphosyntax ol the Homeric Greek Verb. 1964. 92 pp. Old. 26.— 10. ROBERT E. DIAMOND. The Diction of the Anglo-Saxon Metrical Psalms. 1963. 59 pp. Old. 20.— 11. JOSEPH E . GRIMES

U u i c h o l S y n t a x . 1964. 105 p p .

Old. 80.—

12. OLAKA Ν HUSH Phonetic Variation and Acoustic Distinctive Features: A Study of Four Oeneral American Fricatives 1964. 161 pp., 64 figs., 84 tables Old. 44.— 13. WILLIAM G. CASTLE The Effect ol Selective Narrow-Band Filtering on the Perception of Certain English Vowels. 1964. 209 pp., 53 figs., 84 tables. Old. 48.— 14. ANN SHANNON A Descriptive Syntax of the Parker Manuscript of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle from 734 —891. 1964. 68 pp. Old. 20.— 15. EICHI KOBAYASHI. The Verb Forms of the South English Legendary. 1964. 87 pp. Old. 24.— 16. UOHER L. FIRESTONE: Description and Classification of Slrionö, a Tupf Guaranl Language. 1965. 70 pp., 7 ligs. Old. 2 1 . 17. W O L F LESLAD. E t h i o p i a n A r g o t s . 1964. 65 pp.

Old.

21.—

18. VIDYA N'IWAS MISRA: The Descriptive Technique of Panini. 1966. 175 pp., some tables. Old. 52.— 19. EUOENE A. NIDA A Synopsis of English Syntax. Second, revised edition. 1966. 174 pp. Old. 80.— '20. ROBERT T. OLIPHANT The Harley Latin-Old English Glossary, edited from British Museum, MS Harley, 3376. 1966. 423 pp. Old. 55.— 21. ERICA REINER A linguistic Analysis of Akkadian. 1966. 155 pp., graph. Old. 42.— 22. M. J HAKDMAN Jaqaru: Outline of Phonologioal and Morphological Structure. 1906. 131 pp., 2 figs., map, 20 tables Old. 88.— 23. MARVIN K. MATERS (ed.). Languages ol Guatemala. 1966. 318 pp. Old. 68.— 24. ROBERT LIVINGSTON ALLEN: The Verb System of President-Day American English. 1966. 808 pp., 7 tables, 24 tigs. Old. 52.— 26. ANDREW MACLEISH· The Middle English Subject-Verb Cluster. 1969. 276 pp. Gld. 76.— 27. EMMA GREOORES and JOROE A . SOAREZ: A D e s c r i p t i o n o f C o l l o q u i a l Ouaranf. 1967. 248 p p . O l d . 6 4 . —

29. HOWARD W. LAW: The Obligatory Constructions of Isthmus Nahuat Grammar. 1966. 73 pp., 21 tables. Old. 2 4 . — 30. MARVIN H. FOLSOH: The Syntax of Substantive and Nonflnlte Satellites to the Finite Verb in German. 1966. 96 pp. Old. 24.— 36. IRMENGARD RAUCH: The Old High Qerman Dlphthongization: A Description of a Phonemic Change. 1967. 130 pp. Gld. 38.— 37. JOSEPH HAROLD FRIEND: T h e D e v e l o p m e n t o l A m e r i e a n L e x i c o g r a p h y ,

4 face.

38. W I L L I A M J . SAMARIN:

A G r a m m a r ol S a n g o . 1967. 280 p p .

1798—1864. 1967. 129 p p .

Old. 36.—

O l d . 80.—

39 DEAN H. OBRECHT: Effects of the Second Forraant on the Perception of Velarization Consonants in Arabic. 1968. 104 pp., 57 HgB. Old. 32.— 40. YOLANDA LASTRA Coohabamba Quechua Syntax. 1968. 104 pp. Old. 32.— 42. R. 8. P. BEEKES: The Development of the Proto-Indo-European Laryngeals In Greek. 1969. xxiv + 324 pp. Old. 90.— 43. HARWOOD H. HESS: The Syntactic Structure of Mezquital Otoml. 1968. 159 pp. Old. 45.— 44. PAUL W. PILLSBURY Descriptive Analysis ot Discourse in Late West Saxon Texts. 1967. 91 pp. Old. 24.— 45. MADELINE ELIZABETH EHRMAN: The Meaning of the Modale in Present-Day American English. 1966. 106 pp. Gld. 24.— 46. VIKTOR KRUPA. Morpheme and Word In Maori. 1966. 83 pp., 26 tables, 1 flg. Old. 24.— 47. JOHN 0. FISCHER: Linguistics In Remedial English. 1966. 71 pp., 4 tables. Old. 18.— 48. Μ. A. K.. HALLIDAT: Introduction and Grammar in British English. 1967. 61 pp., 2 folding tables. Old. 18.— 49. SA70 YOTSUKURA: The Articles in English: A Structural Analysis of Osage. 1970. 113 pp Gld. 24.— 50. MART RITCHIE KEY: Comparative Tacanan Phonology: with Cavinena Phonology and Notes on PanoTacanan Relationship. 1968. 107 pp. Gld. 32.—

52. Roth ΜAKQARET HRKNÜ Λ lagmeinic Analysis ΟΙ Mexican Spanish Clauses. 1968. 128. pp. 53 HAROLD H. KEY Morphology ol Cayuvava. 1967. 73 pp. 55. L. ΚυΜΚΟ l'he Economy ol DiphthotiKization in Early Romance. 1968. 127 pp. 57 ALAN CAMPBELL WARES A Comparative study ol Vüinan Consonantism. 1968. 100 pp 58. J RAN PRANINSKAS Trade Name Creation. Processes and Patterns. 1908. 115 pp

Old. Old Gld. Gld. Gld.

33.— 22.— 30.— SO.— 30.—

59. GEORGE G I A C U M A R I S JR.

Gld.

36.—

Gld.

40.—

Gld

28.—

Intonation.

1970.

l'he

A k k a d i a n ol

Amlah.

1970. 119 p p .

60 JUAN RUBIN Nationa Bilingualism in Paraguay 1968. Ι3Ό pp. Gld. 40.— 01. SALMAN Η AL-ANI Arabic Phonology An Acoustical and Physiological Investigation. 1970. 104 pp. 18 rtgs. 16 »itamples, 13 'Hustr., 3 diagrams. Gld. 36.— iJ2. CURTIS Ρ HEROLD l'he Morphology οι King Alired's Translation of the Orosius. 1968. 80np Gld. 24.— 63. JAN SVARTVIK On Voioe in the English Verb. 196«. XIV + 2 0 0 pp., tigs, and tables. Gld. 32.— 64. MARVIN R WILSON Coptic future Tenses Syntactical Studies in Sahldic. 1970. 143 pp. Gld. 40.— 15. RÜSSEL N. GAMPHELL Noun Substitut«« lb Modern Thai: A Study in Pronominality 1969 70 pp. Gld. 2 1 . 66. MARIA 1'SIAPERA. A Descriptive Analysis ol Cypriot Maronite Arabic: 1969. 69. pp. GUI 20.— 70. BRE.