that 'per quae' is not strictly used for the instrumental ablative, as in c. 24 5, where see note, but in its original local sense with an accusative of extent, here facilitated by its antecedent 'itineribus.' So similarly c. 29 8 per quae . . . inrepit c. 32 8 per . . . numeros isse H. IV 7 per altercationem... provecti sunt, the metaphor being taken from verbs expressing motion. This usage is poetic and post-Aug. Cf. Peterson, Quint. X 5, 21. 23 vi et potestate, non iure et legibus: It cannot have been Aper's intention to assert, as might perhaps appear at first sight, that the monotony and prolixity of former speeches were in his day partly done away with, because the modern judge no longer presided with equity and fairness, but substituted in their place arbitrariness and despotic authority. Such a change would not have been a creditable achievement of the new era which the speaker wishes to place in as advantageous and favorable a light as possible. Hence Aper can only be understood to mean, that modern judges did not allow themselves to be tied down to the letter of the law, but occasionally followed their own interpretation, enforcing it by the authority vested in their office. See also following note. Peter who, alone of the commentators, seems to have felt any difficulty here, supposes Aper to refer to the trials presided over by the princeps himself whose decisions were, of course, not necessarily influenced by law or precedent, but this is intrinsically improbable for the reason just given, nor is there anything in the context that lends itself readily to so restricted an application of Aper's words. Vis is power generally, potestas the particular authority of a magistrate. vis (or ius) and potestas combined e. g. H. III 11. 39 G. 42 vis et potentia Ter. Heaut. IV 3, 32 vim. . et potestatem Liv. XXIV 39 ius. . . potestatem Sen. Ep. 17, 2 Gell. VII 7 Dig. IX 4, 1. So similarly, iure 'legal code' is amplified by the more specific term legibus, provisions, enactments' (cf. Cic. Top. V 28). Both are grouped together e. g. Cic. pro Planc. 36, 88 de leg. I 5, 17 Cp. note c. 9 1 (carmina et versus). On the quasi-instrumental or causal ablat. 'in accordance with, by means of,' see Nipp. Ann. III 24 who cites the following instances from Tacitus: G. 25. 28 H. I 28. 48 IV 12. 50 V 23 Ann. I 70 II 75 III 24. 27. 43. 48 VI 20 XII 10. 29 XIII 16 XIV 30. 31. 62 XV 65, but omits the present passage and c. 25 28 malignitate, invidia. 24 nec accipiunt tempora sed constituunt: Our judges do not bind themselves, Aper means to say, to the time-regulations found in earlier laws (such as the lex de vi et ambitu, for instance) but they themselves determine, according to their discretion, the number of hours to be allotted to the several speakers. The commentators tacitly assume the meaning of 'accipiunt' to be that the magistrates do not accept the proposals as to time allowance made to them by the litigants themselves, but this seems to conflict with what we know of Roman court procedure. Cf. Plin. Ep. IV 9, 9 e lege accusator sex horas, novem reus accepisset II 11, 14 nam XII clepsydris, quas spatiosissimas acceperam, sunt additae quattuor (sc. a iudice) which passages lend weighty support to the interpretation advocated in the preceding note. 25 expectandum habent: On this gerundive construction with habere, cf. note c. 8 12. 27 alio transgredientem: Referring to irrelevant digressions, TарeκBáσεis. Cf. Quint. IV 3, 13 quo ex genere (sc. egressionum) est in orationibus contra Verrem compositis Siciliae laus, Proserpinae raptus, pro C. Cornelio popularis illa virtutum Cn. Pompei commemoratio, to which we may add the eulogy of poets in the pro Arch. and the banter on Stoic paradoxes in the pro Mur. § 61 f. This practice, though at times not out of place (cf. Cic. de orat. II 77,311 digredi tamen ab eo quod proposueris atque agas, permovendorum animorum causa saepe utile est Quint. IV 3, 14 f.), is cleverly ridiculed by Mart. VI 19 non de vi neque caede nec veneno | sed lis est mihi de tribus capellis | vicini queror has abesse furto | hoc iudex sibi postulat probari | tu Cannas Mithridaticumque bellum | ... iam dic, Postume, de tribus capellis (cf. Anth. Pal. III 46). Cp. Volkmann, Rhet. p. 124 ff. Mayor, Quint. X 1, 33. festinare se testantur: Cf. Quint. IV 1, 72 aliquando tamen uti (sc. prooemio) nec si velimus eo licet, cum iudex occupatus, cum angusta sunt tempora, cum maior potestas ab ipsa re cogit incipere and esp. IV 5, 10 festinat enim iudex ad id quod potentissimum est, et velut obligatum promisso patronum, si est patientior, tacitus appellat; si vel occupatus vel in aliqua potestate vel etiam sic moribus incompositus, cum convicio efflagitat. 20. 1 de infirmitate valetudinis suae praefantem etc: Quint. IV 1, 8, is more tolerant of such 'captationes benevolentiae': Quaedam . . . commendatio tacita, si nos infirmos, imparatos, impares agentium contra ingeniis dixerimus, qualia sunt pleraque Messallae prooemia. est enim naturalis favor pro laborantibus et iudex reli giosus libentissime patronum audit quem iustitiae suae minime timet. inde illa veterum circa occultandam eloquentiam simulatio, multum ab hac nostrorum temporum iactatione diversa VI 3, 76 Curionem semper ab excusatione aetatis incipientem. Cf. also Mart. III 18 perfrixisse tuas est praefatio fauces | cum te excusaris, Maxime, quid recitas? With the possible exception of Caes. B. G. VI 30 aedificio circumdato silva, ut sunt fere domicilia, neither 'fere' nor 'ferme,' the form preferred by Tac. in his later writings, ever directly modifies a substantive, not even when it signifies ut plerumque fit, ut fieri solet,' on which see note c. 31, 7. Taking this in connection with the remarkable parallel passage from Quint. just cited, I have had no hesitation in inserting 'omnia.' The archetypon had cũ, which either stood for omnia' as in c. 2 14 13 15 or was possibly a remnant of an original 'cuncta,' but as the compendium was not understood by the scribe, the syllable was dropped. So similarly in Quint. X 1, 106 omnia, though essential to the context, is omitted in some MSS. Perhaps the passage in Caesar is only another case in point. 3 quinque in Verrem libros expectabit: Aper sophistically ignores the fact that Cicero actually delivered only one speech in court against Verres (Aug. 5, 70 B. c.), the others having been, as is well known, subsequently composed. There are in all six speeches against Verres, but Aper, according to our MSS., mentions only five, excluding, as is expressly or tacitly assumed by the commentators, the Actio Prima. But in doing so, Aper would be virtually confessing that he was well aware of the purely literary character of the other five, which cannot possibly have been his intention, for if his censure was to have any foundation at all, it was clearly essential to speak of all the six extant orations as having been actually delivered, and this I believe he did. The archetypon had either VIINVERREM or vunverrem, which reading, owing to the graphical identity of the numeral and the letter 'i' following, caused the evident corruption now existing. expectabit: i. e. 'wait or listen patiently to the end.' Cf. Cic. de orat. I 36, 166 Potes ... oratores putare eos quos multas horas expectavit Hor. Sat. I 5, 9 cenantes. . . expectans comites Sen. de ben. V 17, 3 quis non patri suo supremum diem ut innocens sit, optat, ut moderatus expectat Quint. IX 3, 68 with a play upon the word: quod is mortem suam expectaret, et ille dixisset se vero non expectare immo, inquit, rogo expectes. Cp. Mayor, Iuv. XIV 249. In Tacitus e. g. c. 19 25 H. I 33 non expectandum ut . . . invadat Ann. XVI 9 senectus eius expectabatur and so similarly 'opperiri' e. g. Ann. II 69, XI 26.-exceptione et formula: Exceptio denoted the objections made by defendant against the statements of the plaintiff which were inserted in the praetor's edict. The formula contained the instructions to the judge, setting forth the points at issue. Cp. Smith, Dict. Ant. I p. 17 ff. II 480 Pauly R. E. III 325. 508 I. Müller's Handb. class. Alt. IV 2 p. 691 ff. = 4 volumina libros, orationes. Cp. H. Landwehr, Archiv VI p. 235-242.-M. Tullio: Cicero made two speeches (72/1 B. C.) in behalf of this Tullius against P. Fabius, one of Sulla's veterans who had destroyed the plaintiff's villa near Thurii. The first speech is entirely lost and the second only preserved in some palimpsest fragments. Aulo Caecina: This extant speech was delivered in 69 B. c. before the 'reciperatores,' and deals with an intricate will case. Its technical nature is expressly alluded to by Cicero himself in Orat. 29, 102: tota mihi causa pro Caecina de verbis interdicti fuit: res involutas definiendo explicavimus, ius civile laudavimus, verba ambigua distinximus, where see Sandys' excellent note. Among the fifty-five complete orations of Cicero which have come down to us, the pro Caecina ranks 11th in point of bulk, so that the epithet 'inmensa' is clearly not so great an exaggeration as Peter thinks, especially as it is not likely that very many of the numerous speeches still accessible to Aper exceeded the pro Caecina in length. Fortunat. 107, 30 H., also groups these two speeches together: cum exemplo multarum legum probamus praesentem quoque legem ita sentire ut nos defendimus, sicut M. Tullius fecit pro M. Tullio et pro A. Caecina. — praecurrit etc: See note c. 19 ext. 6 cursu argumentorum: opp. to 'mille argum. gradus' of c. 19 13. Cf. Quint. IX 4, 138 in argumentis citati atque ipso etiam motu celeres sumus? in locis ac descriptionibus fusi ac fluentes. -colore sententiarum: color, corresponding to Gk. xp@ua, in its technical post-Aug. sense denotes the varnish, gloss or color by which the accused endeavors to palliate, the accuser to aggravate, the allowed facts of the case.' These 'colores' were often collected by rhetoricians. Thus the elder Seneca, for instance, arranges his Controversiae under the three heads, sententiae, divisiones and colores. Cp. Mayor, Iuv. VII 155. But as 'sententiae' is clearly distinguished from 'color' (cf. also Quint. IX 1, 18), it is best to take the word in our passage in its classical signification of beauty, embellishment.' The phrase 'color sententiarum' would then correspond to 'color ipse dicendi quamlibet clarus' (Quint. VIII 5, 28) and 'colorata oratio' (Cic. Brut. 46, 170). sententiae here are maxims, ethical reflections. Cp. Sen. Contr. I pr. 23 has tralaticias quas proprie sententias dicimus, quae nihil habent cum ipsa controversia inplicitum sed satis apte et alio transferuntur, tamquam quae de fortuna, de crudelitate, de saeculo, de divitiis dicuntur; hoc genus sententiarum supellectilem vocabat. See also note 1. 16. On the thought itself, see Quint. 1. c. § 34 ego vero haec lumina orationis velut oculos quosdam esse eloquentiae credo, sed neque oculos esse toto corpore velim, ne cetera membra officium suum perdant, et, si necesse sit veterem illum horrorem dicendi malim quam istam novam licentiam, sed patet media quaedam via sicut in cultu victuque accessit aliquis citra reprehensionem nitor. - ... 7 nitore et cultu descriptionum: Cf. Cic. Top. 22, 83 additur etiam descriptio quam xaрaктîpa Graeci vocant . . . qualis sit avarus, qualis assentator ceteraque eiusdem generis in quibus natura et vita describitur Rhet. ad Her. IV 51, 65 huiusmodi notationes quae describunt. . . vehementer habent magnam delectationem. Totam enim naturam cuiuspiam ponunt ante oculos aut gloriosi. . . aut invidi aut timidi aut avari, ambitiosi etc. See Sandys' note to Orat. 40, 138. But 'descriptio' was not confined to oroita but also included descriptions of places, works of art, etc., as appears from Quint. IV 3, 12 laus hominum locorumque, descriptio regionum, and Cic. in Verr. IV. Cp. John ad loc. Nitore et cultu' are again combined in c. 23 22 Quint. VIII 3, 61 XI, 1, 48. Invitatus, the reading of our MSS., cannot be right, for, as the context shows, the stylistic qualities enumerated are admittedly capable of exerting a corrupting influence upon the judges, but this is incompatible with the meaning of invitatus' which in a figurative sense is invariably used of allurements of a beneficial or harmless nature and hence frequently joined with allicere.' This objection is strengthened by the fact that 'invitatus' and corruptus,' standing in the relation of cause and effect, can only, according to Tacitean usage in the Dialogus, (see note c. 4 3) be joined by 'atque,' 'et,' combining only synonymous verbs. I, therefore, write with but a very slight change vitiatus et corruptus. 'in' is a dittography of the 'm' preceding (as in c. 9 29 18 6 Sen. Controv. III 11 ext. Sen. Ep. 40, 13), a notoriously common source of corruption. This error once committed, the 'i' was soon dropped, the very familiar invitatus' naturally taking the place of invitiatus' which is no Latin word. Nor are there examples lacking, if any be needed, of a similar omission of 'i' in the "inlaut." e. g. c. 25 31'antiquorum' for antiquiorum,' 394 virum for virium.' 'Vitiare' is frequently used as a synonym of corrumpere.' Cf. especially |