Noctes Atticae

A passage from the history of Claudius Quadrigarius, in which he pictured the combat of Manlius Torquatus, a young noble, with a hostile Gaul, who challenged the whole Roman army.

TITUS MANLIUS was a man of the highest birth and of exalted rank. This Manlius was given the surname Torquatus. The reason for the surname, we are told, was that he wore as a decoration a golden neck-chain, a trophy taken from an enemy whom he had slain. But who the enemy was, and what his nationality, how formidable his huge size, how insolent his challenge, and how the battle was fought all this Quintus Claudius has described in the first book of his Annals with words of the utmost purity and clearness, and with the simple and unaffected charm of the old-time style. When the philosopher Favorinus read this passage from that work, he used to say that his mind was stirred and affected by no less emotion and excitement than if he were himself an eye-witness of their contest.

I have added the words of Quintus Claudius in which that battle is pictured:

In the meantime a Gaul came forward, who was naked except for a shield and two swords and the ornament of a neck-chain and bracelets; in strength and size, in youthful vigour and in courage as well, he excelled all the rest. In the very height of the battle, when the two armies were fighting with the utmost ardour, he began to make signs with his hand to both sides, to cease fighting. The combat ceased. As soon as silence was secured, he called out in a mighty voice that if anyone wished to engage him in single combat,

v2.p.197

he should come forward. This no one dared do, because of his great size and savage aspect. Then the Gaul began to laugh at them and to stick out his tongue. This at once roused the great indignation of one Titus Manlius, a youth of the highest birth, that such an insult should be offered his country, and that no one from so great an army should accept the challenge. He, as I say, stepped forth, and would not suffer Roman valour to be shamefully tarnished by a Gaul. Armed with a foot-soldier's shield and a Spanish sword, he confronted the Gaul. Their meeting took place on the very bridge, in the presence of both armies, amid great apprehension. Thus they confronted each other, as I said before: the Gaul, according to his method of fighting, with shield advanced and awaiting an attack; Manlius, relying on courage rather than skill, struck shield against shield, and threw the Gaul off his balance. While the Gaul was trying to regain the same position, Manlius again struck shield against shield, and again forced the man to change his ground. In this fashion he slipped in under the Gaul's sword and stabbed him in the breast with his Spanish blade. Then at once with the same mode of attack he struck his adversary's right shoulder, and he did not give ground at all until he overthrew him, without giving the Gaul a chance to strike a blow. After he had overthrown him, he cut off his head, tore off his neck-chain, and put it, covered with blood as it was, around his own neck. Because of this act, he himself and his descendants had the surname Torquatus.

[*](Fr. 10b, Peter2.)

From this Titus Manlius, whose battle Quadrigarius described above, all harsh and cruel commands are

called

Manlian;

for at a later time, when he was consul in a war against the Latins, Manlius caused his own son to be beheaded, because he had been sent by his father on a scouting expedition with orders not to fight, [*](There is a lacuna in the text, but this seems to express the general sense.) and disregarding the command, had killed one of the enemy who had challenged him.

That Quadrigarius also, with correct Latinity, used facies as a genitive; and some other observations on the inflection of similar words.

THE expression that I quoted above from Quintus Claudius, [*](2 ix. 13. 11)

On account of his great size and savage aspect (facies),

I have inquired into by examining several old manuscripts, and have found it to be as I wrote it. For it was in that way, as a rule, that the early writers declined the word—facies facies— whereas the rule of grammar now requires faciei as the genitive. But I did find some corrupt manuscripts in which faciei was written, with erasure of the former reading.

I remember too having found both facies and facii written in the same manuscript of Claudius [*](Frag. 30, Peter2.) in the library at Tibur. But facies was written in the text and facii, with double i, in the margin opposite; nor did I regard that as inconsistent with a certain early usage; for from the nominative dies they used both dies and dii as the genitive, and from fames, both famis and fami.

Quintus Ennius, in the sixteenth book of his Annals, wrote dies for diei in the following verse: [*](Ann. 413, Vahlen 2; Vahlen reads postremo and omits quod.)

1. Caused by the distant time of the last day (dies).

Caesellius asserts that Cicero also wrote dies for diei in his oration For Publius Sestius, and after sparing no pains and inspecting several old manuscripts, I found Caesellius to be right. These are the words of Marcus Tullius: [*](Sest. 28; our texts commonly read diei.)

But the knights shall pay the penalty for that day (dies).

As a result, I readily believe those who have stated that they saw a manuscript from Virgil's own hand, in which it was written: [*](Georg. i. 208.)

1. When Libra [*](The constellation of the Balance.) shall make like the hours of day (dies) and sleep,

where dies is used for diei.

But just as in this place Virgil evidently wrote dies, so there is no doubt that he wrote dii for diei in the following line: [*](Aen. i. 636.)

1. As gifts for that day's (dii) merriment,

where the less learned read dei, [*](Making munera dei = the gifts of the god (Bacchus). ) doubtless shrinking from the use of so uncommon a form. But the older writers declined dies dii, as they did fames fami, pernicies pernicii, progenies progenii, luxuries luxurii, acies acii. For Marcus Cato in his oration On the Punic War wrote as follows: [*](xxxvii. 1, Jordan.)

The women and children were driven out because of the famine (fami causa).

Lucilius in his twelfth book has: [*](430, Marx, who completes the line with distendere ventrem, to fill a belly.)

1. Wrinkled and full of hunger (fami).

Sisenna in the sixth book of his History writes: [*](Fr. 128, Peter2.)

That the Romans came for the purpose of dealing destruction (pernicii).

Pacuvius in the Paulus says: [*](i, p. 325, Ribbeck3.)

1. O sire supreme of our own race's (progenii) sire.

Gnaeus Matius in the twenty-first book of his Iliad: [*](Fr. 7, Bährens; Iliad xxi. 3 f.)

1. The army's (acii) other part the river's wave had shunned.

Again Matius in Book xxiii writes: [*](Fr. 8, Bährens; Iliad xxiii. 103 f.)

1. Or bides in death some semblance of a form (specii)
2. Of those who speak no more.

Gaius Gracchus, On the Publishing of the Laws has: [*](O.R. F., p. 235, Meyer2.)

They say that those measures were taken because of luxury (luxurii casaa)

and farther on in the same speech we find:

What is necessarily provided to sustain life is not luxury (luxuries),

which shows that he used luxurii as the genitive of luxuries. Marcus Tullius also has left pernicii on record, in the speech in which he defended Sextus Roscius. These are his words: [*](Pro Rose. Amer. 131.)

We think that none of these things was produced by divine will for the purpose of dealing destruction (pernicii), but by the very force and greatness of Nature.

We must therefore suppose that Quadrigarius wrote either facies or facii as the genitive; but I have not found the reading facie in any ancient manuscript.

But in the dative case those who spoke the best Latin did not use the form faciei, which is now current, but facie. For example, Lucilius in his Satires: [*](1257, Marx, who fills out the second line with naturae dotibus aetas; tantis,w.)

1. Which first is joined to a fair face
2. And youth.

And in his seventh book: [*](269, Marx.)

1. Who loves you, and who to your youth and charms (facie),
2. Plays courtier, promising to be your friend.

However, there are not a few who read facii in both these passages of Lucilius. But Gaius Caesar, in the second book of his treatise On Analogy, [*](ii, p. 129, Dinter.) thinks that we should use die and specie as genitive forms.

I have also found die in the genitive case in a manuscript of Sallust's Jugurtha of the utmost trustworthiness and of venerable age. These were the words: [*](Jug. xcvii. 3)

when scarcely a tenth part of the day (die) was left.

For I do not think we ought to accept such a quibble as the assertion that die is used for ex die.