A syntactical hellenism at Horace, satires 1.3.120–1, and a possible imitation in livy

Classical Quarterly 63 (1):430-433 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Horace, Satires 1.3.117–23, as transmitted: adsitregula, peccatis quae poenas inroget aequas,ne scutica dignum horribili sectere flagello.nam ut ferula caedas meritum maiora subire 120uerbera non uereor, cum dicas esse paris resfurta latrociniis et magnis parua minerisfalce recisurum simili te, si tibi regnumpermittant homines.Let there be a rule to impose fair penalties for transgressions, lest you pursue with terrible scourge one deserving but the stick. You see, I don't fear that you will strike with a schoolmaster's rod one who has earned more serious lashing when you say mere thefts are of a pair with brigandage and threaten to trim little things and great with like sickle, would the world but grant you power. Horace is attacking the Stoics for their doctrine that all sins are equal. The overall run of sense must be that given above. If kept, the ut of line 120 must then have the value of ne: were it allowed its normal meaning in expressions of fear the opposite of what is required would be said. The oddity of the construction was long excused as a sort of anacoluthon, provoked by the postponement of uereor. Such defences of the received text were rightly criticised by Palmer and Housman: ‘incredible’, they both concluded, and indeed it is incredible that Horace could have in such a short space forgotten what he had written, and forgotten it in such a way as to say the opposite of what he meant.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Horace, Satires 2.4.61.S. J. Harrison - 1988 - Classical Quarterly 38 (02):566-.
The Satires of Horace.L. P. Wilkinson - 1959 - The Classical Review 9 (02):139-.
Horace, Satires 1. 3, 63–66.E. C. Woodcock - 1938 - The Classical Review 52 (01):9-.
The Frog of Horace, Satires I. 5.J. Gow - 1901 - The Classical Review 15 (02):117-.
On Horace Satires I. iii. 7.T. Nicklin - 1907 - The Classical Review 21 (01):14-15.
Horace's Satires. [REVIEW]K. Freudenburg - 1997 - The Classical Review 47 (1):38-40.
On the Cruces of Horace, Satires, 2. 2.A. Y. Campbell - 1951 - Classical Quarterly 1 (3-4):136-.
Two Notes on the Satires of Horace.J. H. Kells - 1959 - The Classical Review 9 (03):202-205.
On the First Book of Horace's Satires.J. P. Postgate - 1901 - The Classical Review 15 (06):302-309.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-01-23

Downloads
14 (#934,671)

6 months
3 (#902,269)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Aspects of the Language of Latin Poetry.J. N. Adams & R. G. Mayer - unknown - Proceedings of the British Academy 93.
Griechische Grammatik.James W. Poultney, Eduard Schwyzer & Demetrius J. Georgacas - 1955 - American Journal of Philology 76 (1):110.

Add more references