Tacitus, Annals, 15.20-23, 33-45. Latin Text, Study Aids with Vocabulary, and Commentary, 2013a
Tacitus, Annals, 15.20-23, 33-45. Latin Text, Study Aids with Vocabulary, and Commentary, 2013a
Tacitus, Annals, 15.20-23, 33-45. Latin Text, Study Aids with Vocabulary, and Commentary, 2013a
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
additional offence outweighs the others in seriousness. But the correlation<br />
of contumeliam senatus <strong>with</strong> iniuriam minorum hints at irony: one is made to<br />
wonder what sort of political system it is, in which a verbal slight of superiors<br />
counts as a more serious transgression than the systematic exploitation of the<br />
powerless. (It is worth bearing in mind that <strong>Tacitus</strong> composed the <strong>Annals</strong> after<br />
a long public career that included the administration of the plum province.)<br />
(= dictitavisset) Normal <strong>Latin</strong> verbs can be re-formed <strong>with</strong> -to<br />
or -so (first conjugation) to produce so-called ‘frequentative’ forms. This<br />
indicates that the action keeps happening: so rogito = I keep asking, ask<br />
persistently (from ‘rogo’); curso = I run about constantly (from ‘curro’). Here,<br />
dictito re-doubles the frequentative form ‘dicto’ (formed from ‘dico’) to<br />
bring out that Timarchus kept bragging about his power incessantly. The<br />
subjunctive mood indicates that it is not a fact that Timarchus said these<br />
things but an accusation (<strong>with</strong> an implied verb that governs the indirect<br />
statement): ‘because (people claimed) he had kept saying that...’ Miller<br />
calls it ‘subjunctive of the charge, virtual oblique.’ 74 This subtlety of <strong>Latin</strong><br />
is one of the ways in which <strong>Tacitus</strong> can report scurrilous allegations in his<br />
history <strong>with</strong>out actually endorsing them himself.<br />
in sua potestate situm an pro consulibus qui Cretam obtinuissent<br />
Here we have the insult that grated <strong>with</strong> the senate (via<br />
the proconsular governor, the senate’s representative in the province):<br />
Timarchus claimed that it was his decision whether votes of thanks were<br />
given to the proconsuls in charge of the province. The exposed position of<br />
in sua potestate underscores the hubris of Timarchus. Meanwhile, age-old<br />
myth maintained that ‘All Cretans are liars’ – <strong>and</strong> made merry <strong>with</strong> the<br />
paradox that arises when a Cretan tells you so...<br />
pro consulibus ... grates agerentur: pro <strong>and</strong> consulibus (in the dative) are to<br />
be taken together (‘proconsuls’ – originally ‘st<strong>and</strong>-ins for consuls’). grates is<br />
in the nominative plural; the word is a poeticism: ‘grates was originally a<br />
religious term for thanks to a god but was first used = gratias by poets <strong>and</strong> then<br />
(from Curtius) by writers of elevated prose. In [the <strong>Annals</strong>] <strong>Tacitus</strong> greatly<br />
prefers it to gratias, which he reserves for speeches.’ 75 At the time, provincial<br />
assemblies could decree a vote of thanks for their Roman governors, which<br />
74 Miller (1973) 69.<br />
75 Martin <strong>and</strong> Woodman (1989) 140.