XV.
Orationem ducis secutus militum ardor, signumque pugnae datum. nec Arminius aut ceteri Germanorum proceres omittebant suos quisque testari, (nec … omittebant suos quisque testari: ‘did not neglect to show beyond doubt that …’; the phrase nec …omittebant testari, essentially a historical tense, calls for indirect discourse in the remainder of the chapter. Adhesion to the sequence of tenses is only partial, that being somewhat the rule rather than the exception in Tacitus.) hos esse Romanos Variani exercitus fugacissimos qui ne bellum tolerarent, seditionem induerint; (fugacissimos qui ne bellum tolerarent, seditionem induerint: ‘…the fastest cowards to turn tail, who, in order not to bear the weight of the war, resorted to mutiny’: a reference to the recent sedition of the German legions, narrated in Book1, ch. 16 ff. ne …tolerarent is neg. purpose clause; qui …induerint: subjunctive for relative clause in oratio obliqua. There is a tendency in Latin to replace the plup. subjunctive with the perfect when the latter corresponds to the perfect indicative that would be used in direct speech. Cf. A.G. 485, c., Note 2.) quorum pars onusta vulneribus terga, pars fluctibus et procellis fractos artus infensis rursum hostibus, adversis dis obiciant, nulla boni spe. (pars fluctibus et procellis fractos artus infensis rursum hostibus, adversis dis obiciant, nulla boni spe: ‘a part were exposing again their limbs, pounded by waves and storms, to fierce enemies, although the gods were against them and hope of success nil.’ An allusion probably to the troops of Caecina and those of Vitellius (Book 1, ch. 65 and 70 respectively. adversis dis …nulla boni spe: abl. abs. of concessive sense) classem quippe et avia Oceani quaesita ne quis venientibus occurreret, ne pulsos premeret: (ne quis venientibus occurreret, ne pulsos premeret: ne introduces neg. final clauses: lit. ‘lest anyone might oppose resistance to them coming, lest anyone might press them in pursuit, having being defeated’; the indefinite quis is for aliquis after si, nisi, ne, num.) sed ubi miscuerint manus, (ubi miscuerint manus: miscere manus, like ad manus pervenire, is idiom: lit. ‘when they would have come to blows’; the future perfect, miscuerint, of direct speech becomes the homonymous perfect subjunctive of indir. speech, although the plup. miscuissent would be more in keeping with the sequence of tenses after a historical verb of saying.) inane victis ventorum remorumve subsidium. meminissent (meminissent: hortatory or jussive subjunctive in indir. speech, ‘let them remember’; meminissent is pluperfect subjunctive in form, but otherwise equivalent to imperfect. See A.G. 205, b. memini requires gen. of the thing remembered.) modo avaritiae, crudelitatis, superbiae: aliud sibi reliquum quam (aliud sibi reliquum [esse] quam …?: rhetorical questions in oratio obliqua require infinitive, as does any statement: ‘was there anything else left for them, but to …?’ A resemblance has been noted between the speeches in this and the preceding chapter and those in Agricola, ch. 30 – 34. Though the speeches here are shorter, they have several points in common with those of Agricola and Calgacus before the battle of Mons Graupius. The leaders in either case give ample expression to their contempt for the enemy as cowardly and weak and stress their superior forces and morale. On the Roman side victory is represented as necessary for survival and relief from the labors of unending campaigns. Reference is made to the glory associated with success. On the barbarian side resentment is roused by mention of Roman cruelty, greed, and arrogance. The orations end with exhortations to choose liberty or death over slavery and shame (Marchesi).) tenere libertatem aut mori ante servitium?