LXVI.
Paulatim dehinc ab indecoris ad infesta transgrediebantur. (paulatim dehinc ab indecoris ad infesta transgrediebantur: the members of the senate are the implied subject of transgrediebantur: ‘the senators soon passed from shameful compliments to infighting’) C. Silanum pro consule Asiae repetundarum a sociis postulatum (repetundarum a sociis postulatum: lit. ‘sought in justice by the allies for malversation’; Gaius Silanus, consul in 10 A.D. and proconsul of Asia for 20/21 A.D., was brought to trial by the people of Asia. repetundarum is gen. of the charge after verbs of accusing, like postulo; cf. A.G. 352.) Mamercus Scaurus e consularibus, Iunius Otho praetor, Bruttedius Niger aedilis simul corripiunt obiectantque violatum Augusti numen, (C. Silanum … Mamercus Scaurus, … Iunius Otho, … Bruttedius Niger … corripiunt obiectantque violatum [esse] Augusti numen: ‘Mamercus Scaurus, Junius Otho, and Bruttedius Niger attack violently (lit. ‘rip into’) Gaius Silanum and fling at him the accusation that Augustus’ sanctity had been violated.’ For Silanum see previous note. For Mamercus Scaurus see Book 1, ch. 13, Book 3, ch. 23, 31 and, ahead, Book 6, ch. 9, 29. Information about Otho and Niger is provided below by Tacitus himself.) spretam Tiberii maiestatem, Mamercus antiqua exempla iaciens, L. Cottam a Scipione Africano, Servium Galbam a Catone censorio, P. Rutilium a M. Scauro accusatos. (Mamercus antiqua exempla iaciens, L. Cottam a Scipione Africano, Servium Galbam a Catone censorio, P. Rutilium a M. Scauro accusatos: ‘Mamercus citing ancient precedents: Lucius Cotta accused by Scipio Africanus, Servius Galba by Cato the Censor, Publius Rutilius by Marcus Scaurus’; Scipio Africanus, the man who defeated Hannibal in 202 B.C., accused Lucius Cotta, consul in 244 B.C., of misuse of funds; Marcus Porcius Cato, a ultra-conservative censor and the first to write history in Latin, accused Servius Galba, consul in 144 B.C., of murdering a large number of Lusitanian prisoners; Marcus Scaurus, consul in 115 B.C., accused Publius Rutilius, consul in 105 B.C. and the great-uncle of Juius Caesar, of corrupt electioneering practices.) videlicet Scipio et Cato talia ulciscebantur aut ille Scaurus, (videlicet Scipio et Cato talia ulciscebantur aut ille Scaurus: videlicet (see last note in previous chapter) warns the reader that the clause it precedes may means exactly the opposite of what it says, a good example of irony as rhetorical device : ‘of course, Scipio, Cato, and that famous (ille) Scaurus were avenging the same kind of offences [as Mamercus himself].’ The crimes attacked by Scipio, Cato, and Scaurus differed in one fundamental aspect from those chased by Mamercus, namely they did not entail the pernicious charges of lese majesty or treason introduced by the imperial system.) quem proavum suum obprobrium maiorum Mamercus (obprobrium maiorum Mamercus: ‘Mamercus, the embarrassment of his ancestors’; in spite of such severe condemnation here, Tacitus has qualified praise for Mamercus in Book 6, ch. 29, where the latter, himself accused of treason, commits suicide. After all, Silanus was guilty, as Tacitus himself admits in the next chapter. As to Mamercus’ ancestor, Marcus Scaurus, held up by Tacitus as the champion of aristocratic integrity, he is described by Sallust as factiosus, avidus potentiae honoris divitiarum, … vitia sua callide occultans.) infami opera dehonestabat. Iunio Othoni litterarium ludum exercere vetus ars fuit: mox Seiani potentia senator obscura initia impudentibus ausis propolluebat. (obscura initia impudentibus ausis propolluebat: ‘with his shameless ventures he was sullying his origins, obscure though they were.’ obscura, as used here, has concessive sense; ausis is abl. plur. of ausum used as noun, ‘daring undertakings’. The word was used this way before in Book 2, ch. 39. propolluebat, if not a transcription error, is found used only here and while its meaning as a whole is clear, that of the prefix is uncertain.) Bruttedium artibus honestis copiosum et, si rectum iter pergeret, ad clarissima quaeque iturum (si rectum iter pergeret, ad clarissima quaeque iturum: the conditional sentence is of the logical kind (type I), thus with indicative in direct discourse. The subjunctive pergeret in the protasis may be justified by the fact that the sentence is in virtual oratio obliqua, since it expresses the writer’s opinion: ‘[in my view], if he followed the right path, he was bound for all the greatest distinctions.’ Note that iturum agrees with Bruttedium, the direct object of extimulabat. ad clarissima quaeque: the indefinite pronoun quisque (here plur. neuter acc.) after a superlative takes on the meaning of ‘all the most …’.) festinatio extimulabat, dum aequalis, dein superiores, postremo suasmet ipse spes antire parat: (dum … parat: dum, ‘while‘, is regularly followed by present indicative.) quod multos etiam bonos pessum dedit, (quod multos etiam bonos pessum dedit: the idiom pessum dare or pessumdare means ‘to send to the bottom’, ‘to destroy’, pessum being adverb, ‘to destruction’: ‘which [impatience] has driven even many good men to ruin’) qui spretis quae tarda cum securitate praematura vel cum exitio properant. (qui spretis quae tarda cum securitate praematura vel cum exitio properant: spretis is abl. abs. with dependent rel. clause: lit. ‘who, slow promotion accompanied by security having been rejected, seek in haste ways [to success] premature and accompanied by ruin’; cum securitate and cum exitio are ablatives of accompaniment, similar to abl. of instrument. vel or aut has the force of et just as often as et has the force of aut or vel (Ernout).)