XX.
Tum Antonius inserens se manipulis, (manipulis: a manipulus, or maniple, was an infantry unit equivalent to a modern infantry company; two centuries formed a maniple, three maniples a cohort, ten cohorts a legion.) ubi aspectu et auctoritate silentium fecerat, non se decus neque pretium eripere tam bene meritis (decus … pretium eripere … meritis: unlike the English verb ‘to rob’, eripere requires acc. of the thing (decus, pretium) and dat. of the person being robbed (meritis).) adfirmabat, sed divisa inter exercitum ducesque munia: militibus cupidinem pugnandi (cupidinem pugnandi: objective gen. gerund after cupidinem) convenire, duces providendo, consultando, (providendo, consultando: use of gerund as ablatives of instrument) cunctatione saepius quam temeritate prodesse. ut pro virili portione armis ac manu victoriam iuverit, ratione et consilio, propriis ducis artibus, profuturum; (ut pro virili portione armis ac manu victoriam iuverit, ratione et consilio, propriis ducis artibus, profuturum: comparative sentence: ‘in the same way he had helped – as much as a man could – to achieve victory with his sword in hand, [so now] he was going to help with his prudence and guidance, proper qualities of a leader’. The perf. subjunctive iuverit is in place of iuvisset, which would be required by the rule for the sequence of tenses when the main verb of saying (here adfirmabat) is secondary, a case of repraesentatio (cf. A.G. 585, b.). Other examples of repraesentatio are occurrant and pateant further down, before adgredienda urbs foret, which marks a return to the expected tense sequence. Such switches from regular sequence to repraesentatio or viceversa often occur with long passages in indirect discourse. pro virili portione: lit. ‘in the degree possible for a man’; the phrase occurs also in Agricola, ch. 45; armis ac manu is hendiadys.) neque enim ambigua esse quae occurrant, (neque enim ambigua esse quae occurrant: subjunctive for rel. clause in indir. discourse; occurrant corresponds to the future indicative occurrent of direct speech. See also previous note.) noctem et ignotae situm urbis, intus hostis (intus hostis: intus is adverb, hostis is acc. plur. in indirect discourse: ‘the enemy inside’) et cuncta insidiis opportuna. non si pateant portae, nisi explorato, nisi die intrandum. (non si pateant portae, nisi explorato, nisi die intrandum: si pateant portae: pres. subjunctive for potential, albeit unrealistic, condition. See also note above for ut pro virili portione, etc. nisi explorato: abl. abs., ‘not without having been surveyed’ or ‘except after being surveyed’. The use of nisi before the abl abs. of a single participle is not rare, especially in post-classical prose. nisi die intrandum: ‘not to be entered except in daylight’; intrandum agrees with situm, acc. in indir. discourse. ) an obpugnationem inchoaturos (an obpugnationem inchoaturos: ‘were they going to begin the assault …’: the question, which is developed in the line following and ends with adgredienda urbs foret, is purely rhetorical and as such becomes an infinitive clause in indir. discourse with acc. subject. Cf. note for quid dicturos reposcentibus aut prospera aut adversa? in ch. 13.) adempto omni prospectu, quis aequus locus, quanta altitudo moenium, tormentisne et telis an operibus et vineis adgredienda urbs foret? (adempto omni prospectu, quis aequus locus, quanta altitudo moenium, tormentisne et telis an operibus et vineis adgredienda urbs foret?: abl. abs. with three dependent indir. questions, ‘…all ability being taken away to see which place was level, what the height of the walls was, and whether the town was to be assaulted using stone and missile throwers or siege-works and mantlets?’ Such adaptations of ths abl. abs. became common in later Latin and especially in Tacitus. Cf. G. 410, Note 4. tormentisne et telis an operibus et vineis adgredienda urbs foret?: the particles -ne …an introduce the two parts of an alternate question; adgredienda urbs foret: use of passive periphrastic conjugation to express both the likelihood and fitness of an action; adgredienda est of direct question becomes adgredienda foret in an indirect question governed by a historical verb of saying.) mox conversus ad singulos, num securis dolabrasque et cetera expugnandis urbibus secum attulissent, rogitabat. (num … attulissent, rogitabat: in indir. questions the particle num simply means ‘whether’; in direct questions num invites a negative answer. rogitabat: rogito is the iterative form of rogo.) et cum abnuerent, ‘gladiisne’ inquit ‘et pilis perfringere ac subruere muros ullae manus (ullae manus: can be, and has been, translated as ‘any mass of men’ or ‘any number of troops’.) possunt? si aggerem struere, si pluteis cratibusve (aggerem … pluteis …cratibus: an agger, in military contexts, can mean various things: a ramp to reach the height of the walls, a mound of earth, an enbankment, a causeway, a parapet, a bastion, a rampart; the same is true of pluteus and cratis: the first may mean hurdle, mantlet, breastwork, movable screen, gabion; the second bundle of sticks, fascine, wickerwork, lattice, hurdle, shield.) protegi necesse fuerit, ut vulgus improvidum inriti stabimus, (si … necesse fuerit, … stabimus: conditional sentence in direct speech after inquit: the use of indicative in both protasis and apodosis reflects the speaker’certainty that the events he fears will happen; the future perfect in the protasis is for action completed before the action of the apodosis (simple future) begins.) altitudinem turrium et aliena munimenta mirantes? quin potius (quin potius: ‘why not rather …?’) mora noctis unius, advectis tormentis machinisque, vim victoriamque (vim victoriamque: hendiadys, ‘the power for victory’) nobiscum (nobiscum: ‘with us’ or ‘for us’) ferimus?’ simul lixas calonesque cum recentissimis equitum Bedriacum mittit, copias ceteraque usui adlaturos. (adlaturos: modifies lixas calonesque, ‘going to bring back’; the use of the future participle alone to denote purpose is found in poetry and in post-classical prose. Cf. G. 283.)