Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T14:54:53.401Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quibus and Quis in Tacitus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2009

R. H. Martin
R. H. Martin
Affiliation:
University of Leeds
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Article
Information
The Classical Review , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , June 1968 , pp. 144 - 146
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1968

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 144 note 1 Note, however, that Syme (ibid.) is judiciously reserved about the position of Annals xi and xii.

page 144 note 2 Corrected figures.

page 144 note 3 I have not counted the figures for nisi: the crucial point is the almost total disappearance of ni after Annals xii. In the case of essem/forem and quibus/quis what matters is not the absolute totals, but the changing proportion between their alternative forms.

page 144 note 4 It is worth noting that the over-all pro-portion in Histories for essem/forem of about 1:3 conceals the fact that in Hist, i examples of essem (7) are actually more than those of forem (5), while in Hist, iii there is no example of essem, but 16 of forem.

page 145 note 1 Includes xii. 9. 2 arte eorum quis ob accusatam Messalinam ultio ex filio timebatur, where M has qui sub and quibus ob is a possibility, though inferior to quis ob.

page 144 note 2 Includes two examples of ex quis (see below) and xiv. 21.4 where the text is not quite certain (see Addendum (iv)).

page 144 note 3 It is only in these books (Annals iii–vi and xi–xii), and for the ablative case only, that examples of quis ever outnumber those of quibus.

page 144 note 4 Note that (i) with the exception of iii. 16. 3 (where ex quibus stands in oratio recta) Annals i–xii have only ex quis; (ii) Ann. xiii has one example (xiii. 19. 2, feminine) of ex quibus, no example of ex quis; (iii) Ann. xiv has one example (xiv. 60. 3, feminine) of ex quibus, two examples (xiv. 5. 1; 42. 2, both masculine) of ex quis; (iv) Ann. xv–xvi have only ex quibus (four examples in all).

page 146 note 1 For this conclusion see now F. R. D. Goodyear, ‘The Development of Language and Style in the Annals of Tacitus’ (forth coming in Journal of Roman Studies, [1968]), where the argument is developed with the aid of much new evidence.