JANUA LINGUARUM

STUDIA MEMORIAE
N I C O L A I VAN W I J K DEDICATA

edenda curat
C. H. SCHOONEVELD
Indiana University

Series Practica, 133

LATIN PUNCTUATION
IN THE
CLASSICAL AGE

by

Ε. OTHA WINGO

1972
MOUTON
THE HAGUE · PARIS
 © Copyright 1972 in The Netherlands.
Mouton & Co. N.V., Publishers, The Hague.

No part of this book may be translated or reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint,
microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publishers.

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOG CARD NUMBER: 79-159474

Printed in Hungary
PARENTIBVS
PIEN TISSIMIS
ET
CARISSIMAE
VXORI
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to express my deep appreciation to my adviser, Professor Revilo P.

Oliver, for suggesting the problem and for his constant and patient guidance
and painstaking assistance throughout the research and writing of the disser-
tation;
to Professors Ben E. Perry, Alexander Turyn, Antonio Tovar, and Gertrude
Smith, as well as to Professor Oliver, for the challenging classes and encouraging
conferences throughout my graduate work at the University of Illinois;
and to Dr. Edith Carrington Jones, who was always generously helpful
in locating and using materials in the great Classical Library at the University
of Illinois, which was founded and in large part assembled by the late Pro-
fessor William Abbott Oldfather.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements 7
I. The Problem of Punctuation 11
II. The Testimony of the Grammarians 20
III. The Res Gestae Augusti 29
IV. Latin Books 50
V. Legal Style 68
VI. Other Styles 83
VII. The Signs of Punctuation 94
VIII. Conclusions 132
Appendix I. Papyri Latinae 134
Appendix II. Metrical Punctuation 140
Bibliography 164
 I

THE PROBLEM OF PUNCTUATION

This treatise is an attempt to answer, insofar as it is possible, the question

whether or not the classical writers, such as Cicero or Vergil or Livy, were
read by their contemporaries in copies that had punctuation. I shall give,
therefore, as complete an account as possible of the types and functions of
punctuation in Latin writing of the classical age. Every published inscription,
papyrus, and manuscript that antedates the fall of the Roman Empire in
the West has been considered, provided that enough of the text remains
to be intelligible and thus show the meaning of punctuation where that is
used. For this study I have checked every inscription in the Corpus Inscrip-
tionum Latinarum and in L'Annee Hpigraphique (1944—1961) and every
papyrus listed in Cavenaile's Corpus Papyrorum Latinarum, using also such
facsimiles as were available in other publications whenever there was reason
to believe that the original contained punctuation.
As late as the year 1908 so careful a scholar as Ioannes Ferrara knew so
little of punctuation in the classical age that he described the marks of punc-
tuation in the fragment of the Carmen de Bello Actiaco as signa "quae quid
spectent me plane ignorare fateor". 1 He thus reached the odd conclusion
that those signs must mark places which the author intended to revise. I t
followed, therefore, that the papyrus was the author's autograph of a poem
that had never been completed. Therefore the poem could not be the work
of any of the ancient poets known to have composed poems on that subject.
Hence it was probably the work of the man who owned the villa in Hercula-
neum at the time of the eruption in 79 A.D. 2
The manuals of epigraphy and palaeography summarily dismiss the subject
of punctuation with brief mention of the interpunctum, or medial point,
1
Poematis Latini Fragmenta Herculanensia (Papiae, 1908), p. 33.
1
This scaffolding of inferences has, of course, long since collapsed. The latest editor
of the fragments (Garuti, 1958) returns to the early attribution of the poem to Gaiue
Rabirius and supports the attribution with arguments on which he relies so confidently
that he places the name of Rabirius on his title page (C. Rabirius: Bellum Actiacum).
12 THE PROBLEM OF PUNCTUATION

used as a word-divider. For the sake of completeness, I shall review the meager
information given in the standard reference works.
James C. Egbert, Introduction to the Study of Latin Inscriptions (1906),
says that "from earliest times individual words in inscriptions were separated
by marks of punctuation, which regularly occupied a position midway between
the upper and lower limits of the letters. These points, as a rule, were not
placed at the end of a line, and did not indicate sentences or parts of sentences."
After discussing the various forms of the medial point, he remarks that "In
carmina the metric lines are marked, and when half-verses are written this
also is indicated by punctuation. At times a long space takes the place of the
punctuation mark. In one of the Scipio 'Elogia' the ends of the metric lines
are indicated by the spacing, while in another the punctuation mark is used,
in this case a horizontal line."
Rene Cagnat, Cours d'Epigraphie Latine (1914), discusses the shapes of
the "points separatifs", but mentions no use of any mark of punctuation
to show syntactical relation or sense.
John Edwin Sandys, Latin Epigraphy (1927), dismisses the matter of
punctuation by stating that the medial points "are not used to denote the
termination of a clause or a sentence."
Pedro Batlle Huguet, Epigrafia Latina (1946), merely mentions inter-
puncta as word-dividers, and adds that "son rarisimos los ejemplos con dos
ο mas puntos puestos en linea vertical u horizontal".
Edward Maunde Thompson, Introduction to Greek and Latin Palaeography
(1912), surveys Greek punctuation; his discussion of Latin punctuation is
confined to later centuries. "The punctuation of Latin MSS. followed in some
respects the systems of the Greeks. In the poem on the Battle of Actium,
found at Herculaneum, points are used to mark off the words, a practice
borrowed from inscriptions; and in the early MSS. of Virgil in the Vatican
Library points are found employed for the same purpose, although they
appear to be due to a second, but still early, hand. From the Latin grammar-
ians we know that they adopted the Greek system of punctuation by points
(θέσεις, positurae), to which they gave the titles of 'distinctio finalis', 'sub-
distinctio', and 'distinctio media', but in practice we find that the scribes
used the points without consistently adhering to their meaning." He does
mention the use of a short space, in some of the more ancient manuscripts,
to indicate the conclusion of a passage or paragraph, and a paragraph mark,
used to separate paragraphs or divisions of the text, as in the poem on the
Battle of Actium.
Giulio Battelli, Lezioni di Paleografia (1949), does not consider the use
of punctuation before the Eighth Century.
Jean Mallon in his Polygraphie Romaine (1952), in which he deliberately
sets out to revolutionize the study of early Latin palaeography, strangely
 THE PROBLEM OF PUNCTUATION 13

makes no mention of punctuation as an indication of date or type, and even

ignores marks other than the interpunct in his transcriptions of some of the
examples shown in the plates appended to his work.
E, A. Lowe, Codices Latini Antiquiores (1934 — 1963) sums up the situation
by repeated statements to this effect: The history of punctuation in Latin
manuscripts is a chapter still to be written. He cautions that punctuation
"can be studied only by inspecting the original, and even then it is not always
easy to determine what is due to the first hand and what to later correctors:
facsimiles often give a false impression . . . ," 3
There is no discussion of Latin punctuation in either Müller's Handbuch
or in Pauly-Wissowa-Kroll. Aemilius Hübner, Exempla Scripturae Epi-
graphicae Latinae (1885), mentions points in carmina; the paragraph signs
7 and 3 in the Monumentum Ancyranum; "virgulae ad commata separanda
inter litteras interpositae" in the Laudatio Murdiae; and spaces for separation
of phrases or paragraphs; as well as various signs placed at the ends of lines.
However, he does not discuss the significance of these marks.
Only recently has the importance of the use of spacing to indicate divisions
of thought and syntax been in any way emphasized—by Joyce S. and Arthur
S. Gordon, Contributions to the Palaeography of Latin Inscriptions (1957).
However, they do not go into great detail, since their concern is with dating
of inscriptions. The Gordons discuss arrangement in paragraph form, and
go into details concerning the use, position, and formation of the interpunctum
as a simple word-divider—and the omission of it. Their chapter headed
"Punctuation" deals almost entirely with the interpunct. They consider
other punctuation only in connection with the occurrences of it on the in-
scriptions published in their Album of Dated Latin Inscriptions (1958).
These scholars leave us with little definite information on the subject of
punctuation. The impression given by their comments is that Latin writing
did not utilize syntactical or sense punctuation at all.
It would seem that an understanding or appreciation of the use of punc-
tuation in the classical age is not much more widely diffused among scholars
in our day than it was in Ferrara's. Marcel Durry, in what is the latest edition
of the text of the so-called Laudatio Turiae (Paris, 1950, with a sheet of addenda
and corrigenda, c. 1952), prints in II.2a-3a of the text a restoration (his own)
which simply ignores the punctuation that is clearly visible on the stone
before the preceding word. The stone shows that a new clause began with
the word ornamentis, but Durry's restoration makes the new clause begin
after that word, although restorations that would not violate the punctuation

3 L o w e is thinking primarily of the vellum codices in which the occasional points to

set o f f words appear usually, if not invariably, to have been added b y a hand later than
the scribe's; cf. infra, p. 23 note 11.
14 T H E PROBLEM OF PUNCTUATION

(e.g. by de Sanctis, reported in Durry's apparatus) are possible. I shall not

here attempt to decide what is the correct restoration: I merely point out
that it apparently did not occur to Durry that the punctuation had any signi-
ficance at all.
The term 'punctuation,' in the restricted sense in which I shall use it here,
refers to the use in writing of certain signs to show the end of a sentence
or to indicate its structure or the interrelation of its parts for the sake of
clarity to facilitate reading. Marks may also be inserted, again for the sake
of clarity, to show pauses in speech even when no syntactical consideration
would demand them. In a somewhat broader sense, a system of punctuation
includes the arrangement of the material into paragraphs by using spacing
and indentation to mark off units of subject matter. And in the broadest
sense, any sign that is not a letter of the alphabet is a mark of punctuation.
I may therefore delimit the topic by listing related matters which fall
outside the scope of this dissertation.
1. The interpunctum as a word-divider. This falls outside our topic because
word-division was universally used during the period in which we are interested
and is therefore to be taken for granted. Indeed, what will be significant for
our purposes will be the absence of interpuncts, which, unless there are con-
trary indications, will place the text outside the historical period in which
we are interested.
The division of writing into words is a practice of great antiquity, and
appears to have been customary in the writing of various languages in cunei-
form characters. The practice may have reached the classical peoples through
Crete, for word-division is clear on the Phaistos-disk, which may be as early
as 1700 B.C.4 The practice of word-division was carried into Greek when the
Cretan characters were used to write that language, for Sterling Dow notes
the presence of the interpunct in Linear B, "regularly inserted, as in cunei-
form, between words". 5 I t is possible that the practice of word-division
somehow survived through the Dark Age that followed the fall of Mycenaean
culture and so persisted when the Minoan characters were replaced by the
Greek alphabet. M. Lejeune in B.JS.A., LVI (1954), p. 429, remarks: "les
plus anciennes inscriptions grecques connaissaient l'usage des interponctions
sdparant mots ou groupes de mots, et il est remarquable que les Grecs aient

4
The Phaistos-disk must antedate the oldest specimens of Linear Β (in which an
interpunct replaces the vertical line as word-divider). Leonard R. Palmer, Myceneans and
Minoans (London, 1961) dates the beginning of Linear Β to c. 1400 B.C. If the Phaistos-
disk comes from the period in which Phaistos was the seat of an independent kingdom,
its date, according to Palmer's chronology, would be c. 1700-1600 B. C. I t remains to be
seen, of course, whether the language of the disk is Luvian. And until the disk has been
read, there will always remain the possibility that it is a forgery.
lA.J.A. 58 (1954), p. 88, col. 2.
 T H E PROBLEM OF PUNCTUATION 15

abandonne cet usage au profit de la 'scriptio continua' de l'äge classique".

I t is extremely curious that the same change took place in Latin, but after
the classical age.
The practice of word-division was standard in Etruscan and it was probably
from this source that it entered into Latin, where it is found in the very
earliest inscriptions, such as the lapis niger and the fibula Praenestina.e The
word-divider is regularly found on all good inscriptions, in papyri, on wax
tablets, and even in graffiti7 from the earliest Republican times through the
Golden Age and well into the Second Century.
As Revilo P. Oliver has pointed out, "that interpuncta were thought to be
virtually an element of the Latin alphabet may be seen from PSI 743 (I/II),
a curious fragment in which a Greek text has been transliterated in Latin
characters, and the words accordingly separated by interpuncta".8 Seneca
regarded the use of interpuncts as a characteristic of the normal writing of
Latin: "nos etiam cum scribimus, interpungere adsuevimus". 9 The remark
is made in passing to point out the contrast between Greek and Latin tem-
perament, i.e. Greeks use scriptura continua, Romans interpungunt, distin-
guishing their words clearly even in writing. The reference is at least to the
use of word-dividers; it is possible that Seneca was also thinking of punc-
tuation for sense. 10
Throughout these periods the word-divider was a dot placed half-way be-
tween the upper and the lower edge of the line of writing. That the original
form was a vertical line may be inferred from the Phaistos-disk. With alphabets
which used the letter I, to avoid confusion with that letter, the vertical line
was broken to form three dots arranged vertically, as in the oldest Etruscan
inscriptions and on the so-called lapis niger in Latin. The simplification to
two dots and then to a single dot was an obvious development. Two dots
seem normal on the fibula Praenestina (c. 600 B. C.), with three as an excep-
tion. The evolution from two to one is beautifully illustrated by the two parts
of the tabulae Iguvinae11 where the two dots divide words in the retrograde

• The Duenoa-bowl, with its retrograde characters, is an exception, but the words have
not yet been satisfactorily read, so that we cannot guess whether the absence of the
interpunct could be explained in terms of great antiquity, foreign origin, semi-literacy,
or religious convention.
7
Good examples are C. I. L. IV. 1893 and 1894, which cannot be much earlier than
the destruction of Pompei.
8
Τ. A. P . Α., L X X X I I (1951), pp. 241-242.
»Ep. Mor. IV. 11. 11.
10
The latter meaning is taken for granted by Walter C. Summers in the notes ad loc.
in his Select Letters of Seneca (London 1910).
11
The limits of the dating of the tabulae Iguvinae are 300 to 89 B. C., according to
Tabulae Iguvinae, editae a Iacobo Devoto (Romae, 1940), pp. 51-52. cf. Poultney, Bronze
Tables, pp. 200-289.
16 T H E PROBLEM OF P U N C T U A T I O N

text in the old alphabet, but the single medial point is used in the later text,
written left-to-right, with the new alphabet. The single medial point became
the normal word-divider in Etruscan (e.g. the Liber Zagrabiensis, c. 50 B. C.-50
A. D.) and became standard in Latin at a very early date, subject only to a
few early variations in shape, evidently for decorative purposes.
The Gordons have described the shape of the interpuncts in early inscrip-
tions: "Although our collection includes some Republican examples of crosses,
crosses within squares, and squares and triangles cut in outline, Part I of the
Album has none of these types of punctuation. The regular punctuation
exemplified here consists for the most part of cut-out, down-pointed triangles,
and a smaller number of cut-out ' c o m m a s ' . . . . Both triangles and commas
are generally placed at mid-height, but they show appreciable variation
in shape, direction, position, and comparative size, often within the same
inscription." 12
As a rule, interpuncta are used simply to divide words, except that pre-
positions are only rarely separated from the word they govern, if this follows
next. Although interpuncta used as word-dividers greatly increase the legi-
bility of the text, they are not punctuation in the sense in which I use the term.
In that sense, the medial point cannot be used as a sign of punctuation until
it is no longer used to divide words.
The regular use of the interpunct as a word-divider continued until sometime
in the Second Century, when it began to fall into disuse, and Latin was written
with increasing frequency, both in papyrus and on stone or bronze, in scriptum
continua. As Professor Oliver states, " I t was evidently during the Second
Century that there took place in Latin Buchwesen one of the most astonishing
cultural regressions of ancient history. Within that century interpuncta and
regular punctuation disappear, apices become rare and sporadic, and lines
become solid blocks of scriptura continua. For this amazing and deplorable
regression one can conjecture no reason other than an inept desire to imitate
even the worst characteristic of Greek books." 13 So far as I know, no study
has been made to determine at what dates the scriptura continua was an in-

12
Contributions, p. 183.
13
Τ. A. P. Α., L X X X I I (1951), p. 242. Professor Oliver further states: "Interpuncta
survive in the fragment De Servio Tullio (POxy. 2088) of the Second Century. A good
specimen of the new style is PRyl. 473, a relatively luxurious book which was reused for
accounts in the Third Century, and is therefore assumed to have been produced in the
Second; it has solid lines, no punctuation at all, and only occasional apices. E v e n in a
grammatical treatise, PMich. 429 (II/III; cf. Lowe, Codices, §212), in which one might
suppose clarity t o have been particularly desirable, punctuation disappears except
where it is necessary to distinguish a vowel or diphthong under discussion from the sur-
rounding text. Of course, some sporadic punctuation is to be found in later manuscripts,
but, so far as I know, no attempt was ever made to abandon the scriptura continua or to
return to the fine lucidity of Augustan standards."
 T H E P R O B L E M OF PUNCTUATION 17
novation in good writing, became an accepted fashion, and then became nor-
mal. The use of the word-divider appears to decline steadily through the Second
Century. It never entirely disappeared, and very late texts can be cited which
use the interpunct regularly,14 but there must have been a time at which
this usage was recognized as intentional archaism.
In this dissertation, my purpose is to deal with the classical period, and
hence with the punctuation that was used in texts in which words were divided
by interpuncts. I shall use later evidence only where there is some reason
to believe that the punctuation is a survival—or deliberate revival—of what
was prevalent before the interpunct went out of general use.
2. Hederae distinguentes, which appear only on inscriptions, are normally
merely ornamental elaborations of the interpunctum. I shall consider only
the rare instances in which they appear with regular interpuncta and seem
to indicate a stronger division.
3. The apex and l-longa are, strictly speaking, phonetic signs, but the fact
that they are not used for every long vowel15 does make them punctuation
in an extended sense, especially when they appear on inflections and so do
show syntactical relation. They are not, however, punctuation in the re-
stricted sense, although their use may frequently make clear the meaning
that might not otherwise be immediately apparent without a mark of punc-
tuation in the strict sense. I therefore exclude apices as phonetic symbols;
an apex—or, if you prefer, a mark exactly like an apex—is used as a sign
of punctuation, usually placed above the interpunct, and this, of course,
I shall discuss.18
4. A space may be as much a mark of punctuation as a written sign, and
was so used in both inscriptions and literary texts.17 This I shall consider,
but I shall limit myself to divisions within paragraphs. The common practice
of dividing Latin texts into paragraphs according to subject matter, and
indicating the paragraphs by beginning them on a new line, usually extended

14 E . g. P. Oxy. 871, which, according to the editors, may be as late as the Fifth Century,

and thus later than the great vellum codices of Vergil, regularly uses interpuncta. It is
a fragment, perhaps of a treatise or diatribe, that deals with a moral subject.
15 cf. Quint. I. 7. 2: ut longis syllabis omnibus adponere apicem ineptissimum est,

quia plurimae natura ipsa verbi, quod scribitur, patent, sed interim necessarium, cum
eadem littera alium atque alium intellectum, prout correpta vel producta est, facit.
, β I note in passing that the mark of punctuation which exactly resembles an apex

is probably the source of some (not all) apices that we find erroneously placed over the
first or last syllable of a clause or sentence. This, I think, should be taken into considera-
tion in any future study of the use of apices.
17 cf. Robert Seymour Conway's preface to his edition of Livy (Oxford, 1914), §51:

"Vestigium antiquitatis, quod, quoad incorruptum mansit, vix est cur Livio ipsi abnege-
mus, in Puteano servatum est, cum persaepe intra vola narrationis spatium iv vel plurium
(interdum etiam x) litterarum vacuum reliquit."
18 T H E PROBLEM OF P U N C T U A T I O N

into the left margin, is a different topic. And naturally, I shall not go into
the division of texts into numbered paragraphs (capita,),1* such as Cicero
takes for granted in the text of laws19 and such as are found in the Lex Gallia
Cisalpina of 705/49 (C. I. L. I 2 , 592) and the Lex Coloniae Oenetivae of 710/44
(C I. L. I 2 , 594).
5. I shall not be concerned here with the lectionary signs (signa critica)
that the Romans borrowed from the Alexandrians. I t will suffice to mention
that these may be found in Reifferscheid^ edition 20 of the Reliquiae of Sueto-
nius, and that the most recent listing of them is by Karl Büchner in his con-
tribution to the Atlantis Verlag's Geschichte der Textilberlieferung (Zürich,
1961), Band I, pp. 329f.
In this dissertation I shall use the following procedure in reproducing texts.
All inscriptions published in the C. I. L. are cited from that work; others
from the publication in which they are most readily available (e.g. from the
Annie iSpigraphique rather than the original publication, unless there is a
difference in the text that is significant for our purpose here). For each in-
scription I have reproduced or summarized an indication of the object on
which the text appears (e.g. "tabula marmorea" or "cippus marmoreus" or
"basis quadrata" or "urna marmorea"), but have omitted all details con-
cerning its ornamentation, discovery, and present location. (Inscriptions lost
before they were examined by modern epigraphers have been generally dis-
regarded, since early transcriptions can not be relied upon for the details of
punctuation.) The volume of the C. I. L. indicates whether a given inscription
is Roman, Italian, or provincial; a more precise statement of the place where
the inscription was set up would have no significance for the present study.
For inscriptions taken from sources other than the Corpus, I have stated the
region in which they were found. Where the editors have dated the inscription
on the basis of either epigraphic or historical evidence, I have quoted or sum-
marized their dating.
Papyri and manuscripts are quoted from the source that contains the most
complete reproduction of the text available to me.
Except where otherwise noted, I have reproduced the whole of the text
under consideration, but I have omitted without comment additions made
on the stone at a later time or inscriptions appearing on other sides of the same

18
cf. Gordon, Contributions, pp. 151 — 155.
l
' E.g. Cie. De leg. Agr. III. 2. 4.: "Caput est legis quadragesimum, de quo ego consulto",
implies that the hearers had somehow before them copies in which the paragraphs of the
law were clearly numbered for reference.
20
C. Suetoni Tranquilli praeter Caesarum Libros Reliquiae; edidit Augustus Reiffer-
scheid. Lipsiae in aedibus Teubneri, 1860, pp. 137-144.
 T H E PROBLEM OF P U N C T U A T I O N 19

monument and, in the case of papyri and manuscripts, corrections and mar-
ginal annotations by later hands.
All texts are reproduced line for line as they appear in the original, but it
was not feasible to make the right hand margins regular or to show variation
in the size of the letters used for each line. I have reproduced all punctuation,
apices, and I-longae, but have not attempted to reproduce ligatures or to show
letters which are somewhat taller than others for merely decorative reasons
(as Τ and Y frequently, and other letters occasionally, appear in some styles
of lettering).
In the interests of clarity, I have taken no notice of broken letters in in-
scriptions or partly preserved letters in papyri; where these seemed certain,
I have reproduced them as part of the text without indication, and where
they were mere traces, as part of the restoration. We are here interested
exclusively in punctuation, and any attempt to reproduce such epigraphical
and palaeographical details in printed copy would merely confuse the eye
unnecessarily. Restorations, which, unless otherwise indicated, are those of
the editor of the text, or, where more than one restoration is proposed, the
restoration which the editor appears to prefer, are here given in italicized
lower-case letters. Square brackets are used only in a few cases where it
seemed necessary to show the edge of the preserved stone or papyrus. I n a few
instances I have thought it desirable to add a transcription of the text with
modern capitalization and punctuation; in these transcriptions, restorations
are within square brackets, and corrections are shown by italics.
 II

THE TESTIMONY OF THE GRAMMARIANS

I t is difficult to say when the system of punctuation in which we are here

interested was introduced or first came into use. As we have said, punctuation
to separate words appears in the earliest Latin inscriptions and was standard
usage at least from the time of the so-called lapis niger. The practice of dividing
words from one another could at any time have suggested the division of a sen-
tence into groups of related words forming a syntactical unit or other-
wise so related that they could be set off from the rest.
The earliest form of punctuation for sense appears to have been a blank
space. Clear instances are found in the well-known Senatus consultum de
Bacchanalibus, which can be precisely dated to 186 B. C. Of other marks
of punctuation, we can only say that Cicero mentions them in passing1 and
that we find them in use in the time of Augustus, evidently as an established
practice and with no suggestion that they are a novelty; there are a few ex-
amples in short texts which may come from the last years of the Republic,
while the paucity of long texts, whether on bronze, stone, or papyrus, from
that period prevents us from determining whether or not they were in general
use.
I t is natural to associate the development of systematic punctuation for
sense with the use of apices and other devices to facilitate the reading of Latin
texts, which are believed to have come into use about the time of Sulla, i.e.
around 80 B. C. This general likelihood is a little supported by the consideration
that the most common mark of punctuation, the virgula (/) has the same form,
and is sometimes of the same size, as the apex.
I t is not likely that punctuation came into use without being discussed

' I n De or. III. 44. 173 he mentions rhythmical clausulae (versus in soluta oratione,
explained as numeri quidamJ as a means whereby clausulae are, so to speak, made orally
interpwnctae, the rhythm replacing the librariorum notae. This suggests that punctuation
for sense was common, if not universal, in Latin books in Cicero's time. But it would be
temerity, I think, to argue that the reference proves that punctuation was in common use
in Roman books by September of 91 B. C., the dramatic date of the dialogue.
 THE TESTIMONY OF T H E GRAMMARIANS 21

by some of the authors who concerned themselves with the proper writing
of Latin. We are certainly entitled to conjecture that Lucilius ( f l 0 3 B. C.)
probably said something about punctuation by blank spaces (which was
certainly known to him), if not by special signs (which could have been known
to, or even invented by, him, even though no example has survived from his
time), in the thirty books of Saturae of which only a thousand lines, or less,
have survived.2 We know that he took an extraordinary interest in devices
to make Latin writing more perspicuous and immediately intelligible, going
so far as to urge that a genitive singular of the second declension (e.g. pueri)
be differentiated by spelling from the nominative plural (puerei) to assist
the eye, although there was no difference in pronunciation.3 We owe this
knowledge to the almost fortuitous preservation of a single fragment, and
it is only reasonable to suppose that such a mind would have taken an interest
in punctuation for sense as another means of assisting the reader. It is not
unlikely, therefore, that he made some reference to it somewhere in the twenty-
nine thousand lines or so that are lost.
It is entirely possible that Varro discussed the subject somewhere, if not
in the De Lingua Latina, where there appears to have been no place for it
according to the necessarily sketchy outline of the contents of the lost books
reconstructed by modern scholars,4 then in some other work, for in his De
Sermone Latino5 he recommended the use of a special mark (nota I transversa)
to call attention to short syllables that occur in verse at points at which the
metre leads the reader to expect a long.
Lucilius and Varro are the only two writers of the Republic whom we can
identify as having discussed subjects closely related to punctuation for sense,
but we could expect the subject to have been treated by some, if not by all,
of the numerous Latin writers who dealt, more or less professionally, with the
orthography and grammar of the Latin language during the late Republic,
when such punctuation seems to have come into use, and during the early
Empire, when we know that punctuation was regularly used in books and
frequently used in long inscriptions. It is true, however, that the comparatively
numerous fragments of the grammatical writers of the two periods, collected

2
There are 120 numbered lines in Lachmann's edition (Berlin, 1876), but m a n y of
these consist of a single word.
3
Lines 317-19 Lachmann. Lucilius m a y have stipulated that I-longa was to be used
in the genitive singular; cf. Velius Longus quoted by Lachmann ad loo. A difference in
pronunciation cannot be presumed from 322-23.
4
For such an outline, see Roland G. Kent's introduction to his edition of Varro in the
Loeb Library, pp. ix-xi.
5
Frag. 66 Goetz and Schoell ( = 46 Funaioli). I t is not clear whether Varro's discussion
of written metrical accents in Greek (Frag. 84 G-S = 282 F) was to have any application
to Latin.
22 THE TESTIMONY OF T H E GRAMMARIANS

by Funaioli 6 and Mazzarino, 7 contain no reference whatsoever to the subject.

Since it is scarcely conceivable that none of these writers mentioned the matter,
and is probable t h a t many did, this silence will seem extraordinary until
we remember that most of the fragments of these writers were preserved by the
later grammarians, such as Diomedes (late Fourth Century), Charisius (late
Fourth Century), and Priscian (early Sixth Century), whose works have
come down to us more or less intact and are thus, in a sense, responsible for
the loss of the far more valuable treatises of the grammarians of the classical
age. Our fragments of the earlier writers, therefore, have not been preserved
by chance and at random, but by selection on the part of the later writers.
I t is a reasonable inference, therefore, t h a t those writers preserved by quotation
only passages which they deemed relevant to the 'modern needs' of a decaying
civilization, and therefore disregarded as otiose references to a system of
punctuation that had become obsolete long before their day.
The late grammarians, whose works have been collected and edited by Keil
in an edition which is still accepted as the standard 8 and, it appears, is not
likely to be superseded in our time, 9 do not by any means neglect the question
of punctuation. On the contrary, they lay down, with really astonishing
agreement and unanimity, definite rules of punctuation, which, they imply,
are, or should be, universally used in the writing of connected Latin discourse.
But the rules they give do not pertain to the specifically and distinctively
Latin punctuation in which we are here interested; on the contrary, the rules
enjoin the use in Latin of a system developed for Greek.
Thompson mentions the regular system of Greek punctuation developed
in the schools of Alexandria, invented by Aristophanes of Byzantium (260
B. C.), using "the full point with certain values in certain positions (Θέσεις):
the high point (στιγμή τελεία), equivalent to a full stop; the point on the
line (ύποστιγμή), a shorter pause, equivalent to our semicolon; and the
point in a middle position (στιγμή μέση) an ordinary pause, equivalent

• Grammaticae Romanae Fragmenta, collegit Hyginus Funaioli. Vol. I. Lipsiae in aedibus

B. G. Teubneri, 1907. (This volume is devoted to fragments from the Republican period;
the death of the editor prevented continuation of this edition.)
7
Grammaticae Romanae Fragmenta Aetatis Oaesareae, collegit Antonius Mazzarino.
Vol. I. Augustae Taurinorum in aedibus Loescheri, 1955. (This volume covers the period
from the accession of Augustus to the death of Nero, and includes a few addenda to
Funaioli; the second volume has not yet appeared.)
8
Except for Charisius, for whose work an incomparably superior edition b y C. Barwick
appeared in the Bibliotheca Teubneriana (1925).
9
Keil's Grammatici Latini is now being reprinted, without change and presumably
without addenda or corrigenda, by the Olms Verlag in Hildesheim. With all due respect
to Keil, whose great work was published in 1855-79, with a supplement in 1923, it seems
extremely improbable that new editions could not effect some improvements in the texts.
For one example, see below, p. 24., n. 15.
 THE TESTIMONY OF THE GRAMMARIANS 23

to our comma". 10 He stated: "The punctuation of Latin MSS. followed in

some respects the systems of the Greeks. . . . From the Latin grammarians
we know that they adopted the Greek system of punctuation by points (Θέσεις,
positurae), to which they gave the titles of 'distinctio finalis', 'subdistinctio',
and 'distinctio media'; but in practice we find that the scribes11 used the points
without consistently adhering to their meaning."
Of the dozen or more grammarians who discuss the system of punctuation
(positurae or distinctio12·), it will suffice here to quote two of the more extensive
treatments.

10
Edward Maunde Thompson, Introduction to Greek and Latin Palaeography (1912),
p. 69.
11
Thompson's attribution to the scribes of the punctuation in our early parchment
codices is certainly wrong in many cases and doubtful in almost all others. I n these co-
dices, beginning with the fragmentary schedae Fulvianae of Vergil and the codex Pala-
tini, which may be the oldest of the complete or approximately complete codices (cf.
Oliver, Τ. A. P. Α., L X X X I I (1951), pp. 251-54), the writing is in scriptura continua
into which almost all of the punctuation has been fitted. Punctuation in a space left
by the scribe is probably his work, but points fitted into scriptura continua probably are
not and are, in any case, too small to show differences in ink or style of writing. The sub-
scription to the Mediceus of Vergil, "Turcius Rufius Apronianus . . . legi et distincxi
codicem" and, a little later, "distincxi emendans," and other colophons recording t h a t
someone "distinxit et emendavit" (see O. Jahn, Berichte . . . der k. Sachs. Gesellschaft der
Wissenschaften, Phil.-Hist., 1851, pp. 327-72), strongly suggest t h a t in the Fifth Century,
and perhaps earlier, codices were delivered to their purchasers in scriptura continua
with little or no punctuation of any kind, and t h a t the purchaser was expected to supply
the distinctiones just as the purchaser of a French broche today is expected to cut the
leaves. I n any event, the person who distinxit appears to have been principally concerned
with inserting points to show the division of words where the scriptura continua would
be most misleading and a few apices to differentiate words. The Mediceus and Palatinus,
for example, show no signs of systematic punctuation for sense, whether by the scribe
or by a later owner of the book. Codices which do show a system approaching t h a t prescrib-
ed by the late grammarians—notably the codex of Juvenal written about 600 A. D.
which I mention below—have punctuation which the editors (in this case, C. H. Roberts)
positively identify as the work, not of the scribe, but of a second hand. For another ex-
ample, see the papyrus codex (P. Ryl. 477) of Cicero, Div. in Q. Gaec., written in good half-
uncials of the Fifth Century; according to E. A. Lowe (Godd. Lat. Antiq., II, 226), the
punctuation is entirely the work of a second hand, although the original scribe may be
responsible for some of the few marks over long vowels (e.g. contra me).
12
cf. Sergii De accentibus (in Donatum) (Keil IV, 482): cum distinctio species sit posi-
turae, tamen abusive pro ipsa positura, hoc est pro ipso genere, accipimus distinctionem.
nam cum sit codex emendatus distinctione, media distinctione, subdistinctione, dicitur
tamen codex esse distinctus.
24 T H E TESTIMONY OF THE GRAMMARIANS

Dosithei Ars Orammatica (Keil V I I , 428):

Distinctio est silentii nota cum sensu terminato. huius autem signum est punctum
supra versum positum. 1 3 subdistinetio est diuturnitas quaedam temporis differens ora-
tionem ad sententiae qualitatem. 1 1 huius autem signum est punctum sub versu positum,
u t est illud,

et si f a t a deum, si mens non laeva fuisset,

impulerat ferro Argolicas foedare latebras;
Troiaque nunc staret, Priamique arx alta maneret. 1 5

non enim similiter u t in distinctione silentium interpositum tacere permisit. media vel
mora est silentium legitimae distinctionis subdistinctionisque medium obtinens locum,
quae hoc solum servat officium, u t legentis spiritum levissima respiratione refoveat et
nutriat. sic enim pronuntiando reticere quia debet, quoad spirat, quia spiritus ipse a
defectione vincatur, deinde vires resumat. multae autem causae mediae huius lectionis,
primum ne confundantur quae dicola vel tricola ponuntur; deinde u t actus verborum
emineat et luceat, qui ex aliquo venit affectu vel indignatione seu misearatione conlata,
aut certe quadam artatione sermonis quae emfaticos a poetis * . siquis itaque sine media
spiritus suspensione pronuntiaverit
aut hoc inclusi in ligno occultantur Achivi
aut haec in nostros fabricata est machina muros
inspectura domos venturaque desuper urbi
aut aliquis latet error equi ne credite Teucri,
confunditur ratio compositionis generali nomine ligni machinae equi. et
lectumque iugalem,
quo perii, super imponam:
hoc enim voluit intellegi Dido non esse lectum iugalem, quo perierit. immorandum est
ergo et respirandum post 'iugalem' et sic inferendum cum νποκρίοεως affectu 'quo perii.'
distinguere autem oportet ante similitudines, quas Graeci parabolas vocant, et ante
redditas ανταποδόσεις et siquando a persona da personam transitus erit factus, et ante
'aut' coniunctionem et ante casum vocativum et ante 'sed' et ante 'quoniam' et ante
interrogativa, 1 * u t
13
cf. [Sergii] Explanationum in Donaium liber I (Keil IV, 533-534): ubi enim plenus
est sensus, hoc est ubi f i t clausula dictionis cuiuslibet, punctum ad caput litterae ponimus.
14
cf. Diomedis Artis Grammaticae liber I I (Keil I, 436-439): subdistinetio est silentii
nota legitimi, qua pronuntiationis terminus sensu manente ita suspenditur ut statim id
quod sequitur succedere debeat. . . . subdistinguendum enim est pro voluntate dicentis.
15
I quote verbatim from Keil's edition, on which I am necessarily dependent. Dositheus
(assuming t h a t he is the author of this work; cf. Schanz-Hosius §836) undoubtedly wrote
the quotation with his own punctuation, including, of course, the punctum sub versu
positum t h a t he is here illustrating, and the appropriate points in the later quotations.
W h a t traces, if any, of this punctuation are preserved in the manuscripts cannot be
determined from Keil's edition.
16
As will be obvious from the context, what Dositheus means by interrogativum a
moment later is a vocative apostrophe or interjection; if we knew hie punctuation, we
could tell whether he means the same thing here or is referring to the interrogatives
(in our sense of the word) qui and unde.
 T H E TESTIMONY OF T H E GRAMMARIANS 25

quis deus, ο Muaae, qui nobis e x t u d i t a r t e m ,

u n d e n o v a ingressus h o m i n u m experientia oepit?

post interrogativa, u t

Musa, mihi causae m e m o r a .

Cassiodorii De Orthographien (Keil VII, 145 — 146):

Illud e t i a m vos m a g n o p e r e credidi commonendos, u t distinctiones s e n s u u m sollicita
m e n t e perquirere ac ponere debeatis, 1 7 sine q u i b u s n e q u e legere q u i c q u a m c o m p e t e n t e r
n e q u e intellegere praevalemus. scire a u t e m d e b e m u s D o n a t u m a r t i g r a p h u m de posituris
i t a tractasse, u t n o n ibi o r d i n e m sed virtutee e a r u m potius exprimere v i d e a t u r . n a m si
distinctionum seriem p e r g r a d u s cognitos sequeretur, p r i m o p l e n a m , deinde m e d i a m
n e q u a q u a m ponere potuisset; nec i n d e magis inciperet, ubi p r a e d i c t a e p o s i t u r a e ad f i n e m
tendere c o m p r o b a n t u r . sequitur subdistinctio, deinde media, q u a e p l e n a s semper prae-
cedunt p o t i u s q u a m s e q u u n t u r . sed sicut visum constat esse doctissimis h u n c debemus
ordinem custodire, u t primo de subdistinctione dicamus, q u a e ibi semper a p p o n i t u r , ubi
in c o m m a t e sermo suspensus a d h u c r e d d e n d u s esse cognoscitur, u t a r m a v i r u m q u e cano,
ubi totius operis s u m m a conclusa est. a r m a enim (ancilla) Vergilius v i r u m q u e d i c t u r u s
est. sed q u o n i a m 'cano' respicit a d u t r u m q u e , hie, id est in ' a r m a , ' subdistinctio recte
p o n e n d a est. m e d i a m vero a d f i g e n d a m c o n s t a t in commate, c u m nullus sermo deest,
sed g r a d a t i m t e n d i t ad p l e n a m , u t

dividimus muros, et moenia p a n d i m u s urbis.

plena est a u t e m , ubi f i n i t u r p e r f e c t a sententia, u t est illud,

t a n t a e molis erat R o m a n a m condere g e n t e m .

subdistinctionem vero vel m e d i a m n o n credas i p s u m ordinem semper t e n e r e q u e m dixi-

mus, u t subdistinctio p r a e c e d a t e t m e d i a c o n s e q u a t u r ; sed p r o r a t i o n e s u p r a d i c t a locis
congruis a p p o n u n t u r , u t distinctiones istae bene positae sensum n o b i s lectionis evidenter
aperiant. n a m si aliter distinguas, sine d u b i t a t i o n e c u n c t a confundis. h a s vero distinctiones
seu posituras D o n a t o t e s t a n t e Graeci thesis vocant. periodus est a u t e m p e r l o n g u m plenae
sententiae d u c t a pausatio, cuius p a r t e s s u n t cola et c o m m a t a . 1 8

Such, then, is the system prescribed by the grammarians. So far as I know,

there is no Latin manuscript which embodies this system of punctuation.
There are some approximations to it, of which an interesting example is pro-
vided by a page from a parchment codex of Juvenal found at Antinoe in
Egypt and published by C. H. Roberts, who assigns the date of c. 500 A. D. 19
This manuscript was written in uncials and scriptum continua; a second,
but contemporary, hand supplied punctuation, marks of quantity (macron

17
cf. [Sergii] Explanationum in Donatum liber I (Keil IV, 533-534): o m n i s enim res
initium h a b e t , s e q u e n t i a m e t clausulam a u t , u t dicas hie, i n i t i u m a u g m e n t u m s t a t u m
(declinationis finis sic est positio).
18
cf. Sergii De Accentibue (in D o n a t u m ) (Keil IV, 482): v e r u m m e m i n e r i m u s in p r o s a
cola et c o m m a t a idem esse e t u n u m significare, in versu vero aliud e t diversum.
11
Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, X X I (1935), 199-209 (with plates).
26 T H E TESTIMONY OP THE GRAMMARIANS

and breve), and word-accents (acute and grave). 20 There are many interlinear
and marginal notes in both Latin and Greek, and it is obvious that the codex
was a carefully prepared edition for the use of readers whose native language
presumably was Greek. With the exception which will be noted below, the
punctuation consists of a medial point, as provided by the grammarians, and
a point on the line, which serves both as subdistinctio and distinctio. There is
no punctum swpra versum positum to serve as full stop. 21 The following examples
will show the use. I give first the text as punctuated in modern editions and
then the text from Antinoe.

VII. 157-164:
nosse v o l u n t omnes, m e r c e d e m solvere nemo.
"Mercedem appellas? Quid enim scio?" Culpa docentis
scilicet arguitur, quod laevae p a r t e mamillae
nil salit Arcadio iuveni, cuius mihi s e x t a
q u a q u e die m i s e r u m dirus c a p u t H a n n i b a l implet,
quidquid id est de quo deliberat, a n p e t a t u r b e m
a Cannis, a n p o s t nimbos e t f u l m i n a cautus
c i r c u m a g a t tnadidas a t e m p e s t a t e cohortes.

In the manuscript this is:

nosseuoluntomnesmercedemsöluerenemö . 3
mercedemappellasquidenimscio · culpadocentis
scilicetarguitur · quodlaeuaepartemamillae
3 nllsdlitarcadicöjuueni · cuiusmihisexta
quaq-dieimiserumdiruscaputhännubalimplet
quidquididestdequodeliberat · a n p e t a t u r b e
acannis · a n p o s t n i m b o s e t f u l m i n a c a u t u s
circumägatmadidasatempestatecohörtes.

VII. 184-190:
Q u a n t i c u m q u e domus, veniet qui fercula docte
componit, veniet qui p u l m e n t a r i a condit.
H o s inter s u m p t u s sestertia Quintiliano,
u t m u l t u m , d u o sufficient: res nulla minoris
c o n s t a b i t p a t r i q u a m filius. " V n d e igitur t o t
Quintilianus h a b e t s a l t u s ? " E x a m p l a n o v o r u m
f a t o r u m transi. Felix e t pulcher e t acer e. q. s.
20
R o b e r t s s t a t e s positively t h a t all these m a r k s are supplied b y t h e second h a n d ;
the scribe, however, appears t o h a v e l e f t a little room for t h e p u n c t u a t i o n in m o s t places,
a n d a t o t h e r points left, it seems, a slight space where no p u n c t u a t i o n was supplied or
needed.
21
Some medial p o i n t s a r e higher t h a n others, b u t it is d o u b t f u l t h a t a distinction
between these a n d t h e o r d i n a r y medial p o i n t was i n t e n d e d ; certainly t h e higher points
are n o t f u l l stops.
 THE TESTIMONY OF THE GRAMMARIANS 27

-
qudnticumq domumu0nietquiferculad0cte
conpönit • uenietqiiipulmentariacondit 3
hösintersümptussestertiaquintilidnö
utmultumdiiosufficiunt · resnüllaminöris
constduitpatriquamfilius · undeigiturtot
quintilianushabetsaltus • exemplanouörum
fatörumtransi · felixetpulcheretäcer

The dot on the line clearly stands for a full stop; it is also used, however,
to separate the two parts of an alternative question (163) and to separate
the two parallel clauses that begin with veniet (185). The use of medial points
instead of a full stop in 189 and 190, and also in 158, probably indicates that
the question and reply were regarded as forming part of the same unit of
thought. With these exceptions a point on the line appears where modern
editors place a period, except at the end of 185, where it may have been omitted
by oversight or have been effaced by damage to the parchment.
What makes this particularly interesting is the presence of the two marks
"3" in the passages which I have cited. These are regarded by the editor as
lectionary signs, but they could also be old punctuation of the kind with which
we shall deal below—marks that somehow survived to even this late text.
The one in 157 is superfluous unless it was added to emphasize or strengthen
the full stop that appears before it, but the one in line 185 may replace the
point which, as a sign of the full stop, one would expect to find in that place.
One of the few examples of a superior sign that corresponds to the grammar-
ians' full distinctio, may be found in P. Oxy. 1379, written in mixed uncials
which may be as early as the end of the Third Century. It contains Livy,
I. 5.7-6.1. I give the words that precede and follow the text, so that the
sentences may be complete.
Romulus non cum globo iuvenum—nec enim erat ad vim apertam par—sed aliis alio
itinere iussis certo tempore ad re-

giamuenirepastoribus
adregemimpetumfacit
etadomonumitorisalia
comparatamanu · adiuuat
remus · itaregemoptrun
cat > numitorinterpri
mumtumultumhostes
inuasiseeurbematque
adortosregiamdictitans
cumpubemalbanamin
arcempraesidioarmisque
obtinendamauocasset
• postquamiuuenesperpetra
tacaedepergereadsegra
tulantisuidit. extemplo
28 T H E TESTIMONY OP THE GRAMMARIANS

aduocatoconcilio . scele
rainsefratris · originem
nepotumutgeniti

ut educati, ut cogniti essent, caedem deinoeps tyranni seque eius auctorem ostendit.

Noteworthy are the use of points on the line to set off an ablative absolute
construction (though not a similar construction a few lines earlier, perpetrata
caede), of medial points to show that Remus is not the subject of obtruncat
and to show that both scelera and originem are parallel objects of the verb
ostendit. We have already called attention to the full stop after obtruncat.
This is the only end of a complete sentence in our fragment (some modern
editors place a full stop after Remus, but others use a colon).
There are, of course, many other examples of manuscripts from late antiquity
that more or less approximate the rules given by the grammarians. These
suffice to show that the grammarians' treatment of the subject was not purely
theoretical, but they naturally shed no light on the punctuation that was
used in the great age of Latin literature and of Rome, for which the testimony
of the late grammarians is almost valueless.
The testimony of the late grammarians is of some value, to be sure, for
their teaching that punctuation marks indicate pauses in speaking is doubtless
correct and represents much older teaching on the subject. But the system
that they expound obviously can have no connection with the punctuation
used in the classical age, for the points of which the grammarians speak
cannot have come into use until after the separation of words by interpuncts
had been completely abandoned and all texts were presumably written in
scriptum continua. The doctrine of the grammarians, therefore, must date
from a time when scriptura continua, which appears to have been introduced
into Latin in the time of Hadrian or later, had so completely supplanted
the older and clearer form of writing that no one any longer thought of using
interpuncts to separate words.
I t follows, therefore, that since the statements of classical grammarians who
mentioned punctuation are lost, and the late grammarians describe a totally
different system, our only means of obtaining information about punctuation
in classical Latin is to examine the surviving texts and seek to elicit from them
the rules or conventions which governed the use of punctuation.
 III

T H E RES GESTAE AUOÜSTI

The questions that a systematic study of Roman punctuation must answer,

so far as may be possible, may most conveniently be posed by an examination
of a celebrated inscription of considerable length which contains a fairly
large number of signs that were obviously inserted for the purpose of making
the meaning more perspicuous and thereby facilitating the reading of the
inscribed text.
The Res gestae Augusti, also known as the Monumentum Ancyranum from
the site on which an epigraphic copy of the text was first discovered, is cer-
tainly one of the most important, if not the most important, Latin inscription
when considered from the standpoint of the historical information which
it contains, and accordingly, since the time of Mommsen, it has often been
called the titulus primarius or "Queen of Inscriptions" in recognition of its
value as an historical document. 1 Its place in a study of Latin punctuation

1 Since the edition of the Monumentum Ancyranum that appears in the Corpus In-

scriptionum Latinarum was prepared in 1873 before casts of the original were available
to the editor, it may be disregarded. I t was superseded by Mommsen's special publica-
tion, Res Gestae Divi Augusti ex monumentis Ancyrano et Apolloniensi iterum edidit
Th. Mommsen, Berolini apud Weidmannos, 1883, to which was appended a quarto supple-
ment containing a photographic reproduction of the whole of the Ancyran text. For the
subsequently discovered fragments at Antiochia, see David M. Robinson, "The Res
gestae Divi Augusti as Recorded on the Monumentum Antiochenum," American Journal
of Philology, X L V I I (1926), 1-54 plus plates; and Monumentum, Antiochenum, heraus-
gegeben und erläutert von William Mitchell Ramsay und Anton von Premerstein (Klio,
Beiheft X I X ) , Leipzig, Dieterich, 1927. The text of the Res gestae has been repeatedly
edited and commented upon, but for the purposes of the present study only the following
need be used:
Res Gestae Divi Augusti ex monumentis Ancyrano, Antiocheno, Apolloniensi; recensuit
Concepta Barini (Scriptores Graeci et Latini iussu Beniti Mussolini editi), Romae,
1937. (The best critical edition; excellent photographic plates of large portions of the
Monumentum Ancyranum.)
Acta Divi Augusti; pars prior, Romae, ex officina typographica Regiae Academiae
Italicae, 1945. (The edition of the Latin text is by the editor of the volume, S. Ricco-
30 THE 'RES GESTAE AUGTTSTi'

is equally conspicuous. It is the longest and most authoritative Latin inscrip-

tion that contains internal punctuation for sense (i.e. in addition to the inter-
puncts that divide words) now extant.
Given the great contemporary importance of this document, which was
written by Augustus himself and served both to exalt him and to provide
propaganda for the principate as a political institution, we may assume that
the official text, inscribed on two pilae aeneae erected in front of the mausoleum
of Augustus shortly after his death in 14 A. D., was, in all respects, as care-
fully executed and as accurate an inscription as was ever set up in Rome. We
have to depend on the fragmentary remains of copies set up in three relatively
minor provincial towns of Asia Minor, where the normal language was Greek:
Ancyra (modern Ankara), Antiochia Pisidiae (modern Yalvac, not to be
confused with the far larger and more famous Antioch on the Orontes in
Syria), and Apollonia Pisidiae (modern Oluburlu).2

bono; t h e Greek t e x t was edited b y Niccolo F e s t a , a n d o t h e r scholars collaborated in

o t h e r p o r t i o n s of t h e volume. T h e L a t i n t e x t here given is a composite t e x t , a n d so
slightly m o r e convenient for our purposes t h a n t h a t given b y Concepta Barini, whose
t e x t shows only t h e A n c y r a n readings a n d relegates t o t h e a p p a r a t u s t h e readings of
t h e o t h e r inscriptions.)
Res Gestae Divi Augusti; t e x t e etabli e t c o m m e n t e p a r J e a n Gage (Publications de la
F a c u l t e des L e t t r e s de l'Universite de Strasbourg), Paris, " L e s Belles L e t t r e s , " 1950.
(Useful only because t h e t y p o g r a p h y of t e x t enables one t o see a t a glance where t h e
A n c y r a n , Antiochene, a n d Apollonian t e x t s overlap.)
Wilhelm W e b e r , Princeps, B a n d I, S t u t t g a r t , K o h l h a m m e r , 1936. (Contains, p p .
102-240 a n d 106*-265*, a very extensive c o m m e n t a r y o n t h e Res gestae; although
W e b e r is primarily interested in t h e personal a n d political c h a r a c t e r of Augustus, his
is t h e only c o m m e n t a r y t h a t considers p u n c t u a t i o n in discussing t h e readings and
proposed restorations.)
T h e m a n y o t h e r studies of t h e Res gestae (for select bibliographies, see t h e editions b y
B a r i n i a n d Riccobono) contain nothing of significance on t h e m a t t e r s which I shall
discuss.
1 refer t o t h e t e x t of t h e Res gestae b y t h e p a r a g r a p h s , which a r e indicated in t h e in-
scriptions a n d a r e n u m b e r e d uniformly in all editions. W h e r e a more precise reference
t o t h e A n c y r a n inscription seems desirable, I use t h e usual f o r m which gives t h e n u m b e r
of t h e pagina followed b y t h e n u m b e r of t h e line (e.g. I V . 3 — t h e t h i r d line on t h e f o u r t h
pagina); m o s t editions show these n u m b e r s also.
2
I t is p r o b a b l y merely coincidental t h a t t h e surviving r e m a i n s of a n inscription presu-
m a b l y set u p t h r o u g h o u t t h e R o m a n world a r e f o u n d in w h a t w a s administratively t h e
province of Galatia. Of t h e three, only t h e f i r s t t w o preserve portions of t h e L a t i n t e x t a n d
so serve our purposes here. I t h a s been conjectured t h a t in Apollonia only t h e Greek
t r a n s l a t i o n of t h e Res gestae was inscribed; it is t r u e t h a t only f r a g m e n t s of t h e Greek h a v e
been f o u n d , b u t all these come f r o m three (or n o more t h a n four) of t h e seven paginae
t h a t , according t o m o s t calculations (see Barini, op. cit., p p . viii f., Riccobono, op. cit.,
p p . 13 f.), were needed t o contain t h e Greek t e x t . I t is h a z a r d o u s t o infer f r o m such evi-
dence t h a t t h e L a t i n t e x t was n o t inscribed a t all—all remains of it could h a v e as easily
disappeared as r e m a i n s of t h e t h r e e or four Greek paginae of which we h a v e no fragments—
 THE 'RES GESTAE ATJGTTSTl' 31

Although there was a great deal of speculation and argument, so long as

only the inscription at Ancyra, which is by far the most extensive of the three,
was generally known and studied, concerning the possibility t h a t the Greek
translation and other characteristics might have been local additions, it is now
generally agreed that the inscriptions, both Latin and Greek, were copied
from manuscript copies of an official text prepared a t Rome, and that the
comparatively minor variations in matters of detail between the three in-
scriptions must be attributed to unintentional inaccuracy on the part of either
the scribes at Rome who presumably prepared many copies of the official
text for transmission to provincial governors or the scribes who (whether
at Rome or in the provinces) made copies sent to the various towns and
cities or the scribes who made the copies that were probably made for the use
of the stone-cutters or the designators who presumably sketched in chalk
the letters to be incised on the stone or, finally, the stone-cutters themselves.
I t is possible, and even probable, t h a t each of the persons who intervened
between the official text and the stone made some contribution to the very
minor discrepancies t h a t are to be found in the preserved inscriptions, but it
seems neither possible to determine, nor profitable to inquire, which hand
was responsible for a given difference in orthography, the use of apices, or
punctuation. 3 None of the observed differences between the inscribed texts
affected the meaning. The most important and conspicuous of them are
merely orthographic or insignificant variations of word order. The text of
Ancyra, for example, has inpensarum and incohavi while the one at Antiochia
has impensarum and inchoavi; the former has quae Marcia appellatur and

and we must further allow for the possibility that at Apollonia the Greek and Latin texts
need not have been adjacent to one another, as they were at Ancyra; ef. David M. Robin-
son's discussion of the placement of the inscription at Antiochia, op. cit., pp. 22—25 and
Plate V I I - B .
3
A very interesting exception m a y be found in VI. 22-23, where the t e x t reads ClSTeri
qui m l H I · QVOQVE . I N MA^wsTRAfV · C 0 N L E G A E · Γuerunt. The stones are so
fractured that only the first apex is entirely certain (hence the differences in reporting
them by Barini, Riccobono, R a m s a y and von Premerstein, and Weber, p. 164), but it
is quite clear that there was no apex above quoque, where one is certainly needed, since
the meaning must be quöque in magistratu (i. q. in singulis magistratibus); cf. Riccobono
ad loc. and F. E. Adcock, J. B. S., X L I I (1952), pp. 10-12. N o w w e are entitled to infer
that the omission of the apex is an inaccuracy that goes back to copies made in Rome,
for it is clear that the m a n who prepared the official Greek translation understood the
word to be quöque and so ignored it in his translation, thus obscuring a very important
point that Augustus was (disingenuously, of course) trying to make. H a d the translator's
Latin t e x t read QV0QVE, he could not have misunderstood, and had he grasped the
meaning, he would surely have added έκάστοτε to his translation, as Riccobono notes
ad XVIII. 8. The quality of the Greek translation as a whole has been much discussed;
see, most recently, Riccobono's commentary on the Greek t e x t and Nicolö Festa's
animadversiones criticae, appended to Riccobono's edition, pp. 65-75.
32 THE 'RES GESTAE AUGUSTl'

the latter, quae appellator Marcia.1 There are also some differences in the use
of apices, but the two texts generally coincide.
Since it would be vain to speculate concerning what punctuation appeared
in lost portions of either inscription, I assume that the same punctuation
appeared on both and here call attention only to the very few instances in
which the punctuation differs in passages preserved in both inscriptions.
As is to be expected in every good inscription of the period, the interpunct
is used regularly and systematically throughout to divide words from one
another. As is usual, the interpunct is frequently omitted between a mono-
syllabic preposition and the noun that it governs, thus presumably indicating
that the preposition was treated as a proclitic. One also finds here, as in other
inscriptions, a curious and apparently inconsistent division of compound verbs
(e.g. I N T E R • ESSENT [ I I I . 3], P E R · F f i C I [IV. 14], but R E F f i C I [ I V . 11]
and P E R F I C I [IV. 16]. I t is in this usage that the two texts most frequently
differ; they agree on P R A E T E R · MISSO (IV. 13), but the, Ancyran text
has P R O F L I G A T A (IV. 13) and I N T E R F E C T O (V. 30) where the other
has P R O · F L I G A T A and I N T E R · FECTO.
I feel certain that the interpunct used within compound verbs on the An-
cyran text does not differ in any way from the interpunct normally used
between words; it would be extremely interesting, if David M. Robinson
were correct in identifying on the text from Antiochia a special form of the
interpunct in compound verbs,5 but although the interpunct in the word
Ε · D I D I 0 is certainly crowded between the letters and very small (if, indeed,
it is more than a flaw in the stone), in the two clearest and best preserved
occurrences ( P R O · F L I G A T A and I N T E R · FECTO) the interpuncts, as
shown on the available photographs and tracings, do not, to my eye, differ
perceptibly from interpuncts that separate words.
With the exception of proclitics, as noted above, and a very few omissions
that were evidently mere oversights, the interpunct is regularly placed after
every word, including words that occur at the end of a line or at the end of
a paragraph. The interpunct accordingly precedes signs of punctuation for
sense wherever these occur.
Seven distinguishable signs of punctuation appear in the preserved copies
of the Res gestae, viz. (1) a blank space; (2) a diagonal bar (/); (3) a small
diagonal (similar to an apex) not much larger than an interpunct (') and placed
close to it or even above it; (4) a small diple pointed to the right ( > or oc-
casionally 7 with the top stroke nearly horizontal); (5) a sign that vaguely

4 For a list of the differences between the Latin texts of Ancyra and Antiochia, see

Riccobono, pp. 17-18.

s Robinson, pp. 31, 33.

* Discussed b y Robinson, p. '.13; the placing of this tiny fragment of stone is in any
case uncertain.
 THE "RES GESTAE AUGUSTI' 3c
resembles two such diplae placed one above the other with the lower one
curved (3) — and we may regard the sign ζ , of which a single instance is found
in the Antiochene inscription as either a variant of this or as an oddly orna-
mented > ; (6) a vertical bar with hooks top and bottom (J*) found thrice
on the Ancyran inscription and with minor variations that will be noted
later; and (7) a sign which is at Ancyra a large inclined stroke curved at the
to
P ( ^ ) a n d at Antiochia consistently appears in a distinctly different
form the only instance of a definite difference in "style" between
the two monuments. 7
Editors, following the lead of Mommsen, do not distinguish among these
various signs. Some, indeed, including, oddly enough, Sandys in his Latin
Epigraphy (pp. 258-276), simply ignore the punctuation of the original;
the others adopt the practice of Mommsen, who used [§] to mark a blank space
and § to replace indiscriminately any of the six written signs. (The only de-
parture from this procedure that I have noted was made by Kiccobono, who
uses ~ to indicate a blank space, but retains § as a substitute for any mark
of punctuation. What is more remarkable, Mommsen in his diplomatic edition
of the text, although he naturally used a blank space to show a blank space
in the original, used a diagonal bar (/) to replace all of the six marks that X
have distinguished. Mommsen seems to have taken it for granted that these
six marks were all equivalent, and in any case he was not much interested
in them: "omnino re non differunt", he says, 8 "pendentque ab arbitrio
scribentis notae hae omnes, Eas si qui erit qui curat, tabulas [sc. photographi-
cas] inspiciat omnia ilia plene repraesentantes."
Since I did not have access to the complete casts of the Ancyran inscription
that are in Berlin (if not destroyed in the European catastrophe of 1945),
Rome, and Ithaca, New York, I have had to rely on the complete photographs
appended to Mommsen's edition, the photographs of a large part included
in Barini's edition, and the casts of a small part of the inscription at the Uni-

7
The form appears consistently in the Antiochene fragments, as will be seen by
inspecting the photographs and tracings. If the epigraphers who believe that they can
distinguish in the Antiochene fragments the work of at least four different stone-cutters
(see Ramsay and von Premerstein, pp. 19 f.) are correct, it may be significant that all
four of these adopted a form of the paragraph-sign that differs very distinctly from the
form regularly used in Ancyra. The reader should consult the plates in Ramsay and von
Premerstein's edition without permitting himself to be prejudiced by the editors' attempt
to suggest the sign on p. 22 by using such type as the printer had in his cases—with the
odd result that it there does resemble the sign found in the Ancyran text much more
than what is shown on the plates. This may mean that Ramsay and von Premerstein
noted the difference between the Antiochene and Ancyran forms and decided that the
latter was more "correct," although they say nothing about it and do not mention the
difference which I have noted.
8
p. 190.
34 THE "RES G E S T A E AXJGUSTl'

versity of Illinois, supplemented by such hints as occasionally appear in the

apparatus of Barini and Riccobono and in the commentary of Weber. As will
be seen, I have had to remain in doubt at some points where inspection of
the stone or a good cast might have removed the uncertainty. For the text
at Antiochia, Robinson's photographs and especially the tracings given in
Ramsay and von Premerstein seemed to be everywhere sufficient, except
for a few fragments of the stone which are said to be now lost.
The marks of punctuation that I have listed above may be clearly seen
on the stones of the inscriptions, and their shapes are so distinct and different
that it could scarcely be argued that one is a scribal variant or whimsical
deformation of another. I should remark, however, that all marks of punctuation
are more lightly incised than the rest of the inscription. The lines are not so
wide as either the vertical or the horizontal bars of the letters, and they are
not cut so deeply into the stone as either the letters or the normal interpuncts
between words. The marks of punctuation are all thin and shallow marks,
resembling in this respect the apices which are placed above long vowels.
Marks of punctuation, therefore could be more easily effaced than letters.
Slight damage to the surface of the stone could destroy them or enough of
each mark to make it uncertain what its full form was. (As will be noted later,
I have encountered a number of places where the stone, as shown by the
photographs, preserves what are clearly vestiges of some sign but not enough
to enable me to say definitely what is was.) It is even possible that some parts
of these signs were so lightly scratched on the surface by a lapidary seeking
to make a very light and thin mark as to be obliterated by mere weathering.
The blank spaces, instead of being a distinct sign, could be merely spaces
in which the stone-cutter either forgot to incise a mark of punctuation or
scratched it on so lightly that it has now disappeared.9
Although it is possible to regard the small diagonal as merely a variant

9 Professor Oliver believes that he will be able to show in a forthcoming article that

all professionally produced inscriptions were the work of at least three specialized artisans,
a designator (who sketched the letters in chalk on the stone), a lapicida (who cut them
with his chisel), and a miniator (who filled in the varnish, usually red, that made the
inscription easily legible from a distance); and that furthermore the miniator frequently
corrected with his brush, and without recalling the lapicida with his chisel, small omissions
or other errors made by the cutter, e.g. an F cut on the stone could be converted to an
Ε by the miniator simply b y painting the bottom stroke on the stone, and likewise an
incised Ε could be corrected to F b y simply failing to fill in the horizontal stroke cut in
error. Portions of letters painted in rather than cut would probably not be detected by a
purchaser, if the total text was of any considerable length and the letters not very large.
If this was a common procedure in making inscriptions, the probability of the possible
explanation of blank spaces that I have given is considerably increased: the stone-cutter
may have made no mark and the miniator may have painted in a slender mark of punc-
tuation which, of course, was eventually washed off the stone.
 THE 'RES GESTAE ATJGUSTl' 35

of the larger one, used when it was necessary to crowd letters together or added
as an afterthought when the following letter had been cut and there was no
longer space available for the larger sign, and although it is conceivable that
the > is merely the upper part of a 3 of which the rest has vanished, it is
apparent that we are dealing with at least three basic forms, / , 3, and , ^
(or , if we prefer the Antiochene form of the sign), no one of which could
be a mere illusion produced by damage to the stone or the result of a mere
oversight by the lapidary.
To determine what distinct values, if any, are represented by the various
signs that I have listed, we must consider their function in the inscribed text.
I shall accordingly proceed to examine the use of punctuation to set off the
various units of the text, viz. paragraphs, sentences, and parts of sentences.

PARAGRAPHS

The inscribed text of the Res gestae consisted of a title, unmistakably set off
by being inscribed in much larger and more formal letters, the text written
by Augustus, which is divided into thirty-five capita, or paragraphs, and a
summary added at the end by another person and forming four additional
paragraphs.
The paragraphs are all clearly set off because the first line of each is, in con-
formity with the common Roman practice, extended into the left margin
and begins with a conspicuous capital letter (i.e. littera capitalis, a large letter
which marks the beginning of a caput or capitulum). The last line of almost
every paragraph, furthermore, ends far short of the right-hand margin, thus
further separating the paragraph from the one which follows, since the con-
siderable amount of blank space thus left is quite conspicuous.
Although, obviously, the paragraphs are clearly and unmistakably set off
by the edentation and large initial letter at the beginning and the area of blank
space at the end, so that any further indication of paragraph-divisions is pure
supererogation, many of the paragraphs are terminated by the s i g a . ^ , ^
With one possible exception, which I shall discuss below, this sign occurs only
at the ends of paragraphs, and must therefore be regarded as a special sign
which distinctly and specifically means "end of paragraph". It is normally
placed at a considerable distance from the interpunct which follows the last
word in the paragraph. The sign is sometimes placed flush with the right-hand
margin and sometimes about a third or a half of the way between the last
word and the right-hand margin. This variation in its position, incidentally,
makes it impossible to be sure that the sign did not appear after a given
paragraph, if the stone is mutilated in any place where the sign could have
appeared.
36 THE 'BES GESTAE AUGUSTl'

Of the thirty-nine paragraphs (35 plus 4 of the "appendix" of summaries),

the last line of nineteen is either lost in both the Ancyran and Antiochene
inscriptions or so mutilated that it is impossible to determine whether or not
the sign ^ ^ was placed at the end of the paragraph. To these I must add
the last paragraph of all, after which Mommsen and the other editors place a
§, thus indicating t h a t it is followed by some kind of sign, but I cannot dis-
cern on the photographs any vestiges of it and so cannot say what shape it
had or where it was placed.
On the remaining nineteen paragraphs, the final line of fifteen (8, 10, 12,
14, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 32, 34, Ap. 2) is sufficiently preserved in one
or both texts to show the sign which concludes these paragraphs and
which is always separated from the last word by a considerable blank space,
appearing sometimes on the right margin and sometimes closer to the last
word than to the right margin. Of these fifteen paragraphs, both inscriptions
preserve the terminal mark of two (21, 26).10 There are also in this group two
discrepancies between the two texts to be noted. The terminal mark of para-
graphs 15 and 25 is preserved in the Antiochene text, but does not appear
in the Ancyran. The reason for this is apparent in 15, where the Ancyran
lapidary was just able to complete the words of the last line, with some slight
crowding, in the space available, and so had no room for the terminal sign.
In paragraph 25, the interpunct following the last word is closely followed
by the sign > ; the condition of the stone is such that a could have ap-
peared later in the line.
Two paragraphs of which the ends are preserved only at Ancyra end with
other marks of punctuation. Paragraph 3, like the 25 just mentioned, has a
> placed immediately after the last interpunct. In paragraph 27, the interpunct
is followed by a considerable blank space and by the large sign ^ . In the first
instance an additional 5 could have been lost, if placed at the right mar-
gin. In the second, it seems certain that nothing followed the unusual mark.
In the remaining two paragraphs, both in Ancyra, there is no terminal
mark. Paragraph 11, like the 15 mentioned above, has a final line that the
lapidary was just able to complete at the right margin with no room left for
a terminal sign. At the end of 16, however, there is plenty of room and the
surface of the stone is fairly well preserved, so that it appears that the terminal
sign was simply omitted by an oversight.
I t will thus be seen that the terminal sign was apparently regularly
employed at the end of paragraphs and intentionally omitted only where there
was no room for it. No reason can be found for the two instances of > and
the occurrence of ^ , apparently in place of

10
1 have already called attention to the variant form of the sign used at Antiochia
 ΤΗ 10 ' r e s g e s t a e augusti' 37

One further occurrence of ^—— remains to be noted; in the Ancyran text

it is used, preceded and followed by a considerable blank space, to divide
paragraph 8 into two parts. (The Antiochene fragment has lost the portion of
the stone on which this sign, if present, would have appeared.) The use
is not an error; it is a very strong mark of punctuation to show a complete
change of subject. In the part of the paragraph that precedes the sign, Augustus
reports the number of Roman citizens enumerated a t each census. After the
sign, he says: "Legibus novis inlatis multa exempla maiorum exolescentia
iam ex nostro saeculo reduxi et ipse multarum rerum exempla imitanda pos-
teris tradidi." This is obviously an entirely different subject, unconnected with
what precedes. I t could properly have formed a separate paragraph, and in-
deed, but for the clear evidence of the Antiochene text that it did not, we
should infer that the Ancyran lapidary erred when he did not extend Legibus
into the left margin. I t seems proper to conclude, therefore, that the paragraph
sign could be used to show the kind of change of subject that would normally
call for a new paragraph, even when, for some reason (perhaps because the
passage would have made a paragraph of only three lines) the division was not
marked by edentation and a capital letter.

SENTENCES

The style of Augustus, which has been much discussed by the commentators, 11
is simple and direct. He used comparatively short sentences, and the only
room for serious doubt concerning what constitutes a sentence in our text
is found where two parallel clauses are connected by et. There is, however,
some little difference between modern editors in this respect, and I shall
follow Riccobono, who recognizes a few more sentences than does Barini.
In the text as punctuated by Riccobono there are 120 sentences, viz. one
in the title, 115 in the thirty-five paragraphs by Augustus, and four in the
four appended paragraphs. Now since the title is set off by its style of lettering,
thirty-nine of these sentences end with paragraphs, and one, which I have
just mentioned, ends with a paragraph sign, there are in the total text seventy-
nine sentences which should have a full stop as a mark of punctuation to se-
parate them from the sentences which follow.
Of the seventy-nine places in the text at which we would expect to find
punctuation showing the end of a sentence, twenty-two occur at points at
which both inscriptions are defective, i.e. the stone is either missing or so
mutilated that it is impossible to determine whether or not punctuation was
present. Four others (in paragraphs 23, 26 bis, 30) occur at points where the

"Especially Weber, op. cit., pp. 102-240.

38 THE 'EES GESTAE ATJGUSTl'

editors can evidently identify the traces of letters, b u t the photographs available
to me do not show these clearly. The ends of forty-four sentences are clearly
marked by punctuation of one kind or another. And at nine points where
Riccobono (who does not differ greatly from other modern editors in this)
places a full stop, the text shows no punctuation, thus suggesting that the
writer's conception of what constitutes a sentence may not always have cor-
responded to Riccobono's. To this question I shall return presently.
Of the forty-four instances of punctuation corresponding to a full stop,
seven appear to be merely blank spaces, although in four of these seven in-
stances the stone is so roughened t h a t I am not certain that some lightly in-
cised mark of punctuation could not have been present at one time. The three
instances where the blank space seems certain occur in paragraph 8 after
tria millia, separating t h a t sentence from the following one, which begins
"Tum iterum consulari cum imperio . . ."; in paragraph 27 after privignus erat,
separating this from the following sentence, " E t eandem gentem. . . " and
in the same paragraph after Artavasdi, separating the sentence there ending
from the following "Quo interfecto T i g r a n e < m > . . .in id regnum misi."
Of the thirty-seven places where marks were certainly present (and further
set off by a generous allowance of space before or on both sides of them), in
seven the traces on the stone (at least so far as they can be seen in photographs)
are not sufficiently complete to enable me to determine with any certainty
what the mark was.
At sixteen places the end of the sentence is marked by a diagonal bar, and
for one of these we have fortunately both inscriptions available and in accord:
paragraph 20,12

RIVOS · AQVARVM · COMPLtfRIBVS · LOCIS · V E T V S T l T E ·

LABENTES · R E F i l C I · E T · AQVAM · QVAE · MÄRCIA ·
APPELLÄTVR · DVPLICAVI · FONTE · NOVO · I N R I W M · EIVS ·
INMISSO • I FORVM · iVLIVM · ET · BASILICAM · QVAE · FVIT ·
I N T E R · AEDEM · CASTORIS · E T · AEDEM · SATVRNI · . . .
P E R F f i C I · e. q. s. 13

12
I n these quotations, since we are interested only in t h e punctuation, I do n o t attempt
to indicate w h a t letters are mutilated or missing in one or t h e other inscription, and in
the present quotation I e v e n disregard the fact t h a t t h e order of the words Marcia
appellatur differs. I do n o t show the division into lines since this differs in t h e t w o inscript-
ions.
13
The marks of suspension in m y quotations, I need scarcely remark, show portions
of t h e t e x t t h a t I h a v e omitted to concentrate t h e reader's attention on t h e essential
grammatical structure in question.
 THE 'RES GESTAE AUGUSTl' 39

In eight instances, the full stop is indicated by the symbol > , and here
again we have one instance in which the symbol is preserved in both inscrip-
tions, 11 paragraph 5:

... .quAM · ITA · ADmmlSTram ut INira · D l f i s · PAVCOS · METV ·

E T · PERICLO · PrAESENTI · CIVITÄTEM · VNIVersam liberarem impensa
et • CVRA · MEÄ · > CONSVLaiwm QVOQVe · TVM · ANNVVM · Et perpe-
tuum mihi DELAiwra non recepi.

There are two instances in which the two texts differ. In paragraph 15, the
Ancyran has:

. . . . HOMINVM · CIRCITER · CENTVM · ET · V I G I N T I · MILLIA · /

CONSVL · TERTIVM · DECiMVM · S E X A G E N 0 S · D E N Ä R I 0 S ·
P L E B E I · QVAE · TVM · F R ^ M E N T V M · PVBLICVM · ACCIPIEBAT ·
D E D I • e. q. s.

The Antiochene text divides the sentences with a > . I n paragraph 8, the
Ancyran has:

. . . IN · CONSVLÄTV" · SEXTO · SfiNSVM · POPVLI • CONLEGÄ · Μ ·

AGRIPPÄ · fiGI · I LVSTRUM • POST • ANNVM · ALTERVM · E T ·
QVADRAGENSIMVM · FfiCi e. q. s.
The Antiochene text uses the curious symbol £ , which appears only a t this
point, and may be only a reversal of the symbol 3, which appears as a full
stop on the Ancyran stone in paragraph 29:

SIGNA · M I L I T A R I A · COMPLVRa per A L I O S · D m C E S · ÄMIssa

DEVICTls hostibuS • REcipeRAVl · E X · HISPANIA · E T • gallia
et a cWraATEIS · 3 PARTHOS · TRIVM · E X E R C I T ^ M · ROMANORVM ·
SPOLIA · ET · SIGNA · REddere MIHI · SVPPLICESQVE · AMICITIAM ·
P O P V L I · ROMANI • P E T E R E · COEGI ·

The sign obviously marks a full stop. There is nothing, however, which would
indicate that the division between the two sentences was either stronger or
weaker than the division marked by / or > .
The Ancyran inscription, furthermore, contains a marking which may, per-
haps, be regarded as a vertical line with small hooks at top and bottom to dis-
tinguish it from an I. There are three instances of this mark, and it will be
noted that each differs quite perceptibly from the others; it is also curious
t h a t they occur in three successive paragraphs.

11
Stin Chapters VI and VII for other inscriptions in which this eign is used.
40 THE 'RES GESTAE AUGUSTl'

25: I V R A V I T · I N • ME A · V E R B A · T O T A · I T A L I A . S P O N T E · S V Ä
E T · M E · B E Hi QVO · V I C I · A D · A C T I V M · D V C E M · D E P O S C I T ·
I V R A V E R V N T · I N · E A D E M · VERöa pnwiNCIAE · G A L L I A E /
H I S P A N I A E e.q.s.
26: . . . E T · E I V S D E M · T R A C T ^ S · A L I I · G E R M Ä N O R V M · POPV/I ·
P E R · LEGÄTÖS · A M I C I T I A M · M E A M · ET · P O P V L I · R O M Ä N I ·
P E T I E R V N T • I MEO IVSSV • E T · A V S P I C I O · DVCTI · S V N T ·
duo • E X E R C I T V S e. q. s.
27: A E G Y P T V M · I M P E R I O · P O P V L I r o M A N I · A D I E C I X
A R M E N I A M · M A I O R E M • I N T E R F E C T O · REGE · EIVS ·
A R T A X E p. η. s.

The three signs obviously serve as full stops. There is no perceptible difference
in value between the three slightly different forms of this sign, or between this
sign and / or > , where these are used to make the ends of sentences.
W e now come to the nine sentences in the text as punctuated by Riccobono
which are not terminated by an indication of a full stop on the stone. In one
of these ( I I . 9 of the Ancyran text), inspection of the stone will show that the
failure to put a mark of punctuation before the third occurrence of quo lüstro
in paragraph 8 is explained by the fact that the mark of punctuation would
have had to come at the end of a line which is so crowded that there was no
room for it.
Of the remaining instances, four can be eliminated by reducing Riccobono's
two sentences to a single sentence composed of two parallel clauses joined
by et. Here is Riccobono's text of the four:

8. Senatum ter legi. Et in consulätü sexto censum populi conlegä Μ. Agrippä

egi.
14. Filios meos.. .senatus populusque Romanus annum quin tum et decimum
agentls consules designävit, ut eum magisträtum inirent post quinquen-
nium. E t ex eo die, quo deducti sunt in forum, ut Interessent consiliis
publicis decrevit senatus.
16. I d primus et solus omnium, qui dedüxerunt colonias militum in Italia
aut in provincis, ad memoriam aetatis meae feci. E t postea Ti. Nerone
et Cn. Pisone consulibus.. . militibus.. . praemia numerato persolvi.
17. Quater pecuniä meä iuvi aerärium, ita ut sestertium milliens et quingenties
ad eos qui praerant aerärio detulerim. E t Μ. Lepido et L. Arruntio cos.
in aerarium militare. . . HS milliens et septingentiens ex patrimonio meo
detuli.

I t will be obvious that in each of these cases the two sentences distinguished
by Riccobono deal with the same subject and could have been treated as a
 THE 'RES GESTAE AUGUSTl' 41

single compound sentence having two principal members joined by et. Augustus
was noted for the impatience with which he regarded the subtleties of gram-
marians and for writing very much as he spoke. The loose junction of such
clauses may be a stylistic weakness, but I am inclined to believe that the texts
justify the tentative conclusion—in the absence of evidence to the contrary —
that the copy of Augustus's work treated the four passages above as composed
of single sentences rather than as composed of two.
There remain, however, four instances in which no such explanation can be
found to account for the omission of a full stop, viz.:

15. . . .consul undecimum duodecim frümentätiönes frümento privatim

coempto emensus sum, et tribuniciä potestäte duodecimum quadringenös
nummös tertium viritim dedi. Quae mea congiaria pervenerunt ad homi-
num millia numquam minus quinquäginta et ducenta.
16. Pecuniam pro agris.. . solvi münicipiis. Ea summa sestertium circiter
sexiens milliens fuit, quam pro Italicis praedis numeravi...
25. Mare pacävi ä praedonibus. Eö bello servörum, qui fugerant ä dominis
suis et arma contra rem publicam ceperant, triginta fere millia capta
dominis ad supplicium sumendum tradidi.
26. Omnium provinciarum populi Romani, quibus finitimae fuerunt gentes
quae ηδη pararent imperio nostro, fines auxi. Gallias et Hispaniäs prö-
vinciäs, item Germaniam qua includit Öceanus a Gädibus ad ostium
Albis flüminis pacavi.

I n the first of these passages, the quae congiaria, which refers to the whole
series of previously enumerated "benevolences", could in modern writing
be tacked onto the sentence by some device such as a dash, but it is clearly
disconcerting to find no indication of a break between it and the preceding
words. I n the other examples, we are clearly dealing with two separate, though
not unrelated, thoughts, each syntactically complete in itself, and we are left
to choose between omission by the lapidary and negligence by the writer as
an explanation. The former is a little the more probable, since the inscriptions
are not letter-perfect: the Ancyran stone has aede for aedem, and the Antiochene
shows memoria for memoriam. I f a necessary letter could be omitted by the
designator or ignored by the mason, a mark of punctuation could be omitted
in the same way.
42 THE 'RES GESTAE AUGüSTl'

I N T E R N A L PUNCTUATION
Disregarding punctuation noted by editors but of which I can discern no clear
traces in the photographs, and, of course, disregarding editors' restorations,15
there are in the inscription forty-six clear examples of punctuation within
sentences.16
The only mark that is limited to internal punctuation is a very short diagonal
bar (') which is not much larger than an interpunct and occupies no more
space, being placed immediately beside it or, in two instances, over it. The other
marks of internal punctuation are all found also at the ends of sentences:
I > 3 (one instance). I note however a definite tendency to allow less space
for the I as an internal mark and to place the > above the mid-point in the
line. In addition, a blank space on the stone is also used.
One use of internal punctuation is to separate items in an enumeration.
The two longest series in the inscription will incidentally suggest that the
various symbols were regarded as equivalents:
19. CURIAM · ET · CONTINENS · EI · CHALCIDICVM · TEMPLVM-
QVE · APOLLINIS · IN PALATIO · CVM · PORTICIBVS · AEDEM ·
DIVI · IVLI · LVPERCAL · PORTICVM · AD · CIRCVM -
FLÄMINIVM · QVAM · SVM · APPELLÄRI · PASSVS · EX ·
Ν0ΜΙΝΕ · EIVS · QVI · PRI0REM · E0DEM · IN · SOLO · FECERAT ·
OCTAVIAM · /PVLVINAR · AD · CIRCVM · MAXIMVM · AEDÖS ·
IN · CAPITOLIO · IOVIS · FERETRI · 'ETTONANTIS · AEDEM ·
QVIRINI · /AEDfiS · MINERVAE · > ET · I ONONIS • REGINAE ·
> ET · IOVIS · LIBERTATIS · IN · AVENTINO · / AEDEM·
LARVM · IN · SVMMÄ · SACRÄVIÄ · / AEDEM · DEVM · PENÄTIVM ·
IN · VELIA · I AEDEM · IWENTÄTIS · / AEDEM · MÄTRIS ·
MAGNAE · IN · PALÄTIO · FECI ·
15
An interesting case m a y be found in 1.39, where Weber (p. 162*, note 598) includes
a mark of punctuation in his restoration, partly because he thinks indication of a mora
is needed to facilitate understanding of the sentence, and partly because a mark of punctu-
ation appears a t the corresponding point in the Greek version, which has ΧΕΙΡΟΤΟΝ-
ΗΘΩ ' Α Ρ Χ Ε Ν Ο Υ Δ Ε Μ Ι Α Ν e. q. s. This, of course, is no proof t h a t a mark appeared in
the Latin text, and, if it were, it would still be impossible to determine what kind of mark
it was. I need scarcely observe t h a t in dealing with t h e Ancyran and Antiochene inscrip-
tions, the presence of punctuation in lost portions could not be determined by measure-
ments of space. When editors still disagree as to whether or not there is room for the
restored mihi in 1.36 (see Barini's apparatus, Riccobono's note, and Weber, p. 169)
measurements of space are not sufficiently accurate (since the letters vary in width) to
indicate the presence or absence of a mark of punctuation.
16
Of course, I continue to follow Riccobono. The amount of internal punctuation
could be increased, a t the expense of the external, by recognizing fewer sentences than
does Riccobono; for example, in paragraph 8, Riccobono treats the three statements
beginning with quo lustro as separate sentences, while Barini treats them as relative clauses
annexed to the preceding sentence. I t seems pointless to argue about such matters here.
 T H E ' R E S GESTAE ATJGTJSTl' 43

Αρ. 2. OPERA · FECIT · NOVA ·' AEDEM · MARTIS iovis tonantis et feretri
apollinis D I V I I ^ L I · 'QVIRINI ·' MINERVAE iunonis reginae iovis
libertatis LARVM · 'DEVM PENÄTIVM · TWentatis matris magnae
lupercal pulvinaR · AD · CIRCVM · CVRIAM · CVM · CHalcidico forum
augustum basilicaM. · IVLIAM · THEATRVM · MARCELLI · PORficwm
octaviam nemus trans i l B E R l M · CAESARVM ·
One is at first sight tempted to distinguish between the three functions of the
punctuation: to introduce a series (·' in Ap. 2), to separate the different items
of the series when they are separated at all ( / and blank space in 19, blank
space in Ap. 2), and to separate the names in the genitive in a series depending
on aedes ( ' and > in 19,' and blank space in Ap. 2). But given the inconsistency
found even here and the great variations found elsewhere, the partial specializa-
tion of the signs in this enumeration is probably fortuitous.
A somewhat similar enumeration, this time of dates, is found in paragraph
16:
POSTEA · TI · NERONE · ET · CN • PISONE · CONSVLIBVS · ITEMQVE ·
C · ANTISTIO · ET · D · LAELIO · COS · ET · C · CALVISIO · ET · L ·
PASIENO · CONSVLIBUS · ET · L · LEwiVLO · ET · Μ · MESSALLA ·
CONSVLIBVS · 3 ET · L · CÄNINIO · ET • Q · FABRICIO · COe
MILITiBVS... PRAEMiA.. .PERSOLVI.
The space after Cäninio is clearly an error; it should have been put either
after one of the earlier groups or after the final COS. The symbol 3 clearly
means nothing more than a blank space. (There is no grouping of years indicated,
for the years after item are 748, 750, 751, and 752 Α. V. C.). Consistency would
have required the same punctuation after each pair of consuls.
The other uses of internal punctuation may be classified thus: to set off
ablative absolute phrases, to set off certain relative clauses, to distinguish
between parallel clauses in a compound sentence, to show that two or more
statements are governed by the same verb or that several genitives depend
on one noun although they are separated by intervening phrases or clauses,
to mark a collective apposition, and to perform some miscellaneous functions
which we cannot state positively since only one example of each use is available
in our text.
There are four examples of the ablative absolute, including two statements
of date, viz.:
8. tertiuM • CONSVLÄRI · CVM · IMPERIO · L^STRVM · CONLEGÄ ·
TIB · CAE.sare filio Μeo feci • /SEX · POMPEIO · ET · SEX · APVLEIO ·
COS.
(We should note that punctuation does not appear in the precisely parallel
construction earlier in this paragraph: LVSTRVM · <s0LVS · F E C I · C •
CENSORINo et c ASINIO · COS ·)
44 THE 'RES GESTAE AUGUSTl'

12. ΤΙ · NERONE · Ρ · QVIntilio cOnSulibus • ÄRAM · .. .senatus. . .

CONSAcRANDAM · censuit

Other ablative absolute clauses:

10. quOT) • SACERDOTIVM · ALIQVOD · POST · ANN0S · EO · MORTVO ·

Qui civilis Μotus oCCASIONE · OCCVPAVERAT · > CVNCTA · E X ·
ITALIA · ad comitia mea CONFLVENie mwLTITVDINE · . . .RECEPi

Here, perhaps, the intention was to divide two successive ablative absolutes
or perhaps to mark the end of the relative clause depending on the first.
Our last example depends on an emendation of the punctuation, but this is
fairly certain. The text reads:

4. Laurum de /ASCiBVS · DEPOSVI · /IN · CKPltolio votis quae QV0QVE ·

BELLO · NVNCVPAVERAM soZVTIS ·

Since Augustus did deposit the laurel in the Capitol and since he simply could
not have discharged all his vows in that place,17 we are surely justified in
assuming that the punctuation was mistakenly put before, instead of after,
the phrase in Gapitolio.

Relative clauses:

1. . . . EXERCITVM · PRIVÄTO · CONSILIO · ET · PRIVATÄ ·

IMPENSÄ · I COMPARÄVI · > P E R · QVEM · REM · PVBLICAM...
INLIBERTÄTEM · VINDICÄm

(Traces of the punctuation after comparavi are clearly seen in the photographs,
although Mommsen in his edition marks a blank space at the point.

12. . . . P A R S praetorum e T · T R I B V N O R V M plebi.. .O&VIAM · M I H I ·

M I S S A · Ε st in campanlAM • Q V I · H O N O S · ad hoc • T E M P V S ·
N E M I N I · P R A E T E R TOE · ES< decretus

(The space, which obviously serves to set off the relative clause, is clearly seen
in the Antiochene text.)

16. . . . PRAEMiA · NVMERATO · PERSOLVI · QVAM · IN · REM ·

SESTERTIVM • quater mILLIENS • QWlcitell • IMPENDI ·

21. DON«.. .CONSECRlVI · > QVAE · MIHI · CONSTITERVNT ·

HS CIRCITER • MILLIENS

17
See especially Weber, op. r,it., p. 13G*, note 580.
 T H E ' R E S GESTAE A U G U S T l ' 45
26. CLAssis mEA. . . A D · Fines cimbroruM • N A V I G A V I T · / Q V 0 ·
NEQVE · TERRA · NEQVE · MARI · QVISQVAM · ROMANVS ·
ANTE · ID · TEMPVS · ADIT · / CIMBRIQVE · ET · CHARYDES...
AMICITIAM · ME AM. . . PETIERVNT

The second diagonal either marks the end of the relative clause or the beginning
of the second half of the compound sentence. In paragraph 17 a space marks
the end of a series of three relative clauses, each depending on the word pre-
ceding it.
Parallel clauses of a compound sentence:
15. . . . IN · CONSVLÄTV · DECIMO... HS QVADRINGENOS. . .
PERNVMERaVI · /ET · CONSVL · VNDECIMVM · DVODECIM ·
FRVMENTÄTIÖNES · .. . EMENSVS · SVM · > ET ·
TRIBVNICIÄ · POTESTÄTE · DVODECIMVM ·
QVADRINGEN0S · NVMMÖS. . .DEDI ·

20. RIVOS · AQVARVM. . . R E F ß C l · ET · AQVAM · QVAE · MÄRCIA ·

APPELLÄTVR · DVPLICAVI ·
20. FORVM • IVLIVM · ET · BASILICAM. . .PERFECI · > ET ·
EANDEM · BASILICAM · CONSVMPTAM · INCENDIO.. .
iNCOHAVI · ET · SI · VIVVS · NON · PERFECISSEM · PERFICI ·
A B · H E R E D I B V S meis iusSl ·

24. STATVAE .. .QVAS · IPSE · SVSTVLI · EXQVE · EÄ • PECVNIÄ ·

DONA · .. .POSVI ·
A somewhat similar use is found in paragraph 16:

. . . sVmma sESTERTIVM · CIRCITER · SEXIENS · MILLIENS · FVIT ·

QVAM i>R0 · ITALIC IS · PRAEDIS · NVMERAVI · /ET · CIrCITER ·
BIS · MILLENS · ET · SESCENTIENS · QVOD · P R 0 · AGRIS ·
PRÖVINCIALIBVS · SOLVI ·

A principal use of punctuation is to set off two or more phrases that depend
on the same noun or verb from which one is separated by a subordinate clause
or other fairly long series of words. This is the kind of construction that is
sometimes explained grammatically as involving an "understood" repetition
of the noun or verb, e.g. the following could be explained as two parallel
clauses with a repetition of tradidi "understood" in the second:

27. EANDEM · GENTEM · . . .REGI · ARIOBARZANI · .. .REGENDAM·

TRADIDI · ET · POST · EIVS · MORTEM FILIO · EIVS ·
ARTAVASDI ·
46 THE 'EES GESTAE Α π β υ β Τ ΐ '

Similarly:
22. LVDOS · F E C I · Meo noMine QVATER · ALIORVM · AVTEM ·
MAGISTRÄTWM · VICEM · TER • ET · VICIENS ·

In paragraph 32, the punctuation (a blank space18 and two diagonal bars,
all clearly having the same function, with the fourth and fifth signs probably
lost in the lacuna) takes the place of a repetition of the word reges as an addi-
tional subject of the verb:
AD · Mfi · SVPPLICES · CONFVGenmi REGES · PARTHORVM ·
TIRIDAieS · ET · POSTea · PHRÄTes REGIS · PHRATIs FILIVs
MEDORVM · ARtavasdes adiabenorum ARTAXARES · /
BRITANNORVM · DVMNOBELLANVS · ET · TINcommius
sugambrORVM. • MAELO · /MARCAMAN0RVM · SVEBORVM
«egrimeRVS ·
Paragraph 33:
A · ME -GENTES · PARTH0RVM · ET · MEDÖRVm per legatos
PRINCIPES · EARVM · GENTIVM · RfiGfiS · PETiTÖS · ACCfiPERVNT ·'
PARthi vononem regis phrkTIS · FILIVM · RßGIS · OR0DIS · ΝΕΡ0ΤΕΜ ·
> MEDI · ARIOB Arzawem e. q. s.
In this classification we must place what is, of course, the most conspicuous
mark of punctuation in the entire inscription, which stands in the title to show
that the two genitive plurals are parallel and depend on exemplar:
RfiRVM · GESTÄRVM • D l V l · AVGUSTI · QVIBVS · ORBEM ·
T E R R A n m - IMPERIO · POPVLI · ROM
SVBlfiCIT · /ETINPENSARVM · QVAS · IN · REM · PVBLICAM ·
POPULVMQVE · ROmaNVM · FECIT · I N C I S A R V M 7
INDVABVS · AHENEIS · P I L I S · QVAE · SVrcT · ROMAE · POSITAE ·
EXEMPLAR · SBViECTVM ·
I t is possible that the punctuation at the end of the second line (not reported
by the editors, but clearly visible) was intended to show that the participle
modifies both of the nouns in the genitive plural, but of this we can scarcely
be certain without other examples of such use.
Comparable uses are:
15. PLEBEI · ROMÄNAE · VIRITIM · HS TRECENOS · NVMERAVI ·
EX · TESTAMENTO · PATRIS · ME I · Έ Τ · NOMINE · MEO · HS
QVADRINGENOS.. .DEDI ·
18
Or possibly a diagonal bar; the surface of the Ancyran stone is somewhat damaged,
and the Antiochene is missing at this point.
 THE 'RES GESTAE AUGUSTl' 47

23. . . . CAVATO sOLO · I N · LONGITVDINEM · MILLE · ET ·

OCTINGENT0S · PEDflS · I N · LÄTITVDINEm mille et
DVCENT <os>

In one instance, punctuation seems to set off an appositive that agrees

with two antecedents:
20. FORVM · i t L I V M · ET · BASILICAM · QVAE · FVIT · INTER ·
AEDEM · CASTORIS · ET · AEDEM · SATVRNI · COEPTA ·
PROFLIGATAQVE · OPERA · A • PATRE · Μ Ε 0 · P E R F f i C I e. q. s.

There remain to be noted five other instances of punctuation, viz.:

15. . . .VIRITIM · MILLIA · NVMMVM · SINGVLA • D E D I · '

ACCEPEVERINT · ID • TRIVMPHALE · CONGIÄRIVM · IN ·
COLONIS · HOMINVM · CIRCITER · CENTVM · ET · VIGINTI ·
MILLIA ·
The punctuation with the short virgula (·') appears in the Ancyran text;
the Antiochene has D E D I • /ACCEPERVNT. What follows the punctuation
can be regarded as either an explanatory addition, such as would be set off
by a dash or perhaps a colon in modern writing, or as the second half of a
compound sentence, which a modern writer would set off with a semicolon.

34. . . . REM · PVBLICAM · E X · MEÄ · POTESTÄTE · IN · SENATwä

populique romANI aRBITRIVM · TRANSTVLI ·

The punctuation (space on either side of the interpunct) differs from t h a t

observed elsewhere in this inscription.

25. SERV0RVM.. .TRIGINTA · F E R E · MILLIA · CAPTA · > DOMINIS ·

AD · SVPPLICIVM · TRADIDI ·

The punctuation does serve to set off the indirect object and perhaps to refer
the reader from the neuter plural participle back to the servorum on which
it depends and from which it is separated by the intervention of a long relative
clause. Our feeling that no punctuation is called for at that point is perhaps
a little conditioned by the fact that the relative clause would be set off by
commas at both beginning and end in most texts, or, at least, by a comma at
the end (it could be treated as a restrictive clause in English).

1. . . . EXERCITVM · PRIVÄTO · CONSILIO · ET · PRIVATÄ ·

IMPENSÄ · I COMPARÄVI · > P E R · QVEM · e. q. s.

Since a mark of punctuation for syntactical reasons is clearly not required

after impenso, the use of the diagonal at this point seems to force a pause
48 THE 'RES GESTAE AUGUSTf

to call attention to the preceding two ablatives of means, just as a speaker

would stop briefly for emphasis.

A P . 4. . . .oppidis T E R R A E · M O T V •' I N C E N D I O Q V E · C O N S V M P T m

We cannot draw conclusions from a single example, but it is interesting to

note that since the passage refers to the total of Augustus's "benefactions"
to cities that had suffered disasters, the meaning of the passage is precisely
of the kind that now gives great difficulty to writers of English, some of whom
resort to the expedient of writing "cities destroyed by earthquake and/or
conflagration," to make the precise meaning clear. I t is not inconceivable that
the punctuation may have been suggested by a perception that the two causes
of disaster connected by -que represent alternatives as well as a combination. 18

CONCLUSIONS

Our examination of the Res gestae as preserved in the copies set up in two
cities of Asia Minor shows that:

(1) Punctuation was at this time employed to expedite comprehension

of the text by a reader.
(2) This punctuation was probably intended to be used systematically
to mark the end of complete units of thought, i.e. sentences, since the few
cases in which sentences are not so marked could be the result of negligence
by the inscribers.
(3) Punctuation was used irregularly within sentences to show syntactical
relatons and to set off clauses, but the use here appears to have depended
on the feeling of the writer rather than fixed rules. (We cannot, for example,
postulate that all relative clauses were to be set off by punctuation without
assuming that the inscribers were more often negligent than not.) This sporadic
use of punctuation seems analogous to the use of apices and I-longae to mark
long vowels in this inscription and other inscriptions of the late Republic
and early Principate. Although these signs were freely used and greatly fac-
litated reading, the Romans, for some reason not clear to us, undoubtedly
felt that it was, as Quintilian said, 20 ineptissimum to mark all long vowels,
and, while theoretically placing the apex only where it served to distinguish
between different words or cases,21 in practice they sometimes failed to write

19
There is no suggestion of sueh a feeling in the Greek version, which has Γ10ΛΕΣΙΝ. . .
ΣΕΙΣΜΩΙΚΑΙΕΝΠΥΡΙΣΜΟΙΣΠΕΙΙΟΝΗΚΥΙΑΙΣ.
20
Inst. I. 7. 2.
21
Such is the rule given by Quintilian (loc. cit.) and Scaurus (Keil VII, 33); cf. Jacobus
Christiansen, De Apicibus et I Longis Inscriptionum Latinarum (1889), p. 12 et passim.
 THE 'RES GESTAE AUOUSTl' 49

it where the length of the vowel affects the meaning, and frequently wrote
the apex where we can see no possible distinction to be made or purpose to be
served.22 Romans evidently did not seek, and certainly never attained in any
extended specimen of their writing known to us, strict consistency in the use
of the apex, whence it would be reasonable to conclude that their use of
punctuation, at least within sentences, was equally flexible.23
(4) With the exception of the paragraph mark, the inscribed texts of the
Res gestae employ a variety of symbols (including blank space), no one of
which appears to have a specific and specialized force that clearly distinguishes
it from the others. Each appears in constructions grammatically identical
with constructions in which other symbols are used to punctuate. Y e t it seems
improbable that the Romans had a rule that "to indicate punctuation, make
any kind of mark that is not a letter". On the other hand, it seems unlikely
that the inscribers of our texts deliberately altered or ignorantly confused
the punctuation found in the copies from which they worked; and it seems
equally unlikely that these copies were the work of persons who knew a variety
of different symbols but were ignorant of the difference between them. There
is, therefore, a need to inquire how these symbols were used in other writing
at this time.
I t is to answer the question that thus imposes itself that I undertake in
the following chapters of this dissertation a survey of all the uses of punctuation
that I have been able to find in the unfortunately limited and even exiguous
amount of contemporary writing that has come down to us from the Roman
world.

32 For example, in the first line of Augustus's text., the apices in P R I V A T A · I M P E N S Ä

are obviously useful (but cf. the strictly parallel construction in 1.35, C V R A · M E Ä ,
where there is only one apex, instead of two), but the apex in P R I V Ä T O · C O N S I L I O
surely cannot mean that there was a word priväius or anything like it.
23 W e may in this connection doubt that the rule now observed by all of our literate

contemporaries could have become so fixed, rigid, and universal in the absence of printing.
 IV

LATIN BOOKS

Since we have found so astonishing a variety of marks of punctuation in

Augustus' famous inscription, we may next inquire whether a corresponding
variety was to be found in the books of that time.
As Professor Oliver has pointed out: "The surviving specimens of Latin
books [of the Augustan Age and the First Century] are pathetically meager
and mutilated—for practical purposes1 they are a fragment of a papyrus roll
of 21-14 B. C. which contained the second book of the Secunda actio in Verrem
[P. land. 90], the remains of the Carmen de bello Actiaco found in Herculaneum
[P. Here. 817], and the historical fragment De bellis Macedonicis [P. Oxy. 30]
which is also the earliest vestige of a vellum codex (c. 100 A. D.)—but these
by the unanimity of their testimony (supported, of course, by the good in-
scriptions and carefully written documents of the same period) suffice to show
that Latin literary texts were written with careful and elaborate punctuation:
words separated by spaces containing interpuncta, clauses set off by two forms
of virgulae corresponding roughly to our comma and semicolon, sentences ter-
minated by a stronger mark of punctuation, and long vowels distinguished by
apices and I-longae wherever necessary to facilitate comprehension of the text." 2
I shall accordingly examine these three early documents. It must be noted
that interpuncta are used throughout all of them to separate words.

Of the three fragments of ancient books, the oldest and, in some respects, the
most significant is the piece of papyrus (P. land. 90) that contains a few
lines from Cicero's In Verrem II. ii.2. This certainly comes from the period

' T h e list which follows is, "for practical purposes", complete, unless one chooses to
question the exclusion of the fragment of the Oratio Glaudi that I discuss, infra, pp. 63 ff.
I have listed all the known papyri from the period in which we are interested in the appen-
dix of this dissertation.
II
Τ. A . P . Α., L X X X I I (1951), p. 241.
 LATIN BOOKS 51

21-14 Β. C.,3 and is given, on grounds not entirely clear to me, the specific
date of 20 B. C. by P. Collart in his article, "Les papyrus litteraires latines",4
in which he describes it as the "doyen" of Latin papyri; Collart's precise
date is adopted by Cavenaile.5 It is certainly the "oldest extant manuscript
of Cicero",® and is sometimes described as the oldest extant Latin papyrus.7
It is written in a precise and professional hand, with ample space between
lines that have an almost mechanical regularity of alignment,8 and with a
right-hand margin that is designed to please the eye, although it could not be
made vertically even because the scribe was obviously obeying some rule
that forbade him to divide words between lines. It did not belong to a lime de
luxe—at least there is no trace of either ornamentation or the regularity in
the formation of letters that could be attained by drawing rather than writing
them9—but there is every indication (that one could expect to find in so short
a passage) that it came from the kind of book that would be produced for
persons who wanted a clear and accurate10 text without unnecessary expense.
Although we must be cautious in generalizing from so small and unique an
example, it is hard to resist the conclusion that chance has preserved for us
a specimen of the ordinary professionally produced book of the early Augustan
age.
The punctuation of this fragment may best be exhibited by writing the
words contained in it above the complete text of the passage as printed and
punctuated by modern editors,11 thus:
3
See Josef Sprey's commentary to the first publication of the fifth fascicle of Papyri
Iandanae (Leipzig, Teubner, 1931).
1
Revue de Philologie, H i e serie, XV (1941), pp. 112-128.
5
Corpus Papyrorum Latinarum (Wiesbaden, 1958), p. 70.
8
Sprey, loc. cit.
7
The one exception is the short letter written by a slave in Egypt under the last of
the Ptolemies, if the dating by Schubart and Mallon is correct (see below, Appendix,
under No. 246). There is also a fragment of undetermined date (Appendix, No. 103).
8
But for the letters R and Q, which regularly descend below the line, one would suspect
that the scribe wrote with the help of a straight-edge. Either the lines were lightly ruled
in some way on the papyrus or the scribe had acquired a remarkable ability to keep his
lines straight on the bottom.
9
One thinks of the codex Augusteus and other examples of square capitals; these come,
of course, from a much later period, but there is no reason why the formal lettering of
inscriptions should not have been imitated in de luxe books in Augustan times.
10
Even in a text so short as this papyrus, it may be significant that there are no errors.
The correct reading, clauderetur, is also found only in the "best" manuscripts of the Cice-
ronian text, but one does not know when the corruption, claudebatur, found in the deteriores
first entered the tradition.
11
Klotz' latest edition (1) omits the comma between ut, quos and (2) omits the commas
between victoriae, mansuetudinis, continentiae. Peterson's Oxford edition (1) adds a dash
after the commas that set off the phrase quae cum manu. . . clauderetur and (2) omits the
comma between ornatam, ut.
 52 LATIN BOOKS

Μ · VRBES SIGNIS ·
2. Quäre P. Äfricänus Carthägine deletä Siculörum urbes signis
MONVMENTISQVΕ PVLI ·
monumentisque pulcherrimis exornävit, ut, quös victöriä populi

R · MAXIME · LAETARl · ARBITRABATVR '

R.maxime laetäri arbiträbätur, apud eös monumenta victöriae
LOCARETK · DENIQVE · ILLE · IPSE
plürima collocäret. Denique ille ipse Μ. Marcellus, cuius in
ES/ · MISERICORDIAM · VICTI · ' FIDEM ·
Siciliä virtütem hostes, misericordiam victi, fidem ceteri
Μ • SOCIIS · IN · EO · BELLO · CONSULVIT ·'
Siculi perspexerunt, nön sölum sociis in eö bellö consuluit,
VERVM · ETIAM · Μ · PVLCHERRVMAM ·
verum etiam superätis hostibus temperävit. urbem pulcherrimam
SYRACVSÄS · QVAE · CVM · MANV
Syräcusäs, quae cum manü münitissima esset, tum loci natura
RR · AC · MARI · CLAVDERETVR · 'CVM LIOQVE ·
terra ac mar! clauderetur, cum vi consioliöque cepisset, ηδη
EM · PASSVS · EST · ESSE · 'SED · ITA · RELIQVIT · ORNATAM/
sölum incolumem passus est esse, sed ita reliquit ornätam, ut
Ε/
esset idem monumentum victöriae, mansuetüdinis, continentiae, cum homines
viderent, et quid expugnasset et quibus pepercisset et quae reliquisset.

I t will be seen that this papyrus exhibits three distinct marks of punctuation
whose significance is evident from the modern text placed below it, viz.:
(1) The mark Κ (perhaps representing kaput), which is distinguished from
an ordinary letter by being both taller and descending below the line of writing
and which clearly marks a full stop at the end of a sentence.12 I t is regrettable
12
One might be tempted to ask whether K, if it is, indeed, taken from the word kaput,
is not rather the indication of a paragraph as a unit of text, since such units were, at least
in laws, called capita (cf. supra, p. 18), but a glance at the text will show that while a
sentence is completed with collocaret, there is no change of subject matter. Since we have
mentioned paragraphing, I will add that I do not think it a coincidence that the first
line in the papyrus (as shown by the spacing) began with the first word of what is marked
chapter 2 in our printed texts. I believe that this was a caput also in the papyrus, indicated
by extending the two or three letters into the left margin and perhaps also by making
the first of those letters somewhat larger than its normal size.
 LATIN BOOKS 53

that this is the only occurrence of the sign in this or in any other extant text
with this significance, but there is, fortunately, evidence which shows that
the sign is not a mere accident or eccentricity here, but was a recognized
mark showing a strong division.13 We may therefore accept the use of Κ as a
full stop.
(2) The short diagonal ('), which sets off clauses.
(3) The longer diagonal ('), which appears to be distinguished from the
shorter by coming well above the line of writing and being a little curved to
the right at its upper extremity. It also sets off clauses, but our fragment is
not long enough to permit us to say exactly how it differs in significance from
the shorter, if, indeed, it is more than a mere variation of that mark. We have
only two examples of it. In one it sets off a statement beginning verum, etiam
that completes and marks a contrast with a preceding clause that was intro-
duced by non solum,—and we could here assign to it a special value. On the
other hand, in the other occurrence of the long diagonal, after virtutem hostes,
it is hard to see how it can differ in force from the shorter diagonal that occurs
after the next two words, misericordiam vidi, a precisely parallel construction.
It is barely possible, of course, that the longer diagonal marked the first in
a series of nouns (hostes. . .victi...ceteri) that are all subjects of the following
verb (perspexerunt), while a weaker mark of punctuation was suitable after
the second in the series, but this seems doubtful. One cannot assume that
there is design in the fact that the longer diagonal in its first occurrence pre-
cedes, and in the other follows, the interpunct.
The fragment therefore shows that there were at least two marks of punctua-
tion in use, one to mark the end of a sentence and the other to set off clauses
within the sentence, but it does not show that there were necessarily two
marks of internal punctuation that would correspond to the modern comma
and semicolon.
Given the importance and interest of this fragment, I here show the com-
plete text of the passage as restored (with punctuation) by the distinguished
Italian papyrologist, Aristide Calderini (Papiri Latini, no. 3).

QVARE · Ρ · AFRICANVS · CARTHAGINE · DELETA · SICVLORVM ·

VRBES · SIGNIS · MONVMENTISQYE · PVLCHERRIMIS · EXORNAVIT·
/VΤ · QVOS · VICTORIA · POPVLI · R · ΜΑΧΙΜΕ · LAETARi ·
ARBITRABATVR/APVD · EOS · MONVMENTA · VICTORIAE ·
PLVRIMA · CONLOCARETK · DENIQVE · ILLE · IPSE · Μ ·
MARCELLVS · CVIVS · IN · SICILIA · VIRTVTEM · HOSTES /·
MISERICORDIAM · VICTI · /FIDEM · CETERI · SICVLI ·
13
The K, exactly in the form that it has here, is used repeatedly in P. S. I. II. 142
to separate hexameters that are written two to the line. This has been assigned to the
Third or Fourth Century; I wonder whether the dating should be reconsidered.
54 L A T I N BOOKS

P E R S P E X E R V N T / · N O N · SOLVM · SOCIIS • I N · EO · B E L L O ·
CONSVLVIT · /VERVM · ETIAM · SVPERATIS · HOSTIBVS · TEMPERA-
V I T K · V R B E M · P V L C H E R R V M A M · S Y R A C V S Ä S · Q V A E · CVM ·
Μ Α Ν Ϋ · MVNITISSIMA · ESSET · TVM · LOCI • NATVRA · T E R R A ·
A C · M A R t · C L A V D E R E T V R · /CVM · V I · C O N S I L I O Q V E ·
CEPISSET · / N O N · SOLVM · INCOLVMEM · PASSVS · E S T · E S S E · /
S E D · ITA · RELIQVIT · ORNATAM/ · VT · ESSET · IDEM ·
M O N V M E N T V M · V I C T O R I A E / M A N S V E T V D I N I S · C O N T I N E N T I A E ·/
CVM · H O M I N E S ·

Our second example differs in two ways: it contains verse and it may be as
much as a hundred years later in time. I t is obviously earlier than the eruption
of Vesuvius in 79 A. D., but there is now no way of telling whether it was a
copy made shortly before that eruption or a copy that had been preserved for
a long time. If it is part of the poem by Rabirius, which was written shortly
before 20 B. C.,14 it could conceivably be of the same age as the fragment of
Cicero, but Rabirius' poem enjoyed a very high reputation in antiquity 15
and perhaps had something of a vogue in the time of Seneca, who quoted
from, and alluded to it, 16 so that copies of it were probably always available
and in circulation. I t is, perhaps, safest to think of our copy as probably not
many years older than the catastrophe which preserved it.
The Carmen de hello Actiaco (P. Here. 817) is the only Latin fragment from
Herculaneum that presents more than a word or two of legible text. 17 There
are quite a few fragments which contain enough text, usually in the form of
two or three words from each of four or five lines, to indicate the subject of
the verses, but the only fragments sufficiently long to show the structure of
sentences are the eight parts of columns that are shown in the apographs
lettered from A to H. 18 I t may be helpful to examine these fragments in order,
so that both negative and positive evidence will be shown.

14
See Garuti, op. cit., pp. xxix-xxxiii.
15
Velleius Paterculus (II. 36. 3) lists "Vergilius Rabiriusque" as the ingenia "quae
maxime nostri aevi eminent".
16
Ibid., pp. x x v , x x x .
" T h e only others, I believe, are P. Here. 1067 and 1475, for which see Lowe, Codd.
Lai. Antiq. II, Nos. 386 and 387. They yield only a few words and show that interpuncts
were used; the subject matter seems to be oratorical.
18
For the study of this papyrus, I have relied on Hayter's apographs (Oxford) as
published in Walter Scott's Fragmenta Heraulanensia (1885), and I use his designation
of the columns b y letters. Ioannes Garuti's edition (1958) is helpful for the apparatus
criticus and commentary, but shows none of the marks of punctuation seen in the original.
Ioannes Ferrara (1908) includes apographs of the smaller fragments as well as the columns,
 LATIN BOOKS 55

In column A no mark of punctuation (other than the interpunct) occurs in

the fragment. It should be noted, however, that every line is mutilated at
every point at which we should expect to find punctuation.19

Column A

C.. .V»
MaXIM cAELesTIA
CaESARIS A . . . APvd pHARIAM
aRTiiiS · ILLE oppugnATO cVM Ε · . .A PORiw
QVEM · I W E N E M · RAN. .AVOS · ERAT · DEfendere cVwcTA
BELLA · FIDE · DEXTRAQVE · POfENS · RERVMQVE · PER Vsum
CALLIDVS · ADSIDVos iraCTANDO · IN MVNERE martiS ·
IMwINET · OPSESSIS · ITALuS · IAM · TVRRIBVS · AosTIS ·
A SA ηEC · DEFVii IMPETVS · ILLIS ·

Column Β is very mutilated, but shows the end of five of the ten lines.
A double mark, like two virgulae, appears at the end of line 4. It can only be
conjectured, because of the fragmentary nature of the preceding lines, that
this mark is intended to represent more than the end of a sentence—perhaps
a complete change in subject matter or tone. The scene seems suddenly to
shift from the wholesale destruction and chaos of a captured city to a general
(Caesar) who by his command is restoring order.20

but he indicates the location of the punctuation marks only by parallel lines. I have also
consulted an unpublished restoration of the poem by Professor Oliver. In my transcrip-
tions, I use Hayter's apographs for the letters and signs in the papyrus, with Professor
Oliver's restorations, which, of course, incorporate suggestions of earlier editors.
19
1, e., so far as we can guess from the context, we should expect a full stop after Martis
and possibly after Ulis, and perhaps lighter punctuation after portu. At all of these points
the papyrus is missing (see Hayter's apograph). Line 5 is scarcely intelligible, but suggests
t h a t some clause ends with bella in the next line. Here the papyrus was sufficiently dama-
ged so t h a t the / in jide is only partly preserved. A mark of this kind seen in line 7 of
column C would, therefore, have been lost a t t h a t point. I t is even possible t h a t what
Hayter took for the upper left angle of the F was t h a t mark.
20
We could perhaps expect punctuation after suorum. (what follows is clearly words
uttered by Caesar), and after either the lost words t h a t end the next line or before quondam
in the following line. At all of these points the papyrus is defective. However, Caesar's
speech may be a question (Quid capitis iarrt capta?) followed by a statement (Quae
iacent. . .subruitis); if so, there was no mark after capta. A very curious point is raised
by line 5; if the restoration is correct, the hexameter is completed by the word Caesar.
This is immediately followed by a hole in the papyrus of three to four letters in extent,
beyond which most of the letter A is visible in the apograph. Could this have been the
sign ^ t h a t we find in column Ε ?
 L A T I N BOOKS

Column Β

S · ..QV
NT-IPSO RE ·
EDVNT · P A ® M I A · TerRIS
et foedA Ilia mAGIS · QVAM · Si coN^esSTA L A T E R e N T <H
CVM sVPERai latVS · P E L V S I A wiOENIA · CAESAR[. . ]A
coepERAT · IMpeRIlS · ANIMOS COHBeRE SVorVM
QuiB CAPITIS · lam caPTA · IACENi QVAE [
SVBrVITIS · /ERRo mea MoENIA QVONdAM · ERai AOSTIS ·
HAEC · ΜΙΛΙ · CVM · sociA • PLEBES • QVOQVE nunc sibi V I C T R I X
V I N D I C A T · Ηanc /aMVLAM · ROMAwA TOT · Ensibus taNcZeM
Column C has eight lines; the ends of five are preserved. The virgula after
belli at the end of line 5 apparently separates the two parallel phrases of a
compound subject: she is a causa belli and also a pars imperii. There was no
punctuation after imperii. It could also be the end of a sentence, since the
following line could begin with a question that is Quae femina tanta pars im-
perii? In either case, we should expect a mark of punctuation after tanta
(the second question must be Quae series virorum antiqua?), but there clearly
is none.
The curved mark (like the apex of this script but more nearly vertical)
in line 7 before ni marks either the end of the second question (possibly follow-
ed by a third) or the beginning of a reply. In either case, a new sentence
begins with Ni.
Column C

LIV
iM Ο V
fas et · ALeXAODRO thalaMÖS · .NER.RE · DEoRVM ·
DIram E T I A M POTVISSE · DEAM · VIDISSe tuMultuS •
AcTIACOS cVM cAVS · A /OReS · T V raAzIMA fteLLl · /
P A R S · E T I A M · IM^erll · QVAE · F E M I N A · TawTA · VlrORwM ·
QVAE · S E R I E « A N T I Q V A /VIT · /NI · G L O R I A · MEND A X ·
M V L T A VeiVSiATIS N I M I O · C. . . E R A T · H O N O R I S

Although in column D most of the right margin is unbroken, no marks appear

except the interpuncta which are placed at the end of all extant lines.21
21 A mark after angor would, of course, have been lost. Punctuation is certainly called

for after libel, but none is shown in the apograph. It seems also called for after gentis
and perhaps after omnis, but the apograph shows a good margin with no punctuation
in both places. One suspects that "Quid velit, incertum est" is a statement explained by
an indirect question beginning quibus terris; there is, however, no mark after est in the
apograph.
 LATIN BOOKS 57

Column D

AN
SAEPE • Εgo QVAE · VE.sTRIS CVraE seRMONIBVS angor
QVAs IGITVr · SÖGNIS · leti NVNC · QVAeRERE · CAVSAS ·
EXSaNGViSQVE · MORaS • VITAE · LIBET · EST · MIHI · CONIVNX ·
partKos si • POSSE« pAARIIS · SVBIVNGERE · REGNIS ·
QVI · S. . . NIT · NOSiTaEQYE · MORI · PRO · NOMINE · GENTIS ·
Hie · IGKwr ^ARTIS · aniMVm DIDVciwS · IN oMwIS ·
gVID · VELIT · INCERTVM · EST · TERRiS QVIBVS · AVT · QVIBVS ·
VNDIS ·
One of the better preserved fragments, column E, which happens also to be
one of the most interesting,22 contains four distinct marks of punctuation.
It reads:

Column Ε

tZeZeCTVMQVe locuM QVO · NoXIA <VRBA COiRET ·

PRAEBERETQVE · SVAE · SPECTACVLA · TRisTIA · MORTIS 7
QVALIS · AD INSTANTlS · AClfiS · CVM ffiLA · PARANTVR ·
9IGNA · TVBAE · CLASSESQVE · SIMVL · TERRESTRiBVS ARMlS • /
EST · FACIES · ΕΑ· VISA · LOCI CVM SAEVA • COIRENT •
INSTRVMENTA · NECIS · VarlO · CONGESTA · PARATV /
VNDiQVE · SIC · ILLVC · CAMPO · DEFORME · COaCiVM
OMNE · VAGABATVR · LETI GENVS · ΌΜΝΕ · TIMORIS · /

The angular mark at the end of line 2 clearly indicates a full stop, i.e.
the end of a sentence. No greater break can be indicated, for the following
Qualis obviously begins a simile that will describe the spectacula.
There are three virgulae: after lines 4, 6, and 8. The exact force of the first
of these will depend on our understanding of line 5, where the lociis mentioned
could conceivably be the battle-field on which telaparantur, but is more probab-
ly the delectus locus mentioned in the first line.23 If so, we have a simile of which
the first part, beginning with Qualis, is a highly impressionistic allusion to a
battlefield, while the second, which means talis visa est fades loci delecti, is
set off by a virgula that corresponds to a comma or semicolon in modern punc-
tuation. Then the virgula in line 6 sets off an expansion of the comparison

22
It deals with the probably fabulous experiment carried out by Cleopatra to ascertain
what form of death was the most pleasant. This is quite possibly an invention by the author
of this poem.
23
It would otherwise be difficult to account for the sequence of tenses: parantur. . .visa
est. . .cum coirent.
58 LATIN BOOKS

("thus on the hideous field, brought thither from all parts of the world, every
kind of death was ranging about...") showing the congesta instrumenta necis
producing omne genus leti; modern punctuation would call for a colon at this
point.24 The force of the final virgula cannot be exactly determined because
what follows has been lost, but it is clearly less than a full stop.
The apex-like mark (with interpunct) after genus in line 8 shows that the
word genus is to be taken twice, with the preceding phrase omne leti genus
and with the following phrase (genus) omne timoris. This corresponds, then,
to the mark used in the title of the Res gestae to indicate that two genitives are
dependent upon the same noun or that a participle modifies two different
nouns.
It is possible that the virgula at the end of the line merely sets off omne
timoris; if so, it would be the equivalent of the apex-like mark, which would
thus be merely a virgula made small and relatively inconspicuous when placed
in the middle of a line. As we shall see, the full-sized virgula occurs in this
papyrus only at the end of lines.
At the beginning of line 4 may be seen a short diagonal mark; if it is punctua-
tion, it prepares the reader for the rather incoherent listing of things seen and
heard on the battlefield. The incoherence of the passage, however, prevents
us from excluding the alternative explanation: that the sign calls attention
to a missing line.
The nine lines of column F provide us with three more occurrences of the
virgula at the end of lines, one of a mark that is surely a paragraphos, and at
least one instance of omission of punctuation where it seems to be needed.
The first eight lines conclude a description of the various forms of death
inflicted on the subjects of Cleopatra's experiment while she, seated on her
throne, watches them die. Each form of death is described in a short clause,
such as would normally be set off by a semicolon in modern punctuation or
could be treated as a separate sentence by a writer cultivating a staccato
style.

Column F

hie iACET incumbens /ERRO · TV. .IS · ilLE • VENeno /

AVT PENDENTe swIS · CERVICIBVS · ASPIDE · MOLLEM ·
LABITVR · IN · SOMNVM · TRAHITVRQVE · LIBlDINE · MORilS ·/
PERCmLIT adFLATV · BREVIS · HVNC · SINE · MORSIBVS · ANGVIS ·
VOLNERE · SeV · TENVI · PARS · INLITA · PARVA · VEjiENI ·
OCIws · INTEREMiT · LAQVEIS · PARS · COGIiVR · ARTlS ·

I t is also possible that paraiu ends a sentence. The following thought could have
14

been something like "Vndeque vagabatur, cum regina iussit. . . "

 LATIN BOOKS 59

INterSAEPiAM · ANIMAM · P R E S S l S · E F F V N D E R E · V E N I S · /
ImMERSISQVE · FrETO · CLAVSERVNT · GVTTVRA · /AVCES ·
A a s · I N T E R · SiRAGES · SOLIO • DfiSCENDIT · eT · I N T E R ·

The first line ends, as we should expect, with a virgula, b u t lacks internal
punctuation, although it seems to mention two form of death (by the sword
and by poison). 25 The next two lines deal with the asp and are terminated by a
virgula. Line 4 seems to be a complete description of death inflicted by the
breath of a small snake, but there is no mark of punctuation in the completely
preserved margin. Line 5 and the first two words of line 6 deal with a quick-
acting poison applied to a slight wound. 26 Undoubtedly another clause, descri-
bing death by strangulation, begins with the word laqueis in line 6, b u t there is
no punctuation before it. A virgula appears a t the end of line 7 and the final
clause in the sequence occupies the whole of line 8.
A full stop at the end of line 8 is made unnecessary by the paragraphos
which separates t h a t line from the following one. This mark is stronger t h a n a
full stop; it marks the end of the descriptive passage and the beginning of a
new action (Cleopatra descends from her t h r o n e . . . ) .
Column G gives us two instances of a full stop, one a t the end and one in
the middle of a line, and at least two instances where punctuation seems
needed but none appears in the apograph.

Column G

Atque a L I A iNCipiens A. .TE.

SIC · I L L I · INier SE MISERO SErMoNe / R W N T V R /
HAEC · R E G I N A · G E R I T · 'PROCVL · AANc OccVLTA · VMEBAT
ATROPOS iNRIDenS m T E R · DIVERS« ^AGANTEM ·
CONSILIA · INTErlTVS · QVam ΪΑΜ • QVA FATA MANERENT ·
T E R · F V E R A T · REVOCATA · DiES · CVM · P A R T E · SEwATVS ·
ET · P A T R I A E · cOMIiANTE · SVAE · CVM · M I L I T E · CAESAR ·
GENU'S · ALEXAweZrl · CA. .Εη. al> moENia · V E N I « > ·
SIGNAQVE · CONSilTVIT · SIC · OMNES · TeRROR · I N ARTVM

25
This is n o t certain. Professor Oliver points o u t t h a t if ferro is opposed to some inflect-
ion of venerium, w e would expect the last words to be tumet ille veneno, b u t t h e clear
letters -IS rule o u t a verb here and the singular ille m a k e s venenis extremely implausible,
even if w e could f i n d an adjective tu. .Is t o agree w i t h it. T h e adverb tütius would f i t t h e
space very well and the I in I S could be the right-hand side of a V (vertical in this script),
but a n y such reading would almost exclude a reading of t h e last three words as descri-
bing a separate kind of death.
26
The reading seems certain, although the use of pars in t w o radically different meanings
(pars veneni, pars multitudinis) in two successive lines is almost intolerably awkward.
GO LATIN BOOKS

A sentence must end with fruuntur and the virgula which follows it. The
words haec regina gerit stand by themselves and are followed by a stroke that
has the exact size and form of an apex, but is shorter and a little higher than
the virgula that appears at the ends of lines. I t is longer than the internal mark
in the last line of column Ε and is much more slanted than the almost vertical
mark that appears in the next to the last line of column C. I t here obviously
represents a full stop.
The mention of Atropos, who unseen watches with amusement while Cleo-
patra tries to decide how to die, ends with manerent. Clearly either a full stop
at the end of this line or a paragraphos between it and line 6 is called for, but
no traces of either appear. It is true that manerent extends farther into the
right margin than the end of any other line, but ample room remained for a
virgula.
Column H, one of the best preserved of all, contains six lines and three marks
of punctuation.
Column Η

obtererE . . Μ • PORtaRVM CZAVSTRA · NEC · VRBEM ·

OPSIDIONE · T A M E N · NeC · CORPORA · MOENIBVS · ArcENi ·
CASTRAQVE · P R O MVRIS · ATgVE · A R M A · P E D E S T R I A · PONVNT
/"HO« I N T E R COETVS · «ALISQVE · AD · B E L L A · P A R A T V S ·
V T R A Q V E · SOLLEMNIS · I T E R V M • REVOCAVERAT · ORBES ·
CÖNSILIIS · N O X • Α Ρ Τ Α · DVCVM · / L V X · A P T I O R · A R M l S ·
X

A long sentence evidently ends with line 3, but here, as before, a full stop
is made unnecessary by the paragraphos which marks a stronger division—
what would be a paragraph in prose.
In the last line, a slightly hooked mark like the one in column C sets off the
parallel phrases that contrast nouns both of which are in apposition to utraque :
nox apta consiliis, lux aptior armis.
The last sentence is concluded with a mark ) which could be either a
careless variation of the double virgula seen as a full stop or a distinct sign.
If the latter, it is probably to be taken as a coronis marking the end of the book,
for this line is followed by a blank area of papyrus equal to about five lines.
The only writing in this well preserved area is a letter X, which could be the
number of the book here concluded.27

27 Garuti's reconstruction of the probable contents of the poem leads him to the con-

clusion that our fragments come from a book that was near the end of the poem but not
from the last book; he estimates that at least two and possibly three additional books
were needed to describe the capture of Alexandria by Octavian and the deaths of Antony
 LATIN BOOKS 61

The minor fragments, which are too meager to be intelligible, show several
marks like those found in the columns. A mark like a small sicilicus is visible
in Frag. 1628a in the middle of the line in high position. 28 Diagonal lines are
visible in Frag. 1630, Frag. 1634b (at the end of Jine 4 and within line 3, pos-
sibly as a comma), and Frag. 1637.
The papyrus therefore exhibits two or possibly three marks of punctuation
used only within lines, viz.: . There are four other marks that are
placed only after lines, viz.: / js^*

P. Oxy. 30 is really a small piece of parchment which is apparently unique

and is of very great interest as the only surviving vestige of the Latin codices
of the First Century. Its importance was not at first recognized because the
first editors, although recognizing that palaeographically the fragment should
be placed in the First Century, placed it in the Third because they, forgetting
or disregarding the testimony of Martial, held that there could have been no
codices before that time—not on parchment, at least. The correct date was
recognized by Jean Mallon29 and later by C. H. Roberts and E. A. Lowe 30
and is now accepted, I believe, without dispute. The writing is definitely of
the First Century, but since Martial speaks of parchment codices with an
enthusiasm that implies that they were novelties in his time, the date is given
as c. 100 A. D. The fragment, however, could be of approximately the same
time as the papyrus of the Carmen de hello Actiaco. The latter, as we have said,
need not be much older than 79 A. D.; Martial's Apophoreta certainly antedate
86 A. D., and are often said to have been published in December of 83. 31
Codices could have been introduced at least five years before that.
The codex contained the work of an unidentified historian and is generally
known as the De bellis Macedonicis from the subject treated in our fragment.

and Cleopatra. If Rabirius's epic was in twelve books, our fragments could thus belong
to Book X . Garuti could have a little strengthened his argument (pp. x x x v i f.) by obser-
ving the presence of the X at the end of what seems to have been the last column in our
papyrus. If the X seems too slight an indication of the end of the book, one can assume
that there was a final column devoted to a more formal colophon.
88
An angular mark in the next line m a y be a sign of punctuation, but the fragment
is too mutilated to be sure.
29
Quel est le plus ancien exeinple connu d'un manuscrit latin en forme do codex?",
Emerita X V I I (1949), pp. 1-8.
30
According to Professor Oliver, who states in Τ. A . P. Α., L X X X I I (1951), p. 241,
note 16: "Mr. C. H . Roberts kindly informs me (27 Feb. 1952) that Mallon's dating of
this fragment has been confirmed by E. A. Lowe."
31
Schanz-Hosius. §413,3.
62 LATIN BOOKS

The hand shows certain peculiarities which Mallon32 believes to have been
designed for small but legible writing on parchment to produce a codex that
would contain as much text as dozens of volumina. I t is noteworthy that the
interpunct is used throughout and that apices are used freely.
The fragment comes from the middle of the upper part of a leaf, i.e. it shows
part of the first line on each page, but does not show either right or left margin.
Small as it is—too small to permit even a hypothetical reconstruction of a
sentence or clause—our fragment shows two distinct signs of punctuation,
recto:
] · TVM · IMPERI[
]QVE · PRAEFECTI [
] · SATIS · POLLl£RENT[
]VS · ATQVE · ANTIOCHJms
ge]NERIS · DfiSPECTi · [
genJTESQVE · ALlENAS · [
sp]ECTÄRENT · ' [
]A PHILIppVS[
]0NE · A N T f i o c t o
]VALIDIO[

verso:
]ER l · SVPERAT · ' Ε · [
] 0 Q R E X · HIEME · C[
] H . . CAVE PACTi[
]S ILLI PAX ROmaNV[
]ΟΟΙΤΫ · TRANS · .. [
]ROMA .. EQVI[
]THRAC. .M · AT[
]M · AVXILIEIS[
]ERREXIT[
]PHRYGIA[

The small high mark, quite like a sicilicus, in lines 7 and 11 comes after the
interpunct that is placed after verbs (spectarent, superat) which probably end
sentences or, at least principal clauses. The second sicilicus is followed by a
blank space wider than most letters; the first, by a very long blank space which
would lead one to wonder whether it was not the last word in a paragraph,
did not a space of almost equal length appear two lines above. I t is possible,
therefore, that the punctuation after spectarent marked a stronger division
than the same sicilicus but less space after superat.
A second sign of punctuation, a blank space without a sicilicus, appears
33
PaUographie Romaine, §138.
 LATIN BOOKS 63

in lines 2 and 5 after praefecti and despecti, words which do not sound as though
they were final in sentences, but could very well end clauses within a sentence.
I t seems probable, therefore, that the blank space was not so strong a mark
of punctuation as the sicilicus. I t is entirely possible that yet stronger marks
of punctuation were used in the codex but did not happen to occur in the tiny
fragment of it that has come down to us.
Our tentative conclusion concerning the force of the sicilicus is a little sup-
ported by the consideration that this mark—or one very similar to it—sur-
vives in some late texts in scriptum continua with the value of a full stop. 33

We may conclude this chapter with an examination of a document which may

or not represent a type of ancient book.
A papyrus in Berlin ( B . 0 . U. I I . 611) consists of three columns, of which
the second is practically entire while only a small part of the first and a larger
part of the third have been preserved. I t contains either the concluding part
of a speech to the senate, or excerpts from two or three such speeches, by a
princeps who is usually identified as Claudius.34 Despite the diversity of opi-
nion, it seems likely that the text contains part of a single speech: since the
second column is so well preserved, we can see that it continues a sentence
from the bottom of the first column and that its last line is continued in the
first line of the third column.35 A paragraph begins in each of the columns,
but there is no title or other indication of provenance before any of these
paragraphs; if, therefore, they are excerpted from different orations, the writer
strangely thought it unnecessary to indicate from what speech a given excerpt
came. And finally, the last paragraph is merely an exhortation to the senators

33 E.g. P. Oxy. 1379, mentioned above, pp. 26ff.

34 See the bibliography in Cavenaile, op. cit., No. 236.
35 The subjects are not so diverse as some commentators seem to suppose: the paragraph

carried over to the top of col. I provides a minimum age for reciperatores; so far as we can
tell from the scanty remains, the paragraph beginning in that column could expound
the evils of the legal trick by which a plaintiff brings a suit and then by obtaining contin-
uances leaves the defendant under a cloud for a long time; the next paragraph proposes
that praetors be directed to see to it that trials are not intermitted and giving them the
authority to compel the plaintiff to proceed with his case under penalty for false accusa-
tion, if he does not. And the final paragraph is, as we have said, an exhortation to the
senate to "speak up", and not merely pass the measure without debate. The speaker is
a little incoherent in his expression, but that is just what we should expect of Claudius!
Commentators have, I think, been a little misled by his somewhat contorted attempt to
say that delays are sometimes wanted by defendants so that they will have time to let
their hair and beards grow and thus excite compassion in the jurors (who, although called
indices in col. II, are probably the same as the reciperatores whose minimum age was
fixed at twenty-five in col. I).
64 LATIN BOOKS

to express their opinions concerning proposed legislation—a suitable conclusion

for a speech, but scarcely a significant passage that would be excerpted for
any purpose compatible with the specific legislative proposals which, on this
theory, were excerpted in preceding paragraphs.
The third column is followed by the Greek numerals ÄPN, which is explained
by Cavenaile as "numero de l'acte", on the assumption, for which, I believe,
there is no other evidence, that the orationes principum or the senatus consulta
were given serial numbers. It seems to me, however, that this could also be a
stichometric notation, particularly if 1150 is a round number for 1144, which
would make this column the end of a volumen consisting of fifty-two columns
of twenty-two lines each, to be paid for at so much per hundred lines. It could
therefore have been a collection of Orationes Claudi.
Assuming that the papyrus contains the conclusion of a single speech,
and that the speaker is Claudius, the date of the speech must be either 41,
42, 45, 46, or 50, since the speaker describes himself as consul designatus,
and it is highly improbable that Claudius would have presided in the senate
under Caligula. I t is generally assumed that the speech would have been of no
interest long after it was given, so that the papyrus may be dated to c. 41-60
A. D. or even 41-50. 3 8
The real question before us is whether the papyrus can be regarded as having
formed part of a "book" in the ancient world.37 In other words, were copies

36 The text of the senatus consultum would have been of interest until it was superseded
by a later act, but a speech in support of it could scarcely have had any legal significance
to call for study of it by lawyers.
37 Professor Oliver comments: " W e today make in common usage a sharp and clear

distinction in terms of physical form between a book, which is printed, and a manuscript,
which is written by hand and (except for possible carbon copies, if a typewriter is used)
a unique copy. Such a distinction, of course, cannot be made in antiquity. The famous
papyrus of the Respublica Atheniensium was obviously a copy made by some amateur
for his own use on what amounts to scratch-paper, but, if rolled up as a volumen and
placed in a capsa or loctdue, it would, in one sense of the word, have been as much a book
in the library as the most expensive and carefully executed copy. But I think we are
entitled to distinguish between ancient books, that is to say copies of literary works
made by professionals, such as Atticus' librarii or Martial's bibliopolae, and transcripts
made by amateurs for their own use. The professionals must have observed certain more
or less definite standards of format and legibility; the amateur, like the writers of bills
of sale, receipts, and the like, merely wanted a written record: he resembles the student
who copies a passage in his notes, possibly in haste and with a disregard of form that
he would not exhibit even in a letter to a friend. I suspect that in antiquity there was a
distinction between 'book' and ephemera as sharp as that which we see in the Renais-
sance, when almost every Humanist wrote at least two hands, one, clear and formal,
for books (i.e. copies of ancient works or copies of his own literary compositions), and the
other, cursive, hurried, and sometimes almost illegible, for his own notes and personal
letters. That, of course, because copying books was with the early Humanists, as it was
not with the ancients, esteemed a 'liberal' art. But I think it probable that there was
 LATIN BOOKS 65

of Sallust or Livy produced in the style of our papyrus ? It is extremely difficult

to imagine that anyone would have wanted to acquire as literature or pleasur-
able reading a collection of orations that, as J. P. Balsdon says, 38 are "grotes-
que in thought and language", being couched in a style which is "as inimitable
as it is grotesque". It may be doubted whether anyone, except Claudius, ever
read Claudius with pleasure. A courtier, to be sure, would have wished to flatter
the muzzy-headed emperor, but he would purchase a handsome and calligraph-
ic copy of the immortal prose, rather than anything resembling our papyrus.
The text is written in a cursive hand utterly unlike the writing of the two
books fairly close to it in date that we have just studied, the Carmen de hello
Actiaco and the De bellis Macedonicis. The hand closely resembles the cursive
found on Pompeian and Dacian wax tablets and on scrawled graffiti, even to
the point that the letters are unshaded, as though they had been scratched
with a stylus rather than written with a pen. Such writing is not unknown on
other papyri,39 but only in documents such as wills, bills-of-sale, and the like—
and by no means in all such documents. In literary papyri, the letters are
shaded, being written with a blunt or flexible pen,40 and they are furthermore
fairly close in form to the capitals of inscriptions. The letters in our papyrus
are not: they are distorted and highly "cursive" in the manner that manuals
on palaeography generally explain as having been developed to attain maxi-
mum speed in scratching letters on wax with a stylus.
The hand is not an amateur's—there is no hesitation or irregularity in the
formation of letters, but they are formed with what seems to be a maximum
economy of time, i.e. this kind of writing must have been the most rapid pos-
sible without resort to notae Tironianae. It is legible enough, after one has
become accustomed to the strangely abbreviated or distorted shapes of some
of the letters, but there is not the slightest concern for pleasing the eye with
regularity of either letters or lines. The scribe's haste is evident in the fact
that in the few lines preserved he made three errors (intercedant for procedant,
consili for propositum, and cum omitted before apud), all of which he corrected
himself, deleting the erroneous letters with a squiggle of the pen and inserting

the same clear distinction of hands and format — that Horace or Asinius Pollio, had they
unrolled a volumen similar to our Respublica Atheniensium, would have felt that it wasn't
a 'book' because it lacked the regularity of the work of a professional Ubrarius
38
Oxford Classical Dictionary, s. v. "Claudius".
30
E.g. a Second-Century will from Arsinoe, B. (J. U. VII. 124 (plate in Mallon-Marichal-
Perrat, No. 26).
40
In this respect, Hayter's apographs of the Carmen are not., and were not intended
to be, copies of the hand that appears on the papyrus, i.e. Hayter copied the shape of the
letter faithfully enough, but did not show what strokes were heavier than others; see
Mallon, plate IV, 2 and 3, the latter a photograph of a portion of the papyrus that, for-
tunately, is still legible. Mallon's indignation (pp. I74f.) is a little misplaced; Hayter was
trying to recover the text of the poem, not produce a lesson in palaeography.
66 LATIN BOOKS

the correction twice above the line and once (when he noticed his error in time)
on the line. One can almost imagine that he was doing the copying for nothing
and had before his eyes a sign reading "Time is money" !
Can such writing ever have been used for "books", i.e. literary texts? One
cannot imagine that such a copy would have seemed other than painfully
crude to the owners of the Carmen or the De bellis Macedonicis, neither of which
was in any sense the luxurious product of calligraphic art, but both of which
seem to represent an ordinary book produced in a workmanlike but inexpensive
manner for readers of poetry and history. The Oratio Claudi certainly did not
belong to that class, but was there a market in antiquity for the cheapest
possible copies of literary works, i.e. copies made with the haste and disregard
for neatness seen in our papyrus ? Mallon assumes that there were such books;41
others think it improbable.42
These considerations, though leading to no certain conclusion, are necessary
here, because the Oratio Claudi differs markedly in punctuation, as well as in
handwriting, from the examples that we examined earlier in this chapter.
It is, of course, paragraphed;43 interpuncta are used throughout, and there
are fairly numerous apices. Punctuation (which is not reported by any editor
and must therefore be ascertained from photographs44) is meager. There are
only two signs, virgulae and blank spaces.

41
Paleographie Romaine, p. 174, where the Oratio Claudi is listed as an example of
"une 'cursive' qui est une 'libraria' ".
42
Professor Oliver comments: " I agree t h a t the hand is certainly 'professional', in one
sense, b u t I think t h a t the proper analogue is the 'law hand' of the thousands and thou-
sands of professional scriveners who, before the introduction of the typewriter, produced
the tons of legal pleadings, arguments, transcripts, abstracts, and the like t h a t are now
rotting in every court house and record office of the United States and England. This
was a highly stylized hand — you should not permit yourself to be misled by the silly
scene in Bleak House in which Lady Dedlock recognizes in a legal document the hand-
writing of a former lover, which is as plausible as though she had recognized it in a type-
written document—and also one t h a t t h e scriveners developed to conserve time. They
were paid by the 'folio', just as your scribe was paid by the hundred lines (if the Greek
numerals are stichometry). They also spread out their writing. Have you thought of com-
puting how m a n y more letters (and words) there would be on such long lines if the writing
were as carefully formed as t h a t in the De bellis Macedonicis ? My guess is, twice as many.
I cannot believe t h a t a contemporary of Claudius would have bought a copy of, say,
Livy or, if you think t h a t an unfair example, of the De amicitia written in such a hand."
43
Since the complete text is more readily accessible in Cavenaile's Corpus, and he has
seen f i t to suppress the paragraphing, I note t h a t the beginning of line 2 in column I I
and of line 10 in column I I I is extended three letters into t h e left margin, and t h a t the
same was certainly true of line 7 in column I, as is obvious from the blank space in line 6.
44
By far the best reproduction is in Mallon-Marichal-Perrat, No. 13. The plate in
Steffen's Lateinische Paläographie (II. Auflage, Berlin, 1929), although it also shows the
left side of col. I l l , is so much inferior in rendering detail t h a t it is scarcely legible in
places and does not show the virgulae a t all.
 LATIN BOOKS 67

In lines 2 to 19 of column II, I recognize five sentences, one of which, of

course, begins the paragraph. Of the remaining four, two are marked off by
virgulae,, one by a space, and the other (beginning with Nec in line 6 as quoted
below) is not set off at all.45 Within these sentences, modern editors recognize
four subordinate clauses to be set off with commas; only one of these is marked
in the papyrus and that by a space at the beginning with no sign at the end.
But the papyrus uses a space to separate words in the ablative plural from
following words in the dative plural, where modern editors place no punctua-
tion at all. Here is the passage:46

hae · ne · prooedant • artes · male · agentibus · si

uobis • uidetur · ρ • c • deoerndmus · ut • etiam
prölätis · rebus · ils"· Iiidieibus · necessitas · iudicandi
5 imponittur · q u i · Intril · rerum · agenddrum · dies
Incohata · iudicia · non · peregerint · nec
defuturos · ignoro · fraudes · monströse · agentibus
multas · aduersus · quae • excogitäuimus · spero
remedia · Interim • hane · praecliisisse
10 nimium · uolgatam · omnibus · malas · lites
habentibus · est · /nam · quidem · aceu
satörum · regnum · ferre · nullo · mod0 · possum
qui · cum apud · curiosum · consilium · Inimicos · suos
reos • fecerunt · relinount · e0s · in · alb0 · pendentes
15 et · ipsi · tanquam · nihil · egerint · peregrinantur
cum · rerum · magis · natura · quam · leges · t a m
accusatörem · quam · reum · copulatum · constric
tumque • habeat/ · adiuuant • quidem · hoc
propösitum · accusatörum e. q. s.

Of the two virgulae, the one in line 11 absorbs the interpunct, i.e. the scribe
evidently placed an interpunct and went on; when he noticed that he had
omitted the virgula, he formed it by marking through the interpunct, which
is still visible. The second virgula is a longer stroke, clearly made before the
interpunct was added.
The "Oratio Claudi", whether or not we regard it as a "book", is of some
value as showing the persistence of some punctuation even in the work of a
copyist who was striving to make his copy with the utmost despatch.

16
There may be a space after peregerint and also one after hahentibua in line 11, but
I cannot be sure that the spaces are not merely the result of a flourished prolongation
to the right of the line of the Τ and S.
4S
I use lower-case letters as far nearer the style of writing than capitals.
 ν

LEGAL STYLE

One reason why the importance of punctuation in Latin writing was for a
long time not recognized is that there is a considerable number of fairly long
inscriptions from the Republic and early Empire in which there are almost
no signs of punctuation except small blank spaces which could be easily over-
looked or disregarded as either fortuitous or the result of the engraver's
efforts to space out the line. These inscriptions belong to a definite class that
includes most of the long inscriptions that have survived from the period in
which we are interested. It seems, therefore, a logical step to prosecute our
inquiry by examining this group of inscriptions, all of which contain the text
of legislative acts or decrees.
The legal inscriptions exhibit a peculiarity of style which is still typical of
legal writing, i.e. the tendency to run the entire text of a law into one long
sentence, with the different clauses shown by the repetition of an introductory
word ("and whereas" or utique). The writers relied almost entirely on para-
graph arrangement1 to make the divisions of the text clear. Paragraphs (capita),

1
The Gordons express p a r t i c u l a r interest in t h e a r r a n g e m e n t of t h e inscriptions in
p a r a g r a p h f o r m (see Contributions, p p . 151-164) a n d classify in their Album all t h e stones
which t h e y s t u d y according t o t h e a r r a n g e m e n t of t h e writing o n t h e m . They s t a t e :
" T h e p a r a g r a p h f o r m , accomplished b y protrusion a n d extension beyond a n otherwise
s t r a i g h t l e f t m a r g i n r a t h e r t h a n b y our usual m o d e r n m e t h o d of i n d e n t a t i o n clearly w a s
used in R o m e well before t h e period covered here [Augustus t o N e r v a ] , certainly b y t h e
second c e n t u r y B. C. P r e - A u g u s t a n examples of t h e f i r s t c e n t u r y B . C. a r e f r e q u e n t .
This m e t h o d of p a r a g r a p h i n g , o r this style of a r r a n g e m e n t , is d e p e n d e n t neither on t h e
m a t e r i a l on which t h e t e x t is preserved nor on t h e subject m a t t e r of t h e t e x t . " They t h e n
m e n t i o n several long inscriptions, such as t h e M o n u m e n t u m A n c y r a n u m , t h e Laudatio
Turiae, a n d t h e records of t h e A r v a l Brethren, as well as legal inscriptions, adding t h a t
shorter t e x t s a r e also p a r a g r a p h e d . I t is t h e p a r t i c u l a r characteristic of legal inscriptions,
however, t h a t t h e y a r e n o t merely p a r a g r a p h e d , b u t a r e usually so composed t h a t n o
sentences end within these divisions. The o t h e r long inscriptions mentioned h a v e internal
breaks, w h e t h e r m a r k e d or n o t .
 LEGAT. STYLE 69

often numbered, 2 were fixed units of all Roman laws, each caput corresponding
to a single topic. We are concerned, of course, with punctuation to show units
of syntax or sense within the caput.
We must preliminarily note that with only two exceptions all of these texts
come from copies that were set up in provincial cities rather than in the capital
itself. We may take it for granted that these copies, for many reasons ranging
from the possibility of error by the Roman scribes who wrote out the text
on papyrus to the probably inferior skill of the engravers in smaller and less
wealthy communities, are less accurate and less handsome than the correspon-
ding texts that were engraved in Rome, but there seems to be no reason for
assuming a fundamental difference in style, except possibly in the matter of
paragraphing, where the available evidence, so far as I know, is merely strong
enough to justify a suspicion that provincial copies may have conserved space
by not beginning each paragraph of the original on a new line extended into
the left margin. 3
With this possible exception, however, there is nothing to indicate that
provincial copies differed from Roman originals to the extent of eliminating
punctuation. If our only inscription of this class from Rome were the De
imperio Vespasiani (69 A. D.), we might be tempted to conclude that there was
such a difference, but we have also the Lex Antonia de Termessibus (71 Β. C.),
which was found in Rome and hence, it may be assumed, originally set up

2
As in t h e Lex Odilia Cisalpina a n d t h e Lex Coloniae Genetivae a n d as implied b y Cicero's
references t o capita b y n u m b e r i n g ; cf. supra, p. 18.
3
To be sure of this, we should need a t least t w o copies of t h e s a m e t e x t . T h e only in-
stance t h a t comes t o m y m i n d is t h e late Senatus considtum de pretiis gladiatorum minuendis
of 177 A. D., m o s t recently edited b y J a m e s H . Oliver a n d R o b e r t E . A. P a l m e r in Hes-
peria, X X I V (1955), p p . 320-349 a n d plate 89. A n early p a r t of this t e x t is preserved o n
m a r b l e a t Sardis, a later p a r t o n bronze a t Italica in Spain. On t h e m a r b l e a t Sardis, t h e
inscription is in scriptura continua a n d p a r a g r a p h s are divided b y a short b l a n k space
within t h e line. On t h e Spanish bronze, i n t e r p u n c t s a r e used, p a r a g r a p h s begin o n a new
line t h a t is extended into t h e l e f t margin, a n d (although y o u would n o t guess it f r o m either
t h e editors' t e x t or their c o m m e n t a r y ) there is a t least one significant m a r k of p u n c t u a t i o n
(see below, p. 82). W i t h this example, late as it is, before us, w e n a t u r a l l y wonder w h e t h e r
t h e m a g i s t r a t e s of a smpll a n d n o t particularly prosperous t o w n w h o set u p a n d p r e s u m -
ably paid f o r t h e Tabula Hebana did n o t t r y t o s a v e m o n e y b y crowding as m u c h t e x t
as possible on each bronze t a b l e t , using virgulae t o divide p a r a g r a p h s instead of t h e u s u a l
paragraphing, which would h a v e wasted n o t only p a r t of t h e l a s t line in each p a r a g r a p h
b u t would also h a v e m a d e all lines except t h e f i r s t in each p a r a g r a p h shorter b y several
letters. B u t of this we have, so f a r as I know, n o m e a n s of judging. F o r one thing, w e d o
n o t really k n o w w h a t considerations (or instructions) impelled small t o w n s t o h a v e copies
of senatus consulta a n d t h e like inscribed on bronze or w h o p a i d for t h e work. Oliver a n d
P a l m e r t h i n k t h a t t h e t e x t t h e y edit is r e m a r k a b l e in t h a t i t w a s "published on s t o n e or
bronze in various p a r t s of t h e empire b y official o r d e r , " w h e r e a s usually such inscriptions
were set u p only b y t h e cities directly affected b y t h e law or decree, a n d t h e n a t t h e
initiative a n d expense of a local g o v e r n m e n t or even a p r i v a t e individual.
70 LEGAL STYLE

there, and which agrees so well in form with the provincial inscriptions as to
make unlikely any great difference between the latter and Roman tablets in
the matter of punctuation.4
We are therefore justified, I think, in taking the legal inscriptions as a class
without subdividing them according to provenience. I shall accordingly report
on the major texts, arranging them chronologically.5
1. G.I.L. I2, 581 (Ritsehl, XVIII). Senatus Consultum de Bacchanalibus.
568/186.
A long space at the end of line 2 separates the heading from the rest of the
inscription. The next paragraph, lines 3-10, contains no such spaces, except
a space at the end of line 10 which marks the end of the paragraph.

11-19:
SACERDOS · NEQVIS · VIR · ESET · MAGISTER · NEQVE · VIR ·
NEQVE · MVLIER · QVISQVAM · ESETD
NEVE · PECVNIAM · QVISQVAM EORVM · COMOINEM · HABVISE ·
VELETDNEVE · MAGISTRATVM
NEVE · PRO · MAGISTRATVD · NEQVE · VIRVM · NEQVE · MVLIEREM ·
QVIQVAM · PECISE · VELET
• N E V E · POST · HAC · INTER · SED · CONIOVRASE · NEVE ·
COMVOVISE · NEVE · CONSPONDISE
NEVE · CONPROME · SISE · VELET · NEVE · QVISQVAM · FIDEM ·
INTER · SED · DEDISE · VELETD
SACRA · IN · OQVOLTOD · NE · QVISQVAM · PECISE · VELETDNEVE ·
IN · POPLICOD · NEVE · IN
PREIVATOD · NEVE · EXSTRAD · VRBEM · SACRA · QVISQVAM ·
FECISE - VELETDNISEI
PR · VRBANVM · ADIESET · ISQVE · DE · SENATVOS · SENTENTIAL) ·
DVM · NE · MINVSD
SENATORIBVS · C · ADESENT · QVOM · EA · RES · COSOLERETVR ·
IOVSISET · CENSVERE

This paragraph has five spaces which set off the parallel clauses in the decree,
in lines 11, 12, 14, 15, and 16, and a space in 17 before the exception granted

4
It would be nice, of course, if we had a Roman legal inscription of the Augustan age
to confirm this conclusion, for it would be possible to argue that the Lex Antonia is too
early to show internal punctuation anyway and therefore not a proof that a legal inscrip-
tion at Rome did not resemble the De imperio Vespasiani much more than the Tabula
Hebana.
5
Since the lines are long and since some important spaces occur at the end of the line,
I shall here indicate all spaces by the symbol • . In later quotations I shall indicate only
those spaces which would not otherwise be apparent.
 LEGAL STYLE 71
(nisi). (The space at the end of line 18 is made necessary by the rule observed
in this inscription that words must not be divided between lines.)

20-31:
• HOMINES · PLOVS · V · OINVORSEI · VIREI · ATQVE · MVLIERES ·
SACRA · NE · QVISQVAM
FECISE · VELETDNEVE · INTER · IBEI ·
VIREI · PLOVS · DVOBVS · MVLIERIBVS · PLOVS · TRIBVS
ARFVISE • VELENT · NISEI · DE · PR · VRBANI · SENATVOSQVE ·
SENTENTIAD · VTEI · SVPRAD
SCRIPTVM · EST · DHAICE · VTEI · IN · COVENTIONID ·
EXDEICATIS · NE · MINVS · TRINVM
NOVNDINVM · SENATVOSQVE · SENTENTIAM · VTEI · SCIENTES ·
ESETIS • EORVM
SENTENTIA · ITA · FVIT · SEI · QVES · ESENT · QVEI · ARVORSVM ·
Ε AD · FECISENT · QVAM · SVPRAD
SCRIPTVM · EST · EEIS · REM · CAPVTALEM · FACIENDAM ·
CENSVEREDATQVE - VTEI
HOCE · IN · TABOLAM · • AHENAM · INCEIDERETIS · ITA · SENATVS ·
AIQVOM · CENSVIT
VTEIQVE · EAM · FIGIER · IOVBEATIS • VBEI · FACILVMED ·
GNOSCIER · POTISIT · • ATQVE
VTEI · EA · BACANALIA · SEI · QVA · SVNT · EXTRAD · QVAM · SEI ·
QVID · IBEI · SACRI · EST
ITA · VTEI • SVPRAD · SCRIPTVM · EST DIN · DIEBVS · X · QVIBVS ·
VOBEIS · TABELAI · DATAI · ERVNT
FACIATIS · VTEI · DISMOTA · SIENT D I N A G R O T E V R A N O

The last paragraph, lines 20-31, shows five spaces as indications of punctua-
tion. It is separated from the preceding paragraph by a space at the beginning
of the line which gives, at first sight, the impression of paragraphing by inden-
tation, but a moment's study will show that the space here differs from the
others only in that it happens to come at the beginning of a line. The spaces
in lines 24 and 26 are equivalent to modern dashes, setting off a recapitulation
of a clause in the decree, rather than a quotation from it, calling for the publi-
cation of the decree. Then follows a quotation ("si quis.. .censuere") fixing
the penalty and ended by a space, and this is followed, somewhat illogically,
by two more recapitulatory statements, introduced by atque and separated
by a space, calling for the setting up of the inscription and the carrying out
of the provisions of the law. (The space before ahenam in line 27 is clearly
meaningless and must be accounted an engraver's error; the space before
in diebus in line 30 is smaller than the others and may be either meaningless
72 LEGAL· STYLE

or the equivalent of a modern comma.) The space in line 31 sets off the words
which indicate the area to which the decree as here recorded applies —a kind
of lemma, as it were, which clearly formed no part of the text transmitted by
the consuls, unless we suppose that scribes at Rome made a number of copies
for transmission to different regions and labelled each copy with the name of
the territory for which it was intended.
The second paragraph contains two further provisions of the senatus con-
sultum separated by a space before neve, as usual.
2. C. I. L. I 2 , 584 (Ritsehl, XX). Sententia Q. M. Minuciorum inter Genuates
et Viturios. 637/117.
Spaces are evident in seven places, most of which may be considered as the
ends of paragraphs (the inscription is not otherwise paragraphed): lines 6
(after siet), 23 (a space and what appears to be three dots arranged vertically,
after terminus stat), 36 (at the end of the line after debento), 42 (after fructique
sunt), and 44 (after primas). Spaces in line 37 set off the names of consuls in
a date (a space appears before and after the words L · CAECILIO · Q · M W -
CIO · COS). A diagonal descending from left to right oddly appears in line
44, probably by some error on the part of the engraver:

SOLVEI · MITTEI · LEIBERIQVE · GENVENSES · VIDETVR\ ·

OPORTERE · ANTE · EIDVS · SEXTILIS · PRIMAS · SEIQVOI · DE ·
EA R E

This mark can have no meaning as punctuation since the meaning here is
videtur oportere Genuenses solvi, liber <^ar^>ique ante Idus . . . (The reference,
as is plear from what precedes, is to citizens of the town who are held captive
in chains; videtur is the formula used by the arbitrators in handing down their
decision.) A similar and equally meaningless mark is found in the Lex Antonia
which I mention below.
3. C. I. L. I 2 , 590. Lex Municipii Tarentini.6 665/89-692/62.
No marks of punctuation or extra spaces are used to show divisions within
paragraphs, although some of the paragraphs are quite long and four of the
six contain at least two sentences by our standards, e.g. Ne quis . . . si quis
adversus ea faxit. . .
4. C. I. L. I 2 , 589 (Ritsehl, XXXI). Lex Antonia de Termessibus. 683/71.
This is a Roman inscription, although neither the lettering nor the extreme-
ly irregular right margin left by an engraver who, obviously forbidden to
divide words between lines, made a real effort to space out the lines, sometimes
carrying over to the next line a word for which he would have had ample room.
There is some punctuation within paragraphs by blank spaces and also some
meaningless blank spaces. There are also a few assorted marks, some of which
6
Mon. Ant. delta R. Accad. dei Lincei, VI (1895-6), pi. XIV-XV.
 LEGAL S T Y L E 73
may be punctuation. In 1.5, for example, we find both a meaningless space
and one that may serve as a comma; the next line contains a curious sign
(like a vertical diple obelismene) that can have no meaning as punctuation:

.. . QVEIQVE
AB IEIS PROGNATI · SVNT · ERVNT EIE · OMNES
POSTEREIQVE EORVM · THERMESES λ · MAIORES · PEISIDAE
LEIBERI AMICEI · SOCIEIQVE · POPVLI · ROMANI - SVNTO
e. q. s.

Most of the extant punctuation is found in a single paragraph of column II:

20. MAIORES PISIDAS · FVIT · EAEDEM LEGES EIDEMQVE IOVS
EADEM · CONSVETVDO INTER · CEIVES ROMANOS ET
TERMENSES · MAIORES · PISIDAS · ESTO · QVODQVE · QVIBVS
QVE
IN · REBVS · HOCEIS · AGREIS · AEDIFICIEIS · OPPIDEIS ·
IOVRIS
TERMENSIVM · MAIORVM · PISIDARVM · IEIS · CONSVLIBVS
QVEI · SVPRA · SCRIPTEI SVNT FVIT · · QVOD · EIVS · PRAETER
LOCA · AGROS · AEDIFICIA · IPSEI · SVA · VOLVNTATE · AB · SE ·
NON
ABALIENARVNT · IDEM · IN EISDEM · REBVS · LOCEIS · AGREIS
AEDIFICIEIS OPPIDEIS · TERMENSIVM · MAIORVM · PISIDARVM
e. q. s.
Long relative clauses are set off in two ways: in line 20 by a sign7 above
the last letter of fuit and in 27 by a blank space before idem. A second relative
clause in the latter is further set off by the use of two dots after fuit in 25.
A sicilicus appears at the end of I. 33, where it may possibly separate the
verbs that show tense alternatives in the normal Roman legal style:
. . .VTEI · SVNT'
FVERVNT · ITA · SVNTO ·
' One would be inclined to dismiss this unusual sign as a mere error or slip of the engra-
ver's tool, if it did not occur in a very fragmentary inscription (G. I. L. VI. 30562, 3)
in which it seems to mark the end of a sentence:
] · SED [
]SIMI · ΤΑΜ T R [
pu]TREFACTAS MV
]TA C O N P O S V I T ~ [
f u ] R I B V S • PERVIVM [
]I T · CVSTODEM [
This mark certainly is not a sicilicus, and it seems unlikely that two engravers at quite
different times would have arbitrarily turned a sicilicus on its side.
74 LEGAL S T Y L E

The same sign reversed appears at the end of 1.9, where it stands before the
third word of the standard ethnic term, Thermenses maiores Peisidae, used
throughout this inscription. It must therefore be meaningless.

Virgulae are used in three places:

I. 14: D L · MARCIO · \ S E X · IVLIO · COSD

separating the names of the two consuls; and in

I. 27:
QVAE · THERMENSORVM · Μ • PISIDARVM · PVBLICA\
PREIVATAVE • PRAETER LOCA AGROS · AEDIFICIA · SVNT
FVERVNTVE e. q. s.

(where it can have no meaning.) An odd sign (/I) appears in II. 13, at a point
where editors mark the end of a sentence:

MAIORVM · PISIDARVM · IN · HIBERNACVLA · MEILITES

DEDVCANTVR · DECREVERIT · J\ NEIVE · QVIS · MAGISTRATVS
PROVE e. q. s.
If there were systematic marking in this inscription, one could feel more certain
that this is more than a slip of the engraver's tool.
We need not notice here a sign in the left margin before lines II. 1 and
29; it was probably a mark made by the engraver as a guide to divide the tablet
into two halves for inscribing the text in two columns.
5. Ο. I. L. I2, 592 (Ritsohl, ΧΧΧΙΪ). Lex de Gallia Cisalpina. c. 705/49.
This inscription has numbered capita in the usual arrangement with the
first line of each paragraph extended into the left margin. The preserved portion
contains the end of X I X , all of X X through XXII, and the beginning of
XXIII. Only four spaces Occur within paragraphs: in column I, line 5 (after
iiibeto q. d. r.), in 27 (after IIS); in column II, line 19 (after dum, t.); 35
(after non faciei), and 49 (after iudicio). None can be considered as punc-
tuation; those in I. 27, II. 19, and II. 35 are blanks for sums of sestertii to be
filled in when the amount is known, and the space in II. 49 is probably ac-
counted for by the workman's failure to engrave the word aid, which the editors
have to insert at this point.
6. C. I. L. I2, 593 (Ritsehl, X X X I I I - X X X I V ) . Lex Tabula Heracleensis
dicta Iulia Municipalis. 709/45.
This very long inscription is arranged into many fairly short sections, or
paragraphs, usually of three or four lines each. There are no marks or spaces.8

»The space in 11.138 (CVMVE • GLADIATORES · Q I B E I · PVGNABVNT ·) is

clearly meaningless and must represent an engraver's slip.
 LEGAL STYLE 75

l.C. I. L.I2, 594 (Bruns-Gradenwitz, XII). Lex Coloniae Genetivae sive

Vrsmensis. 710/44.
This very long inscription, generally believed to be a copy made much later
than the date of the law, is divided into numbered paragraphs. There is no
punctuation by either marks or spaces.
8. The Tabula Hebana (La Parola del Passato, Fase. XIV [1950], pp. 97-184).
19-20 A. D.
Interpuncts are used throughout and virgulae are used to divide the decree
into paragraphs (e.g. · /VTQVE e. q. s.). No punctuation is used within para-
graphs. The typical legal style of the inscription is well imitated (in the edition
cited) by the translators, who do not divide paragraphs into sentences, but
follow the style of Italian laws and other legal documents. The editors include
the virgulae in their transcription where they appear in lines 4, 5, 16, 50,
54, and 57—and restore them in lines 32, 38, and 59. The use of the virgula
instead of normal paragraphing has saved a good deal of space (over 10%)
on the tablet, which gives the impression that the engraver was trying to crowd
in as much text as possible.
9. G. I. L. XI. 3805. Decretum Gentumvirorum. 26 A.D. 3, 8-15:
PLACVIT · VNIVERSIS...
. . . · HON0REM • EI · iVSTISSIMVM · DECERNI · VT
AVGVSTÄLIVM · NVMER0 · HABEÄTVR · AEQVE · AC · SI · E 0
HON0RE · ^SVS · SIT · /LICEATQVE · E l · OMNIBVS · SPECTÄCVLIS
ΜΫΝΙΟΙΡΙΟ · NOSTRO · BISELLIO · PROPRIO · INTER · AVGVS
TÄLES · CONSIDERE · CElNISQVE · OMNIBVS · PVBLICIS
INTER · CENTVM · VIR0S · INTERESSE · /ITEMQVE · PLACElRE
NfiQVOD · AB · E 0 · LIBERISQVE · EIVS · VECTIGAL · ΜΫΝΙΟΙΡΙΙ
AVGVSTI · VEIENTIS · EXIGERETVR
In lines 10 and 13 of this short inscription the diagonals set off clauses of the
decree, which is written as a single sentence. In both instances they show
parallelism by sending the reader back to the verb on which the second clause
depends. In the first, the construction is, of course, decerni . . . ut habeatur . . .
<ei ut^> liceat; in the second, since, from a strictly grammatical viewpoint,
the indirect discourse must depend on some verb of saying, the construction,
illogical as it seems, must be placuit decerni . . . placere. Such virtual indirect
discourse is usually set off by a colon in modern editions.
10. C.I. L. V. 5050 (Bruns-Gradenwitz, XV). Edictum Glaudi de Civitate
Anaunorum. 46 A. D.
Small blank spaces are left in thirteen places: lines 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13,
16, 18, 30, 32, and 36. The first six lines are titulature. The text of the oration
proper begins in line 7. The space in the following line sets off a relative clause.
The space in line 9 marks the beginning of an explanation, interjected in Clau-
76 LEGAT, STYLE

dius' characteristically confused manner, which ends in line 11, having within
it a provision, quantum, memoria refero, which is terminated by the space in
line 10. The space in 13 marks the end of another interjection in which Claudius
with heavy humor observes that Caligula was content to let sleeping dogs of
litigation lie. The discourse then becomes a little more coherent and the follow-
ing will show the normal punctuation, the first space setting off a relative
clause of result and the second an appositional phrase:

.. .IN · REM · PRAESENTEM · MISI

PLANTAM · IVLIVM · AMICVM · ET · COMITEM · MEVM QVI
CVM · ADHIBIT IS · PROC^RATORIBVS · MEIS · QVISQVE · IN ALIA
REGIONE · QVIQVE · IN • VICINIA · ERANT · SVMMÄ · CVRÄ ·
INQVI
SIERIT · ET · COGNOVERIT ·

11. C.I.L. XIII. 1668. Oratio Claudio 48 A. D.

This is a beautifully executed inscription with elegantly formed letters,
apices and I-longae to mark many long vowels, but with no marks of internal
punctuation. In lines 33 and 45 spaces mark the end of rhetorical questions that
Claudius asks himself. The latter will serve as a good example:

QVID · ERGO · NON · ITALICVS · SENATOR · PROVINCIALI ·

POTIOR EST · IAM
VOBIS · CVM · HANC · PARTEM · CENSVRAE · MEAE · PROBÄRE ·
COEPERO · QVID
DE · EÄ · Rfi · SENTIAM · REBVS · OSTEND AM · SED · NE ·
PROVINCIALES e. q. s.

It will be noted that the sentence which ends with ostendam is not in any way
set off from what follows. This is the normal style in this inscription. There
are several slight spaces elsewhere which might be intended as punctuation,
but if they are, it is hard to understand why at so many other points, where
punctuation is really needed, no sign appears.
12: C.I.L. II. 1963 Lex Municipii Salpensani. Aetate Vespasiani.
This inscription has numbered paragraphs, with the sign of rubrication
(-R). Four peculiar marks are visible, with no apparent significance either as
punctuation or as lectionary symbols:
(a) small virgulae, no taller than the letters:

29-31: . . . FACITO · VT · IS · IVRET · PER

IOVEM · ET · DIVOM • AVG · ET · DIVM · CLAVDIVM · ET · DIVOM
VESP · AVG ET DIVOM / TITVM · AVG · ET e. q. s.
9
cf. Philippe Fabia, La Table Claitdienne de Lyon (1929).
 LEGAL S T Y L E 77

35:
QVI · ITA PRAEFECTVS · RELICTVS ERIT · DONEC · IN · ID ·
MVNICIPIVM I ALTER VTER E X IIVIRIS
REDIERIT e. q. s.

(b) a sign like a figure 3 in the right margin in paragraph XXVI and XXVIII.
It is reversed in one of the three occurrences.

I. 40-45:
R DE IVRE IVRANDO IIVIR · ET AEDIL ET Q
DVOVIR QVI · IN EO MVNICIPIO F D P - ITEM AEDILES IN EO ·
MVNICIPIO SVNT · ITEM
XXVI QVAESTORES QVI IN EO MVNICIPIO SVNT · EORVM
QVISQVE · IN DIEBVS QVINQ
PROXVMIS · POST • Η L · DATAM QVIQVE IIVIR · AEDILES
QVAESTORESVE POSTEA · EX • Η · L
CREATI ERVNT EORVM QVISQVE · IN DIEBUS QVINQVE
PROXVMIS E X QVO IIVIR J
AEDILES e. q. s.

II. 20-24:
SI QVIS MVNICEPS . .
XXVIII QVI IVRE.
E X SERVITVTE. . .
DVM NE QVIS PVPILLVS NEVE QVAE · VIRGO · MVLIERVE ·
SINE TVTORE · AVCTORE ο
QVEM QVAMVE e.q.s.

(c) a sicilicus-like mark:

II. 28:
SI CAVSAM MANVMITTENDI · IVSTA · ESSE IS · NVMERVS
DECVRIONVM · PER Q V E M 3
DECRETA Η · L · FACTA e. q. s.

(d) the mark at the end of the inscription. If this is a coronis, it is of most
unusual form (I recall nothing comparable). If, as the shape suggests, it is a
ceraunion, the Aristarchean nota to mark spurious verses would have no con-
ceivable application here.
1 3 . C . I . L . X . 7852. Decretum Proconsulis Sardeniae. 69 A . D .
Only two spaces, without significance as punctuation, are left in the inscrip-
tion.
14. C. I. L. VI. 930 (Bruns-Gradenwitz, XVI). Senatus Constdtum de Imperio
VesDasiani. 69 A. D.
78 LEGAL STYLE

Strangely enough, in the time when we would expect the use of virgulae
as internal punctuation to be declining elsewhere, they appear on a legal
inscription in the time of Vespasian.10 This inscription, incidentally, provides
a very good warning concerning the extent to which the transcriptions in the
0.1. L. can be trusted in matters of punctuation. The text of the C. I. L.
shows sixteen large virgulae, particularly at the end of lines 19-27, and repre-
sents all of them by the same typographic character, a diagonal (/). I t is appar-
ent from a photograph of the inscription that most of the marks represented
by the diagonal differ very little from many of the interpuncts in the inscrip-
tion, and that there is no reason for showing them as diagonals of any size.
The interpuncts in this inscription are of two forms,11 the regular dot, which
is used where the engraver is pressed for space, and a somewhat more ornate
form, like a modern comma placed at a mid-point in the line ('), which is used
where the engraver is spacing out his words on the line. A t the ends of lines
that are a little short, this form of the interpunct is placed a little farther from
the preceding word and may in some cases be slightly larger. Obviously,
however, it is an interpunct, and the Corpus is guilty of a gross inconsistency
when it prints OPORTVIT/ at the end of line 27 and FACERE · LICEAT in
line 28, where the interpunct is of precisely the same shape and, in fact, slightly
larger in size. The effect of this typography, of course, is to conceal the real
punctuation where it does occur in the form of a diagonal bar (/), i.e. the
virgula, which occurs four times in the inscription, twice in line 3, at the end
of line 4, and at the end of the paragraph in line 6. The only uncertainty is at
the end of line 4, where the diagonal is a little shorter than elsewhere and it
could, perhaps, be argued that it is only a little larger than the largest of the
commashaped interpuncts (end of line 7).

3-7:
VTIQYE E I SENATVM · HABERE/ RELATIONEM · FACERE/
REMITTERE · SENATVS
CONSVLTA · P E R R E L A T I O N E M ·
DISCESSIÖNEMQVE · FACERE · LICEAT/
I T A · V T I · LICVIT DIVO · AVG · T I • I V L I O · CAESARI · AVG · T I ·
CLAVDIO · CAESARI
AVGYSTO · GERMANICO · /
VTIQVE · CVM · E X VOLVNTATE • AVCTORITATEVE · IVSSV ·
M A N D A T W E · EIVS e. q. s.

In line 3, a series of infinitive phrases is set off. No mark is placed after the
fourth infinitive (line 4) because the finite verb follows immediately. If the
10 This may show the extreme conservatism of law, which was only beginning to accept

what was already becoming obsolete in other types of inscriptions.

11 On shapes of the interpunct, of. the Gordons, cited above p. 16.
 LEGAL STYLE 79

mark at the end of line 4 after liceat is intended as a virgula, it indicates a

break between two clauses. The long diagonal at the end of the paragraph
(line 6, after Germanico) is, of course, as redundant as the paragraph marks
in the Res gestae: one can see no reason why it should be used here but not
after the other paragraphs.
There is one other peculiarity that may be noted, the two interpuncts and
space between Vespasiano and Aug. in line 28, but these are certainly the
result of the correction of an error. The engraver probably had sketched AVG
twice after Vespasiano and discovered his error too late to change the rest of
the line. He took up as much space as he could by spacing out the last three
letters of Vespasiano, and tried to diminish the space that was left by writing
two interpuncts instead of one.
15. G. I.L. XIV. 2112. Lex CollegiorumP 136 A. D.
This is not, strictly speaking, a legal inscription since it contains the "consti-
tution and by-laws" of a club. The inscription is in scriptura continua with
occasional interpuncts. I t is of interest here because there are some small
extra spaces and seven diplae ( » .

I. 6-8: .^POLLICITVS · EST · SE

tfoTVRVME ISEXLIBERALITATESVAIIS · XV · Μ · Ν · VSVM DE
nofoZiSDIANAE · I D I B · AVGIISCCCCN · ET · DIENATALISANTINO I ·
V K

The small space left after pollicitus est marks the beginning of the indirect
discourse. The larger one in the next line after usum sets off the clauses which
state the purpose for which the money is to be used. 13 The slight space after
Antinoi sets off the date which follows.
The preamble ends with a warning to candidates for membership that they
should read the "constitution" of the club, which is then transcribed under
the title LEX COLLEGI. This consists of a series of resolutions, each intro-
duced by placuit. These are arranged in paragraphs by general topic, but
each paragraph contains several provisions. Within a paragraph item placuit
is always preceded by a dipla with blank space on either side. The following
examples will show the use.

" MSlanges d1 Archäologie et d'Histoire de VlÜcole Franfaise de Rome, X V I I I (1898),

pp. 27Iff., plates VII—VIII.
13
The whole statement is really quite confused since a clause after usum would be
required to make clear the meaning: the giver promised the income (usus) of 15,000
sesterces at a rate of 5 1/3%; this income was to be spent on the two birthdays, 400 ses-
terces on each—but we have to read all this into the blank space!
80 LEGAL STYLE

I. 17-25:
.. . ITAQVEBENECONFERENDOVNIVERSICONSENTIRE
DEBEMVSViZowgrOTEMPOREINVETERESCERE · POSSIMVS · >
TVQVINOVOS · INHOCCOLLEGIO
INTRAREVOLespRIVSLEGEMPELEGEETSICINFRANEPOSTMODVM
QVERARIS AVTHEREDITVO
CONTROVERsiAM · RELINQVAS L E X COLLEGI
piacttlTVNIVERSISVTQVISQVISINHOCCOLLEGIVMINTRAREVOLVE
RIT · DABIT KAPITVLARINOMINE
I I S C N E T i w n B O N I • AMPHORAMITEM · I N M E N S E S · SING · A · V · >
ITEMPLACVIT · VT · QVISQVISMENSIB
C O N T I N i m z N O N P A R I A V E R I T E T E I H V M A N I T V S · ACCIDERIT · EIVS ·
RATIO · F V N E R I S • NON · H A B E B I T V R
ETIAMSftesiAMENTVM · FACTVM · H A B V E R I T > ITEMPLACVIT
QVISQVIS EXHOCCORPO
R E · Ν · P A R I A T V s D E C E S S E R I T e. q. s.
I I . 5-10:
. . .TABELLAS · F E C E R I T EIFVNVSIMAGme
RIVM F I E T >
I T E M PLACVIT · QVISQVIS EXQVACVMQVECAVSA ·
MORTEM ·
EIVS · RATIO F V N E R I S · NON · H A B E B I T V R
ITEMPLACVITVTQVISQVIS · SERVVS · E X · HOC · C O L L E G I O L I B E R ·
FACTVS · F V E R I T · IS · D A R E D E B E B I T V I N I
öoNIAMPHORAM > ITEMPLACVITQVISQVISMAGISTERSVO ·
A N N O E R I T · E X · ORDINEAIbi
ADCENAM · FACIENDAM e. q. s.
I I . 26-30:
ITEMPLACVIT · VT · QVISQVIS · SEDITIONISCAVSA · DELOCO I N
ALIVM · LOCVM T R A N S I E R I T E I · MVLTA · ES
TO I I S I I I I · Ν · > SIQVISAVTEMINOBPROBRIVMALTER ·
A L T E R I V S D D I X E R I T · AVTTVmul
TVATVS · F V E R I T · E l · MVLTAESTO · I I S • X I I N · > SIQVIS
QVINQVENNALI · I N T E R E P V L a s
O B P R O B R I V M · AVT · QVID · CONTVMELIOSE D I X E R I T E I ·
MVLTAESTO · I I S X X N D
ITEM • PLACVIT · VTQVINQVENNALIS · SVI • CVIVSQVETEMPOR1S ·
DIEBVS e. q. s.
The use of the dipla is regular: it appears before every occurrence of item
placuit within a paragraph. Once (II. 20-21) a kind of supplementary provi-
sion is stated with item a t the beginning and placuit a t the end of the sentence;
here the dipla is not used.
 LEGAL STYLE 81

1 6 . C . I . L . II. 5181. Lex Metalli Vipascensis,14 Saec. I / I I .

This inscription, assigned to the last half of the First, or the first half of the
Second Century, is of interest here.
Rubrics normally begin paragraphs and are incised in much larger letters.
The short imperative statements are all separated by blank spaces.
This inscription belongs to a type of "legal" inscription t h a t is to be distin-
guished from the kind of enactment found in senatus consulta or plebiscita, in
which the style called for very long sentences with usually each paragraph
forming a parallel clause dependent on some introductory verb such as cen-
suere. I t is simply a classified list of peremptory instructions regarding the
Vipascene mining area, with regulations for each class of persons who are to
live in it. The style is reminiscent of t h a t of the Twelve Tables, with the same
kind of formulaic construction: a series of short clauses with the principal
verbs almost always in the imperative. I t is a reasonable speculation t h a t if
we had the Perpetual Edict of the Praetors 1 5 in a contemporary inscription,
it might have been arranged in much the same way.
A good example of the style and arrangement of the whole inscription may
be seen in its second paragraph:
S C R I P T V R A E P R A E C O N I I D Q V I PRAECONIVM ·
C O N D V X E R I T · P R A E C O N E M I N T R A F I N E S P R A E B e f o pro
mercede ab eo qui venditionem
X L · M I N O R E M V E F E C E R I T · CENTESIMASDVASABEOQVIMAI-
OREMXC · F E C E R I T · CENTESIMAMEXIGifo qui mancipia
sub praecone venum
D E D E R I T · SIQVINQVEMINOREMVENVMERVMVENDIDERIT ·
CAPITVLARIVMIN SINGVLACAPITA · x . . . . si maiorem
numerum vendi
D E R I T · INSINGVLACAPITA · X I I I · CONDVCTORISOCIOACTORIVE-
EIVS · D A R E D E B E T O • SIQVAS res proc. metallorum nomine
fisci ven-
DETLOCABITVE · IISREBVSCONDVCTORSOCIVS ACTORVEEIVS ·
PRAECONEM P R A E S T A R E D E B E T O • Qui inventarium
cuiueque rei vendun-
D A E N O M I N E P R O P O S V E R I T · CONDVCTORISOCIOACTORIVEEIVS ·
X I · D D • PVTEORVMQVOs proc. metallorum vendiderit em·
14
Ephemer is Epigraphica, I I I (1877), pp. 166ff., plates I I - I I L
15
The edict was certainly fixed in form by 67 B. 0. when the Lex Cornelia required
praetors to observe its regulations. Although, so far as I know, there is no specific state-
ment that the pretorian edict was inscribed on bronze tablets in Rome, it is a reasonable
assumption that it must have been, because Cicero (De Inv. II. 22.67) evidently regards
it as a fixed law that any one could consult, a statement which implies the use of bronze
tablets to provide a definitive text.
82 LEGAL STYLE

PTORCENTESIMAM · DD · QVODSIINTRIDVONONDEDERIT ·
DVPLVM · D · D • CONDVCTORISOCio actorive eius pignus
capere liceto
QVIMVLOSMVLASASINOSASINAS · CABALLOS · EQVAS e. q. s.

17. G. I. L. II. 6278. Senatus Consultum de Sumptibus Ludorum Gladiatorium

Minuendis,1β 177 A. D.
This bronze tablet has sixty-three long lines, arranged in paragraph form,
with the first line of each edented. One paragraph not thus arranged is marked
by a sign17 which repeats the paragraph sign in the Res gestae of Augustus,
and is set off by a space on either side.

27-30:
QVAMQVAM · AVTEM · NON · NVLLI · ARB ITRENTVR · DE · OMNIBVS
QVAE · AD · NOS · MAXIMI · PRINCIPES · RETTVLERVNT ·
VNA · ET · SVCCINCTA · SENTENTIA · CENSENDVM
TAMEN · SI VOS · PROBATIS · SINGVLA · SPECIALITER · PERSEQ-
VAR · VERBIS · IPSIS · E X · ORATIONE · SANCTISSIMA ·
AD · LVCEM · SENTENTIAE · TRANSLATIS · NE · QVA ·
E X · PARTE · PRAVIS · I N
TERPRETATIONIBVS · SIT · LOCIS ^ ITAQVE · CENSEO · VTI ·
MVNERA · QVAE · ASSIFORANA · APPELLANTVR · IN ·
SVA · FORMA · MANEANT · NEC · EGREDIANTVR · SVMP
TV I I S X X X e. q. s.
The mark in line 29 shows a strong break, not so strong as that of a para-
graph since there is no change in subject, but stronger than a full stop since the
mark ends the statement in which the speaker apologizes for quoting from the
text of the emperor's speech and marks the beginning of the sentence in which
the speaker begins the quotation. The sense is: si vosprobatis, singula specialiter
persequar, verbis ipsis ex oratione sanctissima . . . translatis, ne . . . pravis
interpretationibus sit locus. Itaque censeo "uti munera quae assiforana appellan-
tur . . ."
From the foregoing examples we are justified, I think, in postulating a
"legal style" used for the text of legislation and for speeches in the senate
proposing legislation. I n this style the text is carefully paragraphed, but
punctuation within paragraphs is not normally used, and when used, takes
the form of blank spaces, with marks such as the virgula generally avoided.
This would account for the absence of punctuation in papyri of a legal nature,
e.g. those listed below in the Appendix, nos. 103 and 212.
16
James H . Oliver and Robert E. A. Palmer, loo. oit.
17
This is ignored b y Oliver and Palmer, who merely show a space, "vacat," thus
implying that there is nothing in the space.
 VI

OTHER STYLES

I t may be that, until we seek examples of extant inscriptions from the Republic
and First Century that contain connected prose and are long enough to provide
good evidence of punctuation or the lack of it, we do not realize how very few
texts of this kind have survived.
Apart from the legal or quasi-legal texts that we have just considered, the
evidence, for all practical purposes, reduces itself to two quite different kinds
of writing: the long series of acta of the Arval priests, which are the dryest
kind of chronicle, and two laudationes funebres, both well known to all students
for the information that they give concerning family life and the status of
women in the great age.

1. ACTA FRATRUM ARVALIUM

The Acta Fratrum Arvalium are the engraved records of official ceremonies
performed by the college of priests. They are necessarily repetitive, reporting
a certain limited number of sacrifices performed on certain occasions. The
same formulae are repeated over and over, with the result that the whole text
is so simple that there is not normally any need for punctuation at all. The acta
were inscribed each year, varying in style of lettering and arrangement on
the stone. This variety shows partly the evolution of the Roman epigraphic
style, partly, no doubt, the willingness at the time to spend money on good
work. There is even a lapse into scriptum continua in the record for 66 A. D.
(G. I. L. VI. 2044, c-d), but in the following years the college resumed the
division of words and retained this form until the regression into scriptum
continua had become fairly universal in inscriptions. In the record of 91-92
A. D. may be seen the beginning of the vogue of scriptum actuaria (i.e. letters
on stone that deliberately imitate letters drawn with a pen or brush).
Although the acta are inscriptions on stone, they really resemble the minutes
of a modern club which nobody reads with any enthusiasm and which are
84 OTHER STYLES

never preserved with the care that would be bestowed on a literary work.
This analogy is strengthened by the fact that the acta contain a number of
engraver's errors, some of which may have been corrected by painting, but
which suggest that no one checked the work very carefully. 1 A good example
may be seen in the section from the record of 80-81 (C. I. L. VI. 2059), which
lists the seating assigned to the Fratres in the amphitheatre. Despite its appar-
ently minute precision in measuring to 3/16 of an inch, nevertheless it is
arithmetically defective 2 and so must also contain some errors in transcription
that no one took the trouble to correct.
The latest discussion of the Arval inscriptions, with selected bibliography,
is by the Gordons, whose Album includes twenty-four fragments of the acta
and one Arval calendar, dated from 29 B. C. to 92 A. D. For the most part
the Arval inscriptions of this period are preserved in comparatively small
fragments.
In the small fragment of the record for 16 A. D. 3 a space was left in line 6 to
separate two names, although they are in different cases. If the left-hand part
of the inscription were preserved, we could determine whether this marks the
beginning of the sentence which ends the paragraph.
I n the record of 57 (C. I. L. VI. 2039) a diagonal mark separates the name
of the Arval priest from t h a t of the emperor, and at the same time sets off
the statement of the date and occasion for the sacrifice from the statement
of what was done. The Gordons note 4 that the Corpus does not show the diago-
nal in line 15.

14-15:
ISDEM · COS · P R · NON · DEC · OB · TRIBVNICIAE · POTESTAT ·
N E R O N I S · CLAVDI
CAESARIS · AVG · GERMANICI/ C · VIPSTANVS ·
APRONIANVS · MAGIST
e. q. s.
In the records for 59 (G. I. L. VI. 2042a), the space between Minervae and
vaccam in the list of sacrifices is clear, but was apparently left accidentally.
The space in line 3 after adfuerunt (ADEVERVNT on the stone; the engraver
1
I t may be relevant to note that if an error was noted after the grove was purified
by the sacrifice to expiate the bringing of iron implements into the sacred enclosure, no
correction could have been made until the following year.
2
See Gordon, Contributions, pp. 170-175. Professor Oliver intends to show in an article
now in preparation that the computation can be made to come out b y assuming a confu-
sion between signs for the semuncia, the sicilicus (i.e. the fraction) and the sextula in
arriving at the total.
3
Athenaeum, 1946, p. 188.
4
cf. Gordon, Album, I, p. 104. They note also a "high, straight vertical mark (line 10)"
which somewhat resembles an apex. Again, it sets off the name of the priest within a
sentence.
 OTHER STYLES 85

cut the bottom stroke of the F by mistake) sets off the list of names of members
present. Similar spaces occur in 15 and 22, where adfuerunt was cut correctly.
In the records of the following year (C. I. L. VI. 2042e), a diagonal bar, in
addition to the space, sets off the names of the members present, and here it
occurs before, rather than after the phrase in collegio adfuerunt:

20-22:
SVLPICIVS CAMERI · NVS · MAGISTER · COLLEGI · FRÄTRVM
ARVÄLIVM · NOMINE · IMMOLAVIT · IN CAPITOLIO · OB
COS · NERONIS · CLAVDI · CAESARIS · AVG · GERMANICI · IOVI ·
Β · MAREM · IVNONI · VACCAM · MINERVAE · VACCAM
GENIO · IPSIVS · TAVRVM · / IN COLLEGIO · ADFVERVNT ·
SVLPICI · VS · CAMERINVS · MAGISTER · L · PISO · L · F
e. q. s.

The diagonal in line 22 certainly marks the end of a sentence. The Gordons
agree5 with this in one place, but in another say that the mark is intended
"apparently to mark a new paragraph."6
In the normal style of the acta, each ceremony is recorded in a separate
paragraph that is indicated in the usual way by extrusion of the first line into
the margin. In the record of January 78 (C. I. L. VI. 2056), however, such a
paragraph is begun within the line and is set off from the preceding one by a
virgula with a conspicuous blank space on either side of it:

14-16:
IN COLLEGIO · ADFVERVNT · L · VERATIVS · QVADRATVS ·
C · TADIVS · MEFITANVS · Q · TILLI
VS · SASSIVS · L · MAECIVS · POSTVMVS A · IVLIVS · QVADRATVS ·
C · VIPSTANVS · APRONIA
NVS I ISDEM · COS VI · IDVS · IAN · IN AEDE · CONCORDIAE
e. q. s.

This diagonal in line 16 is clearly visible in the plate published by the Gordons,
but is not mentioned in their commentary or indicated in their transcription.7

5
Contributions, p. 183.
6
Album, I, p. 108. Since the routine s t a t e m e n t of who w a s present usually follows
the routine listing of sacrifices in the acta, I suspect t h a t the Gordons were here thinking
of the inscription which I treat n e x t below.
7
Album, I, No. 141, pi. 59a. The Gordons state, of course, t h a t t h e y do n o t differentiate,
in the transcriptions, t h e various forms which the interpuncts take; a n d t h e y do describe
those shapes in great detail. T h e y apparently take the mark here t o be a n interpunct.
I n the plate, however, it is clearly a virgula. I suspect t h a t the Gordons' notes on this and
the preceding inscription (see note 6 above) became confuSed.
86 OTHER STYLES

Two parts of a date are separated by a diagonal in the inscription of 80-81

(G.I.L.Vl. 2059):

20: L · VEITIO · PAVLLO Τ · IVNIO · MONIANO COS / Κ MAIS · e. q. s.

The Gordons mention another mark similar to this, but much shorter, after
another date in the same fragment, but they do not show it in their transcript: 8

37: I I I · NONAS · IAN'

The virgula in line 20 is clearly punctuation, although really unnecessary,

given the standard form in which dates were stated; the shorter mark can
scarcely be regarded as punctuation: the date occupies a whole line and cer-
tainly does not need to be set off otherwise.
In the record for 86 (C. I. L. VI. 2064) the list of members present is set off
by a wide space before the words in collegio adfuerunt, but an interpunct
(not a virgula, as in the record for the year 60) is placed in the middle of the
space.
22-23:
verBA NOMINE COLLEGI · FRATRVM ARVALIVM BOVE · FEMINa
/VTVRVM · IN COLLEGIO · ADPVERVNT · L · VERATIVS
e. q. s.

In the small remains of the record for 87 (C. I. L. VI. 2065) a small space
is left after the words (sacri)ficium fecerunt in line 6, which is the end of a
sentence.
The variation in the setting off of names may be observed in the record of
the year 89. In line 4 the words in collegio adfuerunt appear in larger letters
and are on a separate line, whereas in line 16, the names follow the formula
on the same line and are not separated from it even by a small space.
The final Arval inscription reported by the Gordons is the record of 91-92,
which is the largest single fragment preserved from this period. I t is written
in scriptura actuaria, as we have noted. 9 A few extra spaces are left, particu-
larly in dates, which are written on separate lines in larger letters. A space
occurs after the quotation which ends with esse futuram (line 17) and before
the description of the sacrifice begins in 27 (In pronao aedis . . .). In the second
column, a space is left after a date which is written in small letters (line 37).
On the photographic plate, several signs are visible which the Gordons correctly
call "queer marks of uncertain meaning" and do not include in their transcrip-
8
Album, I, pp. 134-135.
9
The Gordons comment on "the very poor script" but do not seem to notice that
there has been a complete change of style since the preceding year's account (90 A. D.),
which was written in square letters.
 OTHER STYLES 87

tion. The wedge-like mark at the end of line 8 follows the word collegi and surely
was not intended to separate it from the words fratrum Arvalium in the next
line. A vertical stroke (which appears to have a small hook at the top) in the
right margin after line 12, also not shown by the G. I. L, is probably accidental.
Another mark, like a small 7, occurs at the end of line 18 after VOVI, which
is completed by MVS in the next line. (The C. I. L. shows this as an interpunct.)
A number of words are divided between lines on this stone, but this is the only
place at which the little 7 occurs, so it can scarcely have the function of a hyphen
in modern printing. A small accent-like mark above the slight space between
Germanico and pontif. in line 32 may be intended for the interpunct which
was omitted, but in the same line a short horizontal stroke appears above the
interpunct after maximo. Neither of these is shown in the O. I. L. Neither
can have meaning as punctuation.
As a final example I note the inscribed record of the year 101 (C. I. L. VI.
2074), which is not included in the Gordons' Album. This inscription shows the
variation of form on the same stone. The same formula is set off three times in
three different ways: by blank space alone (line 51), by blank space in which
an interpunct is placed in the middle (line 58), and by a blank space in which
a long virgula is placed (line 67).

50-52:
QVOD · HODIE · VOV · ASTV · EA · ITA · FACSIS · TVNC · TIBI · IN
EADEM · VERBA · NOMINE · COLL · FRATR · ARVAL
TAVRO • AVRATO · VOVIM · ESSE · FVTVRVM MARS · VICTOR ·
QVAE · IN VERBA · I · Ο · Μ · PRO SALVTE
e. q. s.

58:
FRATR · ARVAL · BOVEM · AVR · VOVIM · ESSE · FVTVR · FORTV-
NA · REDVX · QVAE e. q. s.
67:
TIBI · IN EADEM · VERBA · NOM · COLL · FRATR · ARV · TAVRO ·
AVR · VOV · ESSE · FVTVR/ HERCVLES · VICTOR e.q.s.

The long record of the Arval college through this period shows a familiarity
with the use of punctuation; the sporadic occurrence of it probably shows noth-
ing more than that the paragraphing and formulaic nature of the entries made
it unnecessary to use much punctuation to facilitate reading of a record which,
in all probability, very few people ever took the trouble to read anyway.
88 OTHER STYLES

2. LAUDATIO M U R D I A Ε

The laudationes funebres are of a very different nature. They record the text
of funeral orations that certainly deserve to be regarded as literary texts.
Such orations must have been composed with care by their authors, and were
certainly inscribed on stone in the hope that they would be generally read.
We should therefore expect to find in such inscriptions such punctuation as
would have been used in the same text written on papyrus, except insofar as
there may have been in ancient times, as in our own, a tendency to use less
punctuation in inscriptions than in written copies—a point which we do not
have the means of investigating, since, of course, we do not have a contempo-
rary written copy of an inscribed text.
The Laudatio Murdiae of the early Augustan age 10 consisted of at least three
marble paginae11 of which we possess the upper part of the last (C. I. L. VI.
10230). Interpuncta are used throughout, apices are used freely, and the text
is punctuated by the use of a single sign of punctuation which is identical in
size and shape to the apices that mark the long vowels, and which we may
therefore call an apex. This sign of punctuation is placed above the interpunct
except when it occurs at the end of a line, where the interpunct is regularly
omitted, and so stands alone.
In view of the great interest of this text, we may quote the whole of it:

MVRDIAE • L · F · MATRIS

SED · P R O P R I I S · VIRIBVS · ADLEVENT · CETERA · QV0 ·

FIRMIORA PROBÄBILIORAQVE · SINT
OMNES · FILIOS · AEQVE · FECIT · H E R E D E S · PARTITIONE ·
FILIAE · DATA ·' AMOR
MATERNVS · CARITATE · LIBERVM ·
AEQVALITATE · PARTIVM · CONSTAT
V1RO · CERTAM · PECVNIAM · LEGAVIT · VT · IVS · DOTIS · HONORE ·
IVDICI · AVGERETVR
MIHI · REV0CATÄ · MEMORIÄ · PATRIS · EÄQVE · IN C0NSILIVM ·
ET · FIDfi · SVÄ · AD
H I B I T l · AESTVMATIONE · F A C T I · CERTÄS
RES · TESTAMENTO · PRAELEGAVIT'

10
Since Murdia is not otherwise known and it is impossible to identify the speaker,
the inscription cannot be dated more precisely.
11
The heading in monumental capitals would certainly have been centered; the part
of it extant above the column of text preserved cannot possibly have been half of the
whole heading; a minimum of three columns must therefore be assumed.
 OTHER STYLES 89

N E Q V E · E Ä · M E N T E · QVO · M ß · F R A T R I B V S · M E I S · QVOM ·
FORVM · ALIQVÄ
CONTVMELIÄ · P R A E F E R R E T ·' S E D MEMOR · L I B E R A L I T A T I S ·
P A T R I S · ME I
R E D D E N D A · MIHI · STATVIT ·' QVAE · IVDICIO · V I R I · S V I •
E X PATRIMONIO
Μ Ε 0 · CEPISSET ·' VT · Ε A · VSSV · SVO • CVSTODITA ·
P R O P R I E T A T I · MEAE · R E S T I
TVERENTVR
CONSTITIT · ERGO · I N · H 0 C · SIB I · I P S A · VT · Ä · P A R E N T I B U S ·
D I G N I S · V I R I S · DATA
MATRIMONIA · OPSEQVIO ·' P R O B I T A T E ·
R E T I N E R E T ·' N V P T A · M E R I T E I S · GRA
TIOR · F I E R E T ·' F I D E · CARIOR · H A B E R E T V R ·' IVDICIO ·
ORNATIOR · R E L I N Q V E R E
TVR ·' POST · DECESSVM · CONSENSV · CIVIVM · L A V D A R E T V R ·'
QVOM · DISCRIPTIO
PARTIVM · H A B E A T · GRATVM · F I D V M Q V E ·
ANIMVM · I N · V I R O S ·' AEQVALITA
TEM · I N · L I B E R O S ·' IVSTITIAM · I N · V E R I T Ä T E
QVIBVS · D E · CAVSEIS · Q · QVOM · OMNIVM · BONARVM ·
F f i M I N Ä R V M · S I M P L E X · SIMI
LISQVE · E S S E · LAVDATIO · SOLEAT · QVOD · N A T V R A L I A · B O N A ·
P R O P R I A · CVSTO
D I Ä · SERVATA · V A R I E T A T f l S · V E R B O R V M · N O N · D E S I D E R E N T ·'
SATISQVE · SIT
E A D E M · OMNES · B O N Ä · FAMÄ · D I G N A · FECISSE •' ET · QVIA ·
ADQVIRERE
NOVAS · L A V D E S · M V L I E R I · SIT · ARDVOM •' QVOM · MINORIBVS ·
VARIETA
TIBVS · V I T A · IACTETVR ·' NECESSARIO · COMMVNIA · E S S E ·
COLENDA •' N E · QVOD
ÄMISSVM · E X · I ^ S T I S · P R A E C E P T E I S · C E T E R A · T V R P E T
E 0 · MAIOREM · LAVDEM · OMNIVM • CARISSIMA · MIHI · M Ä T E R ·
MERVIT ·' QVOD
MODESTIÄ · P R O B I T A T E •' PVDICITIA ·' OPSEQVIO ·' LANIFICIO •'
D I L I G E N T I A ·' F I D E '
P Ä R · SIMILISQVE · CETEREIS · P R O B E I S · F E M I N I S · FVIT ·'
N E Q V E · XTLLI · CESSIT ·' VIR
T t T I S ·' L A B O R I S ·' S A P I E N T I A E ·' PERICVLORVM · P R A E C I P V A M ·
ΑΫΤ·CERTE
90 OTHER STYLES

It will be observed that the text is divided into short paragraphs—perhaps

even excessively paragraphed, for it could be argued that lines 4 to 13 should
form but one paragraph, since they all deal with Murdia's testimentary dis-
positions.
All but one of the paragraphs contain a single sentence. The one exception
occurs in line 4, where the end of a short sentence is marked by an apex plus
a space—the only place where this combination occurs in the inscription.
The punctuation in this fragment appears to be highly consistent and its
use can be stated in terms of rules. It will be seen that ablative absolute phrases
are never set off by punctuation (4, 7, 8). Furthermore, ut clauses are not set
off when they immediately follow the words on which they depend (6, 14),
but where there is a series of parallel ut clauses depending on a single statement,
they are divided by punctuation (15, 16 bis, 17). An vi clause is also set off
when it depends, not on the immediately preceding clause but on one earlier
in the sentence (12).
Members of compound sentences with parallel verbs joined by the thought
'and' or 'but' are set off by punctuation (8, 10, 29).
Subordinate clauses which depend on other subordinate clauses are set off
(17, 24, 25), with but one exception, the quod (causal) clause in 21 which is so
closely dependent on the preceding cum (causal) clause that we could argue
that the omission was due to a feeling similar to that which dictates in English
the omission of a comma before a restrictive relative clause.
A cum clause that begins a sentence is terminated by a mark of punctuation
(25), and a quod (causal) clause is likewise separated from the preceding main
clause.
Parallel clauses, even when the introductory word is varied rhetorically
(i.e. cum . . .[cum'] . . . et quia) are separated by punctuation (22, 23).
Parallel objects of a verb are likewise separated when they are modified
by phrases (18, 19).
A series of parallel words in an enumeration is likewise marked off by punc-
tuation; thus the seven ablatives of specification in 28, the four genitives in
30, and even the two ablatives of means in 15, are separated from one another
by apices. The two parallel ablatives in 5 are not divided, possibly because
each has a genitive dependent on it.
The only adjectival relative clause (11, where quae stands for ea, quae) is
also a clause of virtual indirect discourse; for one reason or another, it is set
off by punctuation.
It may be of some interest to compare the internal punctuation with modern
usage. Taking the transcription in Egbert's Latin Inscriptions as a convenient
standard of modern usage, we find that the virgula of our text has a comma
as its counterpart everywhere except at one point (before sed, line 10) where
Egbert has a colon, although a comma would suffice.
 OTHER STYLES 91

Our inscription has punctuation wherever Egbert has a comma, with the
following exceptions:
Egbert sets off ablative absolute phrases (4, 7, 8) and separates the two
ablatives in line 5. He sets off all ut clauses and relative clauses of purpose
(1, quo; 6, ut; 9, quo; 14, ut). He also punctuates before the explanatory quod
in line 21, sets off the phrase quibus de causis in line 20, and the nominative
phrase memor . . . mei in line 10.
Our inscription punctuates where Egbert does not (but where an Eighteenth-
Century writer would have punctuated) in dividing the parallel words (two
ablatives in 15, seven ablatives of specification in 28, four genitives in 30).
I do not exaggerate, I think, when I say that the punctuation of the Laudatio
Murdiae is as systematic as Egbert's, and differs from his only in that it
follows different, but definable, rules.

3. L A U D A T I O T U R I A E

The justly famous inscription, generally known as the Laudatio Turiae although
the name of the lady commemorated does not appear in the extant text, was
set up between 8 and 2 B. C. The inscription was carefully executed, and is
one of the most beautiful, from the standpoint of lettering and execution,
that has survived to our day.
The text of the laudatio was divided into a fairly large number of paragraphs,
most of them quite short and somewhat reminiscent of the short paragraphs
in vogue in newspapers today. The paragraphs contain at least two kinds of
internal punctuation—a blank space and at least one kind of mark, perhaps
a virgula. Interpuncta appear throughout and apices are used freely.
In view of the importance of this inscription, which represents the best
style of the best period, I particularly regret that I can make only a limited
use of it here because the greater part of the inscription is either lost or not
available for study. 12

12
The inscription consisted of t w o columns. Column I is represented by three large
fragments, A, B , and C, n o w lost and k n o w n only f r o m Seventeenth-Century copies w h i c h
(to judge from t h e publication in the G. I. L.) tell us nothing a b o u t punctuation. Column
I I is represented b y t w o comparatively small fragments, t h e so-called "Via Portuense"
and Professor Gordon's, b o t h of which can be studied f r o m excellent photographs in t h e
Gordons' Album, and t w o large fragments n o w preserved in t h e Villa Albani, where t h e y
have been seen b y several scholars w h o vainly sought t o o b t a i n photographs of t h e m .
Since the officials of t h e Villa Albani h a v e consistently refused requests from Professors
Durry (see his edition of t h e Laudatio, p. L), Gordon (see A. J. Α., L I V [1950], p. 223),
and Oliver for permission t o m a k e photographs, squeezes, or rubbings, i t seemed futile
to request assistance f r o m them. I t was hoped t h a t a photographic plate could h a v e been
published here, b u t m y a t t e m p t s have also been in vain. Professor Oliver has reminded
92 OTHER STYLES

The sixty-nine lines of the Laudatio partly preserved in the two large extant
fragments contain seven marks of punctuation, which may be most conven-
iently examined in Durry's edition of the text, in which they are represented
by the sign §. There appears to be no published information whatsoever con-
cerning the shape of the mark or marks that appear on the stone.13
Of the seven attested marks of punctuation, three mark full stops, three
separate a rhetorical question from a second question or a reply to it, and one
seems to mark the beginning of indirect discourse within a sentence. These
may be listed as follows (I use marks of suspension to show where I have
omitted words to reduce preceding and following constructions to a gramma-
tical minimum):
Full stops:
I n f i n i t a sint si a t t i n g e r e coner. § Sat est mihi tibique aaluäriter m [ e latuisse].
M. L e [ p i ] d u s . . . u t a u c t o r m e ö r u m peric[ul]orum nötesceret. § Quoi noc[uit m o x ea res.]
F u e [ r u ] n t o p t a t i liberi, quos aliqua[mdiu sors i n v i j d e r a t . § Si fortiina procedefre e]sset
paasa.

Rhetorical questions:
Vt repentinis n u [ n t ] i i s ad praesentia et i n m i n e n [ t i a pericula evoca]tus tuis consiliis
cons[er]vatus sim? § u t neque audaci[us experiri casus] temere p a s s a sis. . .
Sed quid p l u r a ? § p a r c a m u f s ] orationi. . .
Si fortiina procede[re e]sset p a s s a . . .quid utrique n o ] s t r u m d e f u i t ? § procedens a[li]as
spem [ f j i n i e b a t .

The final example marks the beginning of a clause of virtual indirect dis-
course according to the generally accepted restoration.14
. . . [de divertio] älocuta es, § v o c u a m q u e d o m u m alterius f e c u n d i t a t i te [ t r a d i t u r a m ] . . .

m e t h a t t h e r e seems t o be a oast of this inscription in t h e Museo dell' I m p e r o near R o m e ,

b u t we h a v e also been unable t o o b t a i n p h o t o g r a p h s f r o m it. T h e Villa Albani f r a g m e n t s
were seen b y t h e editors of t h e Corpus, b u t they, oddly enough, t o o k n o notice of p u n c t u -
ation in their transcription.
13
T h e use of t h e sign § t o represent a n y m a r k of p u n c t u a t i o n a p p e a r s t o h a v e become
conventional a f t e r Mommsen's publication of t h e Res Gestae (v. supra, p. 33), and t h u s
dispensed epigraphers f r o m more precise reporting. Professor Oliver h a s t h e impression
t h a t t h e m a r k s — o r a t least a n u m b e r of t h e m — a r e diagonals, i.e. virgulae, b u t h e w a r n s
m e t h a t t h e saw t h e stones, which are set in t h e wall of a d a r k corner of a side r o o m in
t h e Villa Albani, o n a d a r k d a y a n d a t a time w h e n h e was n o t p a r t i c u l a r l y interested in
noting such details, a n d t h a t he would n o t rely on t h i s recollection of one of m a n y in-
scriptions t h a t h e inspected some years ago.
14
Vollmer would restore [tradere proposuisti] t o t a k e account of t h e preceding que,
b u t t o j u d g e f r o m t h e space shown in t h e C. I . L., t h e r e would n o t h a v e been room for
so m a n y letters.
 OTHER STYLES 93

Since punctuation by blank spaces was not noted by any editor, our study
here will necessarily be confined to the small portion of the inscription for
which photographs are available. Three such spaces are visible. Two occur
in a paragraph that consists of one long sentence; the first is equivalent to a
modern colon, the second marks the end of a subordinate clause and the be-
ginning of the second half of a compound sentence:
Amplissima subsiDIA • FVGAE · MEAE · P R A E S T I T I S T I · O R N A M E N T I S
tuis iuvisti me CVM · OMNE · A V R V M · M A R G A R I T A Q V E · C O R P O R I
tuo detracta iradlDISTl · M I H I · ET · SVBINDE · FAMIL1Ä · NVMMIS ·
FRtCTIBVS
callide deceptis aDVERSARIORVM · CVSTODIBVS · A P S E N T I A M · MEAM •
LOCVPLETASTI

The remaining instance sets off a subordinate clause after a short phrase that
opens the paragraph:15
Periculis posthablTIS · QVOD · VT · CONARERE · V I R T V S · T V A · T E ·
HORTABATVR

These instances suggest fairly systematic punctuation, but so small a part

of the inscription is available in photographs that the data for a comparison
with modern punctuation, such as was offered for the Laudatio Murdiae, are
lacking.
The two examples of laudationes funebres that survive from the period we
are studying are also the only two epigraphic specimens of texts in prose that
may fairly be called literary. Both indicate that punctuation was used as a
matter of course, and one gives proof that that punctuation was highly syste-
matic.
From the evidence thus far accumulated, although it obviously is much less
copious than we could wish, it seems reasonable to conclude that, as shown by
the laudationes and the remains of books, literary texts in this period were
normally punctuated with both spaces and written signs. I t can further be
inferred that the punctuation in the Res gestae is probably an indication that
Augustus regarded his autobiographical statement as a literary text and hence
used punctuation in a way in which it probably would not have been used in a
contemporary decree or senatus consultum.

15 The various restorations proposed of the opening phrase do not affect the nature of
the clause set off b y the space, so I use D e Rossi's, which is, perhaps, the least implausible.
 VII

THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

The foregoing chapters have examined the available texts of sufficient length
to show variety and system of punctuation. Of the great number of inscriptions
now extant, the majority come from the later empire. And the overwhelming
majority of inscriptions from any period are either small fragments or, if
complete, short texts containing simple statements in which little punctua-
tion would be called for, since the arrangement of lines and size of letters would
usually suffice to show the interrelation of parts of the text, even if the state-
ments were not couched in conventional and familiar formulae.
The numerous shorter inscriptions do exhibit some punctuation, although
I found fewer instances than I anticipated when this study was begun. Most
of these short inscriptions exhibit only one mark of punctuation and often
only one use of that mark. It seems best, therefore, to classify this evidence
according to the sign of punctuation used, and it will be convenient to list
under each mark all the uses of it observed in the earlier chapters, so that
the reader may have before him a conspectus of the value of each sign, so far
as it has been possible to determine that value in the course of this study.
There is an astonishingly large variety of marks of punctuation, and it
seems desirable to treat each distinctive and recognizable form separately,
although there is no suggestion that all of these forms belong to a single system
of punctuation.
Although in a few marginal occurrences the classification must be more or
less arbitrary, the various marks are normally clearly distinguishable from
one another. However, it may be worthy of remark that one could speculatively
construct a kind of evolutionary sequence that would derive almost all of the
signs from a single source. Such a scheme could well be the following.
As everyone knows, the apex placed above long vowels in inscriptions is
almost always proportionally larger than the acute accent (') by which it is
conventionally represented in transcriptions. Where we find the apex used
as a symbol of punctuation, it does not differ from the phonetic sign in size
or shape, and this in turn does not greatly differ from the short diagonal (')
 T H E S I G N S OF PUNCTUATION 95

that one finds in some inscriptions. I classify as apices the marks which one
finds above the interpunct, and as short diagonals those which are placed
beside the interpunct.
The long diagonal, for which I reserve the term virgula, is obviously but a
larger form of the short, and since the size could obviously differ (as do the
proportional sizes of various letters) in different styles of engraving, we should
not differentiate between the two, were it not for the fact that both occur in
some inscriptions.
An obvious way to produce a mark stronger than a virgula is to repeat it,
producing what I call the virgula geminata (//).
Now the virgula (and also, sometimes, the phonetic apex) is in some styles
formed with a slight projection to the left at the top of the diagonal stroke
( J ) . From this it would be easy to derive three different forms: if the virgula
were made vertical to save space, it would yield the odd signs observed in the
Monumentum Ancyranum ); if both the hook and the diagonal line were
rounded and the whole made larger, we would have the paragraph sign
and if the projection at the top of the diagonal were exaggerated, we would
have the mark which I have elected to call the virgula ansata (7).
The vertical mark from the Monumentum Ancyranum ( r \ i ) has the alter-
native form i f and if this were placed above an interpunct, it would be natural
to curtail it to the mark Ρ found in the Carmen de bello Actiaco.
Then, if the virgula ansata were turned a little, we would have a dipla ( » .
If this, in turn, were made smaller and elevated to the top of the line, we would
have the small dipla (> or 7 ). This could easily be rounded, and would then
produce the sicilicus ( ). Two sicilici (or small diplae) placed vertically would
give the sign 3, of which £ would be a simple reversal. And a sicilicus turned
downward would give us the sign that we noticed in one early legal text.
If the virgula ansata were exaggerated with a kind of flourish it would give
us the paragraph a i g n ^ ^ And if the dipla were exaggerated by drawing its
point out into a line, it would give us the common paragraphos^~~ .
If the dipla were reversed, it would give us <C and if this were combined with
a virgula as an alternative to the virgula geminata, the result could well b e j < .
Such an evolutionary shema would account for all the marks except the
blank space, the interpunct, and the hedera. I t will be understood, of course,
that I do not mean to suggest that such an evolution actually took place.
The scheme provides however a fairly logical order for arranging the signs in
sequence, which I shall follow here, faute de mieux.

l. Ai'EX (')
As a sign of punctuation, the apex (which is placed above the interpunct)
occurs with the following values:
96 T H E SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N

(i) full stop, when combined with following space (L. Murdiae);
(ii) equivalent of modern comma in all of its uses (L. Murdiae);
(iii) equivalent of modern colon as (a) introducing enumeration of items,
and (b) dividing compound sentence (Res gestae).
An additional example of the use of the apex may be found in the fragment
of an otherwise unknown Latin dialogue preserved in P. Hamb. II. 167, which
is assigned to the Second or Third Century. This papyrus, while not really
calligraphic, was executed with some care with two colors of ink, since the
names of speakers are written in red. Words are separated by interpuncts
and long vowels are marked by apices. The dialogue —or at least this part of
it—was evidently a lively interchange of short speeches, so that little punctua-
tion would be needed. 1 In our short fragment, however, a diagonal mark of
punctuation, which we must call an apex, appears twice, once above, and once
just before the interpunct. 2
1-5:
]T · CÖGIT · AM.f
]. . · GRATIA · ROMAM[ ]F[
]. .CA.. [ ]M[ ]AEGR0TAM · INNÄVE · IM[
•mo ]RTVA · C[ ] · ME · SOCER0 · NEC · Dfi · FEIG[
JSATIS · FA [cere • ^OSSVM ·' QVID · EST · QVR · I ]
]REINVM PATRE[m · ^JRAEPONAM • [
20-22:
]. TVLISSEM · NISI · PERVENISSEM · FO[r]TE · V[
]' · MEVM · Ν0ΜΕΝ · IN · HAEC · DISCIP[Z]EINA [
The apex here may represent either a full stop or a comma. In line 5, it may
either divide a sentence from a following question or set off a clause or clauses
that depend grammatically on the question. 3 In line 21, meum nomen could
well begin a new sentence, but it need not do so.

2. SHORT DIAGONAL
(i) Apparently the equivalent of a full virgula in all senses (including full
stop), but differing in that it is used within lines while the virgula appears only
at the end of lines (Carmen).
1
The papyrus is so lacerated that not a single complete sentence can be reconstructed.
It seems likely, however, that the words necesse fuit which appear in both lines 12 and Ki
began parallel clauses which both depend on the preceding "non viri perfidiä." If so,
these clauses were not set off by punctuation.
2
Cavenaile shows the mark in line 5 as an apex over the next letter (· quid). In the
facsimile given by Lowe, no. 1214, I see that it is distinctly over the point and somewhat
longer.
3
I.e. one could have a sentence of the form "Si haec ita sunt neque ei satisfacere pos-
sum, quid est cur innocenti filio adulterinum patrem praeponam?"
 THE SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N 97

(ii) The equivalent of a comma, and hence the equivalent of a virgula, from
which it is distinguishable in form but not apparently in function, when the
virgula
(a) is used only as equivalent of a comma (Cicero);
(b) is used both as a comma and with other values,
for which the short diagonal is not used (Res gestae).
(iii) Possibly with a special force to separate words that are to be taken as
"and/or" (one conjecturally possible instance in Res gestae; see p. 48 above).
(iv) Possibly with the special force to show that the words separated are not
in the same case. That is the value of the sign in the following carefully executed
inscription:

C. I.L.Y I. 4119 (tabula marmorea).

ELATE · IVLIAE
DRVSI · CAESARIS
FILIAE · ' LIBERTAE
APHRODISIVS · C · CAESARIS
SER·FEC

The punctuation4 shows that libertae goes with Elate (dative) while filiae goes
with Iuliae (genitive). Thus it is made clear by punctuation that the inscription
is set up for Elate, the liberta of Iulia, daughter of Drusus.

3. V I R G U L A

The virgula is by far the most common of all marks of punctuation. It is used:
(i) To mark the end of a paragraph (only in Tabula Hebana and, once, in
Lex de imperio Vespasiani).
(ii) As a full stop (Res gestae, Carmen, papyrus Oratio Claudi, Acta Arva-
lium).
(iii) As the equivalent of the modern comma in virtually all of its uses,
especially to set off subordinate clauses within a sentence, to set off phrases
that are parallel because they are the object of the same verb or modify the
same noun, to set off syntactically separable phrases such as ablative absolute
constructions, and to separate items in a series (Res gestae, Cicero, Carmen,
Lex de imperio Vespasiani).
(iv) As the equivalent of the modern semicolon (or colon) used to divide a
compound sentence (Res gestae, Carmen, and C. I. L. XI. 3805 [see page 75]).
(v) As the equivalent of the modern dash used to set off an explanatory
addition (Res gestae).
4
The Gordons, Album, p. 83 and plate 35c, show the short diagonal, which is omitted
in the C. I. L.
98 THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

(vi) To mark a rhetorical pause for emphasis (once in Res gestae, see page
48 above).
Of additional examples of the use of virgulae, the following seem particularly
significant or worth mentioning; I classify them according to the certain or
most probable function of the sign.
I list first inscriptions which contain virgulae that mark the end of a sentence,
or the beginning of a new sentence:

G. I. L. I 2 , pp. 231ff. (tabulae marmoreae). c. 2-10 A. D,

HAEC • ΝΟΤΑ · SIGNIFicai

P R O · IN ·PONEBATVR [
QVAM · HOSTIA · INMOLeiwr
NEFAS · F I T I ITAQVE • SAepe
LICERE · AGI TI CAESAr
e. q. s.

AGONIA[
QVT · QVIA[
HAEC · ΝΟΤΑ · SIGNIFicai diem intercisum nam endo olim
PRO · IN · PONEBATVR die interciso nefas est mane ante
QVAM · HOSTIA · INMOLeiwr et post exta porrecta rursus
NEFAS · FIT I ITAQVE · Saepe responsum est medio tempore
LICERE · AGI TI · CAESAr

MARTIVS · AB · LATINORVM marte appelLANOI • ITAQVE · APVD/

ALBANOS · ET · PLEROSQVE popVLOS • LATw mOS · IDEM · FVIT ·
ANTE
CONDITAM · ROMAM · VT · AmTEM · A L I I · CREdwNT · QVOD · ET ·
SACRA
FIVNT · HOC · MENSE e. q. s.

(note the meaningless separation of apud Albanos)

rectius tamen alii pitta

dictum ab eo quod hie
dies est post diem ν idus
quoT) · INLATIO · POST idus dies simili fere
ratione decZiNARENTVR / ARTIFICVM · DIES
quod minervae AEDIS · IN · AVENTINO e. q. s.

In these fragments from the Fasti Praenestini, virgulae are used occasionally
to terminate sentences, sometimes without significance as punctuation. Some
spaces appear which, with the interpunct, seem to indicate sentence-ends.
 THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION 99
Note that the virgula as a mark of punctuation is used with extra space on
both sides.

C. I. L. IX. 3664. 18 A. D.
DIVOS · AVG · E[
TI · CAESAR · DE · INQVISITIOwe
ORDINI · SCRIPSIT / CVIVS[
PRINCIPES · IN QV0S · IMPERIwm
PER · SVCCESSI0NES · TRAdunt
PRAEFECTO · SAGITTAR[
GERMANICO · CAESARE IK seio tuberone cos
ASCALONITANAE / IIIIVIR[

The editor notes that virgulae are used "ubi sententiae finiunt". That is almost
certainly true in the third line, but only possibly so in the last line.

C. I. L. XIV. 4014.
jjorTICVM[
sua impensA · FECIT / PII[
semRVM · AVGVSTÄLIVM · ET · INCO larum
wVENVM · ET · PVER0RVM · ET puellarum
] ^ R A I ET[
aCCENSI Velati
c · AV[
Although this fragment is small, it is sufficient to show that the virgula in the
second line probably terminated a sentence. The value of the second
diagonal, in line 5 (which is incised in larger letters), is uncertain.

C. I. L. VI. 33033 (tabula marmorea).

12-13:
TAMENTI FECIT · /PRAETere
A · SECVNDVM PRAECEPTwra
e. q. s.
Here the diagonal is used with an interpunct to show that a new sentence
begins.
C. I. L. IX. 4973 (tabula magna marmorea).
PAL·LABEONI
iiii viro iure diciiKD · BIS · CVRIB · SABIN
coLLEGIIS · EX · C · VIROR · DECR · FfiC
INCISVM · EST I SECVNDo
100 T H E SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N

quattuorviraTV • EPVLVM • POPVLO · DED · PRImws

curensium inteR · SELECTOS · IVDIC · V I X · AN
1 0 · PIISSIMO · FF

C. I. L. mentions the "virgulam commata separatem" in line 4; however, the

editors do not generally distinguish between various types of commata. The
virgula here appears to mark a full stop.
The following inscription represents many in which a mark is placed at the
end of a short inscription. In addition to the virgula, the mark in many inscrip-
tions takes other forms, such as a point, horizontal stroke, or hedera.

C. I. L. VI. 37901 (tabula marmorea).

D · Μ ·
Τ · FLÄVI · IÄNVÄRI
• M^RIS ·
V A · IUI · D · XIX ·
Τ · F · IÄNVÄRIVS · ET AClLIA · NICE
PARENTIS · PIENTISSIMI ·
SIBI POSTERISQVE SVOR
FECERVNT /

Here the diagonal marks the end of a sentence—or merely the end of the in-
scription. Of course, it is unnecessary.

C. I. L. VI. 10229 (stela marmorea). 108 A. D. This is a small fragment of the

inscribed text of a will (well known since it contains the names of Tacitus and
Pliny).
9-11:
Item VS · MEVS · MIHI · HERES esto ex. . .cernitoque eadem
condicione. Item
et.· mIHI · HEREDES · SVNDO ex.. .cernuntoque eadem
condicione. Denique. . .
eadem condicione ex.. .mlHI HERES ESTO · /SI · DAsumia filia non
creverit,.. .ex.. .mihi heres esto, e. q. s.

The Corpus comments: "virgula novum comma incipere nuntiat." The space
plus virgula marks a full stop, but not a new section, since what follows seems
to name an alternate heir:

53-55:
QuodcumQVE • VICENSIMAE · NOMINE · Ez lege publica debebitur
propter eos omnES · QVOS · LIBEROS · ESSE · IVSSI · EO · Soluto Us qui
solverunt heredes meos
 THE SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N 101

reddere volo fideique ΐίΕΜ · EORVM · [

] COMMITTO · IQVISquis mihi heres
er it dato e.q. s.

Here the C.I.L. remarks: "Capitis de vicensima libertatis restituenda iis

qui solvissent (similiter Trimalchio Petronii c. 71 servo legat insulam et vicesimam
et ledum stratum) finis cum virgula indicatus sit v. 55 post COMMITTO,
supplementa convenienter formavi." The editor would thus interpret the
virgula as beginning a new paragraph (caput), but I can see no reason why
anything more than the beginning of a new sentence need be indicated. The
fragments give only the middle part of lines; the inscription was long (at
least 104 lines) and was probably paragraphed in the usual way.
An interesting example of the use of the virgula may be found in a rather
odd inscription that has been preserved in what is presumably an exact manu-
script copy. The right-hand margin is even, but that only partly explains the
extravagant use of blank space.

C. I.L.Y I. 33813.

L · VALERIVS · ZABDAE · MERCATORIS · VENALICI · L · ARIES

SEV · STVPOR · EST · HVIC · STVDIO · SIVE · EST · INSANIA • NOMEN
OMNIS · AB · HAC · CVRA · /CVRA • LEVATA · MEA · EST
MONIMENTVM · APSOLVI · IMPENSA MEA · Α ΜI C A
TELLVS · VT · DET · HOPITIVM · OSSIBVS /QVOD · OMNES
ROGANT · SED • FELICES · IMPERTRANT /NAM · QVID
EGREGIVM · QVIDVE · CVPIENDVM · EST · MAGIS · QVAM
VBI · LVCEM · LIBERTATIS · ACCEPERIS LASSAM · SENECTAE
SPIRITVM · IBI · DEPONERE · QVOD INNOCENTIS · SIGNVM
EST · MAXIMVM

The first of the three virgulae is placed in the middle of the pentameter line
of the well-known quotation from Ovid (Trist. I. 11. 12), a place where no
modern writer would mark punctuation; it seems intended to separate the
ablative curd from the nominative cura—a distinction that could have been
made by an apex above the first a.5 The whole of the last paragraph can be
restored as verse, if we assume an extraordinary number of blunders on the
part of the writer, designator, or stone-cutter.® On that assumption, the spaces

5
I have collected instances of the use of punctuation to show metrical structure by
dividing lines, but have found no instance of marking to show the caesura in a line,
except in one (G. I. L. XIV. 914) in which points are used. cf. App. II, § III.
β
Buecheler restores senarii thus:
Monumentum < h o c > apsolvi <0pera e t > impensä mea,
arnica tellus lit det ho < s >pitium össibus,
102 THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

and virgulae would mark the beginning of lines of verse and so fall outside the
scope of this study.
I now give examples of the use of the virgula to divide the items in a series
of appositives. The first is taken from a huge and oviously expensive sarcopha-
gus which the Corpus describes as an area gemina ingens.

C. I. L. IX. 2845.
Ρ · PAQVIVS · SCAEVAE · ET · FLAVIAE • FILIVS · CONSI · ET ·
D I D I A E · NEPOS · / BARB I • ET · DIRVTIAE · PRO ·
NEPOS
SCAEVA · I QVAESTOR · DECEM · VIR · STLITI · BVS · IVDICANDIS ·
E X · S · C · POST · · QVAESTVRAM · QVATTVOR - VIR
CAPITALIS · E X · S · C · /POST · QVAESTVRAM · ET · DECEM · VIRA-
TVM · STLITIVM · IVDICANDARVM · TRIBVNVS ·
PLEBIS
AEDILIS · CVRVLIS · / IVDEX · QVAESTIONIS · / PRAETOR ·
A E R A R I I · I PRO · CONSVLE · PROVINCIAM ·
CYPRVM · OPTINVIT
VIAR · CVR · EXTRA · V · R · E X • S · C · I N QVINQ · PRO · COS ·
ITERVM · EXTRA · SORTEM · AVCTORITATE ·
AVG · CAESARIS
ET · S · C · MISSO · AD · COMPONENDVM · STATVM · I N · R E L I Q W M ·
PROVINCIAE · CYPRI · FETIALIS ·
CONSOBRINVS · IDEMQVE · VIR · FLAVIAE · CONSI · F I L I A E · •
I BARBI · PRONEPTIS · SIMVL · CVM · EÄ ·
CONDITVS

C. I. L. IX. 2846.
FLAVIA · CONSI • ET · SINNIAE · FILIA • / SCAPVLAE · ET · SINNIAE ·
NEPTIS · /BARBI · ET · DIRVTIAE
PRONEPTIS · I CONSOBRINA · EADEMQVE · VXOR · Ρ · PAQVII ·
SCAEVAE · F I L I I · SCAEVAE · CONSI
NEPOTIS · BARBI · PRONEPOTIS · / SIMVL · CVM · E 0 · CONDITA

In both inscriptions, the punctuation in the indications of descent was made

more or less necessary by the unusual inclusion of the names of the mothers
and also by the unusual designation of the father by his cognomen rather than

< rogänt > quod omnes [rogant], sed felices impetrant.

Nam quid < t a m > egregium quidve cupiendum est magis,
quam <libertatis> tibi < t u > lucem [libertatis] acceperis,
lasaace >[m] aenectae spiritum ibi depönere,
quod innocentis < vitae > signum est mdximum.
 THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION 103

his praenomen. No mark appears after pronepos in the first part, probably
because this comes at the end of the line. That a break is clearly intended is
shown by the mark which appears after the parallel proneptis in the second
part. The omission of the virgula in the first inscription after filius may be an
oversight, or it may have been felt that this part of the name was sufficiently
clear without a sign.
The diagonals in lines 2, 3, and 4 (ter) of the first inscription again set off
items in a series, viz. the various stages of the man's career. Wilmanns7 notes
that in line 6 his priesthood is separated from the other offices by a blank space.
It may be possible that a virgula was originally intended here, as in the other
places. We should have expected a virgula before post in line 2; the meaningless
double interpunct after that word may show that the lapidary was confused
here. Virgulae were presumably omitted at the ends of lines; hence we do not
find punctuation after plebis (line 3), obtinuit (line 4). But surely the omission
of a virgula before proconsule iterum in line 5 must be a stone-cutter's error.
A somewhat similar, though less perspicuous, use may be observed in the
following:

C. I.L. X. 1081.
Μ · V I R T I 0 · Μ · F / MEN
CERAVN0 I l E D I L t · IIVIR • IVRE
DICVNDO · PRÄEFECT0 · FABRVM · V · VIR
e. q. s.
Although again the editor notes "virgulas, quibus commata separantur,"
this is very vague—in fact, incorrect. The intention probably was to make
a name clear which has an unusual cognomen. The abbreviation MEN is, of
course Menenia (tribu). One has the impression that the virgula was felt to be
only a slightly stronger form of the interpunct.
Comparable in that respect is another inscription in which the first two names
in a series are set off by virgulae.

C. I.L. VI. 10848 (tabula marmorea).

AELIA ARSINOE/ ET AELIVS HILARVS/ ET AE
LIVS TIMOTHEVS IVNIOR · ET · Ρ · ANTONIVS
ARSINOVS · ET • Ρ · ANTONIVS MARINVS e. q. s.

I t will be noted that the next three names are set off by points rather than
virgulae.
From the practice observed in other inscriptions, fairly certain conjectures
can be made concerning the use of virgulae in quite fragmentary stones.
'No. 1124.
104 THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

C. I.L. IX. 4133.

]L VOLVsius
] · Τ · MALLius
JCAIVS I Q • VOMponius
orchesfRAM · STRAVERVNT · PODIVM · ET · TRIBIVNaZ et
statuam iVSTITIAE · AVGVSTAE / DECVRIONIBVs
ZVDOS · SCAENICOS · QVADRIDVO · ET[

The editor mentions "virgulas quibus commata separantur." But the letters
CAIVS must be part of a nomen. Apparently all the names in this list were
separated by virgulae. The mark in line 5 is of uncertain meaning. I t could
show that a new sentence begins or that a previous verb is inferred.
I have left to the last an example of particular interest since it shows the
virgula apparently used as a sign of suspension:

C. I. L. VI. 16521 (parva urna marmorea). c. 62 A. D.

5-7:
D I E · NATAL · I I I · Κ · FEBR
Ρ · MARIO I ET ·
AFINIO · GALLO · COS

The virgula apparently indicates that the name of the first consul is not yet
complete and that therefore the cognomen Gallus goes with both, as is certain,
for P. Marius Gallus and Afinius Gallus were in office at least from January 1,
62, until March 2, perhaps until October 27.

4. VIRGULA GEMINATA

Found only in the Carmen, where it has a force greater than that of a full
stop but less than that of a paragraphos.

5. THE SIGN 1)

Found only in the Res gestae, where it indicates a full stop.

0. THE SIGN ^

(i) Full stop after a question (Carmen).

(ii) To separate parallel and antithetical phrases (Carmen).
I can cite but one other instance of this sign. The Gordons point out a "pecu-
liar mark" which they describe as an "inverted-apostrophe-like mark before
 THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION 105

the freedwoman's cognomen," 8 and note t h a t previous editors have failed

to show the mark. The stroke appears slightly less curved in their plate t h a n
the corresponding signs in the Carmen, but it is probably identical, since it
is placed just before and a t the top of the letter it precedes. I t separates the
cognomen of a liberta from her nomen:

CARISIA r NESIS · Ο L ·

The rest of the inscription records a series of victories by an agitator; the last
date in this list is 25 A. D. Presumably the inscription was set up not long
thereafter by Carisia, who p u t her name a t the top b u t does not explain her
connection with it. If her name was really Carisia Nesis, the use of the sign
seems inexplicable.

7. T H E S I O N

(i) Marks (redundantly) the end of a paragraph (Res gestae).

(ii) Marks a break, much stronger than a full stop, within a paragraph (Res
gestae, Senatus consultum de pretiis gladiatorum).
The type used to represent this sign in the Corpus' transcription of the
De pretiis gladiatorum is certainly misleading as to its shape. The same type is
used, and so the same sign is probably intended, in the transcription of a tiny
fragment of what appears to have been a set of regulations for a temple of
Iuppiter Behelepharus:

C. I. L. VI. 30934 (tabula marmorea).

Iovi 6 E H E L E P A R O QVI S[
]C DEO MORE PÄTRIO S
AOCERIT Ρ N I QVID IN
]RASE V E L I T AD I S REBVS Q
. . ASTVS ADITO ITEM A SVILI
OMNIS G E N E R I S MELLE N I
MVNDA TOTVS ANTE D I E M
D E T INMOLATVM N I GVST
PARTV · ANTE · DIEM X ACCI
LEONAS VILIC
Although the inscription is fragmentary, it is clear t h a t the sign in line 3, with
extra space on both sides, marks at least the end of the sentence. One suspects
that it also marks the end of a section or subsection of the regulations.

8
Album, p. 68.
106 THE SIGNS Ο ι PUNCTUATION

8. V I R G U L A A N S A T A

This sign ( y or 7) occurs as a full stop in the Carmen. It is not uncommon in

inscriptions.
It first occurs in a Republican inscription:

C. I.L.I2, 1694.

Ρ • MAGIVS · Ρ · F · IVNC
Q · MINVCIVS · L · F · 7 CES
BASILICAM · FAC
CVR · DE · SEN · SENT

The sign evidently indicates that the word ce(n)s(ores) applies to both persons.
The need for such a mark may have been felt because the cognomen of Magius,
Iuncius, is given, but Minucius apparently had no cognomen.
The virgula ansata appears with the value of a full stop in a handsome and
carefully executed inscription that has regular interpuncts and some apices:

G. I. L. VI. 24808 (tabula marmorea).

POPILLIA-FELICVLAPIASANCTA
CARA · SVIS · ET · MENOPHILO · CONIVGI · ET · COLLIB · SVO · V ·
A · XIIX
HVNC · EGO · NVNC · TITVLVM · STATVO · TIBI · CARISSIMA ·
CONIVNX
L^CTVÖS · MIHI · QVISCIO · QVID · FVERIS · 7 EXTREMVM ·
OFFICIYM • QVONIAM · TIBI · REDDERE · COGOR · ET · MERITO ·
HOC · FIERI · TESTIS · ET · IPSE · LOQVOR · 7 NVNC · VOS · CONTES-
TOR
MENS · QVIBVS · OSSA · RELINQVO · TELLVS · HVIC ·
TVMVLO · NE · GRAVIS
ESSE · VELIS

There can be no question about the force of the virgulae ansatae in lines 4 and 6.
In another inscription the sign appears as a mark of punctuation stronger
than the virgula, which also appears, evidently with the force of a full stop.·
In a part of the inscription which I do not quote here, a blank space is used
to mark the beginning of a quotation.

9
I t should be noted t h a t the reading is somewhat uncertain. One editor placed a
virgula where C. I. L. leaves a blank space. The editors of C. I. L. further warn: "Vide
n e reliquae quoque virgulae (20, 22) a descriptore additae sint."
 THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION 107

C. I. L. VI. 10239 (tabula marmorea).

19-23:
TANTAM PECVNIAM · DAR I · ET ·^MPLIVS · POENAE · NOMINE
HS L · Μ · Ν · STIPVLATV [
SPOPONDIT · Τ · FLAVIVS • AITHALES · LlBERTVS / TVM ·
HORTVLOS CVM · AEDIFICIO • E[
EMPTI SVNT ET QVAE POSTEA IIS ACCESSERYNT MANCIPIO
ACCEPIT Τ FLAVIVS AITHA[
LIBRIPENDE · TI · CLAVDIO · PHILETO 7 ANTESTATVS · EST · Τ ·
FLAVIVM · THEOPOM[
RVM Q S · S · S · EX • CAVSA · SVPRA SCRIPTA · IRE · AVT · MITTERE ·
IVSSIT · Τ · FLAVIVS · ST[
The sign here marks the end of a series of transactions, possibly extracted
from a will, which was either quoted or reported in resume. The virgula ansata
sets off what seems to be a report of the signing and witnessing of the will.
In a comparatively late inscription, the virgula ansata is used to separate
the verb fecerunt from the compound subject which follows it:

C. I.L.Y I. 213. 131 A. D.

SIGNVM · GENI · CENTVRIAE · CVM AEDE · MARMORIBVS ·

EXORNATA • ET ARA · SVA PECVNIA · FECERVNT
7 Q · SOCCONIVS · Q · F · CRV · PRIMVS · TVDER · ET · EVOCATI
ET · MILITES · QVORVM · NOMINA · IN · ARA ·
SCRIPTA · SVNT
DEDICAT · KAL · IVNIS
IMP · Μ · AVRELIO · COMMODO · ANTONINO · AVG · III · L ·
ANTISTIO · BVRRO · COS

Another example will show the sign used as punctuation not for syntactical
reason but in response to some feeling that the libertus who sets up the monu-
ment should mark a difference between himself and his family on the one hand
and his patron on the other.

C. I. L. VI. 28960a (tabella marmorea).

DIS · MANIBVS
Μ · VINICIVS · FAVSTVS · FECIT • SIBI · POSTE
RISQVE · SVIS · 7 ET · Μ • VINICIO · ALLI
MO · PATRONO · BENE · MERENTI
AEDICLA · C O L V M B A R V M IUI·
108 T H E S I G N S OF P U N C T U A T I O N

It may be worthy of remark that in some late inscriptions 10 the sign 7 appears
as an ornate form of the interpunct, possibly through some confusion with
the hedera.

9. D I P L A

(i) Twice used, perhaps by error for the sign J , to mark the end of a para-
graph in the Res gestae.
(ii) When used with a blank space, a full stop (Res gestae, Lex collegi).
(iii) With most or all of the functions of the modern comma (and therefore
indistinguishable in function from the virgula similarly used): to set off subor-
dinate clauses, phrases that are parallel and governed by the same verb, and
syntactically separable phrases (ablative absolute), and to separate items in a
series (Res gestae).
Among further examples of the use of the dipla is an extremely interesting
inscription of the year 114 A. D. which reports the official authorization for
the construction in Caere of a phetrium—a structure of unknown nature 11
for the use of the local college of Augustales. As the preamble makes clear, the
inscription quotes from the commentarium cottidianum municipi, a daily record
kept by some responsible official 12 and reporting the decisions of the local
decurions (and, quite possibly, other matters). We learn that this record, which
must have been kept on either papyrus or parchment, 13 consisted of a series
of volumes (either rolls or codices) 14 with numbered paginae, that each item of

" • E . g . C.I.L.II. 4064; I I I . 13972; VI. 20948, 25935; X I I . 2091, 3693. I t obviously
h a s n o value as p u n c t u a t i o n in such places, e.g. D · Μ · S7 (C. I. L. V I . 16592).
11
T h e word phetrium, n o t recorded elsewhere, occurs thrice in t h e inscription. I t h a s
been conjectured (see Dessau, 5918a, ad loc.) t h a t i t is a m i s t a k e f o r phretrium, a word
i m p o r t e d f r o m Greek as a s y n o n y m of schola. B u t t h e s t r u c t u r e w a s built in angulo
porticüs basilicae, a n d one wonders whether it could h a v e been large enough for a schola
in t h e sense of either a m e e t i n g place or a school. I t would seem b e t t e r t o conjecture
phrätrium, on t h e supposition t h a t t h e Augustales regarded themselves as t h e equivalent
of a n A t h e n i a n phratria a n d so would w a n t a shrine f o r t h e worship of their t u t e l a r y
deities. B u t even this would be q u i t e hypothetical.
12
Dessau a n d , so f a r as I know, all other editors r e a d in line 8 P R A E F (ecto) A E R A R I ,
t h u s assuming t h a t C. Suetonius Claudianus held t h a t office in addition t o being aedilis
iuri dicundo. B u t I wonder w h e t h e r it would n o t be b e t t e r t o r e a d P R A E F (ecti). . .
C O M M E N T A R I V M , i.e. t h e record of t h e P r a e f e c t u s Aerarii, w h o could h a v e been a
professional employe of t h e municipality a n d hence t h e Cuperius Hostilianus of line 5,
who h a d charge of t h e commentaria a n d gave permission t o q u o t e f r o m t h e m , b u t who
a p p e a r s n o t t o h a v e been one of t h e decurions (he is n o t n a m e d as h a v i n g been present
w h e n t h e decision w a s reached).
13
I t is inconceivable t h a t such voluminous a n d o f t e n trivial records were inscribed on
bronze or stone.
14
T h e f i r s t q u o t a t i o n comee f r o m page 26. T h e second, d a t e d four m o n t h s later, comes
f r o m " p a g i n a a l t e r a " . This c a n n o t m e a n " n e x t p a g e " , because surely m o r e business m u s t
 T H E SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N 109
business was entered in a paragraph or section (kaput), and these kapita were
numbered on each page, not continuously throughout the volume.
It will be worth while to quote the whole of this inscription, since it gives
both positive and negative evidence. It will be noted that punctuation occurs
only in the text extracted from the Commentarium; this may be an indication
that the punctuation comes from the document itself.
C. I.L. XI. 3614 (tabula marmorea).
VESBINVS · AVG · L · PHETRIVM · AVGVSTALIBVS
MVNICIP · CAERITVM · LOCO · ACCEPTO · A RE · Ρ
SVA · IN PENSA · OMNI · EXORNATVM · DONVM · DEDIT
DESCRIPTVM · ET · RECOGNITVM · FACTVM · IN · PRONAO ·
AEDIS · MARTIS
EX · COMMENTARIO · QVEM · IVSSIT · PROFERRI · CVPERIVS ·
HOSTILIANVS · PER · Τ · RVSTIVM · LYSIPONVM
SCRIBAM · INQVO · SCRIPTVM · ERAT · IT · QVOD · INFRA ·
SCRIPTVM · EST
L · PVBLILIO · CELSO · II · C · CLODIO · CRISPINO · COS · IDIBVS ·
APRILIB
Μ · PONTIO · CELSO · DICTATORE · C · SVETONIO · CLAVDIANO •
AEDILE · IVRI · DICVNDO · PRAEF · AERARI ·
COMMENTARIVM · COTTIDIANVM · MVNICIPI
CAERITVM · INDE · PAGINA • XXVI · KAPITE · VI
Μ · PONTIVS · CELSVS · DICTATOR · ET · C · SVETONIVS ·
CLAVDIANVS · DECVRIONES · IN · TEMPLO · DIVOR ·
CORROGAVERVNT · VBI · VESBINVS · AVG · LIB · PETIT
VT · SIBI · LOCVS · PVBLICE · DARETVR · SVB · PORTICV ·
BASILICAE · SVLPICIANAE · VTI · AVGVSTALIB · IN · EVM ·
LOCVM · PHETRIVM · FACERET · VBI · EX
CONSENSV · DECVRIONVM · LOCVS · EI · QVEM · DESISERAVERAT ·
DATVS · EST > PLACVITQ · VNIVERSIS · CVRIATIO ·
COSANO · CVRATORI · OB · EAM · REM
EPISTVLAM · MITTI > IN · CVRIAM · FVERVNT · PONTIVS ·
CELSVS · DICTAT · SVETONIVS · CLAVDIANVS · AED

have been transacted in four months, so it must mean page 2 in the next "volume".
The third and last quotation, dated one month later, eomes from page 8, presumably of
the same volume. N o w if we assume that a month's business occupied seven to eight
pages, and that no volumes intervened between April and August, the first volume, when
complete, contained about fifty-eight paginae—which would be neither too long for a
volumen nor too short for a codex (14 or 15 sheets of parchment, if a pagina was, as in
the mediaeval codices and early printed books, both sides of a leaf). Of course, papyrus
could also have been used for a codex.
110 THE SIGNS ΟΓ PUNCTUATION

IVRIDIC · Μ · LEPIDIVS · NEPOS

AEDIL · ANNON · POLLIVS · BLANDVS · PESCENNIVS · FLAVIANVS ·
PESCENNIVS · NATALIS · POLLIVS • CALLIMVS ·
PETRONIVS · INNOCENS · SERGIVS · PROCVLVS
INDE · PAGINA · ALTERA · CAPITE · PRIMO > MAGISTRATVS ·
ET · DECVRION · CVRIATIO · COSANO · SAL · IDIB · AVG · •
DESIDERANTI · A NOBIS
VLPIO · VESBINO · CONSILIVM · DECVRION · COEGIMVS · AQVIB ·
PETIT · VT · SIBI · LOCVS · PVBLICE · IN · ANGVLO ·
PORTICVS · BASILIC · DARETVR · QVOD · SE · AVGVSTALIB
PHETRIVM · PVBLICE · EXORNATVRVM · SECVNDVM • DIGNITAT ·
MVNICIPI · POLLICERETVR · GRATIAE · HVIC · ACTAE ·
SVNT · AB · VNIVERSIS · PLACVIT · TAMEN · TIBI
SCRIBI · AN · IN · HOC · QVOQVE · ET · TV · CONSENSVRVS · ESSES ·
QVI · LOCVS · REI · Ρ • IN · VSV · NON · EST · NEC · VLLO ·
REDITV • ESSE · POTEST · INDE · PAGINA · VIII · KAPITE
PRIMO
CVRIATIVS · COSANVS · MAG · ET · DEC · CAERETANOR · SAL
EGO · NON · TANTVM · CONSENTIRE · VOLVNTATI ·
VESTRAE · SET · ET · GRATVLARI · DEBEO · SIQVI · REM ·
P N
EXSORNAT · ACCEDO · ITAQ · SENTENTIAE · VESTRAE · NON ·
TANQVAM · CVRATOR · SED • TANQVAM · VNVS · EXSORDI-
NE · CVM · ΤΑΜ · HONESTA · EXSSEMPLA
ETIAM · PROVOCARI · HONORIFICA · EXORNATIONE · DEBEAT >
DATA · PRID · IDVS · SEPTEMBR • AMERIAE
ACT · IDIB · IVNIS · Q · NINNIO · HASTA · Ρ · MANILIO ·
VOPISCO · COS
DEDICATVM · Κ · AVG · ISDEM · COS

No punctuation was needed after the reference, "on page 26, in section 6,"
since the rest of the centered line was left blank and the quotation starts on
the next line (not extended into the margin). The extract consists of three
parts separated by diplae with generous spaces on each side, viz. (a) the deci-
sion of the decurions, (b) their resolution to write to the curator about it, and
(c) a list of decurions present.
The page and chapter reference for the second extract is not placed on a
separate line; a dipla, therefore, is placed after it. There is no punctuation in
the text of the letter other than the blank space which divides the salutation
(oddly including the date15) from the body of the letter.
15
That the normal style of placing the date at t h e end of letters was followed a t this
time and place is s h o w n b y line 21. One wonders, therefore, whether the notation "Ibid.
 T H E SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION 111

The letter ends in line 18 and its termination is shown only by a blank space—
which suggests that the blank space was here (but not in line 15) regarded
as a stronger mark of punctuation than the dipla. It is possible, of course, that
the dipla was accidentally omitted by the engraver, and that it could have been
supplied in paint by the miniator. The citation of page and chapter for the final
quotation follows on the same line. Presumably a dipla following it was omitted
because it would have come at the end of a line.
In the final quotation, the salutation of the letter is not set off from the
body, but the colophon, giving date and place of writing, is set off with a dipla.
The failure to use punctuation within units of text thus set off (unless,
perchance, the oversize V beginning the subordinate clause of purpose in line
11 was intended to set off that clause16) provides negative evidence of consid-
erable interest.17
A somewhat similar example may be found in a late inscription (c. 168
A. D.) in which interpuncta are used with fair regularity but by no means
with the consistency of earlier times. The inscription, of which only the first
twenty-four lines are preserved, is a transcription on stone of a threatening
letter sent to the magistrates of Saepinum by Bassaeus Rufus and Macrinus
Vindex (who are later described as praefecti praeforio, eminentissimi viri),
who enclosed a copy of a letter which they had received from an imperial
libertus, Cosmus, who in turn had enclosed with his letter to them a copy of a
letter which he had received from another imperial libertus, Septimianus.

Aug." should have followed or preceded the reference to page and chapter at the begin-
ning of this line as the date of the meeting of the decuriones at which the letter was offi-
cially approved.
16 I have considered the possibility of punctuation of this kind, but found no certain

evidence of it. Many inscriptions contain some oversize letters (aside from I-longa),
but they were obviously so made for aesthetic effect or, occasionally, to help in spacing.
17 Note particularly (1) that a single sentence (lines 10-12) consists of a statement that

the decuriones met followed by two parallel relative clauses beginning with vbi (i.e.
in eo templo), of which the first (a statement followed by an ut clause on which depends
a clause of purpose) states the petition made to the decuriones, while the second records
their granting of the petition. Perhaps punctuation in this sentence is not absolutely
necessary, but I imagine that most readers of the text as it now stands begin by taking
the second vbi as referring to the locum that occurs three words earlier and need a moment
of reflection before they see that vbi must go back to the templo in line 10.
(2) The names in lines 13 and 14 are not separated by punctuation of any kind; the
first three names are sufficiently set off by the titles of office but thereafter the list be-
comes sadly confusing, particularly since there are no praenomina and multiple cogno-
mina were frequent in this period.
(3) The letter (lines 16-18) consists of four distinct sentences (hence full stops are
needed after polliceretur, universis, and esses) but these are simply run together.
(4) The second letter (lines 19-21) certainly needs punctuation, at least before accedo,
but there is none.
112 T H E SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N

I begin my quotation with the last two lines of the prefects' letter and continue
only through the first line of Septimianus's. These include all the punctuation
to be found in the inscription. Of course, the long blank space in the second
line of my quotation was inserted to emphasize the word vindicari (the space
has about the effect that printing in bold-face capitals or in red would have
today).

C. I. L. IX. 2438.
6-14:
RVM · CVM · MAGNA · FISCI INIVRIA NE · NECESSE · SIT
RECOGNOSCI · DE · HOC
ET · IN • FACTVM • SI · ITA · RES · FVERIT VINDICARI ·
COSMI AVG · LIB · A RATIONIBVS · SCRIPTAE · AD · BASSEVM ·
RVFVM · ET · AD
MACRINVM · VINDIC · PR · PR · Ε · V > EXEMPLVM · EPISTVL ·
SCRIPTAE · MIHI
A · SEPTIMIANO · COLLIBERTO · ET · ADIVTORE · MEO · SVBIECI ·
ET · PETO · TANTI
FACIATIS SCIBERE · MAGG · SAEPIN · ET · BOVIAN · VTI · DESINANT
INIVRIAM
CONDVCTORIBVS · GREGVM · OVIARICORVM QVI SVNT • SVNT · SVB
CVRA · MEA · FACERE
VT · BEFICIO VESTRO · RATIO FISCI · INDEMNIS · SIT · SCRIPT
• A · SEPRIMIANO · AD CO
SMVM · CONDVCTORES · GREGVM · OVIARICORVM · QVI · SVNT ·
SVB · CVRA · TVA IN RE PRESENTI
e. q. s.
In the third line of my excerpt, we must, of course, understand the words
exemplum epistulae at the beginning of the line. The dipla in the following line
therefore marks the beginning of the actual copy, which begins "Exemplum
epistulae . . . " The end of the letter is indicated by a fairly wide blank space,
after which we must again understand the words exemplum epistulae. But the
text of this letter begins with the second word in the next line, "Conducto-
res . . ." It is noteworthy that there is neither dipla nor space to set off the quo-
tation.
An example of capricious use of the dipla for subordinate punctuation may
be found in a long inscription of which the text is dated 11 A. D., but which
is believed to have been inscribed (doubtless as a restoration) much later,
probably in the Second Century. So far as can be determined from the Corpus
and Hübner (No. 1099), there are only two marks of punctuation in the seventy
lines extant. It is quite possible that others were omitted when the inscription
was copied in the Second Century.
 T H E SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION 113

My quotation is part of a long sentence that begins with the statement that
the people of Narbonne have set up an altar in honor of the numen of the
(living !) Augustus; the statement is followed by a long series of clauses, each
beginning with a date, important in the career of Augustus, and prescribing
what rites shall be performed on that date by tres equites Bomani a plebe et tres
libertini, who are to make certain sacrifices and provide at their own expense
incense and wine for the colonists and inhabitants; the lines I quote are part
of that series:

C. I. L. X I I . 4333 (ara marmoreaj.

23-30:
COLONIS · E T • INCOLIS · P R A E S T E N T · V I I · QVOQ
IDVS · IANVAR · QVÄ · D I E · P R I M V M · I M P E R I V M
O R B I S · T E R R A R V M • AVSPICÄTVS · E S T > T H V R E
VINO · S V P P L I C E N T · E T · HOSTIAS · SINGVL I N
MOLENT · E T · COLONIS • INCOLISQVE · THVS · V I
NVM · E Ä · D I E · P R A E S T E N T V
E T · P R I D I E • Κ · IVNIAS · QVOD · EA · D I E · Τ · S T A T I L I O
TAVRO · Μ · AEMILIO · L E P I D O · COS · INDICIA
e.q.s

The dipla in line 25 obviously marks the end of the clause that begins with
qua die and states why the date is to be commemorated.
Both the paragraphing and the sign in line 28 are odd. As will be seen in
line 23, the items in the list of dates are not set off in separate paragraphs,
and it is hard to see why an exception should have been made here. On the
sign, the editors comment: "28 ex. commatis signum videtur, qualia inveniun-
tur in Monumento Ancyrano". This is wrong: no sign resembling this one
(which I have copied as exactly as possible from Hübner's plate) appears on
the Monumentum Ancyranum, nor do I recall having seen a similar sign of
punctuation elsewhere. I t is possible, of course, that in the original inscription
punctuation was used to separate the items, but it is very far from certain
that this sign is punctuation at all. 18

18 The mark looks very much like a letter V—it is, in fact, the same as the other V's

in thie inscription, except that the left-hand stroke is just a little more curved. The dates
on which sacrifices are to be offered by the equites and libertini are, in order:
(1) a. d. I X Kal. Oct.
(2) a. d. VIII Kal. Oct.
(3) Kal. Ian.
(4) a. d. V I I Id. Ian.
(5) prid. Kal. Iun.
etc.
I am inclined to believe that this is not a coincidence.
114 T H E SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N

As a final example of the dipla in a somewhat unusual use, which however

may have been common enough in written records, we may cite an inscription
from the common sepulchre of a familia of gladiators. I t is worthy of note
that the interpunct occurs on both sides of the mark of punctuation.

C. I. L. IX. 465.

5-9: MANDATVS · RAB · I I I • > · I I

TR
SECVNDVS · POMP · I · > · I I
C · MASONIVS · VII · > · I U I
PHILEROS · DOM · X I I · > - XI

As the editors remark: " > inter duos numeros pugnarum et victoriarum."
That the dipla in this use was simply equivalent to the large sicilicus (see
below) is evident from the fact that in another inscription (C. I. L. IX. 466),
set up for the same familia, it is used to separate the number of engagements
from the number of victories won.

10. SICILICUS MAIOR

The term sicilicus properly designates two distinct marks which have approxi-
mately the same shape but differ in size and in meaning. The small form of
it, usually called simply sicilicus, is mentioned under that name by Marius
Victorinus and Isidore and is called geminationis nota by Velius Longus.19
I t is a small symbol, shaped like the right-hand half or third of a small letter
ο or something like a comma ('), that, as the grammarians tell us and as the
few inscriptions in which it is found 20 show, was written above a single conso-
nant to indicate that it should be pronounced as a double consonant (e.g.
ΟέΑ for ossa); it was used in the late Republic and the Augustan period.
The term sicilicus (which simply means 'sickle'21) is also applied to the
18
ViotorinuB ap. Keil VI, p. 8; Isidore, Etym. I. 27. 29; Velius Longus ap. Keil VII, p. 80.
20
E.g. C. I.L.Y. 1361; VI. 21736; X . 3743; X I I . 414.
21
It seems obvious that the name of the sickle-shaped sicilicus is derived from the
common Latin word for 'sickle', slcllis, and this derivation is simply taken for granted
not only in the latest edition of Georges' Handwörterbuch, but also in the very recent and
authoritative revision of the Lateinisches etymologisches Wörterbuch of Α. Walde and
J. Β. Hofmann (3d. ed., Heidelberg, 1954), which says (s. h. v.) "von der sichelförmigen
Gestalt dieses Zeichens benannt", and thinks further discussion unnecessary. The same
view is stated, with a little reservation, b y Ernout and Meillet in the latest (fourth)
edition of their Dictionnaire etymologique (1960), s. v. slcllis; "Peut-etre faut-il y rattacher
sicilicus (scande sicilicus dans Palemon, de Ponder., temoignage tradif et sans autorite)
"48e partie de l'as, 4e partie de l'once", ainsi n o m m e en raison de la forme du Symbole)
qui le designe et qui a servi k noter la virgule." Ernout and Meillet's "peut-etre" is pro-
 T H E SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION 115

numerical symbol for 1/48. This symbol, although approximately of the same
shape, is larger than the phonetic symbol: it has almost exactly the shape )
and is approximately as tall as the average letter in the line in which it occurs.22
The typewritten symbol ) only very slightly exaggerates the size of the numeri-
cal sicilicus and may therefore fairly represent it.
The sicilicus that is approximately the size of a letter I call maior to distin-
guish it from what I call the minor, which was the sign of geminated consonants,
since both marks are used as punctuation. As punctuation, the maior is written
on the line in the same way as it is written when it designates a fraction;
the minor is placed at the top of the line to the right of the last letter in the
word that precedes the punctuation. It is quite possible that the Romans in
the period in which we are interested called both marks simply sicilicus
without distinction. Marius Victorinus, writing in the middle of the Fourth
Century, designates as sicilicus a mark of punctuation to which he gives a
value approximating that of the modern comma, and it is not impossible that
he was thinking of two sizes of it, although his statement (at least in the text
as it has been transmitted to us) is not entirely clear:

Quando distinguitis, cum erit perfecta oratio

et sensus concludetur, inter novissimam verbi
litteram et primam insequentis in superiore p a r t e
rursus p u n c t u m ponite aliud, q u a m quod librariue

bably a reservation m a d e in view of the somewhat astonishing f a c t t h a t the fraction was

apparently named f r o m t h e symbol, rather t h a n vice versa; m a n y other R o m a n fractions
have names related t o their numerical value, e.g. triens, 1/3, quadrans, 1/4, semuncia,
1/24, sextula, 1/72, b u t scrüpulum, 1/288, and siliqua, 1/1728, have names t h a t clearly
have no numerical value. The most likely name for 1/48 was dimidia semuncia, and it is
easy to see why, for so common a fraction, the longer expression would have been replaced
by the name of t h e symbol. An odd etymology of sicilicus, which neither Walde-Hofmann
nor Ernout-Meillet t h o u g h t worthy of mention, was proposed by Viedebantt in Pauly-
Wissowa-Kroll, s. h. v.; he thinks t h a t it m a y come f r o m Greek σικελικός, which m a y
in t u r n represent some confusion with t h e Hebrew shekel, a measure of weight which
could have been used b y t h e Carthaginians and so come t o t h e knowledge of the R o m a n s
via Sicily—hence t h e confusion. If there were any relation between the Hebrew weight
and the R o m a n fraction, this might be plausible, b u t it is extremely difficult to see how
the Semitic name could have been transferred t o a weight t h a t represented either slightly
less t h a n l^f or „ of the Phoenician weight t h a t corresponds t o the shekel. Pro-
itLitA ZÖU.O
feasor J o h n L. Heller of t h e University of Illinois informs me t h a t there can be no connec-
tion between sicilicus and sicilis, and t h a t t h e derivation of t h e former f r o m t h e latter
is emphatically rejected in some edition of E r n o u t and Meillet. I have been unable t o
locate this reference, since t h e first edition (1932), second edition (1939), and third edition
(1961) all contain—at least in the copies of t h e m in t h e library of t h e University of Illi-
nois—a statement exactly t h e same as t h a t which I h a v e quoted f r o m t h e fourth edition
(1960) above.
22
For good examples, see G. I. L. VI. 2059, lines 30, 32 (Gordons, Album, plate 60a).
116 T H E SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N

inter d u o v e r b a posuit. quotiens a u t e m a n t e dis-

t i n c t u m m o r a fuerit necessaria, similiter inter
d u a s litteras άπλψ aversam, id est sicilicum,
ponite. si vero fuerit h y p e r b a t o n e t longior
sensus, a t vos in i m a p a r t e versus inter d u a s
similiter, u t s u p r a , litteras d a r u m p u n c t u m ponite,
e t si prius q u a m distinctum concluditur, m o r a
i t e r u m fuerit necessaria, άπλήν a v e r s a m , id est
sicilicum, similiter in ima p a r t e versus ponite. 2 3

The earliest example, so far as I know, of the large sicilicus used as punctua-
tion comes from 17 B. C., the well-known record of the celebration of the Ludi
Saeculares (cf. Monumentum Ancyranum, §22; Horace, Carmen Saeculare,
70). Its use corresponds to the short diagonal in C. I. L. VI. 4119 (above, p.
97) and the virgula in C. I. L. X. 1081 (above, p. 103) in distinguishing names.
The text follows:
23
Victorinus (ap. Keil V I , p p . 22-23) is evidently i n s t r u c t i n g his pupils t o p u n c t u a t e
a t e x t (probably codex) t h a t h a s been copied by a librarius, a n d he r e c o m m e n d s t h e use
of t w o m a r k s of p u n c t u a t i o n , viz. (1) a clarum punctum, which is t o differ in some u n s t a t -
ed w a y f r o m t h e i n t e r p u n c t , a n d which is t o be placed a t t h e t o p t h e line t o m a r k a full
stop, a n d (2) a sicilicus, t o m a r k a pause within t h e sentence. So m u c h is clear, b u t un-
f o r t u n a t e l y he h a s n o t m a d e it clear w h e t h e r t h e sicilicus is t o be placed on t h e line or
a t t h e t o p of i t (one could i n t e r p r e t either way, depending o n t h e force t h a t one gives
t o t h e a d v e r b similiter), a n d it is f u r t h e r uncertain w h e t h e r his m e n t i o n of t h e i n t e r p u n c t
implies t h a t words were separated in t h e t e x t s he h a d in m i n d (a usage t h a t would h a v e
been ostentatiously archaic in his day) or implies merely t h e occasional use of t h e inter-
p u n c t t o m a r k abbreviations or a quoted syllable or word (as was c o m m o n enough in
his d a y ; e.g. P. Mich. 429). These uncertainties, however, are m i n o r compared t o those
which c o n f r o n t us in t h e second p a r t of his instructions, which s t a t e w h a t is t o be done
w h e n t h e sentence is a very long one w i t h hyperbaton. This word, despite its n o r m a l
m e a n i n g in rhetorical terminology, could here simply m e a n 'oversize' (from a common
meaning of t h e Greek adjective ύπερβατός), i.e. a c o m p o u n d sentence, a n d m u s t h a v e
t h a t m e a n i n g if distinctum m e a n s " e n d of sentence." B u t it is also possible t h a t t h e hyper-
baton is a long clause of some kind, which is t o be set off a t b o t h beginning a n d end b y a
clarum -punctum in ima parte versus, so t h a t t h e distinctum is t h e punctum a t t h e end of
t h e clause. A t all events, pauses within it are t o be indicated b y a sicilicus which, it is
definitely s t a t e d , is t o be placed a t t h e b o t t o m of t h e line.
A sicilicus on t h e line would p r e s u m a b l y be as large as t h e sign of t h e fraction, i.e.
a maior, whereas i t would be likely t h a t one placed a t t h e t o p or b o t t o m of t h e line would
be smaller, i.e. minor.
A f u r t h e r difficulty arises f r o m t h e f a c t t h a t t h e a l t e r n a t i v e n a m e f o r t h e sicilicus is
twice given in t h e m a n u s c r i p t s as άπλή aversa. T h a t is a n intelligible reading, since t h e
sicilicus as a curved m a r k resembling could be called 'simple' in c o n t r a s t t o t h e dipla
( > ) , which is 'double' because it h a s a n angle. T h e r e appears, however, t o be n o other
reference t o a m a r k called in Greek άπλή, and some editors (including Keil) accordingly
emend t o read διπλην aversam in both places. I n f a v o r of this e m e n d a t i o n it m a y be noted
t h a t t h e small sicilicus c a n n o t be readily distingushed f r o m a small diple, since in so small
a m a r k , n o m o r e t h a n a f o u r t h as tall as a letter, t h e scribe usually does n o t m a k e either
a smooth curve or a s h a r p angle, b u t r a t h e r something " b e t w i x t a n d b e t w e e n . "
 T H E SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N 117

0 . 1 . L . VI. 32232 (massa marmorea).

151-153:
C · NORBANVS · Μ · COCCEIVS · Μ · LOLLIVS · C · SENTIVS . . .
Q · TVBERO · C · REBILVS · ) MESSALLA · MESSALLINVS
LVD IS · SCAENICIS · DIMISSIS • Η ora e. q. s.

The Gordons comment: "The mark to the right of the point after Rebilus
(not shown by Mommsen, CIL, or Dessau) appears made by the stonecutter,
whether intentionally or by mistake, rather than a later, accidental cutting.
It looks like a major punctuation-mark, intended to make clear that Messalla
is not Rebilus' cognomen."24 This is certainly right, for Messalla is a common
cognomen (occurring as such earlier in this inscription), and is a cognomen
here—the man designated is C. Valerius Messalla Messalinus. Without some
mark of punctuation, the reader would naturally assume that these cogno-
mina belonged to Rebilus.
An example of 18 A. D. may be found in the first of the six paragraphs of
a not very carefully cut inscription which reports somewhat confusedly
resolutions of the local decurions concerning celebration of the birthdays of
Augustus and Tiberius.

G. I. L. XI. 3303 (tabula parva marmorea).

TI · CAESARE · TERT · GERMANICO · CAESAR · ITER · COS

CN · ACCEIO CN · F · ARN · RVFO · LVTATIO · Τ · PETILLIO · Ρ · F
QVI · Π · VIR
DECRETA
AEDICVLAM ET STATVÄS HÄS HOSTIAM DEDICATION! VICTIMAE
NATALIAVG V I I I Κ OCTOBR DVAE QVAE
Ρ Ρ
INMOLARI ADSVETAF SVNT AD ARAM · QVAE NVMINI AVGVSTO
DEDIC EST V i l l i ET VIII Κ OCTOBR
INMOLENTVR ) ITEM NATALI TI · CAESARIS PERPETVE
ACTVRI DECVRIONES
ET POPVLVS CENARENT ) QVAM INPENSAM Q · CASCELLO
LABEONE
IN PERPETVO POLLICENTI VT GRATIAE AGERENTVR
MVNIFICENTIAE EIVS EOQVE
NATALI VT QVOTANNIS VITVLVS INMOLARETVR

" Album, p. 30.

118 THE SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N

The sicilici separate the three clauses of resolutions, all presumably depen-
dent on some understood verb, such as decernimus or decreverunt. The last
clause, of course, is incoherent—possibly eoque is a mistake for eiusque.
The space before ad ararn in line 5 probably marks the end of the relative
clause that describes the victimae duae who were thereafter to be immolated
at what was presumably a new altar.
One sicilicus of the same shape appears in the small fragment, G. I. L. VI.

31194a:
anteqYAM · P E R LE^es
liceret, interesset consiliiS · PVBLICIs ) [
drusO • FRÄTRE · SVo [
senatuS • DECRfiVIT · Vti

Here, apparently, it marks the end of a sentence. The other fragment of the
same stone has a sentence terminated by a virgula.
This sicilicus is used more frequently than the dipla in the records of gladia-
tors to separate the number of fights from the number of victories, e.g. C. I. L.
IX. 466 (a companion to the inscription containing diplae we quoted above): 25

DONATVS · NER · X I I · ) · VIII

e. q. s.

11. SICILICUS MINOR

This small mark, placed at the top of the line and not larger than half the height
of a letter, can scarcely be distinguished from a very small dipla in the same
position. The forms that one sees are neither perfectly round nor perfectly
angular, and a distinction between the two possible types would scarcely have
been feasible.
(i) Full stop (De bellis Macedonicis; cf. P. Oxy. 1379 discussed above, p.
27).
(ii) Possibly with the meaning "or" (one very doubtful occurrence, Lex
Antonia).

12. SICILICUS GEMINATUS

The sign 3 is quite rare. (Cf. the papyrus from Antinoe discussed above, p. 26)
(i) When written very large, it seems to mark the end of a paragraph (one
occurrence, Res gestae).

85
Other examples of the same usage are: IV. 4179; VI. 33952; XII. 5836.
 THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION 119
(ii) Full stop (Res gestae).
(iii) Apparently with the function of a comma in dividing elements in a
series (Res gestae).

13. THE SIGN

One occurrence as a full stop in the Antiocherie text of the Res gestae, corres-
ponding to a virgula plus space in the Ancyran text.

14. THE SIGN ^

Only two occurrences noted; apparently a full stop in C.I.L.VI. 30562

(see page 73) and perhaps a weaker form of punctuation in the Lex Antonia.

15. THE SIGN^y^

Marks the ends of paragraphs in the Antiochene text of the Res gestae.

16. PARAGRAPHOS

The paragraphos (>—) marks major divisions within a book in the Carmen.
This, of course, is a sign used with the same meaning in Greek, e.g. in the
papyrus of Bacchylides to separate strophes. It is to be distinguished from
the diple obelismene (>—) used to athetize spurious verses (two of these are
found in the papyrus copy of Juvenal that we mentioned on p. 25 above).

17. Κ
Full stop (Cicero).

18. J

I have noted in two inscriptions a sign of punctuation that very closely resem-
bles a large letter J inclined slightly to the right. Although in one of these in-
scriptions the sign is used to show metrical structure (C. I. L. VI. 5767), the
two support one another as evidence that the sign was not an accidental or
capricious variation. It is noteworthy that in both inscriptions the sign is
itself set off by an interpunct on either side.
120 THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

In the following, the sign J seems to have a specialized function as punctua-

tion:

C. I. L. VI. 13498.

BAEBIA · TROPHIME
M O N I M E N T V M · F E C I T • S I B I · ET
L · ΒΑΕ ΒI Ο · PISTOPATRONO
SVO · BENE · MERENTI · ET
L · BAEBIO · PISTO · ET · BAEBIAE · PHOEBE
F I L I I S · SVIIS · ET
PHOEBO · LIBERTO · SVO · ET · CETERIS
LIBERTIS · LIBERTABVSQVE • SVIIS
POSTERISQVE · EORVM · J · PRAETER
EPITYNCHANVM · ET · FORTEM
I N · FRONTE · Ρ · X I I I I · IN AGRO · Ρ · X I I I I

The sign must be intended to indicate or emphasize that the exception

praeter Epitynchanum etc. does not refer to posteris but goes back to libertis.

19. B I N A INTERPUNCTA

The interpunct, of course, cannot be used to punctuate for sense in the period
in which we are interested (cf. supra, pp. 14, 16), but two interpuncts placed
one after the other shows that more than division between words is intended
and so can be used as punctuation. Such punctuation appears once in the
Lex Antonia to set off a relative clause.
There are a very few examples of this form of punctuation, and I can cite
only two.28 The first is a Republican inscription from Capua, C. I. L. I2, 679,
which ends with the date (104 B. C.) stated thus:

c. /ZAVIO · C · F · · C · MARIO · C · F · COS

The punctuation obviously serves to separate the two names.

An unnumbered papyrus in the Erzherzog Rainer's collection27 is a fragment
of a roll in which a man named Macedo evidently transcribed letters that he
26
I h a v e seen an inscription in which t h e t w o points serve to m a k e clear the relation
liberti libertus, but m y notes on this inscription were somehow lost and I h a v e n o t been
able to locate it again among t h e m a n y thousands in the C. I. L. The double point is used
in P. Mich. V I I . 456 (see Appendix, No. 231), which appears to h a v e been a kind of legal
form-book, but there is n o t enough context to indicate its value. The same papyrus also
has t h e points arranged vertically, thus producing the modern colon (:).
" See t h e plates in Wessely's Aelteste latein. Pap. (pi. I V - V I I ) and in Mallon-Marichal-
Perrat (No. 11).
 THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION 121

received before 14 B. C. Our fragment is thought to have contained three letters

in the two columns that are partly preserved; there are at least two, since
the second column ends with a short letter that is virtually complete. The
copies presumably follow the originals: the interpunct is used systematically
throughout, but the last letter contains numerous (phonetic) apices and I-
longae, while neither is found in the letter or letters that precede it.
Macedo's correspondents were obviously not persons of any great education
or literary pretensions, and must have been of modest social position. 28 The
copies are certainly not the work of a professional scribe. So the usage repre-
sented is presumably that of moderately literate persons.
The letter of Paconius is punctuated with spaces. The first column contains
one clear instance of an apex used as punctuation, although there is no marking
of long vowels:
ET DE · FILIO · MEO · QVI · HOC ·
moliTVS · EST ·' Vt VTROSQVE · CA®EAS
In what, so far as I can see, may be a continuation of the same letter in the
second column, the writer (whose learning may be estimated from his use of
mihi for vocative mi) writes: 29
11-19:
HIC · NIAIL · EST · NISI · MI
SERIA · MAGNA · ITAQVE · PVTA
Bo · ME · E X · NAVFAGIO · EFFVGISSE
NVC · SI AT · VOS · PERVENERO '
^ A L E · MIHI · MACEDO · · ET · ME
MOR · NOSTRI · ESTO · ET • FILIO ·
MEO · BENEVOLENTIAM · EAM ·
PRAESTA · QVAM · EGO · TIBI · PRAE
STITI · SALYTEM · DIC · MVSAEO
e. q. s.
28
The n a m e s show t h a t neither Macedo nor t h e m a n w h o calls himself his /rater (the
writer of t h e last letter, Paconius) were R o m a n citizens; t h e last letter shows t h a t Macedo
m u s t conciliate t h e favor of persons named Iucundus, Dido, a n d Nireus, the last a libertus.
Other persons mentioned as friends or associates of Macedo are Bassus, Musaeus, Auguri-
nus, Antheus, and Lyciscus. A n d Macedo h a s domini to w h o m he is asked to recommend
the son of t h e writer of one letter.
2
· I work, of course, f r o m the plates; the p u n c t u a t i o n (apex, double point, space) is
n o t shown in Cavenaile, w h o also begins line 13 thus: e [ t · ] m e . . . B u t t h e first letter is
obviously b (exactly like t h e b in line 17), and t o t h e right of t h e hole is visible t h e edge
of a letter t h a t could be ο b u t could n o t be t, and this is followed b y a clear interpunct.
The reading therefore is w h a t both sense and s y n t a x require, putabo, n o t puta et. I n m y
transcription I h a v e not shown t h a t the g in ejjugisse w a s written above the line as a
correction.
122 T H E SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

The space in line 19 obviously serves as a full stop. I believe that the apex
at the beginning of line 15 and the elongation of the interpunct after pervenero
(which could be fortuitous, but may show that the transcriber's pen hesitated
for a moment in uncertainty) may come from punctuation by apex over inter-
punct such as was seen in the first column. 30
With the other indications of punctuation in the letter before us, we are
entitled to regard the double point in line 15 as intentional, either calling
attention to the vocative that precedes it or indicating, as would a dash in
modern punctuation, an addition that is somewhat in the nature of an after-
thought.

20. HEDERAE

Hederae, or "ivy leaves", appear first near the beginning of the First Century,
and become fairly common near the end of that century. 31 For the most part,
these hederae distinguentes are certainly nothing more than variant and deco-
rative forms of the interpunct. 32 But the hedera, obviously, could be used with
a special value in an inscription in which the interpunct is the usual word-
divider, and it seems that it does have such value in the inscription from Cirta
which is the oldest inscription in which the mark appears. 33

C. I. L. VI. 5197 (tabula marmorea).

MVSIC0 · TI · CAESARIS · AVGVSTI

SCVRRAN0 · DISP • AD FISCVM · GALLICVM
PROVINCIAE · LVGVDVNENSIS
E X · VICARIIS · EIVS · QVI · CVM · EO · ROMAE · CVM
DECESSIT · FVERVNT ν BENE · MERITO
e. q. s.34
30
The transcriber need not have copied line for line. If he saw in his original PER-
VENERO · VALE—or, even more, if he saw PERVENERO · 'VALE—he could have
thought that the apex went with the v.
31
Hübner (p. LXXXVI) says: "Forma ilia hederacea a liberae rei publicae titulis
abest; vetuetissima eius exampla videntur praebere tituli aliquot Gallici. . ., Hispanus. . .,
Mantuanus. . ., Germanici.... Frequentiora deinde paullo fiunt inde a saeculo primo
exeunte."
3i
E.g. G.I.L. VIII. 6982, which has ten "hederae distinguentes".
33
According to the Gordons, Contributions, p. 183, this is the earliest occurrence of
the leaf. They found only two in the First Century, but mention one other published in
Notizie degli Scavi di Antichitä (Atti della Accademia dei Lincei), 1915, pp. 158ff. The
editor, G. Cultera, identifies the leaf as a regular mark of punctuation after Ti. In the
other inscription, C. I. L. VI. 1348, the hedera is merely a word-divider.
34
In the transcription I omit the list of sixteen names.
 THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION 123
35
Regular interpuncts are used, except the hedera after fuerunt, line 5, where,
I think, it marks the end of the clause describing the persons who set up the
monument ("those of his administrative assistants who were with him in Rome
when he died") and so prepares the reader for bene merito, which, of course,
goes with Music6 Scurran6 in lines 1 and 2.
There are other inscriptions in which hederae, used with regular interpuncts,
serve as punctuation.

C. I. L. XI. 4815 (tabula marmorea).

C · TORASIVS · C · F · HOR · SEVERS · Ι Ϊ Ϊ Ϊ · VIR I D

AVGVR · SVO · ET · Ρ · MECLONI · PROCVLI · TORASIANI · PONTIF
FILI · SVI · NOMINE · LOCO · ET · PECVNIA · SVA · FECIT Q $ IDEM
AD CELEBRANDVM • NATALEM FILI · SVI · IN PVBLICVM • DEDIT
HS-CCL
EX QVORVM • REDITV · III · Κ , SEPT · OMNIBVS · ANNIS
DECVRIONES · IN PVBLICO
CENARENT · ET · MVNICIPES · PRAESENTES - ACCIPERENT · AERIS
OCTONOS · ITEM
DEDIT • VI · VIRIS · AVG · ET · COMPIT · LARVM · AVG · ET · MAG
VICORVM · HS · CXX · VT · E X · REDITV
EIVS · SVMMAE · EODEM · DIE · I N · PVBLICO · VESCERENTVR
HVNC · OB · MERITA · EIVS
ERGA · REM · PVBLICAM · ORDO · DECVRIONVM · PATRONVM ·
MVNICIPI · ADOPTAVIT

The hedera in line 3 marks the end of the sentence. We might expect a similar
mark before item in line 6, but there the break is one that could be shown
by a semicolon in modern punctuation whereas a full stop is needed before
idem. In line 8 the end of the sentence is indicated by the extra space on each
side of the regular interpunct. If we could expect absolute consistency, we could
conclude that the space shows a stronger division than the hedera.3*
The same use of the hedera as punctuation is found in the mutilated inscrip-
tion which sets forth the regulations governing the leasing of space in public
granaries.37 Note that apices and I-longae are used, and that the interpunct

35
N o t e t h a t t h e f o r m here is n o t the usual heart-shaped leaf.
36
I.e. there are three principal statements: (1) Torasius built t h e m o n u m e n t t o honor
his son, (2) m a d e provision for celebration of this son's birthday, and (3) w a s m a d e hon-
orary patron of t h e municipality in recognition of his services to it. Clearly the connection
between (1) and (2) is m u c h closer than between (2) and (3), where there is no connection
a t all, unless t h e b a n q u e t s provided in (2) were counted a m o n g t h e merita of Torasius.
37
A large part of t h e stone o n the l e f t is lost. For s o m e suggested restorations, see
Dessau, 5914.
124 THE SIGNS OP PUNCTUATION

appears regularly except in two places (line 6 before qui, line 7 before non)
where it was omitted by the negligence of the lapidary. 3 8 I t will be obvious t h a t
the hedera is here used, like the dipla in the Lex collegia and the blanks in the
Lex metalli,i0 to separate the various regulations.
C. I. L. VI. 33747 (tabula magna marmorea).
5-12:
LflX · HORRE0RVM
aliuBVE · QVID · A N T E · IDVS · DEC · P f i N S I Ö N E · S O L ^ T A ·
RENVNTIET^Vl · Ν 0 Ν ·
-iNSEQVENTE · A N N 0 N O N · T R A N S f i G E R I T · TANTI · H A B f i B I T ·
QVANTI · E I V S · G E N E R ·
« O N · E R I T · Φ QVISQVIS · I N · H I S · H O R R E I S · CONDVCTVM ·
HABET·ELOCANDI·ET·
cwSTODIA · Ν 0 Ν · P R A E S T A B I T V R 0 QVAE · I N · H I S · H O R R E I S ·
INVECTA · INLATA
]VS- SATIS EI non /eceRIT · C^ QVISQVIS · IN HIS · HORREIS ·
CONDVCTVM · H A B E T · E T · SVA
W E R · VÜNIA quiSQVIS · I N · H I S · H O R R E I S · CONDVCT · H A B E T
P E N S I 0 N E · SOLVTA · C H I R O G R ·
quisquis habens conductuΜ · H O R R E V M · SVA ibi RELIQVER ·
E T · CVSTODI · N O N · ADSIGNAVER ·
H O R R E A R I V S · S I N E · CVLPA · E R I T
Another hedera was obviously lost in the lacuna before [quijsgm's in line 11.
I think t h a t we can also see a trace of subordinate punctuation in the apex
over Q in line 6; the cutter has clearly been negligent in omitting the inter-
punct after renuntiet, and the apex must belong over t h a t omitted interpunct.
His copy must have read R E N V N T I E T ·' QVI, and the punctuation must
have been the equivalent of a modern colon, since the one provision requires
t h a t a lessor in certain circumstances (possibly if he wishes to renew his lease)
should give notice before the Ides of December and then proceeds to state
what will happen if he does not do so. With supplements intended only to
suggest the grammatical structure, 4 1 the regulation would run:
a t . . . a n t e ldua Dec. pensions soluta renuntiet: qui n o n
[renuntiaverit pensione soluta quive c u m horreario pro
i]nsequente anno n o n transegerit, tanti habebit e. q. s.

38
I t is also omitted, probably for the same reason, before the hedera t h a t begins t h e
provision "Quae in his horreis inveeta inlata [ e r u n t . . . Since t h e point does appear before
the hederae in lines 8 and 10, w e m a y assume t h a t it should have been used here.
39
Supra, p. 79.
40
Supra, p. 81.
41
1 h a v e added t h e words pensione soluta quive cum horreario to the restoration in
Dessau, where no a t t e m p t is made to fill out t h e line.
 T H E SIGNS OP P U N C T U A T I O N 125

In a long inscription of the Second Century, hederae mark the ends of each
item in the enumeration of the persons to whom the stone is dedicated.
C . / . L . VIII. 211.
Τ · FLAVIVS SE
CVNDVS FILIVS ·
FECIT
Τ · FLAVIO ·SECVN
DO · PATRI · PIO •
MIL · AN · X X X I I I /
VIX · A N · C X · Η · S · Ε ψ
FLAVIAE VRBANAE ·
MATRI · PIAE · VIX ·
AN · CV · Η · S · E/Z>
FL · SECVNDAE SO
RORI Ρ · V · A · XX • Η • S · Ε
Τ · FL · MARCELLO · FRA
TRI · Ρ · V · A · XX · Η · S · Ε
e. q .s.
The hedera as a mark of punctuation survived even in the time in which
the use of the interpunct and word-division was being abandoned. In the
following fragment, hederae set off the date, which is also the only part of the
inscription in which interpuncts are used.
C.I.L. VI. 31982 (fragmentum tabulae marmoreae).
jAIESTATE PERPETVA CERTVM EST ESSE VENERABILEM
1Ε CVSTODIAM DATA DIE · PRIDIAE · KAL · MAIAS
]VCC • CONSS f£>
PROSB
In the following inscription, which is entirely in scriptum continua (I se-
parate the words for the convenience of the reader) and in which the inter-
punct serves only to make an abbreviation, a hedera marks the beginning
of the quotation (line 2) and another (line 7) marks the end of the long "where-
as" clause and the beginning of the actual decision (evidently by the proconsul)
concerning the boundaries.
C 1 L III. 586.
Q, • GELLIO SENTIO AVGVRINO PROCONS · DECRETA
EX TABELLIS RECITATA KALENDIS MARTIS—/ CVM OPTIMVS
MAX1MVSQVE
PRINCEPS TRAIANVS HADRIANVS AVG ·
SCRIPSER1T MIHI VTI ADHIBITIS MENSO
126 T H E SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N

RIBVS D E CONTROVERSIIS F I N I V M I N T E R LAMIENSES E T

HYPATAEOS COGNITA CAVSA
T E R M I N A R E M EGOQVE I N R E M P R A E S E N T E M SAEPIVS E T
CONTINVIS DIEBVS
F V E R I M COGNOVERIMQVE P R A E S E N T I B V S
VTRIVSQVE CIVITATIS D E F E N S O R I B V S ,
A D H I B I T O A ME IVLIO VICTORE EVOCATO AVGVSTI M E N S O R E ^ D
PLACET INITIVM
FINIVM ESSE AB EO LOCO I N QVO SEDEN FVISSE C O M P E R I QVAE
EST I N F R A e. q. s.

I n a large fragment, C. I.L. V. 2781, no interpuncts are used to separate

words, b u t hederae mark the end of all paragraphs. The signs, like the para-
graph sign ( ) of the Monumentum Ancyranum, are added even though
the rest of the line is left blank, so t h a t there could have been no doubt where
the paragraph ended.
W i t h t h e hedera, I conclude my catalogue of marks of punctuation, leaving
only t h e blank space to be treated. I t is true t h a t various other marks appear
in inscriptions, b u t they are either on fragments so small t h a t one cannot be
certain w h a t they are or in inscriptions so late and exhibiting so high a degree
of illiteracy t h a t it would be extremely rash to regard them as survivals of an
intelligible system of punctuation. Many indeed are obviously mere a t t e m p t s
a t decoration.

The only other mark t h a t I have observed t h a t m a y have a claim to inclusion

in my catalogue will be treated briefly here because it, like the hedera, is usually
found only as decorative variant of the interpunct. This sign is supposed
to have h a d its origin in hurried writing of the interpunct in cursive. 42 I t
appears in a number of inscriptions 43 as a mere word-divider. I n a few inscrip-
tions it has the specialized function of the modern hyphen (or, in German
Fraktur, the sign = ) when the latter is used to show t h a t a word has been
divided between lines. 44 I t also appears in a very few inscriptions as a kind
of punctuation. The two following are the clearest examples:
42
Hübner (p. LXXVI): Pronum erat in cursiva potissimum scriptura, ut puncta in
lineolas transirent. Exampia iam praebent scariphata Pompeiana (CIL. IV. 1261. 1896.
1899. 1908. 2203. 2400); inde a saeculo fere altero exeunte forma haee etiam in titulos
sculptos transiit. Lineola aut curva est ut in titulo urbano sepulcrali saeculi fere se-
oundi (CIL. VI. 11890). . .
13
E.g., in addition to the example cited by Hübner in the note above: C. I. L. II.
1168; III. 184(7), 362, 2659, 2664; IV. 4764, 4778; VI. 10632, 12269, 28511, 35860, 37204,
37307; XII. 1781; XIII. 6972, 7121, 8017.
14
Cf. P. Ryl. 477 (Fifth Century), in which words divided between lines are joined by
this sign at the end of the line (commise~rari, coepe~rit). For good examples in inscriptions,
see C. I. L. VI. 10848 (se~viri, quod~si), 17287 (Criso~mela); XI. 782 (pientis~simi).
 THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION 127

A. E. 1955, No. 119.

D · NEPTVNO
o^VARVM
i?oTENTI~
ofeiNDVCTVM
in TRAGISA
räVM~
• AVR •
...LIVS·
v. p. A · V · Ρ ·
v. s. L · L · Μ ·

5: [in] Tragisa(mum); 9: [v(ir) p(erfectissimus)] a(gens) v(ices) p(raesidis).

The two signs here separate three phrases in the short inscription: (1) the
name of the person to whom the stone is dedicated, (2) the location, and (3)
the donor.

C. I. L. VI. 19253.

D Μ
]NNIAE · HELVIDIAE · COIVGI · SAnctissiMAE •
ET INCOMPARABILI · EEC it · ~
P. · ARRENIVS · GEMELLINVS DE SE · D · Μ · Ν · Τ ·
CON QYA · VIXIT · ANNIS · X I · ~ ET ·
Ρ · AELIO · FILARGVRO · MARITO · VIRGINIO ·
AEIVS · CO η quo VIXIT · ANNIS · X X I · ~

The editors explain D · Μ · Ν · Τ as an attempt to write bene merenti, as is

quite possible when we are dealing with a person who could not spell cum!

21. THE BLANK SPACE

A blank space is, so far as we know, the oldest sign of punctuation in Latin,45
and it is certainly the most frequent. Where written marks of punctuation are
15
Cf. p. 20 above. The Gordons comment (Contr. p. 151): "Among our inscriptions of
the period Augustus-Nerva are a few in which extra space has apparently been left for
the express purpose of indicating breaks or divisions in thought or syntax, the same
kinds of division which in some inscriptions are indicated by different or additional
punctuation. . . Whether the use of space to indicate breaks in sense is of significance for
dating remains to be seen, but clearly where it is used it is of importance for the correct
interpretation of texts and has not always received the attention it merits. To be sure,
the number of long, connected texts in which it is likely to occur is comparatively small,
128 T H E SIGNS OF P U N C T U A T I O N

used, a blank space is frequently used to strengthen or at least to emphasize

them. A blank space without a mark may have, in the various texts, the
force of almost any written mark. Specifically, it serves:
(1) To mark division into paragraphs (Senatus consultum de Bacchanalibus,
Sententia Minuciorum) ,46
(ii) Stronger than a full stop but less than a paragraph, i.e. the kind of
division shown in modern punctuation by period plus dash (Lex metalli
Vipascensis; cf. C. I. L. XI. 3614 and 2438, both quoted above in §9 of this
chapter, and C. I. L. XI. 4815, quoted in §20).
(iii) Full stop (Res gestae, papyrus Oratio Claudi, Lex Antonia, Acta Arva-
lium).
(iv) As equivalent of modern dash to set off parenthetical remarks (Oratio
Claudi de civitate Anaunorum).
(v) As equivalent of modern semicolon or colon in dividing parallel clauses
of a compound sentence (Res gestae, Laudatio Turiae).
(vi) As equivalent of modern comma in setting off relative and other sub-
ordinate clauses, and in separating items in a series (Res gestae, Oratio Claudi
de civitate Anaunorum, Laudatio Turiae, and probably De bellis Macedonicis).
(vii) To separate words that are in different cases but have the same case-
endings (papyrus Oratio Claudi).
Among other examples of the use of blank spaces as punctuation, the fol-
lowing are the most interesting.
In one of the early Scipionic epitaphs, the text of the eulogy begins on
the first line and is set off from the name of the deceased by a space.

C. I.L.I2, 11.

L · CORNELIVS · CN · F · CN · Ν · SCIPIO · MAGNA · SAPIENTIA

MVLTASQVE · VIRTVTES · AETATE · QVOM · PARVA
e. q. s.

In the Fasti Praenestini of 4-10 A.D., a space is used to separate the cal-
endar entry (usually notation of the deities to whom sacrifice is to be made)
from the explanations that are sometimes offered, thus:

but their relative importance makes it all the more imperative to bring every aid for
understanding to their study. . ." The space appears as punctuation in the Senatus
consultum de Bacchanalibus (186 B. C.) and, as we shall note below, continues to be used
occasionally to the last age of the Empire.
46
Of course, if one wishes to split hairs, one could say that the blank space normally
left on the last line of a paragraph shows that the paragraph ends there.
 THE S I G N S ΟΓ P U N C T U A T I O N 129
C. I.L.I2, p. 231.
3: aescwLAPIO · VEDIOVI · IN · INSVLA · HAE· ET
ijnMAE · CALENDAE · APPELLANTVR · QVIA
e. q. s.
The use of a space as a full stop is not uncommon on inscriptions that record
benefactions and then record an official expression of thanks for them, as
in C. I. L. XI. 4815, quoted in §20 above. Another example:
G. I. L. VI. 9044 (tabula marmorea).
C · I V L I V S · AV C ·
NARCmtw A • SPECVLÄRIS · DECVr · in
SACerdotio in aRAM · PVBLICAM Ob
CfiRTamma cONTVLIT · IIS X · ET · CENA
TICVM DEDIT · SACfiRDÖTIBVS · ET · HON0
raTIS · ET · DECVRIÖNIB • DVPLVM · ITEM
ob deDICÄTIÖN • IMÄGINIS · SVAe cenati
cmM · DVPLVM · DfiDIT · HVIC · SACER
DOTALES · DECVRIÖNES · DECRfiVERVNT
VTI · ΙΫΙία eglOGE • C0NTVBERNÄLIS
EIVS in numerO • DECVRIONVM
RECITareiwr

The use of the space especially to make the beginning and the end of quo-
tations continues even when the use of interpuncta becomes irregular:
C. I. L. VI. 32329:
(a), 10:
MAXIMILLA · ET · TERENTIA ZaVOLA t>IRG · VEST · PRAEIT · IN
HAEC VERBA IVNO REGINA · AST · QVID · EST[
(b), 13:
PRECAMVR · OrAMVS OBSECRAMVSQVE [ m]ATRONAE ·
FL · POLLITTA e. q. s.
The use continues even with scriptura continna, as in these examples in
which I divide words for the convenience of the reader:

C. I. L. VI. 32374. 118 A.D.

CAPITE SVB DIVO CVLMINE CONTRA ORIENTEM CVm collegia
SVIS INDIXIT QVOD BONVM FAVSTVM FELix fortu
NATVM · SALVTAREQVE SIT
IMP · CAESARI e. q. s.
130 THE SIGNS OF PUNCTUATION

The space after indixit, like the modern colon, introduces a quotation. Si-
milarly:
C. I.L.Vlll. 15880.
. . .CENSVIT I N Ver
BA INFRA SCRIBTA CVM LICINI PATERNI V I R I DE
e. q. s. PRIMORIBw«
Spaces are occasionally used for emphasis, as in C. I. L. I X . 2438, cited in
§9 above, in which we pointed out the emphasis given the threatening word
VINDICARI. In a great many inscriptions, of course, the arrangement of
lines serves, like the use of larger or smaller letters, to emphasize parts of the
text.47 Spaces within lines may serve the same purpose. A good example is
an inscription of 58 or 59 A. D. first published by A. E. Gordon.48
University of California Publications in Classical Archaeology 2: 5 (1952):49

5-13:
resiiiVTIONEM · MOENIVM · REMISSAM · ET · INTERCEPTAM
ACERBa · PACAVIT · PROPTER QVAE · AVCTORE
JCONSVL · DESIGNATVS · I N CONSVLATV · NOMINATIONE
] N I · AVGVR · CREATVS · I N NVMERVM · PATRICIORVM ·
ADLECTVS·EST
grermANICl · AEDIVM · SACRARVM · ET · OPERVM · LOCORVMQVE
oRDO · ET · POPVLVS · ROMANVS · CONSENTIENTE · SENATV ·
LVD IS
pETIERIT · AB AVGUSTO · PRINCIPE · CVIVS · LIBERALITATIS ·
ERAT · MINISTER
]ICI · PROVINCIAE · BRITANNIAE · I N QVA · DECESSIT
e. q. s.
The space after pacavit probably shows the end of the sentence, although
what follows could also be part of a compound sentence or even, perhaps,
a relative clause. In line 7, the words consul designatus seem certainly to end
a sentence. In line 10, the relatively small extra space comes after the ablative
absolute consentiente senatu, which may be the end of a clause. But in line 12
the wide extra spaces on both sides of the phrase provinciae Britanniae can
serve only to set it off from the rest of the sentence and thus make this entry
very emphatic.
17 And so also paragraphing. The Gordons comment (Contr., p. 154): "The paragraph

form appears sometimes to be used as a device for drawing attention to particular lines
rather than for setting off a unit of syntax or sense which we should today consider as
constituting a proper paragraph unit."
48 Quintus Veranius, Consul A. D. 49 (Berkeley, 1952).

49 Ibid. The inscription is published again in the Gordons' Album, No. 109, plate 47.
 T H E SIGNS OP P U N C T U A T I O N 131
We may transgress the chronological limits we have set ourselves to note
that even Christian inscriptions in scriptura continua sometimes use the blank
space to mark a full stop, although words, of course, are not separated. For
example:

C. I.L. VIII. 25045 (tabula marmorea)

sancflSSIMORVM PATRIARCHARVM ET VNIVERsae ecclesiae

]PA SANCTITATE VNDE CVM DIV DISCEPTAREiwr
]IMVS DISPOSITIONEM SANCTAE MEMORIAE
]. . .RE VEL PASCERE NEQVE PVBLICE NEQVE APVT SVOs
]DINARVM NON ACCEDANT SET QVONIAM A. . . [
]SIMVS SED QVIA RES ΤΑΜ GRAVISSIMA A P I R . . .[
quAE APPELLATVR PROTOGAMIA ADEQVE P R I M A . . . [
]IONEM VENIRE AVSVS FVERIT QVI VINDICAV[
^moCVMQVE MODO IVBANDOS ESSE PVTABERINT [
].IS PRIOMISIT IPSE VQOS EIDEM MERCEDI PARTIc^are
]QVE DIE NVPTIARVM QVARTA IERIA IIANT [
Such punctuation is also found in some literary texts, e.g. P. Oxy. 884, a leaf
from a papyrus codex of the Fifth Century that contains part of Sallust's
Catilinae coniuratio. In the same century was copied the Codex Puteanus of
Livy, which occasionally shows comparable punctuation by spacing—even
extravagant spacing.50

50 See the photographic reproduction edited by H. Omont, Histoire Romaine de Tüe-

Live (Paris, 1907).

 VIII

CONCLUSIONS

The foregoing study, I believe, authorizes the following conclusions.

(1) During the Classical Age, formally written Latin, in marked contrast
with contemporary Greek, was not only separated into words by the use of
interpuncts, but was, within each paragraph, divided into sentences and clauses
by special signs of punctuation.
(2) The available evidence indicates that punctuation for sense within
paragraphs was least used in legal texts and in writings that can be classified
as memoranda of one kind or another and that the more closely a writing
was thought to approach a literary standard, the more frequent was the use
of punctuation.
(3) We are therefore entitled to assume that our texts of such authors as
Cicero, Sallust, and Livy, Lucretius, Vergil, and Ovid, were ultimately derived
from copies that were punctuated for sense. Thus in attempts to reconstruct
the earlier stages of the manuscript tradition of the Classical authors, punctua-
tion may be as important as styles of handwriting.
(4) The evidence indicates that the Classical punctuation for sense was
closely associated with, and even a part of, the systematic use of word-division,
and that, in general, the ancient punctuation was discarded when scriptum
continua replaced the practice of separating words.
(5) The extant remains of Latin writing through the First Century exhibit
punctuation within paragraphs effected by a total of twenty-one signs, that
is to say, blank spaces and twenty distinguishable special marks.
(6) The largest number of signs found in any one composition is seven
(in the Res gestae of Augustus). Normal practice appears to have called for
the use of two, three, or not more than four distinct signs of punctuation
by the writer or copyist of a text.
(7) Although it is clear that the twenty-one signs were by no means inter-
changeable, there is a very great overlapping of function in the texts taken
as a whole, and in many of the extant texts there appears to be a considerable
overlapping of the function of the various signs employed in a single com-
 CONCLUSIONS 133

position. Such overlapping is most conspicuous in the Res gestae, where the
greatest number of different signs was employed.
(8) Despite such overlapping in some texts, there was a general tendency
to use signs of three orders of value corresponding approximately to the modern
period plus dash (showing a break greater than a full stop within a paragraph),
the modern period (a full stop ending a sentence), and the modern comma
(used to set off subordinate clauses, to show parallel structure when several
clauses, phrases, or words have the same relation to a single verb or noun,
and to separate items in an enumeration). There is no certain indication
of the use of additional signs with the special functions of the modern semi-
colon and colon. From the modern point of view, the most remarkable omission
was the failure to develop a sign to distinguish interrogations.
(9) The degree of consistency in the use of punctuation, i.e. in placing a
sign of punctuation wherever it is required by some rule, appears to have varied
greatly. Some texts, such as the Res gestae (in the form, several stages removed
from the original, that has reached us), not infrequently fail to place punctua-
tion at junctures that seem grammatically and rhetorically indistinguishable
from others where punctuation is used. A few texts, unfortunately short,
suggest punctuation as consistent as modern usage.
(10) An incidental result of this study has been the observation that the
Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, despite its reputation for phenomenal
accuracy, cannot be relied upon implicitly so far as punctuation is concerned,
since it sometimes fails to distinguish between manifestly different marks of
punctuation, and sometimes fails to report punctuation at all. Further study
of ancient punctuation, therefore, so far as the epigraphic evidence is concerned,
should be based exclusively on good photographs supplemented wherever
necessary with squeezes or by inspection of the stone or bronze itself.
 APPENDIX I

PAPYRI LATINAE

It is now generally known that, although Latin papyri are few in comparison
with Greek, several hundred have been found and published. It is less well
known that the overwhelming majority of Latin papyri now known come
from the late Empire and are therefore later than the time of the Antonines,
i.e. are much later than the change in the mode of writing Latin that is gen-
erally assigned to the time of Hadrian (-f 138). The majority of them, indeed,
were written subsequent to what the eminent palaeographer, Jean Mallon,
has termed "la grande brisure qu'a connue le monde avec la crise du troisieme
siecle, crise apräs laquelle tout s'est trouve change, y compris les institutions,
la religion, et aussi l'öcriture."1 It is therefore possible that the reader may be
inclined to wonder at the paucity of the papyrological material that I have
used in this dissertation. It may not be amiss, then, to list in this appendix
what is available.
Since the present study was begun, there has become available the Corpus
Papyrorum Latinarum compiled and edited by Robert Cavenaile (Wiesbaden,
Harrassowitz, 1958 [ = I960?]), which purports to list all Latin papyri known
and published before 1958, with the odd exception of those found at Hercula-
neum, and to give the text of most of them. Cavenaile's texts are worthless
for our present purposes, since the attempt to combine a report of what is
on the papyrus with modern capitalization and punctuation has necessarily
obscured or destroyed most of the details in which we are interested, but his
catalogue is, so far as I know, complete, and I know of no Latin papyri relevant
to the present study that have been published since 1958.
It may be helpful, therefore, to list here all the papyri in Cavenaile's Corpus
that are certainly or possibly earlier than the Third Century (as dated by the
editors) and contain a text which can be identified as either literary or, at least,
connected discourse of some kind (i.e. excluding mere scraps, scrawls, ac-

1
Paldographie Romaine, p. 171.
 APPENDIX I: PAPYRI LATINAE 135

counts,2 receipts, and memoranda). This will show what available material
has not been used in the present study, and why it seemed useless for our
purposes.

No. in Cavenaile Date Contents

14 Saec. I p. C. n. Exercise in
writing
The information in Cavenaile is to be corrected from E. G. Turner's
article in Stvdi in Onore di A. Calderini e R. Paribeni, Milan,
1957, Vol. II, pp. 157-161 (with two plates). On one side, the
apprentice scribe copied seven times four words from Vergil;
on the other, he copied six times a few words of prose or iambic
verse ending -iut (?) velocius and followed by what Turner calls
"decorative doodling". The symbols thus repeated, which look
something like 7xxxx, are too long to be punctuation, but may be
a coronis or stichometric reckoning or, conceivably a symbol
meaning "etc." or something like that.

20 20 B.C. Cie. In Verrem

See above, pp. 50ff.

28 II/III Sallusti Historiae

Fragments of a volume written after scriptum continua replaced
the classical style; there are no interpuncts, no apices, and,
naturally, no marks of punctuation. It is unfortunate that the date
has not been determined more precisely.

41 II Fenestella ?
This fragment de Servio Tullio, of which a good reproduction
may be found in Mallon, op. cit., PI. X. 1, is a strip from the central
part of a column. Interpuncts are used regularly, but there are no
apices. We do not have enough of the text to tell whether there is
any point in our fragment at which punctuation, if used, should
have appeared. Levi, in his attempted restoration, would begin
a sentence with the words At Romam, before which there is no
punctuation, but Piganiol, in his reconstruction, takes these
words as the equivalent of ad Romam. He would have a sentence

2
The military payrolls and tables of soldiers on duty (especially nos. 106 and 109)
are interesting for examples of ancient bookkeeping and for other reasons, but I do not
regard columnar arrangement as punctuation.
136 APPENDIX ι : PAPYRI LATINAE

No. inCavenaile Date Contents

begin Hae et ceterae; a lacuna immediately precedes these, so

that if punctuation was present, it would now be lost. Clearly, the
fragment cannot be used for deductions either way.

43 c. 100 A.D. De bellis Macedoni-

cis

See above, pp. 61ff.

46 II ex. "Virtus nihil

volt humile"

Ed. Mariotti, Athenaeum, 1947, pp. 166-170 (with plate). In this

fragment of a few words, no interpuncts are visible on the damaged
surface. The restoration of blan[Aa\m before viderint is certain,
but the traces of the m could also represent m plus virgida (/) as
punctuation. The fragment is chiefly noteworthy for the use of a
special mark (') corresponding to our hyphen, at the ends of lines
to show that a word is completed on the following line. Since the
lines were very short (c. 16 letters), the symbol was used thrice
in six lines. Two of these occurrences are now clearly visible;
the third was lost by damage to the papyrus at that point.

64 II/III Catalogue of
noteworthy works
of art in Egypt?

See R. Marichal, Chartae Latinae Antiquiores, Vol. I, No. 11 (with

plate). Has regular interpuncta and some apices. The text is
not sufficiently complete to permit the reconstruction of sentence-
structure, and although Marichal's photographic plate appears
to have been made with the greatest care, it does not show many
details that, to judge from the transcription, are visible to the
naked eye. There seems to be a mark of punctuation after -spitibus,
but it could also be part of the next letter.

65 II/III Dialogue

See above, pp. 96ff.

 APPENDIX i : PAPYRI LATINAE 137

No. in Cavenaile Date Contents

103 ? Α Marius Valens

veteranus quotes
an edict by Octavian,
40-37 B.C.
No one seems to have tried to determine how much later the
papyrus is than the edict quoted or rather misquoted here. There
are no interpuncts or other punctuation; there are many errors
in spelling and grammar.

170 45 A. D. Citizen's
declaration
Best reproduction is in Mallon, plate V, 2. Good example of formal
document with regular interpuncts and I-longae; there was no need
for punctuation, since the opening statement is followed by a tabu-
lation of property.

212 41-68 A. D. Military judge's

decision
P. Mich. III. 159 (with plate). Regular interpuncts, but no punctua-
tion. This is apparently a preliminary draft, since the space left
vacant for the date was not filled in. (See Calderini, op. cit., p. 92).

231 I/II Legal form book?

P. Mich. VII. 456 (with plate). Interpuncts throughout and one
mark of punctuation in line 3, which reads:
]EAMIJS: APR[
The next line, to judge from the very clear reproduction, reads:
]ERE · · SUB · EX[
But obviously there is not enough context to show the significance
of these marks.

236 41-54 A. D. Oration of Claudius

See above, pp. 63ff.

237 I/II Imperial edict

Dated in the Second Century by Van Hoesen on palaeographic
grounds; the legal situation is thought better to fit the time of
Nero. This is interesting as showing the transition to scriptum
138 APPENDIX I: PAPYRI LATINAE

No. in Cavenaile Date Contents

continual Although the surface of the papyrus is much abraded,

it seems certain that there are no interpuncts between words, and
there certainly were no spaces left for them. But a single medial
dot is used as a full stop in lines 14 and 16.

238 I/II Imperial codicil

Edited by H. Kortenbeutel, Abhandlungen der Preussischen
Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1939, Phil.-Hist. XIII (with plate).
What is preserved is the middle section of a column headed
Exemplar codicillorum. The emperor is supposed to have been Domi-
tian, and the Maximus addressed is thought to have been a Prefect
of Egypt. I could discern no punctuation in the photograph, but
according to the restoration accepted by Cavenaile, no sentence
ends on the preserved part of the papyrus.

246 Late Ptolemies Letter

This, in the opinion of Mallon, is the oldest Latin papyrus that
we are likely ever to find. Written by a slave to his fellow slaves
at home, it uses interpuncts religiously. There is no punctuation,
but the text of the letter is very short (23 words).

247 21-14 B. C. Letters

See above, pp. 120ff.

248 I/II Letter of recom-

mendation
P. Ryl. IV. 608; this short letter has regular interpuncts and some
apices, but no punctuation. It consists of two sentences which
could be treated as a compound sentence of two principal clauses.

249 II Letter of recom-

mendation
P. Oxy. I. 32. Words are divided by spaces and, usually, inter-
puncts. No punctuation, unless, perhaps, by blank spaces, but
the writing is too irregular to show what slightly longer spaces
were so intended, if any were.

3
This suggests the obvious question raised by the documentary papyri: to what extent
do routine copies made in Egypt, presumably by persons who must have known Greek
much better than Latin and so have been habituated to the use of scriptum continua,
reflect Roman practice? Cf. Nos. 250-265.
 APPENDIX I: PAPYRI LATINAE 139

No. in Cavenaile Date Contents

250-255 II Letters
P. Mich. VIII. 467-472. This is the Latin part of the correspond-
ence of a Claudius Terentianus, who, as is clear from the names
of his relatives and their activities, was not a Roman or a Greek,
but either an Egyptian or, possibly, some kind of hybrid. Latin,
in a vulgar form, was presumably his third language, and Pro-
fessors Winter and Youtie, in their commentary, have pointed
out several places where his spelling of Latin words was clearly
affected by the spelling of these words in Greek (e.g. OU for v).
It is not astonishing, therefore, that the Latin is written in scriptum
continua: Claudius was simply writing more Oraeco.

303-307 I/II Letters

As edited, these letters, now in the Museum of Cairo, show regular
interpuncts. No photographic reproduction appears to be available.
The many misspellings give us no very high opinion of the writer's
learning.

Papyri not listed by Cavenaile

Herculanensis 817, Carmen de bello Actiaco: see above, pp. 54ff.
Herculanenses 1067, 1475, Orations: see above, p. 54, note 17.
 APPENDIX II

METRICAL PUNCTUATION

Although we are here interested in the use of punctuation to make meaning

more perspicuous, we must notice the use in Latin of the same kinds of punc-
tuation to show metrical structure.
In both inscriptions and in texts written with a pen the normal usage in
Latin was to show the metrical units of carmina by writing each verse as a
separate line. This was, I believe, the invariable practice when verse was
transcribed on papyrus and parchment, and it is the usual practice in inscrip-
tions. In the latter, however, limitations of space sometimes made other
arrangements of verses necessary or desirable. As a matter of preliminary
interest, I give a few examples of such abnormal arrangements in which
there is no punctuation to assist the reader.
Where verses are too long to be written on a single line, the most common
and perspicuous arrangement is that in which one verse is written as two
lines with the second line indented under the first. The following is a good
and typical example. It will be noted that the interpunctum is used as a word-
divider throughout, that the right-hand margin was made even by bringing
out to it the last letter in each short line, and that the initial letters of the
hexameters form an acrostich.

C. I. L. VI. 20674 (urna marmorea).

IAM · DATVS · EST · FINIS · VITAE · IM

PAVSSA · MALORY Μ
VOBIS · QVAS · HABET · HOC · GNATAM
MATREMQ · SEPVLCRV Μ
LITORE · PHOCAICO · PELAGI · V I
EXANIMATA S
ILLIC · VNDE · TAGVS · ET · NOBILE
PLVMEN · HIBERV S
 A P P E N D I X I i : METBICAL PUNCTUATION 141
VORSVM · ORTVS · VORSVM · OCCA
SVS · FLVIT · ALTER · ET · ALTER
STAGNA · SVB • OCEANI · TAGVS · ET
TYRRHENICA · HIBERV S
SIC · ETENIM · DVXERE · OLLIM
PRIMORDIA · PARCA Ε

[verso]

ET · NEVERE · SVPER · VOBIS · VlTALIA • FILA

CVM · PRIMVM · LVCINA · DARE Τ
LVCEMQ · ANIMAMQV Ε
VT · VITAE · DIVERSA · DIES · FORET · V
NAQVE·LET I
NOBIS · PORRO · ALIA · EST · TRINO
DE NEMINE · FAT I
DICTA · DIES · LETI · QVAM · PRO
PAGARE · SVOPT Ε
VISVM · OLLIS · TACITO · ARBITRIO
CVM • LEGE · PERENN I
SISTI · QVAE · CVNCTOS · IVBET · AD
VADIMONIA · MORTI S

As an example of odd and confusing arrangement I quote a metrical in-

scription, which is, incidentally, disfigured by frequent hiatus and numerous
false quantities. It opens with an elegiac distich (in which we must read
situ nominative and aeqüälis\): the hexameter and pentameter are run to-
gether and the distich is written in a paragraph of three lines, of which the last
two are indented under the first. Then follow two hexameters, also run together
and similarly written as a paragraph of three lines. A second pair of hexa-
meters is presented in the same way. The metrical part of the inscription is
completed by two elegiac distichs, but the verses are now written as separate
lines and each pentameter is indented under the hexameter.

C. I. L. VI. 7898.

HIC · SVM · BASSA · SITA · PIA · FILIA

VIRGO · PVDICA · EXCEDENS
CVNCTAS · INGENIO · AEQVALIS
CVM · MIHI · BIS · QVINOS · ANNOS · MEA
FATA · DEDISSENT · VNDECVMVM · ME
NON · LICVIT · PERDVCERE · ANNVM
142 APPENDIX Ii: METRICAL PUNCTUATION

CVMQVE PATER · MATERQVE DEOS · PRO ME

ADVLARENT · AT · SAEVOS · PLVTO · RABVIT
ME · AD INFERA · TEMPLA ·
OPSEDE ME PARCAE · FINEM · FECISSE · VIDENTVR
CVM · ANTE · ALIOS · VERNAS · TRES · RAPVERE · MIHI
SI QVIS · FORTE · MEA · GAVDET · DE MORTE · INIQVA
HVIC · SIT · INIQVA · CERES PERFICIATQVE · FAME
CAECINIAE · SEX · F · BASSAE

It will be noted that interpuncta are used throughout, but that there is
no punctuation for either sense or metre, unless some significance is attached
to the interpunctum which appears at the end of line 9, although interpuncta
are omitted at the ends of all other lines. If more than a mere inconsistency
on the part of the inscriber, the point may mark either the end of a sentence
and hence a change in subject or a change to a different metre, but if either
significance was intended, interpuncta should also have keen placed after aequalis
and fame.
The one example we have given will suffice to show the need for some
means of marking off verses when they are written in the form of prose.
We may accordingly proceed to consider the three distinct uses of punc-
tuation to show metrical structure in Latin inscriptions, viz.:
1. To set off verse from prose;
2. To show change in metre;
3. To separate verses.

1. PUNCTUATION TO SET OFF VERSE FROM PROSE

I find three kinds of punctuation used for this purpose: a. The beginning
of the verse is indicated by a special mark of punctuation ' which, as we
have seen, is also used in punctuation for sense in prose (v. pp. 114ff.). In this
fragment (C. I. L. XIV. 4195) it will be observed that the hexameter and
pentameter are written as separate lines, and that the pentameter is in-
dented under the hexameter, as is usual. Although the stone is fractured near
the end of the second line, it seems certain that no mark of punctuation
followed the last word.
It seems probable that the mark of punctuation was intended to show the
beginning of verse, but, particularly since the verses are, as the editor has
noted, obscure in their present context, it is quite possible that they are a
quotation from some poet or rather versifier now unknown, and that the mark
of punctuation was intended to show that they are a quotation.
 A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION 143

C. I. L. XIV. 4195 (fragmentum tabulae marmoreae).

DIC· [
Μ · MANNEIO · DOMESTICO · MA[
L · OPPVNEIO · AVGVRINO XII Τ · VOLTEDIO INDICTORE ·
II · QA [
MARCELL0 C LVCILI0 · Ρ Ι 0 ' YNVS ES EX SACRIS ·
CVI PARENT · DONA · DIANA[e
QVOD TRIBVIT ·
POPVLVS · RESTITVIS · POPYLO [

b. Verse is set off from prose by a space at the beginning and a mark of punc-
tuation at the end.

G. I.L.Y I. 6182 (tabula marmorea)

D Μ
C-VETTIO CAPITOLINO FILIO PIENTIS
SIMO PLOTIA C A P I T O L I N A MATER IN
FELICISSAMA FECIT VIX ANNIS · XIII
Q V I D I E Ν AT A L I SVO H O R A QV A N A T V S
EST OBBIIT · TAN CITO PICTOR ACV STY (sic)
GIA DELATVS AD VMBRAS QVAM PVER INGENIO NOTVS
IN ARTE SVA QVOT SI FATA VELINT ALIA PRO SPIRITO (sic)
VITAM HOC · MATER TITVLO MALVIT ANTE LEGI >
SIBI Ε ET S SVIS > POSTERIS · QVE • EORVM ^

It will be observed that the two elegiac distichs (with misspellings and false
quantities) are written as prose with no indication of the metrical lines. The
long space preceding the verses is undoubtedly intended to set them off, and
since interpuncta appear only sporadically in the inscription (they set off
abbreviations in lines 1 and 2, numeral in line 4, and, if the point is correctly
placed in line 9, show syntactical connection in that line, i.e. that höc goes
with spirito rather than titulo, an odd but not impossible construction), the
interpunctum in line 6 probably reenforces the space as a warning to the reader
that what follows is verse.
The punctuation which ends the verses may be called from its shape a
diple. It presumably has significance here, although it clearly has none in
the last line where the stonecutter, in addition to the meaningless letters Ε
and S and two useless interpuncta, has inseited a diple in the middle of the
line and placed what seems to be a diple peri zstigmene at the end, presumably
as mere ornament.
144 APPENDIX I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION

The following inscription furnishes a curious example of verses separated

from prose by blank space. Alternate lines are indented, according to the usual
method, but no attempt is made to arrange them by meter. The elegiac distichs
end indiscriminately at any point in the line.

G. I. L. VI. 27852.
CAIVS · TVTILIVS · RVFINVS · NOMI
NOR · ILLE · ANNOS · QVI · VITAE · LINQVO
NOVEM · ATQVE · DECEM · HEV · SCELVS · HEV
CRVDELE · NEFAS • FACINVSQVE · TREMEN
DVM · CVMFATIARE · VIDES · QVAM · MISE
R · EST · GENITOR · QVI · ME · CONSPEXIT
MORIBVNDVM · QVI · MEA · CLAVSIT · LV
ΜΙΝΑ · DIVERSIS · AETATIS · VICIBVS
QVOS · NON · ILLE • PRIVS · QVA · NON · EGO
VOCE · ROGAVI · INFELIX · SVPEROS
NEC · VALVERE · PRECES · SED · VIS · MA
IOR · AGIT • MORTIS · IAM · IAMQVE
PARENS · AVT · MECVM · SEMPER · ERIS
AVT · DOLOR · VNA · OBIET HOC
SEPVLCHRVM · Τ · FL · EVTYCHIANVS
Μ · Μ · RVFINI · ALVMNI · SVI · FEC ·

c. Verse is distinguished from prose by a horizontal bar, similar to a paragraphia

at the beginning and end. The two following inscriptions are excellent examples
of this use. In the first, the verses consist of two elegiac distichs; each verse,
whether hexameter or pentameter, occupies two lines, and all lines come out
to the left-hand margin. Interpuncta are used throughout; the longer spaces
between some words within lines obviously have no function other than that
of making the right-hand margin more even. The second inscription seems
to consist of a septenarius followed by a senarius, each verse occupying two
lines.

C. I. L. VI. 33904 (cippus).

D Μ
Μ R O M A N I · I ΟV I Ν I ·
RHETORIS · ELOQVII · LATINI ·
CONDITVS · HAC · ROMANVS
EST · TELLVRE · IOVINVS ·
DOCTA LOQVI · DOCTVS·
QVIQVE · LOQVI · DOCVIT •
 A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION 145

MANIBVS · INFERNIS ·
SI VITA · EST · GLORIA · VITAE ·
VIVIT · ET · HIC · NOBIS ·
VT · CATO · VEL · CICERO ·
Μ · IVNIVS · SEVERVS · ET ·
ROMANIA · MARCIA ·
HEREDES · BENE · MERENTI ·
FECERVNT
C. I. L. VI. 33905 (cippus).
D · Μ·
Μ · ROMANI · IOVINI
RESTITVTI
RESTITVTVS HOC INFELIX ·
TEGITVR · IN TVMVLO PVER ·
(urceus) SOCIVS · PARENTE GEMINO (patera)
TVMVLI · FOEDERE
Μ · IVNIVS · SEVERVS · ET
ROMANIA · MARCIA ·
HEREDES • BENE · MERENTI
FECERVNT

2. PUNCTUATION TO SHOW CHANGE OF METER

a. The paragraphos served also to show change of metre. In the extant part
of the following inscription, two lines of iambic trimeter (with free substitution),
written line for line, are followed by a horizontal line extending in from the
left margin. This sign of metrical transition is followed by seven hexameters.
The horizontal line now is duplex, one extending in from the left margin and
the other from the right. An elegiac distich follows. Again the double para-
graphos, and then another elegiac distich. Both pentameters are indented
under the hexameters. The separation of the two distichs by a double para-
graphos was probably determined by the consideration that the first distich
identifies the tomb as that of Laberius, while the second expresses a general
sentiment concerning life and death. One suspects that the hexameters are
quoted from some work by the defunct vatis, rather than composed especially
for the inscription.

C. I. L. VI. 13528 (cippus magnus marmoreus).

PARATO HOSPITIVM CARA IVNGANT CORPORA
HAEC RVRSVM NOSTRAE SED PERPETVAE NVPTIAE
146 A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION

I N SPICA ET CASIAES BENEDORA STRACTA ET AMOMO

INDE ORO GRAMENVE N O W M VEL FLOS ORIATVR
VNDE CORONEM AMENS ARAM CARMENQVE MEVM ET ME
PVRPVREO VARVM VITIS DEPICTA RACEMO
QVATTVOR AMPLESAST VLMOS DE PALMITE DVLCI
SCAENALES FRONDES DETEXVNT HINC GEMINAM VMBRAM
ARBOREAM PROCAERAM ET MOLLIS VINCLA MARITAE
HIC CORPVS VATIS L A B E R I NAM SPIRITVS IVIT
ILLVS VNDE ORTVS QVAERITE FONTEM ANIMAE
QVOD FVERAM N O N SVM SED RVRSVM ERO QVOD MODO N O N
SUM
ORTVS ET OCCASVS VITAQVE MORSQVE ITIDEST ·

b. Change of meter is indicated by a special sign (/") in the left margin.

In the following inscription, unfortunately badly mutilated on the right and
at the bottom, seven hexameters (although obviously something is wrong
with lücus inque in the last of these) are followed by seven choriambics ad-
dressed to Silvanus, the Fauns, and the Nymphs, and the choriambics are
in turn followed by seven verses too mutilated to permit certain restoration,
but evidently in a different meter. The changes are shown by the signs, in
the margin, the first of which, doubtless by an error of the stone-cutter, was
placed opposite line 9 instead of line 8.

C. I. L. VIII. 27764 (tabula marmorea).

OMNISATA • OMNIGENA · Ε TERRA · [nunc gramina surgunt]1

QVAEQVE · EFFETA · TVLIT · TELLVS · CATA · SOL[e vigescunt]
CVNCTA IVB ANT · ANIMANT VIRIDANT NEM[um undique frondes]
SOLLICITAE · DE · FLORE · NOVO · DE · VERE · MARIfto]
QVARE · CETTE · DEO · PATRIVM · DEDAM[us honorem]
SILVANO DE FONTE BOVANT CVI FROND[ea claustra]
GIGNITVR Ε SAXO LVCVS INQVE ARB [ore rami]
HVNC TIBI DE MORE DAMVS DIFFICIL[em. . . ]

Γ HVNC TIBI DE VOCE PATRIS FALCITEN[entis haedum]

HAEC TIBI DE MORE TVO PINIFERA ES[t corona]
SIC MIHI SENIOR MEMORAT SAC[erdos]
LVDITE FAVNI DRYADES PVELL[
LVDITE CANITE IAM MEO SACELL[
NAIDES Ε NEMORE MEO COLON[
J — C A N T E T ADSVETA DE FISTVLf

1 Restoration is by (,'hat.olain, quoted from the. G. I. L.

 A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION 147

ADSIT ET LVDO DE MORE PA[

CANTET ET ROSEA DE TIBIA[
]PREMAT BIIVGES DEVS A[
]IAT BELLO DEVS HO[
JVENIAS PATER[
]VLO TV[

3. PUNCTUATION TO SEPARATE VERSES

The ends of verses are shown in nine different ways in inscriptions—by a space
and by eight different symbols.
a. When a verse ends within a line, an extended space separates the verse
which ends from the verse which begins in that line.
One of the well-known elogia of the Scipiones consists of seven verses. The
first of these is written as a complete line; the remaining six verses are con-
tained in eight lines, all equally indented under the first. The fourth verse
ends with the end of line 5 and there is no sign to show that here the end
of the verse and the end of the line coincide. The second, third, fifth, and
sixth verses all end within lines, and are accordingly followed by spaces
which serve as metrical punctuation.
G. I. L. P . 10.

QVEI · APICE INSIGNE · DIALt's /ZAMINIS · GESISTEI

MORS · PERFEcit TVA · VT · ESSENT · OMNIA
BREVIA · HONOS · FAMA · VIRTVSQVE
GLORIA · ATQVE · INGENIVM · QVIBUS SEI
IN · LONGA · LICViSET · T I B E VTIER · VITA
FACILE · FACTEIS SVPERASES · GLORIAM
MAIORVM QVA · RAE · LVBENS · T E · IN GREMIV
SCIPIO RECIPiT · TERRA · PVBLI
PROGNATVM · PVBLIO · CORNELI
I t will be noted that interpuncta appear consistently except at the ends of
lines, and appear, with one exception, after the last word of a verse that ends
before a space within a line. The exception, in line 7, seems to have no signi-
ficance.
The same system is used in a well-known inscription that adapts the famous
epitaph of Pacuvius.
Ο. I. L. I 2 . 1209 (tabula ex lapide Tiburtino).
ADVLESCENS · ΤΑΜ · ET · SI · PROPERAS
HIC · TE SAXSOLVS · ROGAT · VT SE
ASPICIAS · DEINDE · VT · QVOD · SCRIPTVST
148 A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION

LEGAS · HIC · SVNT · OSSA · MAECI · LVCI · SITA

PILOTIMI · VASCVLARI · HOC · EGO · VOLEBA
NESCIVS · N I · ESSES · VALE ·
I t is noteworthy that although the first and second iambic trimeters are set
off by spaces, no space separates the prose interjection that ends with vasculari
from the final trimeter. This is probably a simple oversight. That the writer
of the inscription was conscious that the last line is verse is shown by the fact
that he has added ego to pad out the verse which in the Pacuvian original
had ossa.
Spaces are likewise used to separate five Saturnians, all of which end within
lines:
C. I.L.I2. 1531.
Μ · Ρ · VERTVLEIEIS · C · F
QVOD · R E · SVA · DIFEIDENS · ASPER
AFLEICTA · PARENS · TIMENS ·
HEIC · VOVIT · VOTO · HOC
SOLVTO DECVMA · FACTA
POLOVCTA LEIBEREIS · LVBE
TES DONV · DANVNT ·
HERCOLEI · MAXSVME
MERETO SEMOL·TE
ORANT · SE · VOTI · CREBRO
CONDEMNES
The first space has a point in the middle of it, two other spaces have no points,
and damage to the stone leaves it uncertain whether or not a point appeared
in the space that marked the end of the second Saturnian. One cannot discern
any meaning in the use or omission of the interpunct at these points.
On another inscription, four hexameters are similarly separated by spaces,
which, in this case, are emphasized by making the first letter of the verse
larger than normal. (The lapidary's errors may have been corrected in paint,
i.e. by adding horizontal strokes to convert I to Ε in florere and by placing
a sicilicus above t h e ν of iuventa.)
2
C. I.L. I . 1603.
CN · TARA CIVS · CN · F
VIXIT · A · X X · OSSA · EIVS · HIC · SITA · SVNT
EHEV · HEV · TARACEI · VT · ACERBO · ES · DEDITVS ·
FATO · NON · AEVO
E X SACTO · VITAI · ES · TRADITVS · MORTI · SED CVM · TE
DECVIT • FLORERI · AETATE
IVENTA INTERIEISTI · ET · LIQVISTI IN MAERORIBVS ·
MATREM
 APPENDIX I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION 149
A later inscription, though badly damaged, shows the same separation
of verses (supposedly senarii) by spaces, sometimes with interpuncta added.
In the part quoted (one of three sections) the ends of verses occur four times
within a line and otherwise coincide with the end of the line. (Illegible letters
are here indicated by asterisks.)

C. I. L. V. 5701 (basis quadrata).

SCIS ME HOC SIBI**VI*
*ATER · INFELIX · AMBOS · NOS
DESIDERAT · ET · TV · VALERIA
RARI · EXEMPLI · FEMINA
SIC · ME · AMASTI · VT · NATOS
DERELINQVERES · NEC • TV
•OTVISTI · EOS • ATTENDERE
*T · ACERBOS · PARITER · MEO · RE
*INQVERES NVNC · ILLE · HAB I*
*I HOS SIBI SVPERSTITES
HAC · ILLE AC · NOS PATER DES*
I*AT ROGO PATER SVAVI*
* * * AS ASICIDE QRORIS MEI
V*MIHI · PONATVR • OMNE FLOS
SVO · TEMPORE
It is noteworthy that of the five examples of this type of metrical distinction
that we have quoted, four come from the first volume of the C. I. L., i.e.
antedate the fall of the Republic. The use of spaces thus appears to have been
the earliest form of punctuation, at least for the purpose of marking off verses,
and to have been little used in the time of the Empire.
b. The hedera, which seems not to have been used before the Augustan age2
is usually an ornamental variation of the interpunct, used especially with
tall letters in "title" lines of inscriptions, or sometimes a convenient ornament
that serves to balance for the eye lines that would otherwise seem too short
or not properly centered. It is, however, a symbol quite different from the
interpunct, and we could expect a priori that it would be used at times to
mark divisions in a text. It is not astonishing, therefore, to find it occasionally
used to mark the ends of verses. The most obvious use for hederae with this
meaning is, of course, in texts with regular interpuncta in which verses are
written as though they were prose, but it is sometimes found marking the ends
of verses where the verse structure is made clear by the arrangement of the
lines.
8
The earliest datable e x a m p l e k n o w n to the Gordons is from t h e time of Tiberius;
see their Palaeography, pp. 183, 227 (n. 3), 216 (§13).
150 APPENDIX I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION

The following inscription is interesting also because of its Greek verses,

which have both interpuncta and hederae.

C. I. L. VI. 10971 (urna depositoria).

D · Θ Κ · Μ
HIC · IACET · EXANIMIS · TVMVLIS • AELIA
SABINA
CVM · SVA · NATA · SIMVL · ΓΕΤΫ · QVEM
PROCREAT·IPSA g f
Ο · EORTVNA · PIDEM · QVANTAM
MVTASTI · MALIGNE
QVEM · GENVIT · GENETRIX · SECVM
TENET · IN · LARE · D I T I S

ΕΙΚΟΣΙΝΕΣ · ΛΥΚΑΒΑΣΘΝΕΓΩ
ΖΗΣΑΣΑ · ΣΑΒΕΙΝΑ f £
ΚΑΙ · ΜΗΣΙΝ · ΤΕΤΡΑΣΙΝ · EITEN
ΔΕΚΑΤΟΝΠΑΛΙΝΗΜΑΡ p 6
ΤΗΔΕ · ΣΟΡΩ · KEIMAI · ΘΥΓΑΤΡ0Σ · ΜΕΤΑ
HME · ΔΙΩΞΕΝ ( g
ΔΙΞΑΜΕΝΗ · ΣΤΟΡΓΗΝ · ΦΙΛΟΜΗΤΟΡΑ
Δ0ΓΜΑΣΙ · ΜΟΙΡΩΝ C 6

Like the space used for a similar purpose, the hedera could give trouble to
the stone-cutters. A good example is the following, an inscription set up by
a Seiius Fundanus whose heirs, if he was indeed buried in the tomb, evidently
forgot to inscribe his age in the space left for it.

C. 1. L. V I I I . 5370.

SEIIVS FVNDANVS NVTRIVIT · NATOS · DVOJ^IN PRIMA ·

AETATE · EX · GERMANA • CONIVGA^IN STVDIISQ · MISIT · ET ·
(sic)
HONORES · TRIBVIT 0 POST · TANTOS · SVMPTVS · W RVITVS ·
. NE
φ MINE FVNERAVIT NATOS · ET HANC · COEPIT · OPERA ·
SENEX · LA
BORANS HAEC PERFECIT OMNIA · V · A GERMANA
CONIVNX V A LXXX SORORI ·
CONIVGIS OR
(sic) NAVIT · MEMORIA · QVAE · IVLIA · PRIM · V · A · Lxxx. ·
VALEAS · VIATOR · LECTOR · MEIS · CARMINIS
 A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION 151

I t seems t h a t the stone-cutter forgot to insert in line 4 before funeravit and

before senex the hederae needed to mark the beginning of the verses; the
signs were therefore added in the margins. The right margin is made even
by spacing and the short line 6 is made to fit the margins in the same way.
The hederae appear frequently in mosaic work. Of the three examples which
I give here, the first, unfortunately fragmentary, uses hederae to separate
six septenarii.
C. I. L. VIII. 1072.

]NC FVND AMENTA

]TEM DEDICAVIMVS
]TIBI D E T E AMICI FLOREM
]DEVM INVOCANTEMpiQVI
]VIT GAVDENTES (6
]D0MINVS T E EXALTA
FASTILANEM INMIN
]CONSVMMAVIT GAVDENS
]EMTEM

Another mosaic consists of two elegiac distichs followed by feliciter; each verse
is marked off with a hedera.

C. I. L. VIII. 8509.
INVIDA SIDEREO RVMPANTVR PECTORA VISVC^CEDAT ET IN
NOSTRIS LINGVA PROTERVA L O C I S ^ H O C STVDIO SVPERAMVS
AVOS GRATVMQVE RENIDETp^AEDIBVS I N NOSTRIS SVMVS A P E X
OPERIS pöFELICITER

In the following, the hedera is not used when the end of a verse comes a t the
end of a line.

0. I. L. VIII. 21510.
HING AB AL****
AQVOSOS AMARA
CAMPOS£INAR****M INS
TRVCTAM CERNIMVS TEC*****
DOMORVMpiCLASSES NAVIVM
CERTANTVR AEQVORA REMIS
AQVARVM MVLTARVM AIIVM
TVR MVLIIUDO POMORVM
ROMANI PROLES EXVLTAT FAS
TIGIA TECTIS
152 A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION

I n the following somewhat obscure sepulchral inscription, the mutilation

of the stone a t the right makes it difficult to be certain whether the hedera
was used at the end of lines. The right margin is more even on the stone than
it appears in this transcription.

C. I. L. VIII. 20758.

D Μ
CAEFALIO Ε X i m i
AE LAVDIS Iuue
NI

R E D D E R E QVOD solum
LICVIT POST FATa sepul
CHRVM QVI PATnae
CASVS MISERANS ci
VIVMQVE SVORVm
CLAVSIS ITINERIBV« pe
NETRAVIT DEVIA CVr.su
QVEM NON RESPEcto
DEFESSA PARS AETAs
NEC SVBOLVM PIETAS po
TVIT D E T I N E R E PERiclis
QVID SVPEREST haec om
NIVM EST CONsciew
TIA NOSTRVM
CVR F V E R I T TALEm ^ E R
PRESSVS MORTE DOlorem
DVM CIVIBVS REQVEM
TRIBVTORVM F E R R E Vo
LEBAT & INCIDII I N F E
L I X CONTRARIO MV
N E R E MISSV (6 IVL
KAPITO · IVL · KAPITO
N I · F I L · FEC · VIX · ANN
X L I I I I ME V I I I

There is some interest in ä very late inscription in wretched hexameters

from Mauretania which bears a date anno Provinciae equivalent to 305 A. D.
I t seems likely that the lapidary, by an odd haplography, omitted the last
three lines of the verse and proceeded to inscribe the prose, set off by a hsdera
which was doubtless intended to mark the end of both the passage in verse
and the acrostich formed by the initial letters of the verses. When the omission
 APPENDIX I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION 153

was noticed, it was necessary to crowd the three verses into the space remaining
at the right of the four that had been inscribed, and the hederae were used to
show the division. It seems unlikely that the symbols would have been used
in the first four lines, had it not been necessary to mark off what is, in effect,
a second column.
VEL VOS QVOS PIETAS DVXIT MVNERARE PARENTES
IAM REQVIEM SVMMVS VBI NOS FORTVNA · REMISIT
TALIA QVIS FACIAT NISI VOS QVOS AMOR ADEGIT
ACCIPIANT CVNCTI VESTROS ORNASSE PARENTES
MVMMICLEA KAMERINA MARITO ET AFLII VITALIS
KAMERINVS SERGIANVS
VITALI PATRI ET SATVRNINAE AVIAE DIGNISSIMIS
PR CCLXVI ET SATVRNINVS
The verse squeezed in at the ends of the first four lines, separated from the
prose by hederae:

Φ ΦΦLAETI TM SVMMVSE**MA
P T R I S QVAE SENECTVS
Φ ITER AGENS SALVE VERSVS CVMLEGERISISTOS
Φ SIA CAPITA EXPLORES INGENIVM NOMENQVE PROBABIS

c. The most common mark of punctuation (as distinct from word division)
is the diagonal bar, or virgula (/).
In a single distich which follows the brief inscription, the two metrical lines
are separated by a virgula:
C. I. L. VI. 27814 (tabella columbarii).
L · TVRRANIVS · OPTATVS
VI X A N N · XXXV
Ε · LAPIS · OBTESTOR · LEVITER · SVPER
OSSA · RESIDAS / NI · DOLEAT
NOSTRI · CONDITVS · OFFICIO
The following fragmentary inscription has two virgulae which separate
metrical lines:
C. I.L.Y I. 14578 (tabula marmorea).
DIS Μ
L · CATELLI · FLORI
CLODIA · AFRICANA
154 A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION

filio · PIISSIMO

]AD HOC · TVMVLVM · DVM · PERLEGIS

]ISTE · /ASPICE QVAM I N DI[
]VITA · MIHI · /XII · EGO[
]M · V I X I · DVLCISSIMAE · MATR[i
]M · FATO CITO RAPTVS · INIQ[«o
]RIAS · CELEBRAREM FORTEM L[
]ATER · ET · GERMANA · SOROR
]TER · FESTA · SACRI · TEMPLA[
TANTVR · AMICI
N I · SI QVID · MEA CARMINA[
] 0 PREOORQVE·ROGO
]VPEROS · VIVAS MVL[
]IS · F E L I X · S[

Only one elegiac distich, lines 5-8, is sufficiently complete for restoration.
The virgulae show the beginnings of verses.3 No other marks are used, except
the word-divider.
In another inscription, a hexameter and two pentameters are separated by
virgulae. Because of the larger letters of the first line, one word of the hexame-
ter had to be carried over and the end of the verse is marked by a virgula.
The pentameter also ends after the first word of the next line.

C.I.L.YI. 18579 (tabula marmorea).

TERRA · PARENS · T I B I · FORTVNATAE · COMMISIMVS

OSSA/QVAE · TANGIS · MATRES · PROXVMITÄTE

TVÖS/NVLLVM · ONVS · I N CVMBÄS · SPERRT • VMBRA · CINIS

It will be noted that four times an apex marks long vowels, and once shows
that, for the sake of the meter, a short syllable is to be considered long (speret).
The result is an incorrect substitution for the second hemistich of the pentame-
ter.4

• T h e editor of C.I.L. comments: vv. 6.7. supplevi ex epigrammatibus Campano

X 4428 et Venafrano X 5020:
Quis quis] ad hoc tumulum dum perlegis [. . . trjiste
Aspice quam indigne [sit data] vita mihi.
(Doudecim ego [annoru]m vixi dulcissimae matri et segg
' A n o t h e r possibility is that the word et was omitted, thus
— W W — U V -

aperat et umbra cinis.

 APPENDIX Ii: METRICAL PUNCTUATION 155

d. Another mark, possibly a mere variation of the virquia, that is used to

mark off verses has the form / The carmen consists of two elegiac distichs
followed by a pentameter. Each distich is arranged in a paragraph of three
lines, with the last two indented under the first. Three of the verses are marked
by the sign f (two of them with an interpunct). The last two verses are not
so marked, possibly because the length of the line leaves little room for a mark.8
It will be noted that the same mark, in the prose portion, with an interpunct
on each side of it, indicates the only sentence-end occurring within a line.

Ο. I. L. III. 4487.

V ΕIΑ ΝIA · HOSPITA

ANN · X L V • Η · S · Ε · ET
L FABRICIVS
CLEMENS · MIL · COH · I · PRAETOR
L · FABRICI · EVOC · F · QVI DECESSIT IM PRAET
ANN · X X I X · STIP · V I I I / • FABRICIA
L · F · MARCELLA · M A T R I · SVAE · ET • F R A T R I
POSVIT
FELIX · T E R R A · PRECOR · LEVITER · SVPER
OSSA · RESIDAS 7 · MATRIS · ET · ET · FRA
TRIS • COMPRECOR · ECCE · SOROR 7
PARS · IACET · IPSA · MEI · MAIOR · GEMI
NATQVE DOLOREM J • F I L I A
MATRI · SIMVL · FRATRE · IACENT · FILIO
MPRECOR · VT · VOBIS · SIT · PIA · TERRA LEVIS

e. Another mark as the form of a J. Only one sign is used, in line 3, where
it marks the end of the hexameter in the middle of the line of beautifully in-
scribed letters. A similar verse-end occurs in line 6, but is not so marked.

G. I.L.N I. 5767 (tabula marmorea litteris pulchris paullo maioribus).

DIS · MANIBVS SACRVM

HIC · TVMVLVS FRCVTI SACER EST
QVEM LAEDERE NOLI J HOSPES
SIC · V O T I S · IPSE FRVARE • T V IS
LEGIST I MISERATVS ABIS
FELIX · TIBI VITA SIT PRECOR
(sic) A Τ Q V Ε • O B I T O SID • T I B I TERRA LEVIS

• In C. I. L. VI. 19253, the curved mark which is used in prose for punctuation for
sense, indicates the ends of verses, although alternate verses are indented. In the seven
lines, three such marks occur.
156 APPENDIX Ii: METRICAL PUNCTUATION

CN · POMPEIYS · OLYMPICVS · VIVS · FECIT · SIBI · ET · GEGANIAE ·

PRIMAe coni( ?)
FELICITATI · F · FRVCTO · L · DE QVIBVS · DOLVIT NIHIL NISI
MORTEto

f. Two inscriptions use the mark 7 to set off verses.

In the first, the sign, somewhat smaller, is used after every verse of the three
elegiac distichs except that no mark is found at the end of the poem.
C. I. L. VI. 33903 (cippus marmoreus).

D Μ
CL · HIC · IACEO · DIADVME
NVS · ARTE · POETA · 7OLIM · CAE
SARiEIS · FLORIDVS · OFFICIIS 7
QVEM · NVMQVAM · CVPIDAE
(urceus) POSSEDIT · GLORIA · FAMAE 7 (patera)
SED · SEMPER · MODICVS · R E X
SIT · VBIQVE · TENOR · 'HYLLE
PATER · VENI · NOLLO · MOVERE
TVMVLTV · 7 HOSPITIVM ·
NOBIS · SVFFICIT · ISTA · DOMVS
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
CL · FRVCTIANE
B M F

In the other, very poorly constructed verses7 are written mostly line for line.
When this is not possible, the sign*/marks the end of the verse (once, line 4,
after the single word of the line; again, in the middle of line 13).
C. I. L. VI. 17518.

.. .VIRO · POSVIT · CONIVNX · MEMORA. .LIS A . . .

DIGNA · PIO · NATO · QVI · CITO · RAPTVS · ABIT
MVENERA QVAE DECVIT NATVM PATRIQ MATRIQVE
PARARE7
IN . . . NATORVM S E R I E MA
SI PIA VOTA MIHI TITVLIS TRISTISSIMA . . . .
QVAE SVBOLES OLIM SERVAVIT TEMPORE LONGO
A · FABIO · DAPHNO
FABIA · PYRALLIS

7 The editor of G. I. L. remarks: Versus inconditi sunt, et tam male coneepti, ut de iusta

restitutione desperandum sit.

 A P P E N D I X I I : METRICAL PUNCTUATION 157
CONIVGI · CARISSIMO
POSVIT
DI TALESQVE DABVNT EPVLAS MERITIS
PRO TALIBVS ILLI7 ET NATVM PATRI
MATRIS PIETATE PROBABVNT

g. Although called hederß by the editor, the mark / is most probably a sign
of punctuation, possibly a variant of the foregoing.

G. I. L. VIII. 16737 (in lapidibus duobus).

HAEC TIBI KARA T W S CONSCRIPT verba

MARITVS/O DVLCIS CONICNX DEfuncta leva
MEN AMISSAE/ΊΑΜ SINE TE ORBI mo
LESTA . . . GVS/ΈΤ CAEL
....LACELL VRASAMABo
FVNERE MVI TALES ACCEndere
FACES/ITVM RVC
NVTRISTIS
VIRIS

The first two hexameters are clearly separated by this mark. The others
are too mutilated for restoration, but two other marks are visible in the extant
portion.
h. The mark hh, which Varro8 calls an I on its side, marks the end of the first
of three elegiac distichs. The end of the second, in line 4, is broken and it cannot
be determined whether the mark was used. It was omitted, however, after
the third, which concludes the carmen.

C. I. L. VIII. 13535 (in fragmentis viginti quinque tabulae).

RVRE Opulens caruSQ · SVIS · CALLISTRATws ipse

iraTERPRES voluit NOMINIS esSE SVI μ
QVI LICET ET cenSV DIVES MANSISSET ET Αuro
INVIDIAE NVMQVAm ferVIDA VELA Τulit
FORTVNATVS OLIM-V SIBI-VXIT AMIcis
αωΧΙΤ CONGESTo pREDIA RVRENOVA
IN PACE YixiT ANNos . . . .dePO · SITVS 1 1 1 Κ L D APR lies

One of the most well-known elogia of the Scipiones has a similar mark to
separate Saturnian verses.

•Varro, De sermone Latino (frag. 66 apud Goetz & Schoell).

158 A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION

C. I.L.I2, 7. (sarcophagus).

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ICORNELIVS · LVCIVS · SCIPIO · BARBATVS ·
GNAIVOD · PATRE
PROGNATVS · FORTIS · VIR · SAPIENSQVE-QVOIVS · FORMA ·
VIRTVTEI · PARISVMA
FVIT—CONSOL · CENSOR · AIDILIS · QVEI · FVIT · APVD V O S -
TAVRASIA · CISAVNA
SAMNIO · CEPIT—SVBIGIT · OMNE · LOVCANAM · OPSIDESQVE ·
AVDOVCsIT

The horizontal mark was not placed after Barbatus, which is the end of the
first verse.
Another inscription has an inclined, but not transverse, I to mark the ends
of verses occurring within a line. The extant portion has two such signs, mark-
ing the ends of verses in an elegiac distich. The other two complete verses
are hexameters and end at the right margin. It will be noted that the nomina-
tive aegregia must be scanned egregiä.

C. I. L. V. 6295.

SCIRE VOLENS LECTOR QVI SIT

IN FVNERE FLETVS I CARMI
NA SI RELEGAS DISCERE CVNTA
POTES I AEGREGIA CON
IVNX NIMIVM DILECTA MARITO
BVSTVS MEMBRA TENET MENS
CAELI PERGET IN ASTRA
SVPERSTEM TENVIT SAECVL***

i. When the interpunct was no longer used as a word-divider, it became avail-

able as a mark of punctuation, and accordingly in late inscriptions we find it
also used to mark the end of verses. A possible anticipation of this use appears
in an inscription in which hexameters written line for line with consistent
interpuncta have the point also at the end of each line except the lines (5, 12)
in which a considerable space was left at the end of the line. Noteworthy also
are the hedera before the last line and what may be intended for a coronis at
the end.
 A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION 159
C. I. L. VI. 39086 (tabula magna marmorea in quinque partes fracta).
HIC · REGINA · SITA · EST · TALI · CONTECTA · SEPVLCRO ·
QVOD CONIVNX · STATVIT · RESPONDENS · EIVS · Α Μ 0 R I ·
HAEC · POST · BIS · DENOS · SECVM · TRANS · SEGERAT · ANNVM (sie)
ET · QVARTVM · MENSEM · RESTANTIBVS · OCTO · DIEBV S·
RVRSVM · VICTVRA/REDIRVRA · AD LVMINA · RVRSVM
NAM · SPERARE · POTEST · IDEO · QVOD · SVRGAT · INAEVO M-
PROMISSVM QVAE · VERA · FIDES · DIGNISQVE · PIISQV E·
QVAE · MERVIT · SEDEM · VENERANDI · RVRIS · HABER E·
HOC · TIBI · PRAESTITERIT · PIETAS · HOC · VITA · PVDIC A·
HOC · ET · AMOR · GENERIS · HOC · OBSERVANTIA · LEGI S·
CONIVGII · MERITVM · CVIVS · TIBI · GLORIA · CVRA E·
HORVM · FACTORVM · TIBI · SVNT · SPERANDA · FVTVRA
0ΏΕ QVIBVS · ET · CONIVNX · MAESTVS · SOLACIA · QVAERIT«/^
The point is used at the end of trimeters written line for line and without
interpuncta :
C. I. L. VI. 28941 (fragmenta quatuor tablulae marmoreae).9
Fecere SeiAE VICTORINAe cONIVGI ·
Seianus, maTRI VICTORINVS FILIVS ·
tribus sit eaDEM SEDIS AETERNAE DOMVS ·
Viro peregit AAEC SVO SEMPER COMES ·
probique castas /eMINAE MORES ERANT ·
Annos tulit, cum est raPTA VIGINTI ET DVOS ·
Scias viator: FATA NON PARCVNT BONIS ·
The point is used in two different ways in another inscription. Two hexa-
meters are marked at the end. Then follow two elegiac distichs, the ends of
which are not marked, but the caesurae of both hexametric verses are indicated
by a point.
C. I. L. XIV. 914.
D Μ
C DOMITI PRIMI
HOC · EGO SV IN TVMVLO PRIMVS NOTISSI
MVS ILLE · VIXI LVCRINIS POTABI SAEPE FA
LERVM · BALNIA VINA VENVS · MECVM
SENVERE PERE ANNOS HEC EGO SI POTVI
SIT MIHI TERRA LEBIS SET TAMEN AD MA
NES · FOENIX ME SERBAT IN ARA QVI ME
CVM PROPERAT SE REPARARE SIBI

» Restored by Bueoheler.
160 A P P E N D I X I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION

In a late inscription, dated 551 A. D., three verses ending within a line are
marked and one coinciding with the end of the line. Interpuncts are used in
the final line, including one at the end. Two other points in the inscription
mark the abbreviation of -que and one (line 17) apparently designates a hepta-
mimeral caesura.

C. I.L. XI. 312 (tabula magna marmorea).

CLAVDITVR HOC TVMVLO
BENEDICTI FIDA IVGALIS ·
QVAE TENVIT CASTAM DEFVNCTO
CONIVGE VITAM
NOMINE PVLCHERIA FVIT
SED NOMINE FORMAM
SIGNAVIT MENTEMQ · SIMVL
VITAMQ · DECENTEM
FILIVS HIS THOMAS ALVIT
QVEM BLANDA RELICTAE
SIMPLICITER PIETAS CARI
POST FATA MARITI · OFFICIVM
SVLA EXIBVIT COMMVNE PA
RENTVM · IPSIVS HIC COLLO
GENETRIX PORTATA QVIES
CIT · TALE DECVS MERVIT
FVNERIS · PIA MATER HABERE
D P · SD I P FB · X · PC · BASIL · I N D · X I I I I ·

In the following fragmentary inscription, points are used to set off lines of
verse, even when the verse ends the line, if there is room for a point. The right
margin is fairly even on the stone. Two pentameters are followed by eleven
rough hexameters. Only one verse of which the end is extant has no mark,
viz., line 3. The last hexameter is divided into two parts by a name in large
letters in line 20.

C. I. L. VIII. 7759.
QVI PROPERAS QVAESO TAR
DA VIATOR ITER · VT PAVCIS
DISCAS CVM GENVS EXITIVM
NON EXTERNA SATVR SCYTHI
CA D E GENTE SYRORVM ·
/VMSATVS AETHNAVIROS VB/
CINGVNT ANSPAGAE MOLES ·
COGNITVS EST LOCVS AMOENIS
 A P P E N D I X I i : METHICAL PUNCTUATION 161

SIMVS ALBA · IN QVA FRONDICOMA[

ODORATVR AD MARE PINVS · DAPHNE[
PVDICA V I . . . .LI ET LOCO VITREA NA[
DVMSIMI NONATAMV[
]VBI METVRALES SED[
]BI SVM CINIS HIC Ο
]TVR · TER DENOS ET
BIS QVIN SVMSPERAT ANNO[
AETATE MY/ERO QVE MIHI FVIT VNICA NA[
A · QVOT DEDIT IT PEPETIT NATVRA NON[
/VIA PECCAT · DICERE NE PIGEATf

Ρ · SITTI · OPTATI·

MOLLITER OSSA CVBENT ·

In the following inscription, consisting of crude hexameters, points mark

six verse-ends within the line. The remaining seven, written line for line, are
not marked except lines 9 and 14 which are somewhat shorter. The word-
divider is not used and the right margin is even.

C. I. L. VI. 32808 (tabula marmorea litteris satis bonis saeculi fere secundi
exeuntis).
RESPICE PRAETERIENS VIATOR CONSOBRINI
PIETATE PARATA · CVM LACRIMIS STATVI QVAN
TO IN MVNERE POSTO VIDETIS · PANNONIA TERRA
CREAT TVMVLAT ITALIA TELLVS · ANN XXVI VT SIBI
CASTRIS HONOREM ATQVIRERET IPSE · DOLORI MA//
NO SVBSTENTAVIT TEMPORE LONGO · POSTEA CVM
SPERANS DOLOREM EFFVGISSE NEFANDAM · ANTE
DIEM MERITVM HVNC DEMERSIT AT STYGA PLVTON
QVOTSI FATA EO SINVISSENT LVCE VIDERE ·
ISTA PRIUS TRISTE MVNVS POSVI DOLORI REPLETVS
MVNVS INANE QVIDEM TERRA NVNC DIVIDIT ISTA
OSSVA SVB TITVLO POTIVS TV OPTA VIATOR CVM PIE
TATE TVA IPSO TERRA LEVE NOBIS FORTVNA BEATA
EX QVA TV POSSIS OBITVS BENE LINOVERE NATO ·
VAL ANTONIVS ET AVR VICTORINVS HERED
VLPIO QVINTIANO EQ SING BEN MER POSVER

The ends of nine long verses, rough hexameters, are marked by points,
except those ending in lines 1 and 9. The right margin is even.
162 APPENDIX I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION

C. I. L. V. 1703.

HIC IACET RESTVTVS P E L E G E R IN PACE FIDELIS

E X A F R I C A V E N I T V T ISTAM V R B E V I D E R E T ·
HEC INVISA TELLVS ISTVM VOLVIT CORPVS HABE
R E · HIC QVO NATVS F V E R A T OPTANS E R A T ILLO
R E V E R T I · ID MAGIS CRVDELIVS VT NYLLVM SVO
RVMQVE V I D E R E T · I N V E N E R A T SATIS AMPLIVS
QVAM SVOS IPSE P A R E N T E S · NEC IAM E R A T E X T E R SI
CVT PROVENIT V T ESSET A B IPSIS · SED QVO F A T A VOCANT
NVLLVS RESISTERE POSSIT HVIC SODALICII MEIOREN
SIVM CONTRA VOTVM F E C E R V N T ·

The writer of this inscription attempted to write Phalaecean verses, the ends
of which are marked by points. Several have been restored as shown below the
transcription.

C.I.L. VIII. 11597.

IV L I Ο G A L L O N I O ·
POST SEPTVAGESIMO NVMERO TEMPVS ·
POSTQVAE TOTIDEM TRANSACTÖS AVTVMNOS ·
T R E S N A T I T I B I IAM FIGIMVS P R O B O P A R E N T I · QVOD GRATVM
TVMVLVM V I D E T V R ESSE MATER K A R A NOBIS TIBIQVE N V P E R HOr
T A T V R F I E R I MORTIS HONOREM · IAM V A L E P A T E R NOBIS RELIC-
TIS · IAM
T E NON T a r T A R A C R V D E L E M T E N E b u N T · SET ELYSIVS CAMPVS
OCCVPAVIT f 6 V N
D///NC II/IYM TIBI R E V E R T FAS ESI V T / / Ο ET PROBO P A R E T I ·
Η S · Ε
figimus tibi iam probo parenti,
quod gratum tumulum videtur esse,
mater kara tibi nobisque nuper
hortatur fieri mortis honorem,
iam vale pater [heu] nobis relictis!
et seqq.

Like apices and other epigraphical devices intended to facilitate reading of

the inscription, the signs which indicated the ends of verses were sometimes
used by persons who did not understand their function, but presumably thought
them elegant and therefore to be imitated. A very good example of this will
be used to close this survey. Both hederae and the sign appear, but are meaning-
less, and the interpunct is also used accurately to separate verses.
 APPENDIX I i : METRICAL PUNCTUATION 163

C. I. L. XII. 533 (cippus litteris bonis saeculi fere secundi exeuntis).

Ρ AVL Ο SISTE GRADVM IVVENIS

P I E QVAESO VIATOR · VI MEA P E R p £
TITVLVM NORIS SIC 1NVIDA FATA · VNO
MINVS QVAM BIS DENOS EGO VIXI P E R ANNOS
INTEGER INNOCVVS SEMPER PIA MENTE
PROBATVS • QVI DOCILI LVSV IVVENVM ( 6
BENE DOCTVS HARENIS.-.PVLCHER ET ILLE FVI
VARUS CIRCVMDATVS ARMIS · SAEPE FERAS LVSI
MEDICVS TAMEN IS QVOQVE VIXI · ET COMES V
VRSARIS COMES HIS QVI VICTIMA SACRIS V
CAEDERE SAEPE SOLENT ET QVI NOVO TEMPORE
VERIS · FLORIBVS INTEXTIS REFOVENT
SIMVLACRA DEORVM · NOMEN SI QVAERIS
TITVLVS TIBI VERA FATETVR
SEX · I VL · FELICISSIMVS
SEX · IVLIVS · FELIX
ALVMNO · INCOMPARAöiZi et
F E L I C I T A S Fr citri
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adcook, F. Ε., "A Note on Res Gestae Divi Augusti, 34, 3", Journal of Roman Studies
X L I I (1952), pp. 10-12.
Aegyptische Urkunden aus die Königlichen Museen zu Berlin, Griechische Urkunden
(Berlin, 1895-1926).
L'annie dpigraphique (Paris, 1888-1962).
L'annie philologique (Paris, 1933-1962).
Baisdon, J . P., "Claudius", The Oxford Classical Dictionary (Oxford, 1949).
Barini, Concepta (ed.), Res gestae Divi Augusti ex monumentis Ancyrano, Antiocheno,
Apolloniensi (Romae, 1937).
Barwick, Karl (ed.), Flavii Sosipatri Charisii artis grammaticae libri V (Lipsiae, 1925).
Battelli, Giulio, Lezioni de paleografia, l i l a . ed. (Cittä del Vaticano, 1949).
Berger, Adolf, Encyclopedic Dictionary of Roman Law (Philadelphia, 1953).
Berliner griechische Urkunden: see Aegyptische.
Brune, Karl G. and Otto Gradenwitz (eds.), Fontes iuris Romani antiqui: I I . Simulacra
(Tubingae, 1912).
Buecheler, Franz (ed.), Carmina Latina epigraphica (Lipsiae, 1895-1897).
Büchner, Karl, "Ueberlieferungsgeschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Altertums",
Geschichte der Textüberlieferung, Band I (Zürich, 1961).
Cagnat, Rene, Cours d'dpigraphie latine (Paris, 1914).
Calderini, Aristide (ed.), Papiri Latini (Milano, 1945).
Cavenaile, Robert (ed.), Corpus papyrorum Latinarum (Wiesbaden, 1958).
Chatelain, iSmile, Paliographie es classiques latins (Paris, 1884-1900).
Christiansen, Jacobus. De apinibus et I longis inscriptionum Latinarum (Husuroi, 1889).
Collart, P. "Les papyrus littöraires latins", Revue de philologie, I l l e eerie, XV (1941),
pp. 112-128.
Conway, Robert Seymour and C. F. Walters (eds.), TitiLivi ab urbe condita, (Oxonii, 1914).
Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum (Berolini, 1863-1959).
della Corte, F., "Lingua e cultura nella Tabula Hebana", La parola del paesato, Fase.
X I V (Napoli, 1950).
della Corte, F. and M. A. Levi, "Tavola di Heba", La parola del passato, Fase. XIV
(Napoli, 1950).
Dessau, Hermann (ed.), Inscriptiones Latinae selectae (Berolini, 1916).
Devoto, Jacob (ed.), Tabulae Iguvinae (Romae, 1940).
Dow, Sterling, "Minoan Writing", American Journal of Archaeology, L V I I I (1954), pp.
77-129.
Durry, Marcel (ed.), ]£loge fun&bre d'une matrone romaine (Paris, 1950).
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 165
Egbert, James C., Introduction to the Study of Latin Inscriptions, 2nd. ed. (New York, 1908).
Epigraphica (Milano, 1939-1960).
Ernout, A. and A. Meillet, Dictionnaire etymologique de la langue latine, H i e ed. (Paris,
1951).
Fabia, Philippe (ed.), La table claudienne de Lyon (Lyon, 1929).
Ferrara, Ioannes (ed.), Poematis Latini reliquiae ex volumine Herculanensi evulgata
(Papiae, 1908).
Funaioli, Hyginus (ed.), Grammatical Bomanae fragmenta, I (Lipsiae, 1907).
Gage, J e a n (ed.). Res gestae Divi Augusti (Parisiis, 1950).
Garuti, Ioannes (ed.), C. Rabirius: Bellum Actiacum (Bononiae, 1958).
Geschichte der Textüberlieferung: see Büchner.
Goetz, Georg and F. Sehoell (eds.), M. Terenti Varronis de lingua Latina (Lipsiae,
1910).
Gordon, Arthur Ε., "A New Fragment of the Laudatio Turiae", American Journal of
Archaeology, LIV (1960), pp. 223-226, plates 26-27.
Gordon, Arthur Ε . and J . S. Gordon (eds.), Album of Dated Latin Inscriptions, I - I V
(Berkeley, 1958).
Gordon, Joyce S. and A. E. Gordon, Contributions to the Palaeography of Latin Inscrip-
tions (Berkeley, 1957).
Grenfell, Bernard P. and Arthur S. H u n t (eds.), The Oxyrhynckus Papyri (London,
1898-1962).
Hiibner, Aemilius, Exempla scripturae epigraphicae Latinae (Berolini, 1885).
—, "Lex metalli Vipascensis", Ephemeris epigraphica, I I I (1877), pp. 165-187.
Huguet, Pedro Batlle, Epigrafia Latina (Barcelona, 1946).
Inscriptiones Italicae (Romae, 1936-1953).
J a h n , Otto, "Ueber die Subscriptionen in den Handschriften römischer Classiker",
Berichte über die Verhandlungen der Königlich sächsischen Oesellschaft der Wissen-
schaften zu Leipzig, Phil.-hist. Classe, Band I I I (1851), pp. 327-372.
Keil, Heinrich (ed.), Grammatici Latini (Lipsiae, 1855-1880).
Kent, Roland G. (ed.), M. Terenti Varronis de lingua Latina (Cambridge, 1938).
Kenyon, Frederic G. Books and Readers in Ancient Greece and Rome (Oxford, 1951).
Klotz, Alfred (ed.), Μ. Tulli Giceronis in C. Verrem actionis secundae (Lipsiae, 1923).
Lachmann, Karl (ed.), G. Lucilii saturae (Berolini, 1876).
Lejeune, Michel. "Les öpingles votives incrites du sanctuaire d'este," Revue des Hudes
anciennes, LVI (1954), pp. 61-89.
Lowe, E . A. (ed.). Codices Latini antiquiores (Oxonii, 1934-1963).
Mallon, Jean, Paleographie romaine (Madrid, 1952).
—/'Quel est le plus ancienexempleconnud'un manuscritlatin en forme de codex?", Eme-
rita, X V I I (1949), pp. 1-8.
Mallon, Jean, Robert Marichal, and Charles Perrat, L'ecriture latine de la capitate romaine
ά la minuscule (Paris, 1939).
de Manteyer, Georges, "L'inscription de Lanuvium λ Rome", Melanges d'archeologie et
d'histoire de Vecole fran^aise de Rome, X V I I I (1898), pp. 271-280.
Marichal, Robert and Albert Bruckner (eds.), Chartae Latinae antiquiores (Olten, 1954).
Mariotti, Adriana, "Testo litterario Latino non identificato", Athenaeum, X X V (1947),
pp. 166-170.
Mazzarino, Antonius (ed.), Grammatical Bomanae fragmenta aetatis Caesareae (Augustae
Taurinorum, 1955).
Mommsen, Th. (ed.), Bes gestae Divi Augusti ex monumentis Ancyrano et Apolloniensi,
IIa. ed. (Berolini, 1883).
ιββ BIBLIOGRAPHY

Oliver, James Η. and Robert E. A. Palmer, "Minutes of an Act of the Roman Senate",
Hesperia, X X I V (1955), pp. 320-350.
Oliver, Revilo P., "The First Medicean MS. of Tacitus and the Titulature of Ancient
Books", Transactions of the American Philological Association, L X X X I I (1951),
pp. 232-261.
—, Review of Arthur E . Gordon and J . S. Gordon's Album of Dated Latin Inscriptions
and Contributions to the Palaeography of Latin Inscriptions, in American Journal
of Philology, L X X X I (1960), pp. 189-197.
Pack, Roger Α., Greek and Latin Literary Teoots from Graeco-Roman Egypt. 2nd. Ed. (Ann
Arbor, 1968).
Palmer, Leonard R., Myceneans and Minoans (London, 1961).
Pauly, August, G. Wissowa, and W. Kroll, Real-Encyclopädie der classiscken Altertums-
wissenschaft (Stuttgart, 1894-1960).
Ponltney, J . W., The Bronze Tables of Iguvium (1959).
Peterson, William, M. Tulli Oiceronis Orationes Verrinae (Oxonii, s.a. [1917]).
Ramsay, William Mitchell and Anton von Premerstein (eds.), Monumentum Antiochenum
(Klio, Beiheft X I X ) (Lipsiae, 1927).
Reifferscheid, Augustus (ed.), C. Suetoni Tranquüli praeter Caesarum libros reliquiae
(Lipsiae, 1860).
Riccobono, S. (ed.), Acta Divi Augusti (Romae, 1945).
Ritechl, Friedrich, Priscae Latinitatis monumenta epigraphica (Berolini, 1862).
Roberte, C. H., "The Antinoä Fragment of Juvenal", Journal of Egyptian Archaeology,
X X I (1935), pp. 199-209.
Robinson, David M., "The Res gestae Divi Augusti as Recorded on the Monumentum
Antiochenum", American Journal of Philology, X L V I I (1926), pp. 1-54.
de Sanctis, Gaetano (ed.), "Noti di epigrafia romana, I. La orazione funebre di Turia",
Atti accademia scavi di Torino, X L V I I I (1913), pp. 270-275.
Sanders, Henry A. (ed.), Latin Papyri in the University of Michigan Collection (Ann Arbor,
1947).
Sandys, John Edwin, Latin Epigraphy (Cambridge, 1927).
Schanz, Martin and Carl Hosius, Geschichte der römischen Literatur (München, 1935).
Scott, Walter (ed.), Fragmenta Herculanensia (Oxonii, 1885).
Smutny, R . J., Greek and Latin Inscriptions at Berkeley (Berkeley, 1966).
Sprey, Josef (ed.), Papyri Iandanae, V (Lipsiae, 1931).
Steffens, Franz Lateinische paläographie (Berlin, 1929).
Summers, Walter C. (ed.), Select Letters of Seneca (London, 1910).
Thompson, Edward Maunde, An Introduction to Greek and Latin Palaeography (Oxford,
1912).
Turner, Eric G., "Half a Line of Virgil from Egypt", Studi in onore di A. Calderini e R.
Paribeni, Vol. II, pp. 157-161 (Milano, 1957).
de Visscher, Fernand, F. della Corte, C. Gatti, and M. A. Levi (eds.), "Tabula Hebana",
La parola del passato, Fase. X I V (Napoli, 1950).
Weber, Wilhelm, Princeps (Stuttgart, 1936).
Wessely, Carl, Die ältesten lateinischen und griechischen Papyri (Wiens, 1914).
—, Schrifttafeln zur älteren lateinischen Palaeographie (Leipzig, 1898).
Wilmanns, Gustav (ed.), Exempla inscriptionum Latinarum (Berolini, 1873).
Youtie, Herbert C. and John G. Winter (eds.), Papyri and Ostraca from Karanis (Ann
Arbor, 1951).
 JANUA LINGUARUM

STUDIA MEMORIAE NICOLAI VAN WIJK DEDICATA

Edited by. Ο. Η. van Schooneveld

SERIES PRACTICA

1. ΜΑΒΠ,ΤΒ CONWELL and ALPHONSE JOTLLAND: Louisiana French Grammar, I: Phonology. Morphology,
and Syntax. 1903. 207 pp., 2 maps. Cloth Old. 56.—
3. IRENE GARBELL. The Jewish Neo-Aramalo Dialects of Persian Azerbaijan: Linguistic Analysis and
Folkloristic Texts. 19Θ5. 342 pp., map. Cloth. Old. 98.—
4. MORRIS F. GOODMAN A Comparative Study of Creole French Dialect. 1964.143 pp., map. Old. 34.—
5. ROLAND HARWEG Compositum und Katalysatlonstext, vornehmlich im späten Sanskrit. 1βθ4. 104 pp.
Old. 8 8 . -
β. GUSTAV HERDAN The Strnctnralistic Approach to Chinese Grammar and Vocabulary: Two Essays.
1964. 56 pp., 4 figs. Old. 2 6 . -
7. ALPHONSB JUILLAND: Dictionnalre Inverse delaLangue Franpalse. 1965.564 pp., 9figs.Cloth. Gld. 120.—
8. A. HOOD ROBERTS: A Statistical Linguistic Analysis of American English. 1965. 487 pp., 11 flgs.,
6 tables. Cloth. Old. 78.—
9. VALDIS LEJNIBKS. Morphosyntax ol the Homeric Greek Verb. 1964. 92 pp. Old. 26.—
10. ROBERT E. DIAMOND. The Diction of the Anglo-Saxon Metrical Psalms. 1963. 59 pp. Old. 20.—
11. JOSEPH E . GRIMES U u i c h o l S y n t a x . 1964. 105 p p . Old. 80.—
12. OLAKA Ν HUSH Phonetic Variation and Acoustic Distinctive Features: A Study of Four Oeneral Ameri-
can Fricatives 1964. 161 pp., 64 figs., 84 tables Old. 44.—
13. WILLIAM G. CASTLE The Effect ol Selective Narrow-Band Filtering on the Perception of Certain English
Vowels. 1964. 209 pp., 53 figs., 84 tables. Old. 48.—
14. ANN SHANNON A Descriptive Syntax of the Parker Manuscript of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle from
734 —891. 1964. 68 pp. Old. 20.—
15. EICHI KOBAYASHI. The Verb Forms of the South English Legendary. 1964. 87 pp. Old. 24.—
16. UOHER L. FIRESTONE: Description and Classification of Slrionö, a Tupf Guaranl Language. 1965. 70 pp.,
7 ligs. Old. 2 1 . -
17. W O L F LESLAD. E t h i o p i a n A r g o t s . 1964. 65 pp. Old. 21.—
18. VIDYA N'IWAS MISRA: The Descriptive Technique of Panini. 1966. 175 pp., some tables. Old. 52.—
19. EUOENE A. NIDA A Synopsis of English Syntax. Second, revised edition. 1966. 174 pp. Old. 80.—
'20. ROBERT T. OLIPHANT The Harley Latin-Old English Glossary, edited from British Museum, MS Harley,
3376. 1966. 423 pp. Old. 55.—
21. ERICA REINER A linguistic Analysis of Akkadian. 1966. 155 pp., graph. Old. 42.—
22. M. J HAKDMAN Jaqaru: Outline of Phonologioal and Morphological Structure. 1906. 131 pp., 2 figs.,
map, 20 tables Old. 88.—
23. MARVIN K. MATERS (ed.). Languages ol Guatemala. 1966. 318 pp. Old. 68.—
24. ROBERT LIVINGSTON ALLEN: The Verb System of President-Day American English. 1966. 808 pp.,
7 tables, 24 tigs. Old. 52.—
26. ANDREW MACLEISH· The Middle English Subject-Verb Cluster. 1969. 276 pp. Gld. 76.—
27. EMMA GREOORES and JOROE A . SOAREZ: A D e s c r i p t i o n o f C o l l o q u i a l Ouaranf. 1967. 248 p p . O l d . 6 4 . —
29. HOWARD W. LAW: The Obligatory Constructions of Isthmus Nahuat Grammar. 1966. 73 pp., 21 tab-
les. Old. 2 4 . —
30. MARVIN H. FOLSOH: The Syntax of Substantive and Nonflnlte Satellites to the Finite Verb in German.
1966. 96 pp. Old. 24.—
36. IRMENGARD RAUCH: The Old High Qerman Dlphthongization: A Description of a Phonemic Change.
1967. 130 pp. Gld. 38.—
37. JOSEPH HAROLD FRIEND: T h e D e v e l o p m e n t o l A m e r i e a n L e x i c o g r a p h y , 1798—1864. 1967. 129 p p .
4 face. Old. 36.—
38. W I L L I A M J . SAMARIN: A G r a m m a r ol S a n g o . 1967. 280 p p . O l d . 80.—
39 DEAN H. OBRECHT: Effects of the Second Forraant on the Perception of Velarization Consonants in
Arabic. 1968. 104 pp., 57 HgB. Old. 32.—
40. YOLANDA LASTRA Coohabamba Quechua Syntax. 1968. 104 pp. Old. 32.—
42. R. 8. P. BEEKES: The Development of the Proto-Indo-European Laryngeals In Greek. 1969. xxiv +
324 pp. Old. 90.—
43. HARWOOD H. HESS: The Syntactic Structure of Mezquital Otoml. 1968. 159 pp. Old. 45.—
44. PAUL W. PILLSBURY Descriptive Analysis ot Discourse in Late West Saxon Texts. 1967. 91 pp.
Old. 24.—
45. MADELINE ELIZABETH EHRMAN: The Meaning of the Modale in Present-Day American English. 1966.
106 pp. Gld. 24.—
46. VIKTOR KRUPA. Morpheme and Word In Maori. 1966. 83 pp., 26 tables, 1 flg. Old. 24.—
47. JOHN 0. FISCHER: Linguistics In Remedial English. 1966. 71 pp., 4 tables. Old. 18.—
48. Μ. A. K.. HALLIDAT: Introduction and Grammar in British English. 1967. 61 pp., 2 folding tables.
Old. 18.—
49. SA70 YOTSUKURA: The Articles in English: A Structural Analysis of Osage. 1970. 113 pp Gld. 24.—
50. MART RITCHIE KEY: Comparative Tacanan Phonology: with Cavinena Phonology and Notes on Pano-
Tacanan Relationship. 1968. 107 pp. Gld. 32.—
 52. Roth ΜAKQARET HRKNÜ Λ lagmeinic Analysis ΟΙ Mexican Spanish Clauses. 1968. 128. pp. Old. 33.—
53 HAROLD H. KEY Morphology ol Cayuvava. 1967. 73 pp. Old 22.—
55. L. ΚυΜΚΟ l'he Economy ol DiphthotiKization in Early Romance. 1968. 127 pp. Gld. 30.—
57 ALAN CAMPBELL WARES A Comparative study ol Vüinan Consonantism. 1968. 100 pp Gld. SO.—
58. J RAN PRANINSKAS Trade Name Creation. Processes and Patterns. 1908. 115 pp Gld. 30.—
59. GEORGE G I A C U M A R I S JR. l'he A k k a d i a n ol Amlah. 1970. 119 p p . Gld. 36.—
60 JUAN RUBIN Nationa Bilingualism in Paraguay 1968. Ι3Ό pp. Gld. 40.—
01. SALMAN Η AL-ANI Arabic Phonology An Acoustical and Physiological Investigation. 1970. 104 pp.
18 rtgs. 16 »itamples, 13 'Hustr., 3 diagrams. Gld. 36.—
iJ2. CURTIS Ρ HEROLD l'he Morphology οι King Alired's Translation of the Orosius. 1968. 80np Gld. 24.—
63. JAN SVARTVIK On Voioe in the English Verb. 196«. XIV + 2 0 0 pp., tigs, and tables. Gld. 32.—
64. MARVIN R WILSON Coptic future Tenses Syntactical Studies in Sahldic. 1970. 143 pp.
Gld. 40.—
15. RÜSSEL N. GAMPHELL Noun Substitut«« lb Modern Thai: A Study in Pronominality 1969 70 pp.
Gld. 2 1 . -
66. MARIA 1'SIAPERA. A Descriptive Analysis ol Cypriot Maronite Arabic: 1969. 69. pp. GUI 20.—
70. BRE.<T HERLIN: Tzeltai Numera Classifiers: A Study in Ethnographic Semantics. 1968. 243 pp.,
1B plated. Gld. 7 2 . -
71. ROBERT D STEyioK: Suprasegmenuiis. Meter, and the Manuscript Ol lieowult". 1968. 88 pp. Gld. 27.—
73. AfiRT Η KUIPERS: 1. l'he Squamish Language Grammar Texts, Dictionary. 1967. 470 pp., map.
Gld. 1 1 0 -
AERT h. Kuii'ERS: t. The Shaimsh Language: Grammar, Texts. Dictionary. 1969. 98 pp.,
1 photograph Gld. 24.—
74. R o IKBLT A L L E N PALMATIER. A Descriptive Syntax ol t h e " O r m u l u r a " . 1969. 137 p p . Gld. 40.—
75. HELMUT R. PLANT Syntaktische Studien zu den Monseer Fragmenten Ein Beitrag zur Beschreibung
der .Qnereu Form des Althochdeutschen 1969. 96 pp. Gld. 24.—
76. ALLAN R. KEILER A Phonological Study ol the Indo-European Laryngeals. 1970. 106 pp. Gld 30.—
77. J R. RAYFIELD The Languages ol a Hllllngual Community. 1970. 118 pp. Gld. 28.—
78. DIANA L. KAO Structure οι the Syllable in Cantonese. 1971. 189 up., 22 fig., 50 tables. Gld. 54.—
76. HENRY G SOHOUT Le ?ystfcme verbal du Iransai» contemporain. 1968. 74 pp. Gld. 20.—
80. KAUIL ZVRI.EBIL Comparative Dravldian Phonology. 1970. 202 pp Gld. 54.—
81. DAVID COUKN fitudes de llngulstique a«5rnitique et arabe. 1970. 178 pp. Gld 54.—
82. GART J. PARKER Ayacucho Quechua Grammar and Dictionary. 1969. 221 pp. Gld. «4.—
83. JAMES W. QAIR Colloquial Sinhatesi, Clause Structures. 1970. 164 pp. Gld. 40.—
84. HIKMET I. SERBKTEKIN. Turkish—English Contractive Analysis. 1971. 116 pp. Gld. 30.-
85. ELMAR SEEBOLO Vergleichendes und Etymologisches Wörterbuch der Germanischen Starken Verben
1970 571 pp. Gld. 132-
86 GENEVIEVE N'DIAVE Structure du dialecte basque de Maya. 1970. 249 pp. Gld. 66 —
87. ANNA Ü'UOHS Morphologie des Verbs im Cahuilla. 1970. 76 pp. Gld. 35.—
91. JAMES E. COPELAND A Stepmatricial Generative Phonology of German. 1971. 105 pp., I table.
Gld. 2 8 . -
93. MARIO SALTARELLI. A Phonology ol Italian in a Generative Grammar. 1970. 96 pp. Gld. 24.—
94. VLADIMIR MILTNER Theory ol Hindi Syntax: Descriptive, Generative Transformational. 1970. 72 pp
Gld. 2 8 . -
J5. D. HARTON JOHNSON L'ranslormations and their use in the Resolution ol Syntatic Homomorphy
Prepositionalot Constructions in Contemporary Standard Russian. 1971.192 pp., 21 tables. Gld. 39.—
ββ. JÖ4EK TOMPA Ungarische Grammatik. 1968. 426 pp. Gld. 90.—
97. RODOLFO JACOBSON l'he London Dialect of the Fourteenth Century. A Transformational Analysis in
Historical Linguistics. 1970. 193 pp. Gld. 48.—
98. A. CAPELL and H. G. HINOH: Maung Grammar: Texts and Vocabulary. 1970. 201 pp., 16 charts.
Gld. 6 8 . -
99. RONALD ANDREW ZIRIN l'he Phonological Basis ol Latin Prosody. 1971. 91 pp. Gld. 25.—
100. Q. 1. M. MOE: Contribution a i ctufle des categories morphologiques du genre et du nombre dans le
traneais parl6 actuel 1908. 155 pp. Gld. 40.—
101. WILLIAM H. BROWN, JR.. A Syntax ΟΙ King Alfred's Pastoral Care. 1970. 91 pp. Gld. 18.—
102. G A R T DEAN PRIDEAUX. The Syntax of J a p a n e s e Honorific«. 1970. 107 p p . Gld 28.—
103. DAVID L. SHORES: A Descriptive Syntax ol the Peterborough Chronicle from 1122 to 1154. 1971. 224
pp., 30 tables. Gld. 50.—
105. SANDRA SOHARFK HABCOOK: The Syntax ol Spanish Reflexive Verbs: The Parameter ol the Middle
Verb. 1970 96 pp. Gld. 21.—
106. ANPKC-MARCEL D'ANS: Le Or6ole Irancais d'Ilaiti: £)tude des unites d'articulation, d'expansion et de
communication. 1968. 181 pp. Gld. 54.—
107. STANLEY TSUZAKI: English Influcnoe on Mexican Spanish in Detroit. 1971. 92 pp., Ϋ tables, 9 maps.
Gld. 25.-
108. ROOER J. STEINER: L'wo Centuries of Spanish and English Bilingual Lexicography, 1590—1800. 1970
130 pp. Gld. 2 3 . —
109. BOBBY RAY GLOVER: A History of Six Spanish Verbs Meaning " T o Take, Seize, Grasp". 1971. 115 pp.
Gld. 2 4 . -
110. DUONO I'OANN BINH: A l'agraemic Comparison of English and Vietnamese Sentences. 1971. 232 pp..
3 tables Gld. 68.—
111. OHARLBS CARLTON: Descriptive Syntax of the Old English Charters. 1970. 200 pp. Gld. 48.—
112. MICHAEL GRADY Syntax and Semantics of the English Verb.Phrase. 1970. 84 pp. Gld. 14.—
113. A L E X A N D E R ISASBNKO H A N S - J O A C H I M SCHÄDLICH A Model of Standard German Intonation. 1970.
66 pp., plate, record. Gld. 21.—
115. ANDRÄ HAÖDRIOOURT et ALPHONSE JUILLAND. Essai pour une histoire structurale du phon£tisme
franfais. 2« öd. r^vis6e 1971. 135 pp., 20 oartee, flgs. Gld. 25.—
116. SAMUEL Ν ROSENBERO: Modern French Oe.: The Neuter Pronoun in Adjeotlval Predication. 1970.
222 pp. Gld. 36.—
119. CHARLES RALLIDES: The Tense Aspect System of the Spanish Verb. 1971. 66 pp. Gld. 18.—
149. A G. SCIARONE: La place de I'adjectlf en Italien moderne. 1971. 112 pp. Gld. 30.—