204 ESSAT upon the PRINCIPLES 



the fliortnefs of the former. Such ufes of And in Englifh, 

 and K*I in Greek, are frequent; but an inftance precifelyfimilar 

 to that mentioned will hardly be found in Latin. 



THE ufe which TACITUS makes of the prepofition Penes is 

 not to be juftified by any good authority. He tells us, that 

 TIBERIUS was offended becaufe the practice of marrying by 

 the Confarreatio had fallen- into difufe. " Plurefque ejus rei 

 " caufas adferebat ; potiffimam penes incuriam virorum femi- 

 " narumque *." 



THE prepofition Penes denotes the relation which an object: 

 bears to a perfon, as being in his power and under his direc- 

 tion f . Thus, 



Me penes eji unum vqfli cujlodia mundl J. 



A CERTAIN vicinity is fuppofed to exift between the mafter 

 and that which is fubject to his dominion. Within a limited 

 fphere, accordingly, he is underftood to have the merit of what 

 is laudable, and the demerit of what is the contrary. So, " Pe- 

 " nes aliquem laudem efle || ;" and, " Illorum efle hanc culpam 

 " credidi quae te eft penes ." The term illorum, in the laft in- 

 ftance, denotes the relation between the blame, and a number 

 upon whom it was not chargeable ; but the term Penes denotes 

 the relation between the blame, and one at whofe door it actually 

 lay, as being in a fphere within which that perfon had an ex- 

 clufive right to exercife authority. 



IN the expreffion, " potiflimam penes incuriam virorum fe- 

 * c minarumque," the prepofition is evidently employed, as in 

 the paffage quoted from TERENCE, to ftate the relation between 



a 



* Ann. lib. 4. cap. 16. 



t I MIGHT here ftate the precife meaning of Penes at greater length, by /hewing 

 the difference between it and Apud, with which it is fometimes confounded; but I 

 referve an analyfis of the Latin prepofitions as the fubjeft of future confideration. 



$ OVID, Faft. i. 119. || Cic. de Cl.Or. 142. 



TER. HEC. aft. 4. fc. I. 20. 



