MORGAN. — ON THE LANGUAGE OP VITRUVIUS. 497 



find occurrences of it early enough to show that in Vitruvius the phenom- 

 enon is due to his lack of finish and that it cannot be taken as evidence 

 of late authorship. Thus, Cato has Venafro (R. R. 135, 1), and Varro 

 has Amitemo {L.L. 6, 5). On the whole, with regard to these three 

 categories we must treat them as errors of style, just as Pliny's frequent 

 use of in with the ablative of a town name (Archiv, XIII, 337) is treated. 

 Nobody thinks of stigmatizing the Natural History as a piece of late 

 workmanship because of them, particularly in view of the practice of the 

 Emperor Augustus, who used prepositions with names of towns in order 

 to avoid obscurity (Suet. Aug. 86). We come next to Ussing's remark 

 about the use of eo. Here it is not necessary to try to defend Vitruvius 

 by means of the disputed passage in Cicero, Ep. ad Brulum, nor even to 

 refer to the undisputed erroneous use of eo in Celsus 8, 9, 1 : ibi pus 

 proximum erit eoque uri debebit. It is enough to show that Vitruvius's 

 use is correct. This has been done for 120, 16 by Rose in a footnote in 

 his second edition, where he refers to per ago used twice with ad and the 

 accusative on a later page. In 284, 11 eo is due to the meaning of con- 

 locatis which here does not mean simply ' to place ' but rather ' to bring 

 together ' ; consequently eo is properly used, as with ad and the accusative 

 in Plaut. Men. 986 : in tabernam vasa et servos conlocavi, a construction 

 found also in Vitruvius himself, 272, 9 : in eos cuneoli ferrei . . . con- 

 locantur. Of course Vitruvius has also the other use of conloco, with in 

 and the ablative, or with ibi or ubi, examples of which may readily be 

 found in Nohl's Index. With these two uses with conloco may be com- 

 pared the same two with coacervo ; for instance, Bell. Afr. 91, 2: eo 

 coacervatis, and Cic. R. A. 133: coacervari una in domo. As for the 

 proper meaning of eo (' thither,' not ' there ') Vitruvius is perfectly aware 

 of it and so employs it in seven other passages. 37 



Passing now to other topics Ussing says : ' Noeeri is constructed per- 

 sonally in the passive voice, 45, 22 : neque ab ignis vehementia nocentur ; 

 59, 7 : larix ab carie aut tinea non nocetur. Similarly Apuleius, de 

 Dogmate Platonis, 2, 17.' — These two examples are not sufficient evi- 

 dence of late authorship, for Vitruvius always uses this verb properly in 

 the active voice (six times absolutely and eight times with the dative 38 

 case), and also has it once impersonally in the passive (59, 14). The 



37 He has eo loci also twice correctly. If he has it twice besides in the sense of 

 ibi (233, 17 ; 235, 14), so have Cicero (Sest. 68) and Pliny (.V. II. 11, 136). 



38 If the work were late we might expect to find the accusative; see Kuhner, 

 Lat. Gr. 2, p. 70, 5 



VOL. XL i. — 32 



