﻿134 THE AGE OF PETRONIUS ARBITER. 



Quod magno opere quaesiverunt, id frunisci non queunt. 

 Qui non parsit, apud sc frunitus est." 



This passage, while it conclusively proves the existence and use of the word in the best 

 period, shows that it was rarel}- used in the time of Cicero, and still more rarely in the 

 time immediately following. The language of the viUgar often retains words which 

 have disappeared from that of the educated, because the iniluence of the educated upon 

 the great mass is slow and gradual. The question arises, then. How long was the word 

 probably retained in the language of the vulgar'? The statement of GeUius throws 

 much light on the subject. He says that the word was rarely used in the age of Cicero, 

 and after that so rarely that those not acquainted ^ith the older literature even doubted 

 whether it was a Latin word. This proves, therefore, that before the death of A. Gel- 

 lius, which must be placed between 145 and 164 A. D., the word had disappeared, not 

 only from the written, but even the spoken language. In Petronius, three different 

 persons, all belonging to the humbler classes, — Seleucus, Ganymedes, and Trimalchio, 

 — use the word, thus proving that, although no longer hi use in the written language, 

 the word was still in common use among the lower classes. This appears to be a very 

 strong, and indeed irrefragable argument, for placiag Petronius long before GeUius, and 

 not very long after Cicero. 



C. 46. 1 : " Quid iste argutat molestus T' and c. 57. 8 : " tu lacticulosus, nee mu nee 

 ma argutas." Cf. Propert. 1. 6. 7 : " Ilia mihi totis argutat noctibus ignes." 



C. 46. 1 : " Quia tu, qui potes loquere, non loquis."' Cf Eun. Annal. 7. 101 : " Quoi 

 res audacter magnas parvasque jocumque Eloqueret."* 



C. 51. 3: "Caesar non pote validius quam expaveiit." Cf. Cic. Brut. 46. 172: 

 "Hospes, non pote minoris." Cic. ad Attic. 13. 38. 1: "Hoc quidquam pote impu- 

 riusl" Ter. Adel. 2. 3. 11 : « XU supra pote." 



C. 52. 3 : " meum enim inteUigere nulla pecunia vendo." The use of the infinitive 

 as a substantive occiu's in the best writers. C£ Cic. de Fin. 2. 13. 43: "Quae cum 

 Aiistoni et PjTrhoni omnino visa sunt pro nUiilo, ut inter optime valere et gravissime 

 aegrotare nihil prorsus dicerent interesse, recte jam pridem contra eos desitum est dispu- 

 tari." Cic. Parad. 3. 1. 20 : " ipsum quidem lUud peccare, quoquo verteiis, unum est." 

 But the addition of any other adjective pronoun than " ipsum," as here of " meum," is 

 very rare. 



C. 71. 10: "Faciatur, si tibi "\idetur, et triclinia." Here are two grammatical irregu- 

 larities, one of which occurs in other writers also, — "faciatur" for "fiat." Cf. Titinius 

 in Non. 10. 507: "stultitia cupidinis petunt consilium, bona gratia ut parvi faciatia" 



* Others read " Eloqueretur." 



