"Ter flamma ad summum tecti subjecta reluxit." Bersmannus has the following note: "Surrectæ MSS. duo, "h. e. sursum erecta a fronte ipsius, ne eam aspicerent." "Certatim structus surrectæ molis ad astra SILIUS ITALICUS, L. ii, 599. 66 Telisque repostis SILIUS ITALICUS, L. xii. 640. "Summissas tendunt alta ad capitolia dextras." Drakenborch in the note says: Summissæ dextræ hic sunt "elatæ, sursum emissæ : supra L. i. v. 673.” Let In prose writers we have sub for "up." "Sublevare men"tum sinistra," Cicero ; "sublevare miseros," Cicero. It occurs under another form, sus, which hereafter will be explained. Sustineo, "I hold up;" suspicio, "I look up." Mr Stewart will have the goodness particularly to mark the form sus. us return to sub. Sublatus means lifted up." "Quum Camil"lus, subjectus a circumstantibus in equum," Livy, L. vi. c. 24, "raised or lifted up upon the horse.' Gronovius in his note produces the following passage from Livy, L. xxxi. c. 37: “Saluti fuit eques, qui raptim ipse desiluit, pavidumque regem in (c equum subjecit."-Livy, L. vii. c. x. The foregoing instances are abundantly sufficient to shew that sub, when compounded, often signifies to "raise up." as Upon sub, when standing alone, I speak doubtfully. There is a passage in Livy, where subire may have the sense of " "cending;" but I am not positive, and shall offer a different explanation. "Equites diu ignari pugnæ et victoriæ suorum 66 steterunt, deinde ipsi, quantum equis subire poterant, sparsos "fuga Gallos circa radices montis consectati cecidere aut cepere,' would rather explain subire, "to enter," and account for it thus. When we go into the open air, the sky is above us; when we go into the house, part of the house is above us; when we go into a forest, the trees are above us; hence," to go un"der," first joined with the notion of "going into," was afterwards separated from it, and signified perhaps mere entrance." There is a curious passage in Manilius, where sub first means 66 to come up, or advance," and afterwards has a signification not very dissimilar. Speaking of the star Andromeda, he says, "Illa subit contra, versamque a gurgite frontem "Emicat, ac toto sublimis corpore fertur. "Sed quantum illa subit, seque ejaculata profundo est, Lib. v. 595. Here subire means "to come towards or advance," and just stops short of "entrance or arrival." 66 Upon the whole, I am persuaded that sub, standing alone, never has the sense of up." But in composition it frequently has that sense; and finding upon my former paper two or three additional examples, I will subjoin them. "Et nox alta polos bigis subvecta tenebat." VIRG. den. V. "Subvehitur magna matrum regina caterva." "Tum sublerat ipsum." Aen. xi. Aen. x. Mr Stewart will permit me to observe, that, in one modern language, the Spanish, there is a striking coincidence with the Latin upon the power of sub to express "elevation" in compounded words. Subida," an ascent, or going up." Subidéro," a high place." Subidéto," that is ascended," " that one must ascend." Subido,lofty, high, proud, haughty." Subidór, one that rises up, or goes up." Subir, "to go up, to rise." 66 99.66 Sublevación, rising up," a sedition." Sublevar," to move a sedition or insurrection." Sublemacion," sublimation," "lifting up," " extolling." Now the old grammarians saw and had noticed this power of sub, but were unable to explain it. "Sub præpositio significat modo supra, ut "Ter flamma ad summum subjecta reluxit," Diomed. 1. i. p. 407. ed. Putsch. Nonius Marcellus shall follow. "Subjicere est subtus jacere, supponere," and of this the more general signification he gives three instances, but adds, 66 susum jacere, excrescere,' ," and gives three examples, all of which I have already produced. Mr Stewart will be pleased to notice the old word susum. "Sublimare, extollere. Ennius Medea: "Sol qua candentem in cœlo sublimat facem." "Subrigere significat susum erigere, quo verbo rustici utuntur, quum trite fruges ad ventilandum in areis eriguntur. VIRGIL, Aen, Lib. iv. "Tot linguæ, totidem ora sonant, tot surrigit auris." So far Nonius Marcellus. Of surrigere I have given ex. amples. In the famous work De Causis Lingua Latina, Joseph Scaliger in chapter 155th treats of "præpositionum efficiens et "materia." "In (genuit) intra; ex, extra; cis, citra ; in, infra; sup, supra: fuit enim sic prius: postea sub, ab iò, ut ab, ab ἀπὸ Sed antea orta sunt, inter, infer, super, exter, deinde, intera, infera, supera, extera, quemadmodum ex Phænomenis Ciceronis observari potuit, "Torvus Draco serpit, subter, superaque retorquens." Scaliger is right enough in his ab, from anò. But, when he says, sup, fuit enim sic prius, postea sub, ab iò," he confounds words of different origin, as we shall presently see. Chapter the 33d turns upon the "consonantum mutatio in compositione." "B mutatur in C, F, G, L, M, P, R. Succurro, suffero, suggero, sullevo, summitto, suppeto, surripio. Id Aeolen cerc. * sium more, qui xάTweσev, xကαλ.sv, dicebant præcedentem sequentis vi pronunciantes. Neque tamen in omnibus his literis semper eadem connexio est. Malim enim SUSLIMEM, quam SULLIMEM diB non mutatur ante T, in S, ut dixere in sustollo, namque fuit vetus vox, sus, quæ motum cœlum versus significaret, üodev; fortasse autem fuerat, subs, sicut abs, quanquam hoc videtur fuisse a, et a sus fuit susum: fecit autem ex se sustuli, non enim a suffero, venit. Eadem est ante C. Suscipio, quod veteres succipio, ut diximus, Aeolesium more, quemadmodum sapra declaratum est, quos prisci etiam in aliis observarunt; ut est apud Plautum in Asinaria. "Suppendas potius me, quam tacita hæc auferas." Quod nos suspendas. Piri exemplo, suscipio, sustineo, suscito, susum cito." What Scaliger says upon the Aeolic doub. ling of letters in compound words is true. But I must beg leave to observe, that in words uncompounded, the old Romans pronounced, but never wrote a double letter till the time of Ennius, and for this assertion I must bring my proof. "Ubi Macelam invenimus scriptum, pro Macellum, Claseis pro classes, sumas pro summas, olorom pro illorum, numei pro nummi, observari meretur, antiquissimos, qui Latina lingua scrips sere, ad usque tempora Ennii poetæ, literas consonantes in eadem voce duplicatas, et immediate alteram alteri annexam, ut nunc quidem fieri perpetuo videmus, minime gentium voluisse. Et hoc ipse Festus (in v. Solitaurilia. Idem in v. Ab oloes et Aulas. Cum istud veteres pro ab illis, et hoc pro ollas dixerint: vid. etiam Morhof. De Ling. Teuton. Pt. I. c. 3. p. 50), eruditissimus scriptor et præclarus antiquitatis indagator, si modo integer ad nos pervenisse potuisset, clarissime testatur: 'nomen,' inquiens, "Solitaurilia antiqua consuetudine per unum L enunciari, non est mirum, quia nulla tunc geminabatur litera inscri bendo: quam consuetudinem Ennius mutavisse fertur.' Idem rursus alibi (in v. Torum, cf. idem in v. porigam et folium): Torum ut significet torridum, aridum, per unum quidem Rantiqua consuetudine scribitur. Sed quasi per duo RR scribatur, pronunciari oportet. Nam antiqui nec mutas, nec semivocales litteras geminabant.' Quod proin etiam Isidorus (Orig. L. I. c. 26. in fine) confirmavit, ubi veteres,' inquit, 6 non duplicabant literas, sed supra sicilicos apponebant, qua nota admonebatur lector, geminandam esse literam, et sicilicus vocatur, quia in Sicilia inventus est primo.' Unde forsan usu venit, ut in recentioribus monumentis etiam scriptitaverint Romani, Juentus pro juventus, Fluium pro fluvium, Dumvir pro duumvir, Flaus pro Alavus (Vid. Aldus Manutius in Orthographia, p. 451. Cf. Jo. Schuzi Florum Sparsio ad Loca quædam in Re literaria controversa, p. 221.)-J. N. Funccii De Origine et Pueritia Lat. Lingua, p. 319, 20. We shall hereafter turn a part of this long quotation to some account. I am chiefly concerned in opposing Scaliger, when he says that sus, signifying "motion towards the sky," comes from ode,that it formerly was subs like abs,-that abs came from 66 ,that susum is from sus,—and that suscipio was apud ve" teres succipio." Long was I puzzled with the contrary powers of sub in compounded words. I knew that in Latin the sibilant letter is often substituted for the aspirate-for as gives sex and igro, serpo, so To would become sub. Reflecting upon the subject, I perceived that sub, when it signifies "elevation," came from ɛg, and that Teg, hike o, lost the closing letters, and that p was changed into b. I never saw this stated in any book, directly or indirectly. But no conjecture was ever more clear, or more satisfactory to my mind; and it solves all difficulties. The letters, and the sound of sub, are the same when their signification is different, because they flow from different Greek words. I think that Mr Stewart will be convinced in one moment. Sub then, signifying "elevation," comes not from iro, but from reg, and sus does not immediately come from sub only, but by another process, as we shall soon see. Scaliger's second position upon subs, like abs, is erroneous; and erroneous, too, is the notion which he took from Festus, that abs came from 4. There is no vestige whatsoever, that sub existed in the form of sup; and as to abs, it came not from ả↓, but from ἀπο. Of abs, Cicero tells us, in Orat. 158. c. 47. "Una præpositio est abs (so Robert Stephens reads, not ab) eaque nunc tantum in accepti tabulis manet, ne his quidem omnium; in reliquo sermone mutata est. Nam amovit dicimus, et abegit, et abstulit, ut jam nescias abne verum sit, an abs. Quid si etiam abfugit turpe vitium est, et abfer noluerunt, aufer maluerunt? quæ præpositio, præter hæc duo verba, nullo alio in verbo reperitur." Cicero's words must be understood with some limi❤ tation. For we find abs compounded in abstemius, and abstineo, and when it is uncompounded, we always ought to write abs te. We find abs se in Cæsar. There is a doubt upon abs Suessa in Lavy, L. xxxii. 1. But we read ABS quivis homine in the Adelphi of Terence. Gesner gives, from Quinctilian, the reason for which ab sometimes took the old final s, which, even among the old Romans, was not always used. "Quid? quod syllabæ nostræ in B literam et D innituntur adeo aspere, ut plerique mollire tentaverint, in præpositione B literæ ob sonum et ipsam S subjiciendo," XII. 10. 32. Against Scaliger's third position, I contend that susum did not come from sus, but versa vice (as we ought to say, instead of vice versa) sus comes from susum. As retrovorsum was contracted into rursum, so supervorsum was contracted into sursum, and sursum |