Alexander," or "Medea illa." In all these usages the triad hic, iste, ille, correspond to the Greek ὧδε, οὗτος, ἐκεῖνος. This is especially seen in the employment of ode and ouros to designate the first and second persons respectively. Thus Edipus is made to say of himself: οὔτι μὴ λάχωσι τοῦδε συμμάχου (Ed. C. 450); but he is addressed by the subterraneous voice (ibid. 1627): ὦ οὗτος, οὗτος Οἰδίπους, τί μέλλομεν; The speaker in a law-court designates himself, his client, and his affairs, by ode; but the defendant is ouros iste, "the man before you” (the judges). In continuous narrative Táde are the things which I am about to say, which are before me, but not yet before my readers; whereas Taura are the things just said, and which have been submitted to them. This shows that the true reading in Eschylus, Suppl. 313, must be:

=

ΧΟ. Βῆλον δίπαιδα πατέρα τοῦ δ ̓ ἐμοῦ πατρός.

BA. τὸ πᾶν σαφῶς νυν ὄνομα τούτου μοι φράσον.

For the Chorus having spoken of their father as present by them (Toude), the King, in his reply, would designate him as by their side (τούτου).

=

The

With regard to the etymology of the indicative pronouns, there can be no doubt that the first part of hi-c corresponds to the Greek, which appears as the nominative of the reflexive το π ο, où, oi, e. It is therefore a subsidiary form of o = σo, and while the h is represented by a more original sibilant in si-c, se, &c., it has vanished altogether in i-s, i-terum, i-tem, &c. most original form represented the anlaut as a strong combination of the guttural and labial, which we call the digamma, and thus qui, si-c, hi-c, i-s, will be four forms of the same pronominal root signifying proximity, in which the guttural element has successively degenerated. The sibilant form, which is regularly found in the Sanscrit sa, sak, só, and in the Umbrian eso, &c., where there is an initial vowel as in eué, compared with ué, was still extant in the days of Ennius, who writes sa-m, sa-psa, su-m, so-s. The guttural appears without any labial affection in the affix -c- or -ce, and in the forms cis, citra, ceteri, &c. As there is reason to believe that the first syllable of the Umbrian e-so is a residuum of the second pronominal element Fa, analogous to the i in i-s, &c., the form e-su-k (above, p. 85) is really a combination of three, as hi-c is of two similar elements. The Latin forms e-ho, e-ja, e-go (New Crat. § 134) might lead us

As

to infer that hi-c may originally have been e-hi-ce-su-c. the first element, in this repetition of cognate syllables, was generally omitted in Latin, so we find that the final -c was dropt in the usual form of the genitive hujus, though hujus-ce occasionally appears, and was usually omitted in the plural, with the exception of the nom., accus., voc. neuter ha-cha-ce, though good writers have occasionally hi-c for hi (Varro, L. L. VI. 73), and ha-c for hoe (Plaut. Aulul. III. 5, 59; Ter. Eun. III. 5, 34; Phorm. V. 8, 23, &c.), in the nom. masc. and fem. The neuter ha-c furnishes us with the clue to some important analogies.

If there is good reason to connect hi-ce-hi-c with the Umbrian e-su-k, there is still more reason for seeking an affinity between the second indicative pronoun is-te and the Umbrian es-tu. The latter combination will not allow us to doubt that the final syllable is identical with the second personal pronoun. Its adjectival inflexion in three genders is a subsequent result of its usage. But there is no reason to conclude that the forms -tius, tî (for -tibi), -tum, -to, are not as original as tis, tibi and te. The identity of the first part of esu-k or e-hi-c and es-tu, as indicatives of the first and second pronouns, is supported by the Hebrew 'han-ó-ki, "I," and "han-tâ = 'hat-tâ, "thou," which are similarly distinguished by the affix only. And such forms as e-go-met, ¿-yw-vn, Sanscrit a-ha-m, show that the syllables e-go, a-ha, e-ho, &c., do not in themselves indicate the first person, though they strongly exhibit the idea of nearness as opposed to that of all other positions. But although -c is the distinction between the first and second pronouns of indication, such is the general usefulness of this adjunct that it is occasionally, though rarely, appended even to certain forms of is-te, as is-tæc, &c. And, what is still more singular, we find even illæc, &c. These are irregularities, and the general distinction of hi-c and is-te remains as I have described it; and thus their relative meanings of "here" and "near to the here" are fully supported by their etymology.

An analysis of the third indicative pronoun ille leads to results quite as interesting as that of the other two. There cannot be any doubt that ille, "that other," and alius, "another," agreeing as they do in declension and primitive meaning, are only different forms of one and the same word: and thus the double l of ille will belong to the same form of assimilation as

=

=

the Greek synonym aλλos (New Cratyl. § 215). The other forms, under which the root of ille or alius occurs, are ollus, which is a common archaism of ille, and is found even in Virgil; ol-im for oll-im ("antiqui enim litteram non geminabant," Fest.) = illo tempore; solus = se-olis = sine aliis; uls (opposed to cis, as ille is to hic) = illo loco; al-ter and ul-tra, ul-terior, ul-timus, expressing relative degrees of distance and separation; and ul-tro signifying movement to a degree beyond expectation. To these must be added compounds beginning with ali-, as ali-quis, &c. The is retained in the Goth. alis, O. N. ella, A. S. ele, O. H. G. ali; but a comparison with the Sanscrit an-ya alius, an-tara = alter, and the Goth. an-thar, O. N. an-nar, A. S. other, O. H. G. an-dar, &c., leads us to the conclusion that the original form must have involved an n, and thus we fall back on the Greek expression for distant locality,-á-vá, and ultimately arrive at keīvos k-év-ios (cf. ěvios), the synonym of ille in its regular use, and κa-Tά, the correlative of ává, both as a preposition and as a particle (New Crat. §§ 135, 138). As it may be shown that ává, in its most distinct significations, is represented by in (New Crat. 170), it will follow that ille in-yus bears the same relation to in that aλos does to ává. And while the a in all these forms is more original than the ¿ (above, p. 261), it is equally clear that the Latin ol- and ul- are successive extenuations of the original vowel, caused in part by the change of n into 7 (p. 259). Of all the words, into which this root enters, ultro alone obscures the original meaning of "distance and separation." It seems to be used as a synonym of sponte, which signifies "of one's own accord" or "free inclination." But an accurate examination of all the passages in which it occurs, enables us to trace it back to its original meaning, "to a place beyond," which is still found in such phrases as ultro istum a me, "take him far from me" (Plaut. Capt. III. 4, 19), ultro citroque, "thither and hither," his lacrymis vitam damus, et miserescimus ultro, "to these tears we grant his life, and pity him besides" (see Döderlein, Syn. u. Etym. III. 103, sqq.). Hence, while s-ponte, which is the abl. of 8-pons or ex-pons, a derivative of another form of pondus, means" by its own weight or inclination," "of its own accord," "unbidden" (Hor. I. Epist. XII. 17: sponte suâ, jussæne); ul-tro means "going still farther," "going beyond expectation," "showing an activity which excites surprise," or the like. Thus we

=

find such phrases as (Tac. Ann. XIII. 23): commotis qui aderant, ultroque spiritus ejus mitigantibus, "when those who stood by were affected, and, what is more, actively bestirred themselves to pacify her wrath," and (Hor. Carm. IV. 4, 51): sectamur ultro quos opimus fallere et effugere est triumphus, "contrary to all expectation, we pursue when we ought to be only too happy to escape." To complete the analysis of the third indicative pronoun, it is worth while to notice that the affix hunt or hont, which marks this pronoun in Umbrian, is clearly connected with the English yon in yonder, be-yond, &c.; and this brings us at once, through the Goth. jains, jaind, N. H. G. jener, &c. to the Greek Keivos, and the root of ille. And thus we see that the common Latin, like the Greek, has lost the three full forms of the distinctive pronouns, which are preserved in the Umbrian esu-k (=ehic = hic), “the particular thing here," es-tu (= is-te), “the particular thing where you are,” and er-ont = es-ont (= -keîvos ille), "the particular thing yonder." The form é-kevos may be a residuum of éσ-Keivos es-ont, and the same explanation may apply to e-ué, &c. Practically we find that ille al-ius differs from al-ter as plurality differs from duality; that is, as ἄλλος = ἄλιος differs from ἕτερος ; for alius, ἄλλος denote "that other person of many," and al-ter, e-repos "that other person of two." On the general differences in meaning and use between the comparative affixes in -ius or -ior and -ter-, the reader may consult the New Cratylus, § 165.

=

ἐσκεῖνος

=

§ 4. Distinctive Pronouns.

=

The elements is-, e-ho, e-so, hi-, which, we have seen, constitute the initial syllable or syllables of the indicative pronouns, appear without any affix in the merely distinctive pronoun is. In the older Latin Grammars it used to be the custom to exhibit the indicative hic as a sort of prepositive article: but this function, so far as the Latin language is capable of performing it at all, belongs rather to the weaker form is, which distinguishes the particular person referred to, especially when the distinction is supported by a defining relative sentence. Thus, is Piso in Sallust, Catil. c. 19, is as nearly as possible o Пllowv. The functions of is, as a distinctive pronoun, are carried still farther by its association with two derivatives i-dem and i-pse (sometimes ipsus). If we except that meaning of is, which has been already

mentioned, and according to which it appears as the correlative and antecedent to qui, so that is qui means "the particular person who," and the relative sentence becomes equivalent to the Greek participle with the article; we shall find that is and its two derivatives enable us to reproduce in Latin the different usages of autós. Thus, is is a mere pronoun of reference like the oblique cases of avτós; uxor ejus is the exact counterpart of nyuun avrou, "his wife" or "the wife of a person already mentioned and referred to;" jungit eos renders (evyvvow avtoús, "he yokes them," i. e. the cattle already mentioned. Idem means more emphatically "the very he," "the same man," like o avrós. And ipse signifies "the man himself," or 66 the man distinguished from others," like aúrós, when it is used as a secondary predicate in apposition without the article (Complete Greek Gramm. art. 445, a). The declension of is, namely, is, ea, id, gen. ejus, &c., is preserved in i-dem for is-dem, ea-dem, i-dem for id-dem, gen. ejus-dem, &c., so that dem becomes a mere appendage like the Greek Tep, dn, to both of which it partly corresponds in meaning, and to the latter of which it is directly related. In the classical use of ipse, on the contrary, the first part, or the is, remains uninflected, while the second syllable is regularly declined; thus: i-psus, i-psa, i-psum, gen. i-psius, &c. There are two ways of explaining this phenomenon. We may either suppose that the ps- represents an inversion of the reciprocal op- analogous to the Doric vé, viv: and thus the inflexion of the second part only will correspond to the Greek forms euavтoù, cavтoû, &c., where the first part is immoveable. This is Bopp's theory. But it may with justice be objected that ipse corresponds to autós, and that we have the combinations me ipsum, se ipsum, &c. Besides, we find in the older writers that the included is is regularly declined, while the affix -pse remains as an immutable appendage, just like the -dem of i-dem; thus we have eam-pse (Plaut. Cistell. I. 3, 22; Aul. V. 7), ea-pse illa (Curcul. IV. 3, 2), eo-pse illo (ibid. 5): and especially in the combination re ea-pse, or reapse (Festus, p. 278, Müller). Since therefore we find another affix -pte also appended not only to the declined forms of is, as in eo-pte (Festus, p. 110, cf. ipsippe = ipsipte, p. 105), but also to vos, mihi, meo, suo, &c. as vo-pte, mihi-pte, meo-pte, suo-pte, &c., as this cannot be referred to an inversion of sv, but may bear the same relation to