G. studies the semantics of the Latin noun foedus. After an introductory survey particularly engaged with treaties and the notion of ‘ritual alliance’, G. traces the employment of foedus in the works of Lucretius, Manilius, Virgil and Lucan. In doing so he passes from the bonds created between atoms to the interaction of star signs and on to the marriage unions that bind husband and wife and the treaties that join country to country. There is also much of interest to be found in accounts of Roman religious practice and in the associative etymologies of the Latin grammarians, and it is good to see such material brought into dialogue with the verse texts at the centre of G.’s investigation. This then is an ambitious study and one in which some good ideas show through (pp. 152–6 on Aeneid 12 and pp. 168–74 on Lucan merit attention). The manifest failings of the execution of the project are, therefore, all the more to be regretted.
G. opens his preface with a flourish: ‘Latinists do not discuss it often, because there is something scandalous about its implications. We all know the truth, though. Outside of a few notable exceptions, we really do not know what the majority of Latin words really mean’ (p. ix). The only author who can carry off such swagger is one who can convince the community of scholars that he has sedulously pondered the potential meaning of those words that he seeks to translate and to interpret. G., by contrast, renders Lucr. 5.1023 imbecillorum esse aequum miserier omnis as ‘that it was just to pity everyone’ (p. 8); translates Livy 1.28.6 nisi in hunc insigne iam documentum mortalibus dedero as ‘if I do not hand over this man to humanity, to the illustrious annals of history’ (pp. 29–30) and 1.28.9 quoniam tuum insanabile ingenium est as ‘since you are predisposed to insanity’ (p. 30). Later on Propertius 4.8.73 admissae si uis me ignoscere culpae turns into ‘if you wish to forgive me for my admitted errors’ (p. 135); Virgil, Aeneid 7.546 dic in amicitiam coeant et foedera iungant becomes ‘well let us enter into friendship and join in foedera’ (p. 138); 12.240 mutati is rendered as ‘silent’ (p. 157); and 12.952 indignata is taken to mean ‘unworthy’ (p. 160); Lucan 9.1025–6 cui tantum fata licere | in generum uoluere tuom is twice given as ‘to whom so great a thing the fates allowed to turn against your son-in-law’ (pp. 17 and 195), while Luc. 4.234 sollicitas reges is given as ‘anxious kings’ (p. 174), 4.577–8 regna timentur as ‘tyrannies tremble’, and uritur as ‘utilizes’ (p. 187). This is but a selection from a very long list.
G. has taken as little care over the correct transcription of the various Latin texts as he has over their translation. As early as p. 2 he prints vercundia for verecundia, and on p. 4 he gives the same sentence from Livy 4.19.3 twice, but only gets it right the second time. Elsewhere he gives more or less erroneous versions of the text of Aeneid 8.701 (p. 164) and 10.498 (p. 161) and of Luc. 2.392–7 (p. 188). He further offers suptum for sumptum (p. 53), prostremo for postremo (p. 85), quodque for quodcumque (p. 89), faciendibus for faciendis (p. 128), agimina for agmina (p. 144), finiti for finitimi (p. 167), machine for machina (p. 176), Oedipodinae for Oedipodioniae (p. 194), and palate for palato (p. 197). Elsewhere he mistakes neuter nominative plurals such as trigona, quadrata and haruspicia for feminine nominative singulars and then invents new plural forms such as trigonae and quadratae (pp. 103, 109, 110, 111, 117, 118, 175). It is even claimed that ‘Cicero refers to Jupiter as genetrix’ when in fact what is at issue is a mother-hen (p. 81). The Greek inscriptions given at the end of the first chapter yield such forms as ὑμέστη (p. 45) and ἡμωῶν (p. 47). In English he offers ‘fatricide’ (p. 186) and ‘Vergilianian’ (p. 188).
This, I emphasise, is but a selection from the errors that mar almost every page. None of us, Latinists or otherwise, can claim never to have made a slip, but it is hard to think of another study so systematically vitiated by the author's want of scholarly diligence. It would be a pleasure to be able to engage with G.’s handling of a genuinely interesting issue, but it is impossible to focus on any contribution to understanding when the text takes on the form of a high-class exercise book for aspirant copy-editors. A scandal indeed.
