5F

5F: The Subjunctive

I. Sequence of Tenses and the Perfect Subjunctive

A. In one of its most common uses, the perfect subjunctive appears in subordinate clauses in primary sequence to refer to an action that took place prior to the action indicated by the main verb:

laudat Āfricānum Panaetius quod fuerit abstinēns. “Panaetius [the Stoic philosopher] praises Scipio Africanus because he was temperate.” [subordinate clause in (implied) indirect discourse]

nēmo scit quot mīlitēs habuerit Mānlius. “No one knows how many soldiers Manlius had.” [indirect question]

In such sentences the perfect is used in its ‘’ sense, as a simple . Often, however, the perfect subjunctive (like the perfect indicative) will be used in its ‘pure’ form as a true perfect. In such sentences the perfect acts as a , referring to a present state that is the result of a past action:

nōn is es ut tē pudor umquam ā turpitūdine reuocārit. “You are not of the sort [‘are not that one’] that shame has ever kept you from baseness.” [result clause]

utrum nescīs quam altē ascenderīs an prō nihilō id putās? “Do you not know how high you have climbed, or do you consider that as nothing?” [indirect question]

multī fuērunt quī tranquillitātem expetentēs ā negōtiīs pūblicīs sē remōuerint. “There have been many men who, because they seek peace and quiet, have removed themselves from public affairs.” [relative clause of characteristic]

B. In a similar way, the perfect subjunctive will be used in its ‘pure’ form as a true perfect in purpose clauses in primary sequence. This use belongs chiefly to earlier and later Latin; it is employed when stress is placed on completion or when an element of hope or fear comes in:

affīrmāre audeō mē omnī ope adnīsūrum esse nē frūstrā uōs hanc spem dē mē concēperītis. “I dare assure you that I will strain every nerve to keep you from having conceived this hope of me in vain.”

nunc agendum est nē frūstrā oppressum esse Antōnium gāuīsī sīmus. “Now we must see to it that we not [turn out to] have rejoiced in vain that Antony has been overcome.”

C. In result clauses the perfect subjunctive will occasionally be used in secondary sequence. It is used in one of two senses. In its ‘pure’ form, as a true perfect, the perfect subjunctive will be used to indicate a result that endures into the present time:

Mūrēna Asiam sīc obiit ut in eā neque auāritiae neque lūxuriae uēstigium relīquerit. “Murena so administered Asia that he has not left in it a trace either of greed or of debauchery.” 5F

On the other hand, the perfect subjunctive can be used in such constructions in its ‘aorist’ sense to indicate the suddenness or the finality of the result:

equitēs hostium ācriter cum equitātū nostrō cōnflīxērunt, tamen ut nostrī eōs in siluās collēsque compulerint. “The cavalry of the enemy engaged the cavalry on our side briskly, and yet [the upshot was that] our men forced them into the woods and hills.”

neque uērō tam remissō āc languidō animō quisquam omnium fuit quī eā nocte conquiēuerit. “And indeed there was no one at all of so slack and indifferent a temper as to take [a wink of] sleep that night.” [relative clause of characteristic indicating result]

In these last examples the perfect displays its ‘aorist’ aspect, presenting the action as something that occurred in the wink of an eye. (Compare the distinction in the indicative between legēbam [: “I was reading”], lēgī [true perfect: “I have read”], and lēgī [aorist: “I read”].)

II. Independent Uses of the Perfect Subjunctive

A. Potential Subjunctive: The perfect subjunctive often will be employed in this construction. Here it can refer either to a general present/future (in which case it is virtually indistinguishable from the present subjunctive) or to the past. Examples:

dīxerit aliquis … “Someone may say …” [present/future: cf. dīcat aliquis …]

tū Platōnem nec nimis ualdē nec nimis saepe laudāueris. “You could not praise Plato either too strongly or too often.” [present/future: cf. the same sentence with laudēs]

errāuerim fortasse. “I perhaps made a mistake.” [i.e., “I may/could perhaps have been wrong.” — past]

The third example here is fairly straightforward: here we see the perfect subjunctive being used in a potential sense to refer to the past (the perfect in its familiar ‘aorist’ aspect once again, as in normal sequence of tenses above). The first two examples are a bit more tricky however. You can regard them in one of two ways. One way of explaining them is to say that they represent a ‘pure’ perfect. On this view the first example would be translated more precisely as, “Someone may have said…” (i.e. “Suppose that someone has said …”), the second as, “You could not have praised …” (i.e., no matter how much you have praised Plato at any one time, it will not be enough to do him justice). [Here you might compare the Romans’ use of the future perfect indicative in conditions: where we would say, e.g., “If Caesar comes here, I will leave,” a Roman would be likely to say, “If Caesar will have come here, I will leave” (sī Caesar hūc uēnerit, ego abībō). In all of these instances the Romans refer to a possible future state of affairs which is the result of a preceding action; a native English speaker will employs a general present tense in reference to the action itself.] A second way of explaining these sentences is to invoke the distinction between tense and aspect. As you know, the tense of a finite verb tells us when the action occurred, while its aspect tells us how that action is viewed. For example, the imperfect indicative combines the past tense with the progressive aspect: thus it refers to an action that occurred in the past and that is viewed as ongoing, continuous, recurrent, etc. The perfect indicative is ambiguous in Latin: it can represent a ‘true’ perfect (present tense, perfect aspect: “I have [now] read”) or a simple past tense which is the equivalent of the English preterite (past tense, aorist aspect: “I read”). In theory, tense and aspect are distinct and independent of one another: in Greek, for instance, verbs often will be used in an aorist form that has nothing at all to do with the past tense but instead stresses only the aorist aspect, presenting the action as a mere fact or as something that occurs in the blink of an eye. (Remember: the progressive aspect treats the action in a colorful, vivid way as ongoing, occurring before our very eyes; the aorist aspect merely states the fact that the action occurs, presenting us with a snapshot as it were.) The first two examples above present a use of the perfect subjunctive that is very like that of the aorist in Greek. Moreover, it is a use that first comes to 5F be widely employed in the works of Cicero, a noted philhellene who greatly expanded the resources of the Latin language by, among other things, patterning his usage after that of the Greeks. Thus, while the (rare) use of the perfect subjunctive in a potential sense in early Latin may have been due to considerations such as those raised in the first explanation above, in Cicero and later Latin it would appear to represent a use of of the perfect subjunctive where tense is suppressed and only the aorist aspect comes into play. Thus dīxerit aliquis would represent “Someone might say” (aorist aspect), as opposed to dīcat aliquis, which would represent, “Someone might be saying” (progressive aspect). Thus viewed, this use of the perfect subjunctive represents a quite artificial attempt to emulate a Greek construction that the Romans found attractive. (It also gives you a good idea of just how influential Cicero was in the development of Latin prose.)

B. The Subjunctive in Wishes (Optative Subjunctive): Like the present subjunctive, the perfect subjunctive can be used in wishes, but this use is rare and old. It is probably to be explained along the same lines as the use of the perfect subjunctive in a potential sense in early Latin (above). Examples:

nē istūc Iūppiter optimus māximus sīuerit! “May Jupiter Optimus Maximus not permit it!”

ita dī fēcerint! “May the gods so act!”

C. The Jussive Subjunctive: Like the present subjunctive, the perfect subjunctive can be used in a jussive sense as a virtual imperative. Here it is used mainly in the second person (the third person is very rare) and in the negative. (Even this last use is rare in elevated prose.) Examples:

nē trānsierīs Hibērum. “Do not cross the Ebro.”

nē uōs mortem timuerītis. “Have no fear of death!”

Again, this use of the perfect subjunctive can be regarded as a true perfect (here with a rather imperious and formal force: “May you not have crossed the Ebro” — i.e. “Don’t even think about it!”) or as modeled after the Greek aorist (the examples cited tend to come from the age of Cicero or later).