GENITIVE ABSOLUTE. ACCUSATIVE ABSOLUTE
[*] 2070.
Genitive Absolute.—A circumstantial participle agreeing with a genitive noun or pronoun which is not in the main construction of the sentence, stands in the genitive absolute. Like other circumstantial participles, the genitive absolute expresses time, cause, condition, concession, or simply any attendant circumstance.
a. Time: ““
ταῦτ᾽ ἐπρά_χθη Κόνωνος στρατηγοῦντος”
these things were effected while Conon was in command”
I. 9.56, ““
τούτων λεχθέντων ἀνέστησαν”
this said, they rose”
X. A. 3.3.1, ““
Ἠϊόνα . . . Μήδων ἐχόντων πολιορκίᾳ εἷλον”
they blockaded and captured Eïon which was held by the Medes”
T. 1.98.
b. Cause: ““
τῶν σωμάτων θηλυ_νομένων καὶ αἱ ψυ_χαὶ ἀρρωστότεραι γίγνονται”
by the enfeebling of the body, the spirit too is made weaker”
X. O. 4.2.
c. Opposition or Concession:
καὶ μεταπεμπομένου αὐτοῦ οὐκ ἐθέλω ἐλθεῖν even though he is sending for me,
I am unwilling to go X. A. 1.3.10.
καίπερ is usually added (
2083).
d. Condition:
οἴομαι καὶ νῦν ἔτι ἐπανορθωθῆναι ἂν τὰ πρά_γματα τούτων γιγνομέ- νων if these measures should be taken,
I am of the opinion that even now our situation might be rectified D. 9.76.
e. Attendant Circumstance:
Κῦρος ἀνέβη ἐπὶ τὰ ὄρη οὐδενὸς κωλύ_οντος Cyrus ascended the mountains without opposition (lit.
no one hindering)
X. A. 1.2.22 (or
since no one opposed him).
[*] 2071.
ἑκών willing,
ἄ_κων unwilling are properly participles and are treated as such (cp.
2117 c). Thus, ““
ἐμοῦ οὐχ ἑκόντος”
without my consent”
S. Aj. 455.
a. ἄ_κων, ἀεκαξόμενος, ἀφρονέων, ἀελπτέων, ἀνάρμενος, ἀνομολογούμενος, ἀτίξων are the only cases in Greek showing the earlier method of negativing the participle with
alpha privative. Elsewhere
οὐ or
μή is used.
[*] 2072. The genitive of the participle may stand without its noun or pronoun
a. When the noun or pronoun may easily be supplied from the context. Thus,
οἱ δὲ πολέμιοι, προσιόντων (
τῶν Ἑλλήνων, previously mentioned), ““
τέως μὲν ἡσυχίαζον”
the enemy, as they were approaching, for a while remained quiet”
X. A. 5.4.16,
ἐρώτα_, ἔφη, ὦ Κῦρε, . . . ὡς (
ἐμοῦ)
τἀ_ληθῆ ἐροῦντος put your question (
said he),
Cyrus,
on the supposition that I will speak the truth X. C. 3.1.9.
b. When the noun or pronoun may easily be supplied otherwise; here, e.g.,
ἀνθρώπων or
πρα_γμάτων is said to be supplied grammatically. Thus,
ἰόντων εἰς μάχην when (men)
are going into battle X. C. 3.3.54,
τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον πρα_χθέντων τῆς πόλεως γίγνεται τὰ χρήματα when (things)
have happened in this way,
the property belongs to the State D. 24.12; and in
ὕ_οντος (
Διός, 934 a) ““
πολλῷ”
when it was raining hard”
X. H. 1.1.16. Quasi-impersonal verbs (
933) thus take the genitive rather than the accusative absolute: ““
οὕτως ἔχοντος”
in this state of things”
P. R. 381c, influenced by
οὕτως ἐχόντων X. A. 3.1.40.
c. When a subordinate clause with
ὅτι follows upon the participle in the passive. Thus, ““
ἐσαγγελθέντων ὅτι Φοίνισσαι νῆες ἐπ᾽ αὐτοὺς πλέουσιν”
it having been announced that Phoenician ships were sailing against them”
T. 1.116,
δηλωθέντος ὅτι ἐν ταῖς ναυσὶ τῶν Ἑλλήνων τὰ πρά_γματα ἐγένετο it having been shown that the salvation of the Greeks depended on their navy 1. 74. The plural is used when the subject of the subordinate clause is plural, or when several circumstances are mentioned.
[*] 2073. Exceptionally, the subject of the genitive absolute is the same as that of the main clause. The effect of this irregular construction is to emphasize the idea contained in the genitive absolute. Thus, ““
βοηθησάντων ὑ_μῶν προθύ_μως πόλιν προσλήψεσθε ναυτικὸν ἔχουσαν μέγα”
if you assist us heartily, you will gain to your cause a State having a large navy”
T. 3.13. The genitive absolute usually precedes the main verb.
a. The genitive absolute may be used where the grammatical construction demands the dative. Thus, ““
διαβεβηκότος Περικλέους . . . ἠγγέλθη αὐτῷ ὅτι Μέγαρα ἀφέστηκε”
when Pericles had already crossed over, news was brought to him that Megara had revolted”
T. 1.114 (in Latin:
Pericli iam transgresso nuntiatum est).
b. The subject of the genitive absolute may be identical with the object of the leading verb: ““
ἧλθον ἐπὶ τὴν Ἐπίδαυρον ὡς ἐρήμου οὔσης . . . αἱρήσοντες”
they came against Epidaurus expecting to capture it undefended”
T. 5.56.
[*] 2074. Observe that the genitive absolute differs from the Latin ablative abso lute herein: 1. The subject need not be expressed (
2072). 2. The subject
may appear in the leading clause (2073 a). 3. With a substantive the participle
ὤν is always added in prose, whereas Latin has to omit the participle. Thus, ““
παίδων ὄντων ἡμῶν”
nobis pueris”
P. S. 173a. On
ἐμοῦ ἄ_κοντος me invito, see
2071. 4. Because it has a present participle passive and an aorist and perfect participle active, Greek can use the genitive absolute where Latin, through lack of a past participle active, has to use a clause with
dum,
cum, etc. Thus, ““
ὅλης τῆς πόλεως ἐν τοῖς πολεμικοῖς κινδύ_νοις ἐπιτρεπομένης τῷ στρατηγῷ”
cum bellicis in periculis universa respublica imperatori committatur”
X. M. 3.1.3,
τοῦ παιδὸς γελάσαντος cum puer risisset. Latin uses the absolute case more frequently than Greek because it employs the perfect participle passive where Greek uses the aorist participle active. Thus,
Κῦρος συγκαλέσα_ς τοὺς στρατηγοὺς εἶπεν Cyrus,
convocatis ducibus, dixit X. A. 1.4.8.
[*] 2075. The genitive absolute took its rise from such cases as
Σαρπήδοντι δ᾽ ἄχος γένετο Γλαύκου ἀπιόντος but sorrow came on Sarpedon for Glaucus—departing M 392. The genitive, here properly dependent on
ἄχος γένετο, ceased to be felt as dependent on the governing expression, and was extended, as a distinct construction, to cases in which the governing expression did not take the genitive. Cp. the development of the accusative with the infinitive (
1981).
[*] 2076.
Accusative Absolute.—A participle stands in the accusative absolute, instead of the genitive, when it is impersonal, or has an infinitive as its subject (as under C). When impersonal, such participles have no apparent grammatical connection with the rest of the sentence.
A. Impersonal verbs:
δέον, ἐξόν, μετόν, παρόν, προσῆκον, μέλον, μεταμέλον, παρέχον, παρασχόν, τυχόν, δοκοῦν, δόξαν, or
δόξαντα (
ταῦτα),
γενόμενον ἐπ᾽ ἐμοί as it was in my power.
οὐδεὶς τὸ μεῖζον κακὸν αἱρήσεται ἐξὸν τὸ ἔλα_ττον (
αἱρεῖσθαι)
no one will choose the greater evil when it is possible to choose the less P. Pr. 358d,
ἧς (
βουλῆς) ““
νῦν ἀξιοῖ τυχεῖν οὐ μετὸν αὐτῷ”
to which he now claims admission though he has no right”
L. 31.32, ““
δῆλον γὰρ ὅτι οἶσθα μέλον γέ σοι”
for of course you know because it concerns you”
P. A. 24d,
μετεμέλοντο ὅτι μετὰ τὰ ἐν Πύλῳ, καλῶς παρασχόν, οὐ ξυνέβησαν they repented that after what had occurred at Pylos,
although a favourable occasion had presented itself, they had not come to terms T. 5.14. Cp. 2086 d,
2087.
N.—Apart from
δόξαν, τυχόν, the accusative absolute of the aorist participle of impersonal verbs is very rare.
B. Passive participles used impersonally:
γεγραμμένον, δεδογμένον, εἰρημένον, προσταχθέν, προστεταγμένον. Cp. Eng.
granted this is so, this done,
which said.
““
εἰρημένον δ᾽ αὐταῖς ἀπαντᾶν ἐνθάδε . . . εὕδουσι κοὐχ ἥκουσιν”
though it was told them to meet here, they sleep and have not come”
Ar. Lys. 13,
προσταχθέν μοι ὑπὸ τοῦ δήμου Μένωνα ἄγειν εἰς Ἑλλήσποντον a command having been given (
it having been commanded)
me by the people to convey Menon to the Hellespont D. 50.12.
N.—The aorist participle passive is rarely used absolutely:
ἀμεληθέν, ἀπορρηθέν, καταχειροτονηθέν, κυ_ρωθέν, ὁρισθέν, περανθέν, προσταχθέν, χρησθέν.
C. Adjectives with
ὄν:
ἄδηλον ὄν, δυνατὸν ὄν, ἀδύνατον ὄν, αἰσχρὸν ὄν, καλὸν ὄν, χρεών (
χρεώ ¨ ὄν), etc.
““
σὲ οὐχὶ ἐσώσαμεν . . . οἷόν τε ὂν καὶ δυνατόν”
we did not rescue you although it was both feasible and possible”
P. Cr. 46a,
ὡς οὐκ ἀναγκαῖον (
ὄν) ““
τὸ κλέπτειν, αἰτιᾷ τὸν κλέπτοντα”
on the ground that stealing is not necessary you accuse the thief”
X. C. 5.1.13.
[*] 2077. The impersonal character of the above expressions would not be shown by the genitive since the participle in that case marks a distinction between masculine (neuter) and feminine. The accusative absolute, which occurs first in Herodotus and the Attic prose writers of the fifth century, is probably in its origin an internal accusative, developed, at least in part, by way of apposition (
991-
994), the neuter of a participle or of an adjective standing in apposition to an idea in the leading clause. Thus,
προσταχθὲν αὐτοῖς οὐκ ἐτόλμησαν εἰσαγαγεῖν (
Is. 1.22)
they did not dare to bring him
in—a duty
that was enjoined (
although it was enjoined)
upon them. Cp.
πείθει δ᾽ Ὀρέστην μητέρα . . . κτεῖναι, πρὸς οὐχ ἅπαντας εὔκλειαν φέρον he persuaded Orestes to slay his mother, a deed
that brings not glory in the eyes of all E. Or. 30.
[*] 2078. The participle of a
personal verb may be used absolutely if it is preceded by
ὡς or
ὥσπερ. Thus,
ηὔχετο πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς τἀ_γαθὰ διδόναι, ὡς τοὺς θεοὺς κάλλιστα εἰδότας ὁποῖα ἀγαθά ἐστι (Socrates)
prayed to the gods that they would give him good things, in the belief that the gods know best what sort of things are good X. M. 1.3.2, ““
σιωπῇ ἐδείπνουν, ὤσπερ τοῦτο προστεταγμένον αὐτοῖς”
they were supping in silence just as if this had been enjoined upon them”
X. S. 1. 11.
a. Cases without
ὡς or
ὥσπερ are rare. Thus, ““
δόξαντα ὑ_μῖν ταῦτα εἵλεσθε ἄνδρας εἴκοσι”
on reaching this conclusion you chose twenty men”
And. 1.81; cp.
δόξαν ταῦτα X. A. 4.1.13 (by analogy to
ἔδοξε ταῦτα) and
δοξάντων τούτων X. H. 1.7.30. Neuter participles so used come chiefly from impersonal verbs, but
T. 4.125 has
κυ_ρωθὲν οὐδὲν οἱ Μακεδόνες ἐχώρουν ἐπ᾽ οἴκου the Macedonians proceeded homewards, nothing having been accomplished. The neuter subject is a pronoun, very rarely a substantive (
I. 5.12).
Part I: Letters, Sounds, Syllables, Accent
Part IV: Syntax
