Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gvh9x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T05:26:08.011Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

‘Tenax Propositi’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2016

F. H. Colson*
Affiliation:
Cambridge

Extract

I have never read the two great stanzas of Odes III. 3 without a feeling that the above phrase was rather inadequate, according to what I suppose to be the accepted translation. I base the word ‘accepted’ on Forcellini, and Lewis and Short, who give the reference under the head of propositum, ‘purpose,’ ‘intention,’ ‘resolution,’ ‘design.’ But the capacity of sticking to some particular purpose is not a very noble quality, and if we take the phrase in the wider sense of general tenacity of purpose, I do not feel that we get the ‘iustus’ of the ode, though we may perhaps get a person who is likely to succeed in life. Taken in this way, ‘tenax propositi’ suggests (as much as anything) the portrait of Henry VIII., with his gross face and striding legs, dominating the English Church and the High Table of Trinity. I shall perhaps be told that the context shows the meaning. It may no doubt prevent the phrase from being misleading, but it does not make it worthy of its setting. I may add that in the other two places, where I know of its occurring, it has no very lofty meaning. In Ovid Met. X. 415, ‘propositi tenax’ is used to describe the persistent efforts of Myrrha's nurse to find out what is the matter. In Quintilian XI. 1, 90, in a discourse on mild equivalents, we are told that the ‘pertinax’ may be spoken of as ‘ultra modum propositi tenax.’

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1926

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Stephanus, s.v. προαίρεσιςtakes this ‘proposito’ as a noun. I should like to think he was right, and that propositum and susceptum consilium, are two separate attempts to give προαίρεσις, but though Cicero does not elsewhere use ‘proponere consilium’ it seems improbable. I am rather surprised that this passage is not quoted by commentators on Horace III. 3, 1–8. There are some striking likenesses, though ‘uultus tyranni’ is given a different turn.