I came across this line today in Caesar’s Comentariī Dē Bellō Gallicō, Liber Prīmus:
Eo concilio dimisso, > idem princeps > civitatum qui ante fu> erant > ad Caesarem revert> erunt > peti> erunt> que uti sibi secreto in occulto de sua omniumque salute cum eo agere liceret.
I don’t understand it. Idem princeps is obviously singular, but then it is followed by plural endings. The translation I have also interprets idem princeps as eidem principes. (I mean, all Caesar had to do was add a couple of "e"s.) Is there some rule in Latin grammar where the singular can be used for a plural and followed by plural verbs? Is it a collective noun followed by a plural verb?
It could be an OCR typo. Old books seem to have principes.
Oh, OCR typos… that would explain a lot! Thank you.
It very likely is, because in 1.30 the phrase occurs, seeming referring to the same people:
1 Bello Helvetiorum confecto totius fere Galliae legati, > principes civitatum> , ad Caesarem gratulatum convenerunt:
The Loeb edition has principes civitatum in both places, while the Latin Library has principes civitatum in 1.30 and princeps civitatum in 1.31.
Okay. I have a cheap Latin-English text which must be based on some popular OCR reading since I have found it in many other places, too. Loeb is reliable, though (unfortunately I got my edition before I found out about Loeb).
I have occasionally found other typos as well, such as summum in se voluntatem rather than summam, lacere for facere, etc.