present tense instead of pluperfect in Hyginius, Fabulae

Dear all, can you please help me to understand the grammatical construction of this sentence? (from Hyginius, Fabulae) Although I got the general meaning I’m striving to understand why is “audit” in the present tense? Shouldn’t it be pluperfect as “venerat”?

My understanding is that the main clause is “Theseus voluntarie pollicitus est”, “se ad Minotaurum ire” is an implicit objective infinitive clause and of course “postquam” introduces a temporal clause but: (i) is the temporal clause the coordination of both clauses “[…] venerat et audit [..] (with “quanta calamitate civitas afficeretur” an objective clause) or (ii) the temporal is just “a Troezene venerat”? (but what type of clause is “audit …”)?


Thank you very much!

How about posting the sentence in full first?

sorry! My mistake! Here it is the full sentence:

Theseus posteaquam a Troezene venerat et audit quanta calamitate civitas afficeretur, voluntarie se ad Minotaurum pollicitus est ire.

I expect it’s to be read as perfect, audit<audiit<audivit. And voluntarie should probably be voluntarium.

thanks, mwh!

Indeed it might be a typo (missing an i) but in that case, why a perfect when the coordinated clause has a pluperfect?

Regarding voluntarie /voluntarium, I actually got it as an adverb.

Hi, I don’t know Hyginius’s Latin, however audit looks like a usage of the historical present used for a verb of perception in a temporal clause.

It’s clear that audit is a historical tense (and no-one in this thread disputes that), being followed by afficeretur in secondary sentence; if it was a true present it would be in primary sequence, but historical present can take either primary or secondary sequence: Woodcock s. 279(c).

For use of historical present with verbs of perception in temporal clauses, see e.g. Woodcock 217(3):

https://archive.org/details/woodcock-e.-a-new-latin-syntax-1959/page/175/mode/1up?view=theater

It’s actually the venerat verb which is more unusual; the aorist perfect would be more common, however the pluperfect can be used to stress the anteriority: Woodcock s. 217(2)(d):

https://archive.org/details/woodcock-e.-a-new-latin-syntax-1959/page/175/mode/1up?view=theater

I’m guessing Hyginius used the pluperfect rather than aorist perfect here to stress that, in the temporal clause itself, venerat happened before audit (historical present). Not super elegant.

Cheers, Chad

thanks Chad, the hint is very useful.

Indeed, I found another version of the text in which the verb is actually in perfect tense (as suggested by mwh):

https://www.thelatinlibrary.com/hyginus/hyginus5.shtml#minos

but you explanation makes sense for me too!