Laudator Temporis Acti

In response to Scholar and Murderer, Ian Jackson kindly sent me some pages copied from Beryl Bainbridge, Watson’s Apology (London: Duckworth, 1984). Pages 171-173 purport to be letters to The Times on the subject of Watson's Latinity. Bainbridge cautions on p. 6 that "The documents presented have been edited here and there to fit the needs of the narrative, but are otherwise authentic."

I reproduce here the letters, which are mostly self-explanatory, although it might be useful to know that "Mr Denman" was the prosecutor in the murder trial. I've suggested some emendations in square brackets, and I've repaired the accentuation of the Greek in the Hertford Scholar's letter, by moving a circumflex accent from an omicron, in Bainbridge's transcription, to its proper place over the immediately following upsilon.

Sir, It appears to me that the Latin phrase found among Mr Watson's papers has been so construed by Mr Denman as to do him an injustice. 'Saepe olim amanti nocuit semper amare.' Mr Denman construes it allowing that it must be bad Latin if it means what he thinks, 'To one who has so often loved it has always been harmful to love,' giving, to say the least, an unamiable turn to the poor man's reflections upon his life [sic, read wife?]. I would ask better scholars than myself whether it is not perfectly good Latin for 'To one who has acquired the habit of loving it has often been an injury not to cease to love.'
    Yours, G.Y., Lincoln's Inn

Sir, Mr Watson's Latin seems to me very indifferent. But the most obvious construction ought to be the following: 'Saepe nocuit olim amanti semper amare' — 'It was often injurious or fatal to a man who once loved to go on forever loving', i.e. to pretend to love on, to insist on a love which no longer exists. This, of course, refers to Mr Watson's case, all whose calamities, by his own account, arose from his continuing to live with a wife whom he once loved, but life with whom had now become insupportable.
    It must be observed that in the two versions mentioned by 'G.Y.', no account is taken of the 'olim', which is the key-stone of the sentence.
    I have the honour to be, sir, your obedient servant
        G., Lincoln's Inn

Sir, It is amusing to see how much mystery can be made out of nothing. If a fifth form schoolboy at Eton (which I was once myself) were asked to translate 'Saepe olim amanti nocuit semper amare', he would go it thus, and he would be right: 'Saepe' (often) 'olim' (heretofore) 'semper amare', here used as a substantive, (constant love) 'nocuit' (has been injurious) 'amanti' (to the lover). This, no doubt, is bald enough, but dress it up a little, and use Shakespeare's formula slightly changed:

Ah, me for all that ever I could learn,
Could ever read in tale or history,
True love hath often been the lover's bane.

In this garb, I doubt not, both Mr Denman and 'G.Y.' will recognise their own extraordinary shortcomings and a solution of all their difficulties, which they will pardon me for thinking are rather to be attributed to their acquaintance with bad Latin than good.
    I am, sir, your obedient servant,
        Winchilsea.
P.S.: What would Mr Watson himself say of two such versions as these?

To one who has often loved it has always been harmful to love. Denman.

and

To one who has acquired the habit of loving, it has often been an injury not to cease to love. G.Y.

Why, if he were an Eton Master, he would put them both 'in the bill.'

Sir, Whatever poor Mr Watson may have to answer for, he has not yet been convicted of writing bad Latin. Your ingenious correspondents from Lincoln's Inn seem, however, to impute this to him. The word 'olim', as every scholar knows, means 'in the far-off line' [sic, read time?], which may be either past or future, but the phrase 'olim amanti' involves a contradiction in terms. The moment you attach an adverb to 'amanti' you restore it to its verbal or participial force — 'one who loves in the present' — and deprive it of its abstract meaning, 'amatori', or lover.
    Lord Winchilsea's construction is undoubtedly the right one. The Latin sentence, which I need not repeat here, simply means: 'Often ere now has the lover suffered from the constancy of his love.' This is good sense, applies to Mr Watson's case, and no one can fairly cavil at Mr Watson's rendering of it.
    These 'nugae' may seem out of place when a man is on trial for his life, but the Law-Latinists must not be allowed to have the last word.
    Yours, M.H.C..

Sir, It is hardly fair of your correspondents to assume that the line 'saepe olim amanti nocuit semper amare' must be bad Latin because they cannot interpret it satisfactorily. The Latin is good Latin, and the meaning of the words can be but one, however the application may differ. "Saepe olim' go together, and like πολλάκις ἤδη, πάλαι in Greek, serve to state the result of experience in the form of a proverb. The apparent redundncy of 'saepe olim' is defended by such expressions as 'saepe ante', Sallust, Jugurtha 107,4, — 'saepe ante paucis strenuis advorsum multitudinem bene pugnantium'. The meaning may be explained by the Greek:

πολλάκις ἔβλαψεν ἤδη τὸν φιλοῦντ' ὰεὶ φιλεῖν.

'Often in the experience of men constant love has proved the lover's bane.'
    I am, your humble servant, Hertford Scholar.
    Magdalen College, Oxford.

Sir, Your learned commentators assume too readily that the words in question were meant by the reverend gentleman Mr Watson to apply to himself. May I venture to suggest that they may have been intended rather as an epigraph to the tale 'Hercules' which he had just completed?
    Your readers will remember that the mad Hercules — the Hercules furens of Euripides' play — was successful in all his labours but less fortunate in his dealings with the fair sex. After being required to satisfy the 50 daughters of Thespius in one night, he was forced into employment for sexual purposes by Queen Omphale of Lydia. He was brought down finally by his wife Deianira, who gave him the fatal shirt of Nessus to wear in the fond hope that it would be the means of restoring his love.
    We may wonder too about the legibility of Mr Watson's handwriting in this time of stress. Did he perhaps write not 'amare' (to love) but 'amari' (to be loved) — not 'amanti' (lover) but 'amenti' (madman)? If so, the adage would fit both equally — 'Fortunate in all things except as pertains to the female sex. Often has it harmed a lover (or a madman?) to be pursued by love.'
    Yours etc, CH, Camden Town

This correspondence is now closed — Ed.