§3.6.63ipse me paulum in alia, quam prius habuerim, opinione nunc esse confiteor.
I confess that I myself am now of a slightly different opinion than I previously held.
et fortasse tutissimum erat famae modo studenti nihil ex eo mutare, quod multis annis non sensissem modo, verum etiam approbassem.
And perhaps it would have been safest, for one who studied only his reputation, to change nothing of that which for many years I had not only felt but also approved.
§3.6.64sed non sustineo esse conscius mihi dissimulati (in eo praesertim opere, quod ad bonorum iuvenum aliquam utilitatem componimus) in ulla parte iudicii mei.
But I cannot bear to be conscious of having concealed my opinion in any part of my judgment, especially in a work which we are composing for some utility of excellent young men.
nam et Hippocrates, clarus arte medicinae, videtur honestissime fecisse, quod quosdam errores suos, ne posteri errarent, confessus est;
For Hippocrates, famous for his medical art, seems to have acted most nobly in confessing some of his errors so that posterity would not err; and M.
et M. Tullius non dubitavit aliquos iam editos libros aliis postea scriptis ipse damnare, sicut Catulum atque Lucullum et hos ipsos, de quibus modo sum locutus, artis rhetoricae.
Tullius did not hesitate to condemn some of his books already published by others written afterward, such as the Catulus and Lucullus, and these very books on the rhetorical art of which I have just spoken.
§3.6.65etenim supervacuus foret in studiis longior labor, si nihil liceret melius invenire praeteritis.
Indeed, labor in studies would be superfluous and longer if it were not permitted to find anything better than what is past.
neque tamen quidquam ex iis, quae tum praecepi, supervacuum fuit; ad easdem enim particulas haec quoque, quae nunc praecipiam, revertentur;
Nor was any of those things which I then taught superfluous; for these things also which I will now teach will return to the same specific details.
ita neminem didicisse paeniteat, colligere tantum eadem ac disponere paulo significantius conor.
Thus, let no one regret having learned them, since I am only trying to collect the same things and arrange them a little more clearly.
omnibus autem satisfactum volo, non me hoc serius demonstrare aliis, quam mihi ipse persuaserim.
But I wish everyone to be satisfied that I do not demonstrate this to others later than I convinced myself.
§3.6.66secundum plurimos auctores servabam tris rationales status, coniecturam, qualitatem, finitionem, unum legalem.
According to most authors, I preserved three rational states: conjecture, quality, and definition, and one legal.
hi mihi status generales erant.
These were my general states.
legalem in quinque species partiebar, scripti et voluntatis, legum contrariarum, collectivum, ambiguitatis, translationis.
I divided the legal into five species: the written and intention, contrary laws, ratiocinative, ambiguity, and transfer.
§3.6.67nunc quartum ex generalibus intelligo posse removeri; sufficit enim prima divisio, qua diximus alios rationales, alios legales esse;
Now I understand that the fourth of the general states can be removed; for the first division is sufficient, in which we said some are rational and others legal.
ita non erit status, sed quaestionum genus; alioqui et rationalis status esset.
Thus, it will not be a state, but a genus of questions; otherwise, the rational also would be a single state.
§3.6.68ex iis etiam, quos speciales vocabam, removi translationem, frequenter quidem (sicut omnes qui me secuti sunt meminisse possunt) testatus et in ipsis etiam illis sermonibus me nolente vulgatis hoc tamen complexus, vix in ulla controversia translationis statum posse reperiri, ut non et alius in eadem recte dici videretur, ideoque a quibusdam eum exclusum.
From those also which I called special, I have removed transfer, having indeed frequently testified (as all who have followed me can remember) and having included this even in those very lectures published against my will, that the state of transfer can scarcely be found in any controversy in such a way that another state is not also rightly said to exist in the same, and therefore it was excluded by some.
§3.6.69ferri, cum in omnibus fere causis, in quibus cecidisse quis formula dicitur, hae sint quaestiones, an huic, an cum hoc, an hac lege, an apud hunc, an hoc tempore liceat agere?
Indeed, it is brought forward when, in almost all causes in which one is said to have failed because of a formula, these are the questions: whether it is permitted to plead for this person, against this person, under this law, before this judge, or at this time?
§3.6.70et si qua sunt talia.
And if there are any such things.
sed personae, tempora, actiones ceteraque propter aliquam causam transferuntur; ita non est in translatione quaestio sed in eo, propter quod transferuntur:
"non debes apud praetorem petere fidei commissum, sed apud consules, maior enim praetoria cognitione summa est. "
quaeritur, an maior summa sit, facti controversia est.
But persons, times, actions, and other things are transferred because of some cause; thus the question is not in the transfer itself, but in that because of which they are transferred: "non debes apud praetorem petere fidei commissum, sed apud consules, maior enim praetoria cognitione summa est." It is asked whether the sum is larger, which is a controversy of fact.
§3.6.71"non licet tibi agere mecum, cognitor enim fieri non potuisti:"
iudicatio, an potuerit.
"non licet tibi agere mecum, cognitor enim fieri non potuisti:" The judgment is whether he could have been.
"non debuisti interdicere sed petere:"
an recte interdictum sit, ambigitur.
"non debuisti interdicere sed petere:" It is disputed whether the interdict was rightly sought.
quae omnia succedunt legitimis quaestionibus.
All of which fall under legal questions.
§3.6.72an non praescriptiones (etiam in quibus maxime videtur manifesta translatio) easdem omnes species habent, quas eae leges, quibus agitur, ut aut de nomine aut scripto et sententia vel ratiocinatione quaeratur? deinde status ex quaestione oritur;
Or do not prescriptions (even in those in which transfer seems most manifest) have all the same species as those laws by which actions are brought, so that there is inquiry either about the name, or the written and intention, or reasoning?
translatio non habet quaestionem, de qua contendit orator, sed propter quam contendit.
Then, a state arises from a question; transfer has no question about which the orator contends, but because of which he contends.
§3.6.73hoc apertius,
"occidisti hominem"
,
"non occidi; "
quaestio, an occiderit, status coniectura.
This is clearer: "occidisti hominem", "non occidi;" the question is whether he killed, the state is conjecture.
non est tale,
"habeo ius actionis"
,
"non habes,"
ut sit quaestio, an habeat, et inde status.
It is not like this: "habeo ius actionis", "non habes," so that there is a question of whether he has it, and from there a state.
accipiat enim actionem necne, ad eventum pertinet, non ad causam, et ad id, quod pronuntiat iudex, non id, propter quod pronuntiat.
For whether he receives the action or not belongs to the event, not to the cause, and to that which the judge pronounces, not to that because of which he pronounces.