Genitive Absolute

The five uses

Smyth sets all five out in one section, in this order. The construction is identical in each; only the surrounding argument decides.

When two readings both work

Goodell prints the question mark in his own translation. Smyth gives the Circumstance sentence a second reading and leaves both standing.

Take the relation the argument needs. Where it will not decide, English can hold the question open the way the Greek does, with with or a participle of its own.

Identify

• A genitive noun or pronoun with a participle agreeing with it, and nothing else in the sentence governing either.
• Its subject is new. Smyth’s test is that it is not identical with the subject of the leading verb.
• It usually stands before the main verb.
• Tense is relative to the main verb, never absolute. In the first Time example above the present participle is contemporaneous with the main verb; in the second the aorist is prior to it.

Rule out

Three checks, in this order.

1. Does something in the sentence govern the genitive?

   Verbs, adjectives and adverbs all take one, and adverbs of place, time, separation and state regularly do. A governed genitive is not absolute, however participial the phrase looks.

   πλησίον Θηβῶν Near Thebes D. 9.27 · Smyth §1437

   Yes → not absolute.

   Smyth §1339, Smyth §1412, Smyth §1437, Goodell §518

2. Is the participle impersonal?

   Then Greek uses the accusative, not the genitive: a genitive participle would mark a gender the impersonal has not got. Smyth’s list is δέον, ἐξόν, μετόν, παρόν, προσῆκον, μέλον, μεταμέλον, παρέχον, παρασχόν, τυχόν, δοκοῦν, δόξαν. Look for a neuter singular with no noun beside it. The same holds when an infinitive is the participle’s subject.

   οὐ μετὸν αὐτῷ Though he has no right L. 31.32 · Smyth §2076

   Yes → accusative absolute.

   Smyth §2076, Smyth §2077

3. Does its noun already belong to the main clause?

   Then the ordinary circumstantial participle, in that noun’s own case, is what you expect. But Greek breaks this for emphasis, and will use the genitive where the construction demands the dative. Both exceptions are under Variants below.

   Yes → probably circumstantial. Check for emphasis before ruling.

   Smyth §2058, Smyth §2073

Variants

No noun at all

The participle stands alone when the noun is easy to supply from the context.

Οἱ δὲ πολέμιοι, προσιόντων, τέως μὲν ἡσύχαζον

As they (men before mentioned) came on, for a time kept quiet

XEN. An. v. 4, 16 · Goodwin §848 · Goodwin’s text and translation

A general word understood

Or when no particular noun is meant. Smyth says ἀνθρώπων or πρᾱγμάτων is supplied grammatically.

ἰόντων εἰς μάχην

When (men) are going into battle

X. C. 3.3.54 · Smyth §2072

Willing and unwilling

ἑκών and ᾱ̓́κων are properly participles and are treated as such, so they form a genitive absolute like any other.

ἐμοῦ οὐχ ἑκόντος

Without my consent

S. Aj. 455 · Smyth §2071

With a substantive

Prose always adds ὤν where Latin drops the participle. Smyth prints the Latin beside the Greek.

παίδων ὄντων ἡμῶν

Nobis pueris

P. S. 173a · Smyth §2074

Before a clause

When a ὅτι-clause follows the participle in the passive, the noun may be left out. The participle may go plural by attraction.

ἐσαγγελθέντων ὅτι Φοίνισσαι νῆες ἐπ᾽ αὐτοὺς πλέουσιν

It having been announced that Phoenician ships were sailing against them

T. 1.116 · Smyth §2072

Same subject anyway

Exceptional, and the point of it is emphasis: the absolute carries weight the main clause would otherwise take.

βοηθησάντων ῡ̔μῶν προθῡ́μως πόλιν προσλήψεσθε ναυτικὸν ἔχουσαν μέγα

If you assist us heartily, you will gain to your cause a State having a large navy

T. 3.13 · Smyth §2073

Where the dative is demanded

A different exception, easy to mistake for the last one. Here the noun does belong to the main clause, which asks for a dative, and Greek uses the absolute anyway. Latin does the same with the ablative.

διαβεβηκότος Περικλέους . . . ἠγγέλθη αὐτῷ ὅτι Μέγαρα ἀφέστηκε

When Pericles had already crossed over, news was brought to him that Megara had revolted

T. 1.114 · Smyth §2073

Subject of one, object of the other

The noun may be the object of the leading verb.

ἧλθον ἐπὶ τὴν Ἐπίδαυρον ὡς ἐρήμου οὔσης . . . αἱρήσοντες

They came against Epidaurus expecting to capture it undefended

T. 5.56 · Smyth §2073

In Homer

Already there. Smyth reads the whole construction out of cases like the first of these, where the genitive still hangs on the governing phrase and had not yet been felt to stand free; Monro adds two, one with its subject expressed and one conditional.

Σαρπήδοντι δ᾽ ἄχος γένετο Γλαύκου ἀπιόντος

But sorrow came on Sarpedon for Glaucus—departing

M 392 · Smyth §2075

οὔ τις ἐμεῦ ζῶντος

No one, while I am living

Il. 1.88 · Monro §246

καί κεν τοῦτ᾽ ἐθέλοιμι Διός γε διδόντος ἀρέσθαι

That too I would be willing to obtain if Zeus gave it

Od. 1.390 · Monro §246

Not the ablative absolute

Three differences, on Smyth’s count: the subject need not be expressed, it may appear in the leading clause, and Greek reaches cases Latin cannot, having a present passive and an aorist and perfect active participle where Latin must fall back on a clause.

τοῦ παιδὸς γελάσαντος

Cum puer risisset

X. M. 3.1.3 · Smyth §2074