[303] The spectacle on the open plains was then frightful--_Tum spectaculum horribile campis patentibus_, etc. The idea of this passage was probably taken, as Ciacconius intimates, from a description in Xenophon, Agesil. ii. 12, 14, part of which is quoted by Longinus, Sect. 19, as an example of the effect produced by the omission of conjunctions: [Greek: _Kai symbalontes tas aspidas eothounto, emachonto, apekteinon, apethnaeskon Epei ge maen elaexen hae machae, paraen dae theasasthai entha synepeson allaelois, taen men gaen aimati pe, ormenaen, nekrous de peimenous philious kai polemious met allaelon, aspidas de diatethrummenas, dorata syntethrausmena, egchoipidia gumna kouleon ta men chamai, ta d'en somasi, ta d'eti meta cheiras_.] "Closing their shields together, they pushed, they fought, ... But when the battle was over, you might have seen, where they had fought, the ground clotted with blood, the corpses of friends and enemies mingled together, and pierced shields, broken lances, and swords without their sheaths, strewed on the ground, sticking in the dead bodies, or still remaining in the hands that had wielded them when alive." Tacitus, Agric. c. 37. has copied this description of Sallust, as all the commentators have remarked: _Tum vero patentibus locis grande et atrox spectaculum. Sequi, vulnerare, capere, atque eosdem, oblatis aliis, trucidare.... Passim, arma et corpora, et laceri artus, et cruenta humus_. "The sight on the open field was then striking and horrible; they pursued, they inflicted wounds, they took ... Every where were seen arms and corpses, mangled limbs, and the ground stained with blood." [304] Besides, the Roman people, even from the very infancy--The reading of this passage, before the edition of Cortius, was this: _Ad hoc, populo Romano jam a principio inopi melius visum amicos, quam servos, quaerere_. Gruter proposed to read _Ad hoc populo Romano inopi melius est visum_, etc., whence Cortius made _Ad hoc, populo Romano jam inopi visum_, etc. But the Bipont editors, observing that _inopi_ was not quite consistent with _quaerere servos_, altered the passage to _Ad hoc, populo Romano jam à principio reipublicae melius visum_, etc., which seems to be the best emendation that has been proposed, and which I have accordingly followed. Kritzius and Dietsch adopt it, except that they omit _reipublicae_, and put nothing in the place of _inopi_. Gerlach retains _inopi_, on the principle of "quo insolentius, eo verius," and it may, after all, be genuine. Cortius omitted _melius_ on no authority but his own.