The historical infinitive (or narrative infinitive) is a present infinitive used as an independent main predicate in a past narrative. Its subject, when expressed, is nominative, and no verb of saying, thinking, beginning, or ability governs it. Authors use it to make an action feel ongoing before the reader’s eyes, rapidly repeated, or piled into a vivid series.
This is a construction, not a separate infinitival tense. The infinitive itself is present in form; past time comes from the surrounding narrative.
The Core Pattern
A finite past verb can be replaced by a present infinitive without changing the subject into the accusative:
| Feature | Historical infinitive | Finite narrative clause |
|---|---|---|
| Predicate | militēs currere | militēs currēbant |
| Expressed subject | nominative militēs | nominative militēs |
| Person/number | not marked on currere | marked by -bant |
| Time | supplied by past narrative context | marked morphologically as past |
| Typical effect | scene unfolding or quick sequence | neutral report |
The finite alternation is often an imperfect (currēbant) because both constructions can view action in progress. Yet the historical infinitive is not simply an ornamental imperfect: it can create acceleration, recurrence, contrast, or a reportorial montage. English normally translates it with a finite past, never with an isolated “to run.”
Sallust: Accumulation and Urgency
Sallust uses the construction with exceptional density. The quotations in this section preserve the source spelling; the explanations supply pedagogical macrons separately.
Tum Catilina polliceri tabulas novas, proscriptionem locupletium, magistratus, sacerdotia, rapinas.
Then Catiline began promising cancellation of debts, proscription of the wealthy, offices, priesthoods, and plunder. — Sallust, Bellum Catilinae 21.2
The subject is nominative Catilina; pollicērī is a present deponent infinitive functioning as the main verb. A neutral finite alternation would be Catilīna pollicēbātur. “Began promising” conveys the inceptive narrative effect, but there is no omitted Latin coepit.
Dispersi a suis pars cedere, alii insequi.
Scattered from their comrades, some gave ground while others pressed the attack. — Sallust, Bellum Iugurthinum 51.1
Here nominative pars is the subject of cēdere and nominative aliī the subject of īnsequī. The infinitives create simultaneous movement. Finite pars cēdēbat, aliī īnsequēbantur would report the same situation more neutrally.
Neque signa neque ordines observare.
They paid attention to neither standards nor ranks. — Sallust, Bellum Iugurthinum 51.1
The soldiers remain the understood nominative subject. Observāre continues the independent infinitival series; there is no nearby verb meaning “they began” that governs it.
Nihil consilio neque imperio agi, fors omnia regere.
Nothing was being done by planning or command; chance ruled everything. — Sallust, Bellum Iugurthinum 51.1
This pair proves that the construction is not limited to active infinitives. Passive agī has nominative neuter nihil as its grammatical subject; active regere has nominative fors. The finite alternation is nihil agēbātur, fors omnia regēbat.
Veterani pristinae virtutis memores comminus acriter instare, illi haud timidi resistunt.
The veterans, mindful of their former valor, pressed fiercely at close quarters; the others, not afraid, stand their ground. — Sallust, Bellum Catilinae 60.3
Nominative veterānī governs instāre. Sallust then switches to historical-present resistunt. The contrast is instructive: the infinitive lacks person marking; the present indicative resistunt marks third-person plural but receives past reference from narration.
Interea Catilina cum expeditis in prima acie vorsari, laborantibus succurrere, integros pro sauciis arcessere.
Meanwhile Catiline moved about with his light-armed troops in the front line, aided those under pressure, and summoned fresh men to replace the wounded. — Sallust, Bellum Catilinae 60.4
Nominative Catilina controls the entire series vorsārī, succurrere, arcessere. The spelling vorsari is Sallust’s archaizing form and is therefore left untouched. Finite prose could use vorsābātur, succurrēbat, arcessēbat.
Livy and Tacitus: Scene and Spectacle
Livy often uses the construction to sketch habitual action or a developing attitude, not merely split-second events.
Nec in stabulis nec ad pecora segnes, venando peragrare saltus.
Never idle around the folds or flocks, they roamed the woodlands hunting. — Livy 1.4.9
The understood subject is the nominative boys Romulus and Remus from the context. Peragrāre depicts their customary activity; finite peragrābant would be the natural alternation.
tota in alterum aversa Tarquinium eum mirari, eum virum dicere ac regio sanguine ortum; spernere sororem
Turning wholly toward the other Tarquin, she admired him, called him a man and one born of royal blood, and despised her sister. — Livy 1.46.6
The understood nominative subject of historical mīrārī, dīcere, and spernere is Tullia. Inside that series, however, eum virum [esse] ... ac rēgiō sanguine ortum [esse] is genuine accusative-and-infinitive indirect statement governed by dīcere: eum is accusative and esse is understood. One sentence can therefore contain both constructions.
Tacitus uses the same resource to make imperial spectacle feel continuous and excessive:
Publicis locis struere convivia totaque urbe quasi domo uti.
He laid out banquets in public places and used the whole city as though it were his house. — Tacitus, Annales 15.37.1
Nero is the understood nominative subject of struere and deponent ūtī. The previous narrative supplies the past setting; the infinitives themselves do not carry a past ending.
Quantum iuxta nemoris et circumiecta tecta consonare cantu et luminibus clarescere.
All the adjacent woodland and the surrounding buildings rang with song and shone with lights. — Tacitus, Annales 15.37.3
The coordinated nominative ideas quantum ... nemoris and circumiecta tecta are associated with consonāre and clārēscere. Finite consonābant and clārēscebant would remove some of the tableau-like accumulation.
How to Distinguish Similar Infinitives
| Question | If yes | Example structure |
|---|---|---|
| Does a speech, perception, or thought verb govern an accusative subject? | Accusative-and-infinitive | dīcit eum venīre |
| Does a modal or phase verb require the infinitive? | Complementary infinitive | potest venīre |
| Is the predicate finite present but placed in past narrative? | Historical present | subitō venit |
| Is there no governor, with a nominative subject and narrative function? | Historical infinitive | subitō ille currere |
The historical infinitive is central in Classical historical prose and appears in comedy and other vivid narrative. It becomes a marked stylistic resource, not the default way to recount every past event. Later Latin continues and extends infinitival narrative patterns, but those later distributions should not be projected automatically onto Sallust, Livy, or Tacitus.
Common Mistakes
Inventing an omitted verb of saying or beginning
⚠️ Catilīna coepit pollicērī.
Valid Latin in isolation, but a misanalysis of Sallust’s construction: it adds a coepit that his sentence does not contain or require.
✅ Catilīna pollicērī.
Catiline began promising / Catiline was promising. — polliceri itself is the narrative predicate.
Changing a nominative subject into an accusative
❌ Tum Catilīnam pollicērī.
Incorrect as an independent historical infinitive — Catilinam would require an external governing verb.
✅ Tum Catilīna pollicērī.
Then Catiline began promising.
Treating the form as timeless
⚠️ Tum mīlitēs currere.
Valid narrative Latin, but not ordinary present time: the soldiers were running or began to run.
✅ Tum mīlitēs currēbant.
Then the soldiers were running. — a finite imperfect equivalent
Confusing it with a complementary infinitive
❌ Mīlitēs poterant currere: currere est īnfīnītīvus historicus.
Incorrect — currere is selected by poterant and is therefore complementary.
✅ Mīlitēs currere; dux clāmāre; hostēs fugere.
The soldiers ran, the commander shouted, and the enemy fled. — an independent narrative series.
Key Takeaways
- A historical infinitive is a present infinitive functioning independently as a past narrative predicate.
- Its expressed subject remains nominative; no governing speech, thought, modal, or phase verb is present.
- It commonly presents unfolding, repeated, simultaneous, or rapidly accumulated action.
- English translates it with a finite past appropriate to the scene.
- Its temporal force belongs to discourse context, not to a hidden past-tense ending.
Now practice Latin
Reading grammar gets you part of the way. The exercises are where it sticks — free, no signup needed.
Start learning Latin →Related Topics
- Faxo, Ausim, and Archaic SubjunctivesC2 — Decode Latin sigmatic forms such as faxo and ausim and distinguish them from ordinary Classical futures and subjunctives.
- Accusative Subject of the InfinitiveA2 — Recognize the accusative noun or pronoun that serves as the subject inside a Latin infinitival clause.
- Present for Ongoing, Habitual, and Historical ActionB2 — Choose and interpret the Latin present as an ongoing, habitual, general, or vividly narrated event.
- Complementary InfinitivesA2 — How an infinitive completes the meaning of a modal, volitional, habitual, or phase verb while normally sharing its subject.