# Why doesn't Caesar use the subjunctive consistently?

In the Commentaries, Caesar writes:

Horum omnium fortissimi sunt Belgae, propterea quod a cultu atque humanitate provinciae longissime absunt, minimeque ad eos mercatores saepe commeant atque ea quae ad effeminandos animos pertinent important

So, I am guessing he is using the subjunctive with commeant because it is an explanation or reason for the primary thought, however, in that case shouldn't he also be using the subjunctive with importo and write "importent"? Instead he just uses the normal active "important", which does not seem to be parallel with commeant which is subjunctive.

## migrated from linguistics.stackexchange.comApr 24 '18 at 7:26

This question came from our site for professional linguists and others with an interest in linguistic research and theory.

The answer is perhaps surprisingly simple: they're all indicatives! Commeant is from commeare, which is of the first conjugation: the a is part of the present stem of the verb, so the a does not indicate a subjunctive. The imperative, for example, is commea.

The present indicative goes like this:

commeo, commeas, commeat

The present subjunctive:

commeem, commees, commeet

The imperfect indicative:

commeabam, commeabas, commeabat

• I guess I don't understand this. The word I have in my dictionary is "commeo" and I know for a fact that the indicative of habeo is habent and the subjunctive is habeant. So, how is that commeant is not subjunctive in the same way that habeant is subjunctive? – Tyler Durden Apr 21 '18 at 15:36
• Commeo is first conjugation: the -e- is part of the stem comme-, and endings (mostly including -a- in the indicative) are added after it. The subjunctive would be commeent. Habeo is second conjugation: the stem is hab-, and most of the indicative endings include -e-. Its subjunctive would be habeant. – Colin Fine Apr 21 '18 at 16:55
• Ok, that makes sense. Might want to make that part of the answer. – Tyler Durden Apr 21 '18 at 20:36