Homer's Iliad Greek/Latin: Questions

Here you can discuss all things Ancient Greek. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Greek, and more.
Post Reply
Carolus Raeticus
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 584
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 11:46 am
Contact:

Homer's Iliad Greek/Latin: Questions

Post by Carolus Raeticus »

Salvete,

I have a few questions concerning the Latin translation of Homer's Iliad. I am posting these here because the answer requires knowledge of ancient Greek.

My first question concerns a recurring phrase, one instance (Book II, line 230) of which is as follows:
Homer wrote: Atride, de-quo autem quereris et quo indiges?
plena tibi ære tentoria, multæque mulieres
sunt in tentoriis selectæ, quas tibi Achivi
omnium-primo damus, quandocunque oppidum cepimus.
An adhuc et auro indiges, quod quis afferet
Trojanorum equum-domitorum ex Ilio, pro-filio redemtionis-pretium,
quem ego vinctum duxero vel alius Achivorum?
This phrase, "equum-domitorum", recurs fairly often, but I suspect strongly, that it might be "equûm-domitorum" as an abbreviated form for "equorum-domitorum". Am I right (there is at least one instance of equorum-domitorum in the text)? And if yes, would one expand it to "equorum-domitorum" if reading the Latin text aloud or keep it as "equum-domitorum"?

Valete,

Carolus Raeticus
Sperate miseri, cavete felices.

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4777
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Homer's Iliad Greek/Latin: Questions

Post by mwh »

“The Latin translation” Was there only one?

The Greek uses a compound adjective meaning “horse-taming”, a stock epithet of the Trojans. The Latin substitutes “tamers of horses.” Gen.pl. equum is a poetic form. I’m guessing it may be deliberate (equum domitorum has a good epic ring to it—but nothing else does), but I have no way of knowing. I have no knowledge of the status of the text you give.

The various hyphens in the Latin indicate what in Greek is a single word. The translation is exceedingly (excessively) literal, apart from the ghastly pro-filio. Did it accompany the Greek? Interlinear?
I would never read such a text aloud.

Carolus Raeticus
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 584
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 11:46 am
Contact:

Re: Homer's Iliad Greek/Latin: Questions

Post by Carolus Raeticus »

The book can be found using the link in my original posting.

Vale,

Carolus Raeticus
Sperate miseri, cavete felices.

Carolus Raeticus
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 584
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 11:46 am
Contact:

Re: Homer's Iliad Greek/Latin: Questions

Post by Carolus Raeticus »

Valete,

finally I can present a list of my questions. Don't be alarmed by the length. Giving an answer should be straighforward. Each instance is followed by a link to the Greek/Latin page (at Google-Books) for comparison of the two language versions. PLEASE, DO HELP! The transcription will be donated to Project Gutenberg.

Book I, Line 114:

"[...] Etenim Clytaemnestrae praetuli,
ingenuae (legitimae) uxori; quoniam non ipsa est inferior,
nec corpore, nec statura, nec mente, neque operibus."

→ I believe that it should read "ipsâ" to indicate an ablative use. Am I right?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book I, Line 171:

"Nunc autem redibo in-Phthiam, quoniam multo melius est
domum ire cum navibus recurvis; neque te puto
hic, inhonoratus quum-sim, opes et divitias collecturum."

→ I believe that it should read "hîc" to indicate it meaning "here" instead of the "hic, haec, hoc"-meaning. Am I right?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book I, Line 348:

"Eduxitque tentorio Briseidem pulcris-genis,
et tradidit abducendam; illi autem redibant ad naves Achivorum;
atque invita una cum- is mulier ibat. [...]"

→ I believe that it should read "cum-iis". Am I right?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book II, Line 258:

"Sed tibi edico, quod et perfectum erit:
sicubi iterum te delirantem deprehendero, sic jam hic,
ne-amplius deinceps Ulyssi caput super humeros sit,
neque posthac Telemachi parens appellatus sim,
si non ego te comprehensum tuis quidem vestibus exuero,"

→ I believe that it should read "hîc" to indicate it meaning "here" instead of the "hic, haec, hoc"-meaning. Am I right?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book II, Line 332:

"Verum age, manete omnes, bene-ocreati Achivi,
hic, donec urbem magnam Priami ceperimus."

→ I believe that it should read "hîc" to indicate it meaning "here" instead of the "hic, haec, hoc"-meaning. Am I right?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book II, Line 343:

"Quo vero pactaque et jurajuranda ibunt nobis?
in ignem nempe consiliaque abierint curaeque virorum,
foederaque meri-libatione-sancita et dextrae, quibus confisi-sumus!
frustra enim verbis contendimus, neque ullam rationem
invenire possumus, multum tempus hic licet-moremur."

→ I believe that it should read "hîc" to indicate it meaning "here" instead of the "hic, haec, hoc"-meaning. Am I right?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book II, Line 435:

"Atrida illustrissime, rex virorum Agamemno,
ne nunc diutius hic colloquamur, neu amplius diu
differamus opus, quod jam deus in-manus-dat."

→ I believe that it should read "hîc" to indicate it meaning "here" instead of the "hic, haec, hoc"-meaning. Am I right?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book II, Line 714:

"Qui vero Pheras colebant apud Boebeïda lacum,
Boeben et Glaphyras, et bene-aedificatam Iaolcum,
horum imperabat Admeti dilectus filius undecim navibus,
Eumelus, quem ex Admeto perperit nobilissima feminarum,
Alcestis, Peliae filiarum forma praestantissima."

→ Shouldn't it read "peperit" instead of "perperit"?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book IV, Line 31:

"Hanc autem valde indignatus allocutus-est nubes-cogens Jupiter:
improba, qui tibi Priamus Priamique filii
tanta mala faciunt, quod indesinenter cupis
Ilii evertere bene-aedificatam urbem?"

→ Shouldn't it read "quî" instead to indicate its use as "in what manner? how?" instead of "who, which"?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book V, Line 313:

"Atque jam ibi periisset rex virorum Aeneas,
si non cito animadvertisset Jovis filia Venus,
mater, quae eum sub Anchise perperit boves-pascente;"

→ Shouldn't it read "peperit" instead of "perperit"?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book V, Line 634:

"Sarpedon, Lyciorum princeps, quae tibi necessitas est
trepidare hic versanti pugnae imperito viro?"

→ I believe that it should read "hîc" to indicate it meaning "here" instead of the "hic, haec, hoc"-meaning. Am I right?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book V, Line 652:

"Tibi autem ego hic edico caedem et mortem atram
a me futuram, meaque te sub hasta domitum
gloriam mihi daturum, animam vero Plutoni insignibus-equis."

→ I believe that it should read "hîc" to indicate it meaning "here" instead of the "hic, haec, hoc"-meaning. Am I right?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book VI, Line 16:

"Axylum porro interfecit pugna strenuus Diomedes,
Teuthraniden, qui habitabat bene-structa in Arisba,
dives victus (opum), dilectusque erat hominibus:
omnes enim excipiebat-benigne, ad viam sitas aedes habitans.
Sed ab-eo nullus horum tun?? ??rcuit tristem interitum,
ante subveniens: sed ambos anima privavit Diomedes,
ipsum et famulum Calesium, qui tunc equorum
erat auriga: hique ambo terram subierunt."

→ The bit between "nullus horum" and "tristem interitum" is not complete. Should it read "tunc arcuit"? Or something else?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book IX, Line 194:

"Hi vero progressi-sunt ulterius: praeibat autem divinus Ulysses:
steteruntque ante ipsum; attonitus autem exsiliit Achilles,
ipsa cum cithara, relicta sede, in-qua sedera
modoque eodem Patroclus, postquam vidit viros, surrexit."

→ I guess the last word should read "sederat", but does that line end there (probably with a ":") or is something more missing?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book XI, Line 227:

"Ac postquam pubertatis gloriosae pervenit ad-mensuram,
illic eum detinuit; deditque ei (is) filiam suam;
ducta autem, e thalamo fama secutus-est Achivorum,
cum duodecim navibus recurvis, quae eum sequebantur:"

→ Shouldn't it read "ductâ" instead to indicate an ablative use?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book XII, Line 190:

"Filium autem Antimachi Leonteus, soboles Martis,
Hippomachum percussit hasta, ad balteum assecutus.
autem e vagina extrahens ensem acutum,
Antiphaten quidem primum, impetu-facto per turbam,
percussit cominus; is vero supinus solo allisus-est:"

→ The last line before "autem" ends with a period. Normally the Latin version begins with a capital letter, as does the Greek in this line. So, "autem" as a beginning is rather abrupt. Is something missing? Perhaps a name?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book XIII, Line 50:

"Alibi enim equidem non timeo manus audaces
Trojanorum, qui magnum murum transcenderunt turba;
sustinebunt enim omnes bene-ocreati Achivi:"

→ Shouldn't it read "turbâ" to mark this as an ablative use?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book XIII, Line 87:

"Interim autem postremos terram-cingens Neptunus excitavit Achivos,
qui ad naves veloces reficiebant suum animum:
quorum simul et gravi labore cara membra soluta-erant,
et ipsis dolor in animo oriebatur, aspicientibus
Trojanos, qui magnum murum transcenderat turba."

→ Shouldn't it read "turbâ" to mark this as an ablative use?

Book XIII, Line 594:

"Atrides autem manum, praelio strenuus Menelaus,
eam percussit, quae tenebat arcum bene-politum; inque arcu
ex-adverso per manum infixa-est aerea hasta."

→ Is this really "in arcu" or should it be "in arcum"?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book XVI, Line 307:

"Tum vero vir interfecit virum, diffusa-late pugna,
ducum. Primus autem Menoetii fortis filius
statim aversi Areilyci percussit femur
hasta acuta, penitusque aes transegit:"

→ Why genitive plural "ducum"? What does it refer to?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book XIX, Line 44:

"Et quicunque antea quidem navium in coetu solebant-manere,
quique gubernatores erant et tenebant clavos navium,
et promicondi apud naves erant, cibi dispensatores:
etiam hi tunc quidem ad concionem ibant, quod Achilles
in-conspectum-venit: diu vero a-pugna abstinuerat tristi."

→ Really "promicondi" or perhaps "promicandi"?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book XX, Line 50:

"Sed postquam ad turbam Olympii venerant virorum,
exorta-est Contentio vehemens, populi-concitatrix; clamabatque Minerva,
stans modo quidem ad fossam depressam extra murum,
modo super litoribus ??esonis altum vociferabatur:"

→ I guess it should read "resonis". Am I right?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book XX, Line 371:

"Huic ego obvius ibo, etiam si igni manuum-vi similis-est,
si igni manuum-vi similis-est
, animoque rutilo ferro."

→ Why is "si igni manuum-vi similis-est" being repeated? The repetition seems to be present in the Greek version as well.
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book XXI, Line 62:

"Sed agedum et hastae cuspidem nostrae
gustabit, ut videam in mente, et edocear,
ultrum similiter et illinc reversurus-sit, an ipsum coercebit
terra alma, quae etiam fortem coercet."

→ Shouldn't it read "utrum" instead?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book XXII, Line 271:

"Non tibi amplius est effugium; statim vero te Pallas Minerva
hasta mea domabit: nunc vero simul omnes lues
dolores meorum sociorum, quos interfecisti hasta furens."

→ I am not completely sure whether it should read "vero" or "vere". What do you think?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book XXIII, Line 641:

"Solis me equis praeteregerunt Actoridae-duo,
ob-numerum superantes, invidentes mihi victoriam,
quod nempe maximi illi certamini relicta-erant praemia.
Hi vero erant gemini: alter quidem firmiter equos-regebat,
firmiter equos-regebat
, alter vero scutica incitabat."

→ Why double "firmiter-equos-regebat" (both in Greek and in Latin)?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book XXIV, Line 175:

"Confide, Dardanide Priame, animo, neu omnino formida:
non enim tibi ego malum meditans huc venio,
sed benevolo animo; Jovis autem tibi nuntia sum,
qui tui, procul licet-sit, magnam curam-habet, et miseretur.
Redimere te jusset Olympius Hectorem divinum,
donaque Achilli ferre, quae animum ipsi placent,
solum, neque quisquam alius una Trojanorum eat vir."

→ Shouldn't it be "jussit" instead of "jusset"?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Book XXIV, Line 244:

"Abite, flagitiosi, probris-digni! non etiam vobis
domi adest luctus, quod me venistis tristitia-affecturi?
an parvi-penditis, quod mihi Saturnius Jupiter dolores dedit,
filium perdendo fortissimum? Sed sentietis et ipsi!
Faciliores enim multo Achivis jam eritis,
illo mortuo, occisu. At ego-certe,
antequam, ut-diruaturque urbs, vasteturque,
oculis videro, descendero in domum Orci."

→ Should it really be "occisu"? Or perhaps "occiso"?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Looking forward to your answer,

Carolus Raeticus
Sperate miseri, cavete felices.

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4777
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Homer's Iliad Greek/Latin: Questions

Post by mwh »

Most of these are places where you desiderate marking of a long vowel for the purpose of orthographic disambiguation. But that doesn’t appear to be the practice of this translation, nor indeed of Latin texts in general. So I don’t see why you should want to introduce it.
(If you do, you should also mark una at 1.348.)

The residue:

1.348 Either cum-iis or cum-eis, depending on the translation’s orthography.

2.714 Yes presumably peperit, unless perperit is an assimilated form, which seems unlikely.

5.313 ditto

6.16 Presumably so.

9.194 Yes sederat with stop, nothing else missing.

12.190 First word must be missing, a word meaning something like “in turn” (Gk. αυτις), not a name. See how the Greek word is rendered elsewhere in this translation?

13.594 arcu is presumably right. The Greek has dative (~ Lat. abl.), and this word-for-word “translation” is exceedingly literal.

16.307 With this punctuation (which matches that of the facing Greek) ducum refers to vir and virum; it was the leaders who were killing each other.

That’s as far as I’ve gone. Maybe someone else can pick it up from there.

Carolus Raeticus
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 584
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 11:46 am
Contact:

Re: Homer's Iliad Greek/Latin: Questions

Post by Carolus Raeticus »

Salve!
mwh wrote:Most of these are places where you desiderate marking of a long vowel for the purpose of orthographic disambiguation. But that doesn’t appear to be the practice of this translation, nor indeed of Latin texts in general. So I don’t see why you should want to introduce it
I am rather confident that these markings are present in the text itself. I have spent a considerable amount of time with it, as you can probably imagine. There are not very many such markings, but they occur only where they appear to make sense. The ones in my original list of questions are only those where I am not completely sure. May I take it that for the instances presented my suggestions are the correct ones? It would help in whittling down the open questions (currently 20 of 28 open).

Thank you,

Carolus Raeticus

PS: I enjoyed reading these translations. It was fun. Plus: they represent a treasure-trove for low-level vocabulary.
Sperate miseri, cavete felices.

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4777
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Homer's Iliad Greek/Latin: Questions

Post by mwh »

I’m not sure why you think the markings are in the text itself, when the ones you desiderate are not. If they’re present in other instances, perhaps—gasp, horror—the translator was not entirely consistent in his application of them? (After all, that the vowel is long is in all cases perfectly obvious.) But yes if you really want to add them I can assure you they’re all correct. That should whittle down the “open” questions considerably!

—I may as well do the remainder for you too, since no-one else has.

19.44 et promicondi apud naves erant, cibi dispensatores: I’d have expected simply promi. (The Greek is ταμιαι.) Your suggested promicandi is out of the question. Perhaps promicondi is an unclassical composite of promi and condi? or could they be alternatives?

20.50 Yes resonis. The letter is in fact visible.

20.371 The translation repeats it because it’s repeated in the Homeric text. Why Homer repeats it I’d have thought was irrelevant to your enterprise, but you could ask in a separate thread.

21.62 Yes, should be utrum

22.271 vero, definitely

23.461 Best asked in separate thread

24.175 Yes jussit

24.244 No, occisu will be right. Abl. of supine, to be construed with faciliores, cf. id dictu quam re facilius est (Livy 32.38). The Greek has the active infinitive (εναιρεμεν), which would give so little sense in Latin that even this translation draws the line at rendering it literally.

If it was fun reading the translation, wouldn’t it be even more fun to learn to read the Greek alongside it? Seems like a golden opportunity. It wouldn’t be very hard, when the correspondence is so extremely close.

Carolus Raeticus
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 584
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 11:46 am
Contact:

Re: Homer's Iliad Greek/Latin: Questions

Post by Carolus Raeticus »

THANKS, mwh!

As for 19.44: You are right, according to a few more web-searches it is indeed "promicondi". Although it would probably better be "promi condi" or "promi-condi" (the same as "peni procurator"). "promus" (LS: " a giver out, distributor of provisions") and "condus" (LS: "one who lays up (provisions)"). The promus condus seems to be a person doing both jobs (laying up provisions and distributing them).
mwh wrote:I’m not sure why you think the markings are in the text itself, when the ones you desiderate are not.
I do not think that these markings indicate long vowels as such, and the "â" or "î" look very distinct from normal "a" and "i". In addition, they only occur in such instances when both forms are grammatically correct. If they were entirely random bad printing they should occur in other instances as well. They do not. Also, I probably did not present the text bits properly. It is always the "suggested" form which appears in the text, but the print is very small...

As for learning Greek: alas, my mind is feeble and busy enough trying to keep up with the languages it is able to decipher to some degree: German [mother tongue], English, Spanish, French, Italian (so-so, never learned it, but rather similar to Spanish), and Latin. I wish to concentrate on Latin. Every text I read improves my reading skills. Nonetheless, after these two texts (I am just beginning proofreading the Latin version of Homer's "Odyssey") I will probably return to the classics for a while. They are rather more challenging. And one needs to do both: "et multum et multa legere".

Vale,

Carolus Raeticus
Sperate miseri, cavete felices.

Carolus Raeticus
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 584
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 11:46 am
Contact:

Re: Homer's Iliad Greek/Latin: Questions

Post by Carolus Raeticus »

Salve,

I noticed that I missed two open questions:

Book XXIV, Lines 41 and 44:

"Sed pernicioso Achilli, dii, vultis favere,
cui nec mens est aequa, neque animus
flexibilis in pectoribus: sed tanquam leo, ferocia animo-fov...,
qui quum magnisque viribus et superbo animo
obsecutus, vadit ad pecudes hominum, ut dapes capiat:
sic Achilles misericordiam quidem perdidit, neque ei pud...
est, qui viros valde laedit omissus, ac juvat servatus."

Line 41: It should be "animo-fovens", shouldn't it?
Line 44: It should be "pudor", shouldn't it?
https://books.google.at/books?id=nLdBAA ... &q&f=false

Looking forward to your answers.

Valete,

Carolus Raeticus
Sperate miseri, cavete felices.

Post Reply