Textkit Logo

Viris Illustribus: Third Punic War

Here's where you can discuss all things Latin. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get translation help and more!

Moderator: thesaurus

Viris Illustribus: Third Punic War

Postby TonyLoco23 » Wed Jun 08, 2011 2:04 am

Having some trouble with this passage:

Qui miles
extra ordinem
fuisset deprehensus,
eum
virgis caedebat:
iumenta omnia
vendi iussit,
ne oneribus portandis
usui essent:
militem quemque
triginta dierum frumentum
ac septenos vallos
ferre coegit.

http://www.slu.edu/colleges/AS/languages/classical/latin/tchmat/readers/lhomond/lho4.htm#puni

Here is my translation, it doesn't seem to make sense:

Which ever soldier that was caught out of rank
he hit him with sticks:
he ordered that all his beasts of burden be sold.
and neither the goods being carried could be sold:
he compelled each soldier to bring thirty days worth of corn
and seven stakes.

Is this translation correct? It doesn't seem to make much sense.
User avatar
TonyLoco23
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 2:53 pm

Re: Viris Illustribus: Third Punic War

Postby Imber Ranae » Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:13 am

It's fine with the exception of the ne...usui essent part.

ne oneribus portandis usui essent
"...lest they [the animals] should be of use for carrying the burdens."

This is a purpose clause explaining why he ordered the pack-animals to be sold, i.e. basically just to be mean to his own soldiers. The gerundive oneribus portandis and usui are what's sometimes called the double dative construction (technically a dative of reference, here the gerundive, together with a dative of purpose usui). Usui est is actually a pretty common Latin expression that means "be useful/serviceable for [dat.]".

Also, you can translate the qui miles...eum part as "any soldier who", which I think sounds a little better here than "whichever soldier".
Ex mala malo
bono malo uesci
quam ex bona malo
malo malo malo.
Imber Ranae
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:06 am

Re: Viris Illustribus: Third Punic War

Postby TonyLoco23 » Wed Jun 08, 2011 1:45 pm

Thanks very much imber ranae. That was extremely useful. I have added 'usui est' to my Anki deck.

I am still having some trouble with this passage, I had some issue with the very next paragraph, but I think I got it:
Cuidam
propter onus
aegre incedenti
dixit:
Cum te gladio vallare sciveris,
tunc vallum ferre desinito.

Is this what it is saying:
To a certain man who, because of the heavy load, became sick, he said:
"You will know how to defend yourself with the sword when you desist in bringing the stakes"

In other words, he is sort of saying, if you don't finish building this fortification, then you better be ready to defend yourself against the enemy using only your sword.....It seems a little akward....

Also, a little farther down there is this really tricky bit:
Cumque ille quaereret
cur notaretur,
qui custodiae causa
in castris
remansisset,
Scipio respondit:
Non amo
nimium diligentes.

Equum
ademit adolescenti,
qui
in obsidione Carthaginis,
vocatis ad coenam amicis,
diripiendam
sub figura urbis Carthaginis
placentam
in mensa posuerat;
quaerentique causam:
Quia, inquit Scipio,
me prior
Carthaginem diripuisti.

Contra
Mummius
Scipionis collega
neque ipse
notabat
quemquam,
et notatos a collega,
quos poterat,
ignominiâ eximebat.

Here is my go at it:
When he questioned why it is noted that, for the purpose of guarding, he had remained in the fortifications, Scipio responded "I do not love excessively those loving" (huh?) :?

He took away a horse of a young man that in the siege of Carthage,
calling his friends to dinner, he had placed a shredded(diripiendam?) cake on the table under the shape (sub figura?) of the city of Carthage, and when they asked the reason, Scipio said "because you shredded me before Carthage.

Against Mummius, a friend of Scipio not even himself noted each, and the things noted by the friend that he could, he got rid of the dishonour. (what an earth is this tricky sentence on about??)
User avatar
TonyLoco23
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 2:53 pm

Re: Viris Illustribus: Third Punic War

Postby adrianus » Wed Jun 08, 2011 7:39 pm

aegre incedenti = marching with difficulty
"since you will [already] know how to fortify yourself with a sword, then let you forget about carrying the stake."
"And when he [the one agrieved] asked why someone should be censured [/branded] who had remained in camp for the reason of guarding [it], Scipio responded, 'I don't like those who are excessively cautious.'
"He confiscated a horse from a youth, who, in the siege of Carthage, having invited his friends to dinner, had placed on the table a cake in the shape of Cathage city to be chopped up, and [who was] asking the reason why. 'Because you cut up the city before me', said Scipio. [tu me prior = you earlier than me]
"In contrast, Mummius, Scipio's [censor] colleague, did not himself censure anyone at all and [/but, what's more,] those reprimanded by his colleague [Scipio], whom he could [take on/deal with], he used to free from the[ir] disgrace."
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Viris Illustribus: Third Punic War

Postby TonyLoco23 » Thu Jun 09, 2011 3:26 pm

Thanks again Adrianus. I guess my main problem was that I had mis-translated "notare", whitakers words does not list "to censure" as a definition for it, one of the rare incidents where Whitakers words is not accurate and exhaustive.

Also "Contra Mummius" I translated as "against Mummius", but actually it would have to be in accusative right? "Contra Mummium", in which case "contra + nominative" is usually "in contrast" rather than "against", is that a fair summary?
User avatar
TonyLoco23
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 2:53 pm

Re: Viris Illustribus: Third Punic War

Postby adrianus » Thu Jun 09, 2011 5:26 pm

It is indeed a fair summary, TonyLoco23. Here contra is an adverb and not a preposition.
Aequum quidem breviarum, AntoniDelireVicesimeTerti. Adverbium non praepositio hîc est contrà vocabulum.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Viris Illustribus: Third Punic War

Postby adrianus » Sat Jun 18, 2011 1:01 am

b132fdt0 [the last poster] must be a billboard bot, I reckon.
Robotum ad proscribendum b132fdt0, puto, quod proximum epistulam misit
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm


Return to Learning Latin

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Barry Hofstetter, Google [Bot] and 57 guests