Iudicum 3:16

Here you can discuss all things Latin. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Latin, and more.
Post Reply
Archimedes
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 5:35 am

Iudicum 3:16

Post by Archimedes »

qui fecit sibi gladium ancipitem habentem in medio capulum longitudinis palmae manus . . .

And he made himself a two-edged sword, with a haft in the midst of the length of the palm of the hand . . .

What exactly does "with a haft in the midst of the length of the palm of the hand" mean? Any alternate translations that might make sense? Thanks!

Calgacus
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 35
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2014 9:57 am

Re: Iudicum 3:16

Post by Calgacus »

We would probably say "hilt" rather than "haft".

Not often that you see three separate genitives in a row like that!

Archimedes
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 5:35 am

Re: Iudicum 3:16

Post by Archimedes »

But what does it mean to have the hilt "in the midst of the length of the palm of the hand"? Is this some sort of push dagger with a hilt so short that the pommel would be nestled in the middle of the wielder's palm when he plunged it into Eglon's belly? Or is the text corrupt, the gist perhaps simply being that the weapon was as long as the palm of a hand?

horus92
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 12:42 am

Re: Iudicum 3:16

Post by horus92 »

Maybe saying the longitudo of the capulum is being measured from the middle of that capulum where it's widest, like if it's a "diamond" shape. Then again you'd expect latitudo; so probably not. Maybe it's literally a double-sword somehow?

Qimmik
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2090
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:15 pm

Re: Iudicum 3:16

Post by Qimmik »

habentem in medio capulum doesn't seem to show up in the Septuagint or in any of the English translations I've looked at. I can't read the Masoretic Hebrew version. In the other versions, the measurement seems to be the measurement of the dagger itself.

Archimedes
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 5:35 am

Re: Iudicum 3:16

Post by Archimedes »

horus92 wrote:Maybe it's literally a double-sword somehow?
Like a double-ended blade with a handle in the middle? But in the story, he rams the thing completely into the body of Eglon, handle and all, probably having to push it home with the heel of his palm. If it had a point at the back end, he'd end up sticking himself.

Archimedes
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 5:35 am

Re: Iudicum 3:16

Post by Archimedes »

Qimmik wrote:habentem in medio capulum doesn't seem to show up in the Septuagint or in any of the English translations I've looked at. I can't read the Masoretic Hebrew version. In the other versions, the measurement seems to be the measurement of the dagger itself.
The Hebrew gives the length of the weapon as a gmd, there being no consensus among scholars as to exactly how long a gmd was. If the intent of the Latin was to give the length as the length of the palm of the hand, this would be in line with the Greek span or spithamē in the Septuagint.

Shenoute
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 527
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 12:23 pm

Re: Iudicum 3:16

Post by Shenoute »

As I see it, there are two possibilities :

- capulus means the cross-guard of the sword and not the handle, this would explain the in medio. Some translations have adopted this solution.
- capulus actually means the 'handle' and then the in medio must have a very weak value, close to something like "in it". But I can't say I've found anything that would exactly match this explanation after a quick search in the Vulgata.

Archimedes
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 5:35 am

Re: Iudicum 3:16

Post by Archimedes »

Shenoute wrote:capulus means the cross-guard of the sword and not the handle, this would explain the in medio.
According to those who believe the weapon was meant to be rammed all the way into the victim, it wouldn't have had a cross-guard as it would inhibit penetration. But if this was a short dagger a spithamē in length, it could have been half blade, half handle. Could the meaning perhaps be that the top end of the handle lay at the midpoint of the weapon?

Interaxus
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 581
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2004 1:04 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Re: Iudicum 3:16

Post by Interaxus »

Is there really a problem (or have I missed something)?

Look at the two-edged BLADE of the sword from above (Mexican-on-a-bicycle or Google Earth view), the tip of the blade pointing towards your toes.

At the mid-point (in medio) of this 'cross-section' view is the spot where you fix the hilt (which has the length of the palm of your hand).

Am I thinking laterally (or vertically)?

Int

Archimedes
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 5:35 am

Re: Iudicum 3:16

Post by Archimedes »

Interaxus wrote:Is there really a problem (or have I missed something)?

Look at the two-edged BLADE of the sword from above (Mexican-on-a-bicycle or Google Earth view), the tip of the blade pointing towards your toes.

At the mid-point (in medio) of this 'cross-section' view is the spot where you fix the hilt (which has the length of the palm of your hand).

Am I thinking laterally (or vertically)?

Int
I had actually considered the possibility that coaxial alignment of the blade and hilt might be what was being described. However, that was quite a common feature of Bronze Age swords and daggers, so I don't see why the writer would go out of his way to describe it. Moreover, a hilt with a length of the palm of a hand would be about twice as long as it would have to be to fit in a clenched fist.

Mexican-on-a-bicycle?

Interaxus
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 581
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2004 1:04 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Re: Iudicum 3:16

Post by Interaxus »

I had actually considered the possibility that coaxial alignment of the blade and hilt might be what was being described. However, that was quite a common feature of Bronze Age swords and daggers, so I don't see why the writer would go out of his way to describe it.
By the same count, wouldn't the writer take it for granted that his readers knew hilts weren't placed halfway down sword blades so could safely assume there would be no ambiguity when he pointed out that the hilt was of such-and-such a length.

Of course I have no idea why this length mattered to him. Google Images for 'bronze age swords' shows many variations.
Moreover, a hilt with a length of the palm of a hand would be about twice as long as it would have to be to fit in a clenched fist.

Really? If I put a pencil in the palm of my hand (part between wrist and fingers), mark that length, and then clench my fist around the pencil, only an inch/half-inch of the measured length protrudes. Do I have a deformed hand like Richard III?
Mexican-on-a-bicycle?
Old visual riddle for kids. Draw a small circle within a larger circle, with a short horizontal line sticking out on either side of the latter. "What's that a picture of?"

Int

Archimedes
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 5:35 am

Re: Iudicum 3:16

Post by Archimedes »

Interaxus wrote:
I had actually considered the possibility that coaxial alignment of the blade and hilt might be what was being described. However, that was quite a common feature of Bronze Age swords and daggers, so I don't see why the writer would go out of his way to describe it.
By the same count, wouldn't the writer take it for granted that his readers knew hilts weren't placed halfway down sword blades so could safely assume there would be no ambiguity when he pointed out that the hilt was of such-and-such a length.

Of course I have no idea why this length mattered to him. Google Images for 'bronze age swords' shows many variations.
Moreover, a hilt with a length of the palm of a hand would be about twice as long as it would have to be to fit in a clenched fist.

Really? If I put a pencil in the palm of my hand (part between wrist and fingers), mark that length, and then clench my fist around the pencil, only an inch/half-inch of the measured length protrudes. Do I have a deformed hand like Richard III?
Mexican-on-a-bicycle?
Old visual riddle for kids. Draw a small circle within a larger circle, with a short horizontal line sticking out on either side of the latter. "What's that a picture of?"

Int
In Latin metrology, the "length of the palm" was the distance from the tip of the middle finger to the wrist, corresponding to the Greek spithamē or span, which was half a cubit or about 9 inches. So I was thinking of a small dagger about 9 inches in total length, 4 1/2 inch hilt and 4 1/2 inch blade, the description maybe getting garbled along the way.

Also, hats off to your bravado in this politically correct world for alluding to a Mexican wearing a sombrero ;-)

Interaxus
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 581
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2004 1:04 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Re: Iudicum 3:16

Post by Interaxus »

Many thanks for the info. Numbers were never my strong point.

Just out of interest I googled "ancient roman units of length" and found this in Wikipedia:

palmus = palm width = 1⁄4 pes (0.243 ft /74 mm )
palmus major = palm length = 3⁄4 pes (0.728 ft /222 mm) (in 'late times')

Seems there were palms and palms.
hats off to your bravado in this politically correct world for alluding to a Mexican wearing a sombrero
My age is showing. Can't help enjoying old jokes, films, books, poems (by Horace, for example), produced in times before folks knew any better.

Int

Archimedes
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 5:35 am

Re: Iudicum 3:16

Post by Archimedes »

Excuse the thread necromancy, but I wanted to run something by the participants of the discussion for some feedback. Here is the original text:

qui fecit sibi gladium ancipitem habentem in medio capulum longitudinis palmae manus

I propose emending in medio to either ab medio or ad medium to give the sense that the hilt or capulum extends either from or to the middle of the palm-length dagger, i.e., that the handle takes up half the total length of the weapon. Do either of the proposed emendations correctly convey that meaning? Thanks.

Archimedes
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 5:35 am

Re: Iudicum 3:16

Post by Archimedes »

I might have left the impression that only those who previously posted on the thread need answer. Actually, I'm open to input from anyone. Thanks again.

Post Reply