Quīntus Stertōrius, īgnōbilī locō nātus, prīma stīpendia bellō Cimbricō fēcit, in quō honōs eī virtūtis causā habitus est.
Quintus Stertorius, born of humble origins, spent his first military service in the Cimbric war, in which he was regarded an honour to him because of his courage.
If habeo meant to bestow, it would be in which an honour was awarded to him because of his courage. But I'm not optimistic, because I can't find that definition in any dictionary. What am I missing?
Quintus has convinced his men that his hind is imbued with divine abilities, and that commands to his men come from the gods through it. Goggle-eyed emoticon!
Ac sī quid dūrius vidēbātur, quod imperandum mīlitibus esset, ā cervā sēsē monitum praedicābat barbarīque statim ad omnia, tamquam dīvīnitus imperāta, oboediēbant.
And if something that needed to be commanded to the soldiers seemed rather harsh, he used to announce himself to have been advised by the deer (i.e. he used to announce that he had been advised by the deer), and the barbarians immediately complied with everything, as though the commands came from the gods.
Have I got this right? sēsē is accusative and refers to Stertorius, not ablative in agreement with cervā; and there is an esse missing or implied after monitum, which is a verb, (moneo), not a noun, (monitum).
Finally, the hind goes missing, and is thought dead, but Stertorius has found out that it is still alive, and has invited his friends (who know nothing) to his place to witness its miraculous return.
Admissīs deinde amīcīs postrīdiē vīsam sibi ait in quiēte cervam, quae perīsset, ad sē revertī et, ut prius cōnsuēvisset, quod opus esset factū, praedīcere.
The next day, when his friends had assembled, he says that the hind, which was thought to have died, to have appeared to him in a dream, and to return to himself, and that as was the habit before, to command what was needed to be done.
There's something I can't understand, and I can't quite put my finger on it, but something to do with the tense of reverti. Shouldn't it be future? Because as I read it, it saysHe says the hind to have appeared to him, and to return to him(self). But shouldn't it be He says the hind to have appeared and be going to return?
adrianus wrote:(honos non honōs)
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Yahoo [Bot], ÓBuadhaigh and 56 guests