DE Republica by Lauro Quirini

Latin after CDLXXVI
Post Reply
ohlavrac
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2021 7:23 pm

DE Republica by Lauro Quirini

Post by ohlavrac »

Im' new here and I'd like to tell you what I'm working on: De republica by Lauro Quirini. Apparently, there is no translation of this text in any language. I hope that there will be soon one in Portuguese (I'm Brazilian). The humanist tries do sumarize the Aristotelian Politics. If anyone is interested in the text, I'll be glad to discuss with you.

cb
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 706
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 3:52 pm

Re: DE Republica by Lauro Quirini

Post by cb »

Hi, that sounds really interesting! Can you please tell us something about Quirini's Latin? How do you find it?

If you're doing it in Portuguese, I'm guessing it's not part of the I Tatti Renaissance Library series of translations of Renaissance Latin. Is this an independent project or part of a broader series?

Cheers, Chad

ohlavrac
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2021 7:23 pm

Re: DE Republica by Lauro Quirini

Post by ohlavrac »

Hi, Chad,
You're right, it's not part of the I Tatti Renaissance Library series. I'm a philosophy professor, and I'm working together with a history professor who is specialist in the humanists. The translated text is to be used in class, since very few students here know latin. I've already translated some humanistic texts, but then I had some translations to compare with. It's harder when you have no way to assure or guide your own translation. And I think that's even harder in relation to the humanists because sometimes I'm not sure about the meaning of some words or sentences, given that they are "recreating" the classical latin after centuries of medieval latin.
As to the text itself, it's not difficult, except for the introduction: a letter to the doge Francesco Foscari, to whom he dedicated the work. Surely, I'll need help with that part, but I'm saving it for later. It seems he wanted to impress here, but the main text was intended to be clear and accessible.
Later I'll post some passages of the text here to let you know more about his style.

Cheers, Alex

ohlavrac
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2021 7:23 pm

Re: DE Republica by Lauro Quirini

Post by ohlavrac »

Here an example of the text. At the end, Quirini says that Tarquinius had raped Lucrecia. But his son Sextus did that. That’s clear not only because the story is very well known, but because the context makes it clear. So, I imagine, I should assume it is implied that it was his son, not he who committed the crime. Is that right, what do you think?


Bella praeterea tyranni inferunt ut subditos occupatos bellicis laboribus vexatos teneant quo minus eum invadant. Corrumpitur autem tyrannia ob nimia ed indigna tyranni scelera ac potissimum stupra aut virgines vitiando aut marito traditas adulterando. Unde cum tyrannus quispiam filium increparet quod nimium alienas uxores violabat praesertim cum ipse in florida sua aetate tale quid non egisset, Sed tu, inquit filius, o pater, patrem non habuisti tyrannum. Sed nec tu nate, respondit, filium habebis si talia facere perges. Multa hic occurrunt exempla, sed quoniam brevitati studemus unum adducere satis erit. Tarquinius Superbus quia Lucretiam Romanae pudicitiae ornamentum violavit regno turpiter spoliatus est.

Moreover, tyrants make war to keep their subjects occupied and so that they, thus afflicted by warlike labors, have less opportunity to attack him. But tyranny is corrupted because of the tyrant’s excessive and unworthy crimes, and especially debauchery, either by raping virgins or committing adultery with married women. It follows that if a tyrant were to criticize one of his sons for raping other men’s wives too much, especially because he himself, in his youth, had not done so, the son would answer him: that is because you, father, did not have a tyrant father. And you, son, would he answer, you won’t have a son if you keep acting like this. There are many examples of this, but since we are striving for brevity, only one will suffice. Tarquin Superbus, because [his son] raped Lucretia, the symbol of Roman chastity, was shamefully deprived of his kingdom.


Cheers, Alex
Last edited by ohlavrac on Mon Feb 14, 2022 6:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Barry Hofstetter
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1739
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:22 pm

Re: DE Republica by Lauro Quirini

Post by Barry Hofstetter »

ohlavrac wrote: Mon Feb 14, 2022 2:46 pm
Multa hic occurrunt exempla, sed quoniam brevitati studemus unum adducere satis erit. Tarquinius Superbus quia Lucretiam Romanae pudicitiae ornamenqum violavit regno turpiter spoliarus est.

There are many examples of this, but since we are striving for brevity, only one will suffice. Tarquin Superbus, because [his son] raped Lucretia, the symbol of Roman chastity, was shamefully deprived of his kingdom.


Cheers, Alex
I notice a number of errors in the Latin that I assume are typos, such ornamenqum for ornamentum.

From a strictly syntax point of view, a change in subject between a main clause and a subordinate clause is nearly always marked, because otherwise the default is to see the subject of the main clause as the subject of the subordinate clause. The kind of elipsis you are suggesting here really isn't done.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter

Cuncta mortalia incerta...

ohlavrac
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2021 7:23 pm

Re: DE Republica by Lauro Quirini

Post by ohlavrac »

Thanks, Barry, I've corrected the typos. I thought that too, id est, that the subject must be the same, but it's so weird such a mistake in context where the author is writing about the debauchery of the son. Anyway, I'd already written a footnote explaining this.

ohlavrac
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2021 7:23 pm

Re: DE Republica by Lauro Quirini

Post by ohlavrac »

Hi there, I'd love to have some help with a passage from the text.

Quot enim strenui Athenienses, quot praeclari Lacedaemonienses, quot probi Graeci, ut simul omnes comprehendam, pro patria defendenda mortui sunt? Quot barbari crudeliter necati? (…) Deinde cognatis, propinquis, liberis, amicis et denique omnibus concivibus parere curant quod in civitatibus negotium amicos, veritas odium parit.

I don't know how to translate "parere curant" and "in civitatibus negotium amigos". My first attempt is: "Then they take care to assist their relatives, close ones, children, friends, and finally all citizens, because that is the task of friends in the states, truth breeds hate". But that sounds weird.

Thanks a lot,

Alex

User avatar
seneca2008
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1797
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 1:48 pm
Location: Londinium

Re: DE Republica by Lauro Quirini

Post by seneca2008 »

I wonder where you got "assist" from? The sense of pareo is obey or yield to and explains the preceding datives. I cannot immediately make sense of "amicos" I wonder if a previous sentence might help us with the subject of "curant".

I also wonder whether parit is "pa[ve]rit" (future or perfect subjunctive) from paveo. "(so that) truth will fear hatred" at least makes some kind of sense.

I will think more about amicos but perhaps someone else can explain what I have failed to see.
Persuade tibi hoc sic esse, ut scribo: quaedam tempora eripiuntur nobis, quaedam subducuntur, quaedam effluunt. Turpissima tamen est iactura, quae per neglegentiam fit. Et si volueris attendere, maxima pars vitae elabitur male agentibus, magna nihil agentibus, tota vita aliud agentibus.

ohlavrac
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2021 7:23 pm

Re: DE Republica by Lauro Quirini

Post by ohlavrac »

Hi, thanks for your help.
Well, veritas odium parit ist a quotation from Terence and is regularly translated as truth breeds hatred, but, of course, it may have another meaning here. I thought of translating parere as obey, but it made no sense, then I decided to translate as assist because of an example I found in my dictionary: magistratibus parere, "assist the magistrates, be their advisor", but, I see now, it'll sound better if I use comply with. As to amicos, I have no clue.

User avatar
seneca2008
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1797
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 1:48 pm
Location: Londinium

Re: DE Republica by Lauro Quirini

Post by seneca2008 »

The Terence reference was helpful thanks.

"sapienter vitam instituit. namque hoc tempore
obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit."

So your sentence is really an expansion of these lines.

"namque hoc tempore obsequium amicos" can be translated (as in the Loeb) as "These days obsequiousness makes friends"

So I suggest that we need a similar verb in "quod in civitatibus negotium amicos" maybe " so that in (transacting) the business of the state (they) make friends"?

I rather the like the Loeb's more idiomatic " the truth just makes you unpopular" for "veritas odium parit".

This extra context tells us that obeying all and sundry is something to be despised. Perhaps the missing sentences make this clear. But the quote from Terence I think clinches the meaning here.
Persuade tibi hoc sic esse, ut scribo: quaedam tempora eripiuntur nobis, quaedam subducuntur, quaedam effluunt. Turpissima tamen est iactura, quae per neglegentiam fit. Et si volueris attendere, maxima pars vitae elabitur male agentibus, magna nihil agentibus, tota vita aliud agentibus.

ohlavrac
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2021 7:23 pm

Re: DE Republica by Lauro Quirini

Post by ohlavrac »

The complete paragraph:

Ceterum bene se habet hoc in loco de eo disserere de quo a plurimis et gravissimis auctoribus verba multa consumpta sunt; sunt enim plerique philosophi qui activam et negoriosam vitam acriter damnent asserentes talem vitam nimis in extrinsecis rebus ita occupatam, ut non ipsis nati videantur. Sed primo quidem patriae inserviunt consiliis et operibus et talibus persaep operibus ut morti ante tempus immaturi tradantur dum student negotia publica administrare. Quot enim strenui Athenienses, quot praeclari Lacedaemonienses, quot probi Graeci, ut simul omnes comprehendam, pro patria defendenda mortui sunt? Quot barbari crudeliter necati? Quot vel praecipue generosi et ilustres Romani in proelio caesi trucidatique fuere dum ordem terrarum in deditionem romani imperii summittere currant? Quote nim Scipiones caesi sunt? Quot Fabii? Quot Marcelli? Quot Reguli? Quot Flaminii, Fabricii, Decii, Pauli, Gracchi? Quot praeterea Caesares et alli innumeri viri, optimi prestantesque viri? Deinde cognatis, propinquis, liberis, amicis et denique omnibus concivibus parere curant quod in civitatibus negotium amicos, veritas odium parit. Multae praetetea, aiunt, seditiones in civitatibus sunt, multae inimicitiae et capitales persaepe, multae simulationes vix ut unquam concivis animum qualis erga te sit dignoscere valeas. Quapropter et te simulate vivere oportet libertate amissa.

Taking into consideration the full quote from Terence that you brought, "quod in civitatibus negotium amicos, veritas odium parit", that passage mentioned above can be translated as something like: "so that (transacting) the business of the state makes friends", truth makes you unpopular".

As to parere curant, I still think that "assist" or "take care" as a suitable translation: Then they are just taking care of their relatives, close ones, children, friends... "so that (transacting) the business of the state makes friends", truth makes you unpopular".

User avatar
seneca2008
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1797
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 1:48 pm
Location: Londinium

Re: DE Republica by Lauro Quirini

Post by seneca2008 »

As to parere curant, I still think that "assist" or "take care" as a suitable translation: Then they are just taking care of their relatives, close ones, children, friends... "so that (transacting) the business of the state makes friends", truth makes you unpopular".
I think this is mistaken. Curare means "to take care to" or "have a care to" and (here) takes the infinitive "parer" (to obey). You are eliding the meaning of the two verbs to produce "assist or take care". I also think you are misunderstanding the thrust of the whole paragraph. No one is "just taking care of their relatives etc". The author is complaining that those who should be commanding are instead obeying all and sundry. (Quot praeterea Caesares et alli innumeri viri, optimi prestantesque viri? seems to sum this up).

I see from OLD that there is one meaning for pareo as follows:

"4, To act as attendant (on).

Bruttios ignominiae causa...magistratibus in prouincias
euntibus -ere et praeministrare seruorum uicem iusserunt
GEL. 10.3.19 "

The full text of this is:

"Id Romani aegre passi, postquam Hannibal Italia decessit superatique Poeni sunt, Bruttios ignominiae causa non milites scribebant nec pro sociis habebant, sed magistratibus in provincias euntibus parere et praeministrare servorum vicem iusserunt."

The sense here is that the Bruttii are ordered as an ignominious punishment to serve the magistrates (ie military commanders) not as allies or soldiers and to "perform the duties of slaves".

This meaning seems to be a highly specific and particular meaning of the general meaning of parer " to obey". From the context your "assist" seems wrong. Even the OLD's "to act as an attendant" seems euphemistic. Although I suppose attendants do assist this is hardly idiomatic English in the case of "would be" soldiers sent to a province with their "hoped for" commanders and instructed to act as slaves. Specifically they are being used as "floggers" "lorarii" and presumably these were normally slaves.

If you wish to use this meaning of "parere" you should understand it as "they have a care to act as attendants to..." and then list the nouns in the dative.

I still think that it would be better to use the primary meaning of "obey".
Persuade tibi hoc sic esse, ut scribo: quaedam tempora eripiuntur nobis, quaedam subducuntur, quaedam effluunt. Turpissima tamen est iactura, quae per neglegentiam fit. Et si volueris attendere, maxima pars vitae elabitur male agentibus, magna nihil agentibus, tota vita aliud agentibus.

ohlavrac
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2021 7:23 pm

Re: DE Republica by Lauro Quirini

Post by ohlavrac »

Thanks a lot for your help. I think that now I can translate it correctly.

Post Reply