There is a passage in Caesar’s Bellum Gallicum (Liber VII/12) which I do not quite understand:
My Loeb-edition translates this passage as follows:
As soon as he heard of Caesar’s approach Vercingetorix abandoned the siege and started to meet him. > Caesar, for his part, had determined to assault > Noviodunum, a stronghold of the Bituriges stationed on his route> .
When I first read the Latin sentence I translated it for myself like this:
Caesar had decided to attack a stronghold of the Bituriges situated on the way to Noviodunum.
Is the Latin sentence really unclear as to whether oppidum Bituriges equals Noviodunum (not very likely), or am I missing something?
By the way, please help me in correcting the mistakes in the KEY to Adler’s Practical Grammar. I really need your help and would appreciate your feedback to my questions.
Valete,
Carolus Raeticus
PS: I have just started to read Latin, or the empire of a sign by Françoise Waquet. From what I have read so far, it promises to be a really interesting book.
According to Wheelock’s Latin (Chapter 37) and A&G’s New Latin Grammar (§ 427) no preposition is used with the actual names of cities, towns, and small islands to indicate the place to which. What am I missing?
An accusative without a preposition can’t depend on a noun. The accusative without a preposition is used with a verb of motion to indicate place to which, but via isn’t a verb. The genitive might work.
You’re making in via function quasi-prepositionally, which it can’t do, as Qimmik has said.
To get the meaning you suggest, you’d have to have something like: Ille oppidum quoddam Biturigum, Noviodunum versus, oppugnare instituerat.