Ecloga IV

Latin Learning Latin
21

et densi frutices et vinctae cortice virgae

I think you have the translation right, except that “both” shouldn’t be there: there are three items: caves (not necessarily grottoes here), bushes and twigs bound with bark. This is simply how Ovid imagined prehistoric people living. I’m not sure about whether this refers to the Silver Age or the Golden Age that preceded it. fuerunt is parallel with subiere and both are perfect; you would expect a pluperfect if he meant the Golden Age, but I think the idea is that in the Silver Age houses began to be constructed, instead of the more primitive living arrangements of the Golden Age.

subiit – this is simply a metrical irregularity–they do occur. A short syllable is sometimes lengthened in the first part of the foot. This isn’t very common, and usually it occurs before a pause, in particular before the main caesura. Some of the manuscripts read subiitque but this is an obvious attempt to “fix” the irregularity. Another rejected reading: subit hi[n]c.

Looks like you’re beginning to master the meter, since you recognized this. But when you’re having difficulty scanning a line, don’t conclude there’s a metrical irregularity except as a last resort. Usually, you’ll find you’ve missed an elision or a syllable that is scanned long “by position,” or some other regular phenomenon. You’ll know you’ve really mastered the meter when you read a verse without even noticing an irregularity like this and everything falls into place.

22

Hit a bit of a snag. 132-136:

Vela dabat ventis (nec adhuc bene noverat illos)
navita; quaeque diu steterant in montibus altis,
fluctibus ignotis insultavere carinae,
communemque prius ceu lumina solis et auras
cautus humum longo signavit limite mensor.

(“The sailor was giving the sails to the winds (to this point he had not known them well); each of them had long stood in the high mountains. The keels sprung upon the unknown waves; the cautious measurer (navigator?) marked out the long path to the common (familiar?) ground just as before he had the sunlight and the winds.”)

“Each of them had long stood in the high mountains” – grammatically it would be “each of the sails” but that doesn’t seem right. I think I have a general idea – I’m thinking the last two lines are contrasting using celestial lights and winds at sea to using them with the more “golden-age-esque” travel on land – but I have trouble with the syntax so that’s not entirely clear.

23

. . . quaeque diu steterant in montibus altis,
fluctibus ignotis insultavere carinae,

quaeque is the relative pronoun quae + -que, not a feminine form of quisque. Its (grammatical) antecedent is carinae, which to be sure literally means “keel,” but in poetry usually means “ship” by synecdoche.

“. . . and ships, which had long stood in the high mountains [as trees, before being cut down to supply timber] jumped into waves [hitherto] unknown [to them].”

This picks up from–

nondum caesa suis, peregrinum ut viseret orbem,
montibus in liquidas pinus descenderat undas,

insulto means both “jump into” literally, and also, by extension, something like “insult,” “affront.” The suggestion is that human seafaring is an offence against the natural world, and belongs to a degenerate age. Ships are viewed from the perspective of those present at the birth of navigation as diving and swimming trees, capturing the strangeness of seafaring to the first men to attempt it. This goes back to Catullus’ image in 64.

communemque prius ceu lumina solis et auras
cautus humum longo signavit limite mensor.

“And the wary surveyor marked out the earth, previously common [to all] like the light of the sun and the breezes, with a long boundary.”

24

Thanks; that makes sense. Looks like I was barking up the wrong tree with the last two lines but realistically it’s a bit too difficult for me anyway.

25

Reading Latin poetry seem difficult at first because you not only have to work out the grammar and syntax, but also you have to get used to the ways in which the Roman poets express themselves and their repertory of common ideas that are often understood rather than expressed explicitly, their preconceptions. The only way to do this is to engage with Latin poetry, and it takes time. So bear with it and don’t be discouraged.

26

I meant the last two lines in particular. Usually when a hard sentence is translated it all seems so obvious but on occasion it seems just as tough as it did when I was struggling with it and I just have to wonder how anyone can get it naturally. This was one of those times.

In general, however, I’m pleased with my progress in poetry. It’s not quite as alien as it was before, and I’m starting to be able to read it more fluently. Obviously I’ve got a ways to go, but I’ve got a ways to go with Latin in general.

Ed: I suppose I shouldn’t say that some toug sentences are “just as” perplexing; I just mean that I can see how the words fit together but it’s completely non-obvious.

27

137-140:

Nec tantum segetes alimentaque debita dives
poscebatur humus, sed itum est in viscera terrae;
quasque recondiderat Stygiisque admoverat umbris,
effodiuntur opes, inritamenta malorum.

(“It was not only the rich fields and due nourishment that the land was demanded, but there was a going/people went into the bowels of the earth; and riches, incitement to evil men, were dug up.”)

Line 139 obviously is the sticking point. I want to say that “it moved them to re-found the Stygian shadows”. I can’t find an antecedent for “quas” except for “opes” – perhaps “it had moved the riches to be dug up, and it had moved them to re-found the Stygian shadows” but that doesn’t seem likely. I can’t find a subject for either of the pluperfect verbs except for maybe “opes”, which wouldn’t work as the antecedent for “quas” in that case, so I’m assuming tthey’re impersonal?

In the section on the giants, does “ferunt (infinitive)” mean “they were said to have (infinitive)” or something along those lines? Ed: it’s an abrupt transition to the giants part and I’m having trouble following what’s going on. As I read it roughly, the giants led a rebellion against the gods, were rebuffed violently, and, to make a memorial of their destruction, made man from their blood? You don’t have to give away the actual text; I’m just not sure of the mythology. I’m going to have to revisit tnis part later: it’s pretty tough.

28

Nec tantum segetes alimentaque debita diues
poscebatur humus, sed itum est in uiscera terrae;
quasque recondiderat Stygiisque admouerat umbris,
effodiuntur opes, inritamenta malorum.

Nec tantum segetes alimentaque debita dives
poscebatur humus

This is syntactically somewhat interesting. It’s the passive of a double accusative construction, which occurs with this verb.

L&S posco:

With a double acc.: parentes pretium pro sepulturā liberum poscere, Cic. Verr. 2, 1, 3, § 7: magistratum nummos, id. ib. 2, 1, 17, § 44: aliquem causam disserendi, id. Tusc. 3, 3, 7: claves portarum magistratus, Liv. 27, 24, 8: non ita creditum Poscis Quintilium deos, Hor. C. 1, 24, 12: cur me in decursu lampada poscis? Pers. 6, 61: poscenti vos rationem, Vulg. 1 Pet. 3, 15.—Hence, pass.: poscor aliquid, I am asked for something, something is asked or demanded of me (poet. and in post-class. prose): gravidae posceris exta bovis, they ask you for the entrails, Ov. F. 4, 670; cf.: poscor meum Laelapa, they demand of me my Lœlaps, id. M. 7, 771: nec tantum segetes alimentaque debita dives Poscebatur humus, id. ib. 1, 138: quod rationem pecuniae posceretur, Gell. 4, 18, 12; to be called upon or invoked to inspire a poet or to sing: aversus Apollo Poscitur invitā verba pigenda lyrā, Prop. 4 (5), 1, 76 (better reading poscis ab); cf. absol. Palilia poscor: Non poscor frustra; si favet alma Pales, Ov. F. 4, 721; so, poscimur Aonides, Ov. M. 5, 333: poscimur, Hor. C. 1, 32, 1.—

http://perseus.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.14:3896.lewisandshort

"Not only was the rich earth required [to produce] crops [here, the crops, not the fields] and [rightfully] owed food . . . ", “Not only were grain and rightfully owed food demanded of the rich earth . . .”

The passive of eo is impersonal, as you recognize. From somewhere Aeneid 6: itur in antiquam siluam.

quasque recondiderat Stygiisque admouerat umbris,
effodiuntur opes, inritamenta malorum.

Once again, a relative clause quas[que] recondiderat Stygiisque admoverat umbris, comes before its grammatical antecedent, opes.

But your problem here (and I don’t mean to be a scold) is that you didn’t look up recondo in the dictionary. It doesn’t mean “re-found” – it means “store away” or “hide away.” Opes is plural and can’t be the subject of the recondiderat and admouerat, as you recognize. The subject is humus.

“and the resources which it had hidden away and moved to the Stygian shades [a poetic expression for “the underworld”] were dug up–incitements to evil deeds.”

I think malorum is probably neuter, not masculine, but I could be wrong.

Incidentally, “store away” is among the meanings of the base verb condo.

L&S:

II With the access. idea of carefulness, to put away, to lay, put, or place somewhere for preservation, etc.; to lay up, store or treasure up (opp. promo).

A In gen. 1 Prop. (a) Aliquid: pecuniam, Cic. Clu. 26, 72: frumentum, id. N. D. 2, 63, 157; Hor. Ep. 2, 1, 140: condere et reponere fructus, Cic. N. D. 2, 62, 156: agri multa efferunt, quae … mandentur condita vetustati, id. ib. 2, 60, 151; cf. id. Brut. 4, 16; Varr. R. R. 1, 62; Auct. B. Afr. 65: vinum, Varr. R. R. 1, 13; cf. Mart. 13, 111, 2; Verg. E. 3, 43; Hor. Ep. 1, 1, 12: aliquid proprio horreo, id. C. 1, 1, 9: Sabinum testā levi, id. ib. 1, 20, 3: pressa mella puris amphoris, id. Epod. 2, 15: messem, Tib. 1, 1, 42: fruges, Paul. Sent. 2, 8, 2.— (b) With the designation of the place (most freq. by in and acc.): minas viginti in crumenam, Plaut. Truc. 3, 1, 9: mustum in dolium, Varr. R. R. 1, 65, 1: cineres in urnas, Suet. Calig. 15: barbam in auream pyxidem, id. Ner. 12; cf. id. ib. 47: legem in aerarium, id. ib. 28: libri in sacrarium conditi, Gell. 1, 19, 10; cf. the foll.: te in pistrinum, Plaut. Ps. 1, 5, 120; cf.: aliquem in custodiam, Liv. 31, 23, 9; Tac. H. 4, 2: aliquem in carcerem, to thrust into prison, imprison, Cic. Verr. 2, 5, 29, § 76; Liv. 26, 16, 6; 29, 22, 7; 30, 21, 5; 45, 42, 5: aliquem in vincula, id. 23, 38, 7; 26, 34, 4. —With adv.: argentum intro, Plaut. Ps. 1, 3, 120; id. Truc. 5, 28: sortes eo, Cic. Div. 2, 41, 86 Orell. N. cr.—With in and abl.: litteras publicas in aerario sanctiore, to keep, lay up, Cic. Verr. 2, 4, 63, § 140: se (aves) in foliis, Verg. G. 4, 473: novissimo die dein (argyritin) condunt in plumbeo vase, Plin. 33, 6, 35, § 109.—With abl.: condidit (libros Sibyllinos) duobus forulis auratis sub Palatini Apollinis basi, Suet. Aug. 31; Scrib. Comp. 145.—With locat.: id domi nostrae, Cic. Verr. 2, 2, 2, § 5; cf.: ut ei jam exploratus et domi conditus consulatus videretur, i. e. he was sure of it, id. Mur. 24, 49.— 2 Trop.: teneo omnia; in pectore condita sunt, Plaut. Ps. 4, 1, 31: mandata corde memori, Cat. 64, 231: tu, qui omne bonum in visceribus medullisque condideris, Cic. Tusc. 5, 9, 27: in causis conditae sunt res futurae, lie, are contained, id. Div. 1, 56, 128.

http://perseus.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.2:4113.lewisandshort

29

The basic Latin vocabulary is relatively poor. Many words, particularly verbs, have a wide range of meanings, so when you come to a passage you don’t understand, it makes sense to look up key words you think you know to make sure you haven’t missed a meaning.

30

Thanks, and thanks for the advice. I looked up the giants/gigantomachy on Wikipedia and found that there was a section on Ovid that basically cleared up any trouble I was having with that part, too. Next I’m going to read De Amicitia; I have a student edition but I also have the Loeb volume (together wwith the De Senectute) to consult when I need it so I shouldn’t need much help.

31

Sorry, I forgot to take up your question about the Gigantomachy. Ferunt means “they [impersonal] say/report”. The passive can be used this way, too. fertur/feruntur: “he/they is/are said/reported to”.

32

I figured it out.