Help with Hannibal!

Latin Learning Latin
1

I’m using Wheelock’s Latin Reader and this is from Page 165. Working on the first 10 lines of “Hannibal and the Second Punic War”.

Latin:
Missus Hannibal in Hispaniam primo statim adventu ominem exercitum in se convertit: Hamilcarem iuvenem redditum sibi veteres milites credere; eundem vigorem in vultu vimque in oculis, habitum oris lineamentaque intueri. Dein brevi effecit ut pater in se minimum momentum ad favorem conciliandum esset. Numquam ingenium idem ad res diversissimas, parendum atque imperandum, habilius fuit. Itaque haud facile discerneres utrum imperatori an exercitui carior esset; neque hasdrubal alium quemquam praeficere malle, ubi quid fortiter ac strenue agendum esset, neque milites alio duce plus confidere aut audere.

What I have thus far:
The messenger Hannibal arriving (don’t know how to translate the supine, “having arrived?”) immediately at first (double adverb, sounds funny, “immediately arriving at first”?) in Spain attracted to himself every army: To entrust to the young Hamilcar (bad rendering of credere or something as this sounds awkward) the veteran soldiers returning (how to properly translate redditum? I think I have trouble with my verbs) to himself: To look at the same vigor in appearance and strength in the eyes, the expression and features of the face. He then proved in a short time that the father in him was endeared at the slightest influence to applause. (conciliandum esset seems to be taking pater in se as the subject but the translation sounds odd) Nevertheless the talent similar to the most diverse matter, obeyed and also commanded, was handy. (don’t know whats wrong or why but it seems wrong) Thus you could by no means easily discern whether the general or the army was beloved; To wish to put in command neither another Hasdrubal, whereby anything was vigorously and bravely leading, nor to entrust or intend other soldiers with a leader.
(The last part I just plain struggled with and I don’t get it)

Notes on my translation are in parenthesis, translation is bolded to help sort and I underlined where I was directly referencing help.

Basically I have all the words, but I don’t have a clue how they flow and in English my translation doesn’t make sense… A smoother translation working out all my mistakes would be much helpful! I know it’s kind of a lot… sorry and thanks in advance!

2

Don’t worry, it’s a rather difficult text. I have tried to translate it as follows, keeping as close as possible to the Latin (caveat lector):

Hannibal, having been sent to Spain, immediately at the first arrival (primo is an adjective going with the noun adventu) turned the whole army to himself (got the attention of the whole army). The old soldiers thought (credere, historical infinitive, I think?) that the young Hamilcar had been given back to them; they looked at (intueri, again historical infinitive) the same vigor in appearance and strength in the eyes, the [same] expression and features of the face. (I stole your translation here. :slight_smile:) Then he quickly accomplished, that the “father in him” was the least reason to attract favour (ad favorem conciliandum. I.e., he proved his own worth.) Never had [one and] the same nature (person) been more apt to [two] very different things, to obey(ing) and to lead(ing). Thus you could by no means easily discern whether he was most beloved to (=by) the general or to the troop; neither did Hasdrubal want to put anyone else in command, whenever something were to be performed vigorously and strenously, nor did the soldiers confide more in (any) another leader, or dare more (under another leader). (The translation got a bit messy at the end.)

3

Thanks! That should help a lot with class this morning. I can see where I made my biggest mistakes! The book notes that credere and intueri are historical infinitives however Wheelock Latin Grammer never covered historical infinitives :open_mouth: but then he put them in his reader :laughing: . We’ve had a couple of those problems in class already this year!


Two questions if someone can answer them:
Why does malle and proficere take Hasdrubal as a subject if they are both infinitives?

4

You use the nominative for the subject of the historical infinitive, which is malle in this case. praeficere then depends on malle – it’s the same as if it were neque Hasdrubal alium quemquam praeficere malebat.

5

Thanks!

I don’t think Wheelocks 6th ed ever covered historical infinitives so I was confused about malle taking the nominative. I see how praeficere relies on malle though.

6

Do you need help translating the supine in general or was it just translating ‘Missus’ that was giving you trouble?

7

I just need to go back to my grammar book and relearn some of the grammar for verbs. I have a super hard time with supines, gerunds, gerundives, and participles…

8

Ok. In regards to “missus”, it is a perfect passive participle, and they are easiest translated as “noun, having been (perfect form of verb),” So “missus” becomes “Having been sent to Spain, Hannibal…” That is a valid translation, but can get somewhat trite. Using a relative clause or circumstantial clause can normally give better sounding English and fuller translations.