In Catilinam 1.17-18

Latin Learning Latin
1

It is better to leave than stay when convicted in the court of public opinion:

Tu, cum conscientia scelerum tuorum agnoscas odium omnium iustum et iam diu tibi debitum, dubitas quorum mentis sensusque volneras, eorum aspectum praesentiamque vitare?

(“Do you, when with the consciousness of your crimes recognize the just and for a long time due to you (i.e. a long time coming) hatred of all, hesitate (to be?) wound(ed?) by(?) their(?) mind and feelings, to avoid their sight and presence?” “Do you hesitate to avoid the mind and feeling of those whom you wound, to avoid their sight and presence?”)

Rome personified admonishes Catiline:

Tibi uni multorum civium neces, tibi vexatio direptioque sociorum impunita fuit ac libera.

(“You hurt only yourself of the many citizens, to you (and only you?) are the vexation and pillaging of your fellows unpunished and free.” “Vexatio direptioque” – a hendiadys, hence the singular forms?)

Nunc vero me totam esse in metu propter unum te, quicquid increpuerit, Catilinam timeri, nullum videri contra me consilium iniri posse quod a tuo scelere abhorreat, non est ferendum.

(“Now truly it is not to be endured that I totally (in my totality) be in fear because of you alone; whatever made a great sound, that I be scared of Catiline (that Catiline be feared by me – end: or Catiline be feared in general?); that no plan, it seems, can be entered into against me that is inconsistent with your crime.”)

I have an educated guess about the other two but here I have no clue where “quicquid increpuerit” comes in.

2

. . . dubitas quorum mentis sensusque volneras, eorum aspectum praesentiamque vitare?

quorum . . . volneras is a relative clause, and the antecedent of quorum is eorum.

“. . . do you hesitate to avoid the sight and presence of those whose minds and senses you wound [i.e., offend]?”

Tibi uni multorum civium neces, tibi vexatio direptioque sociorum impunita fuit ac libera.

neces is the nominative plural of the noun nex, “slaughter”, “murder”, not from the verb neco.

“For you alone the slaughter of many citizens, the harassment and plunder of allies, was unpunished and free.”

I think sociorum refers not to Catiline’s associates, but to Roman allies as opposed to citizens (multorum civium neces). Catiline had served as a provincial governor, and was accused, but acquitted, of corruption. He had also served as a henchman of Sulla–hence the reference to civium neces.

“Vexatio direptioque” – a hendiadys, hence the singular forms?

More or less, and neces is lumped together with the singular forms, too.

See Allen & Greenough sec. 317b:

b. If the subjects are connected by disjunctives (§ 223. a), or if they are considered as a single whole, the verb is usually singular:—

“quem neque fidēs neque iūs iūrandum neque illum misericordia repressit ” (Ter. Ad. 306) , not faith, nor oath, nay, nor mercy, checked him.
“senātus populusque Rōmānus intellegit ” (Fam. 5.8 ) , the Roman senate and people understand. [But, neque Caesar neque ego habitī essēmus (id. 11.20), neither Cæsar nor I should have been considered.]
“fāma et vīta innocentis dēfenditur ” (Rosc. Am. 15) , the reputation and life of an innocent man are defended.
est in eō virtūs et probitās et summum officium summaque observantia (Fam. 13.28A. 2), in him are to be found worth, uprightness, the highest sense of duty, and the greatest devotion.

[*] Note.–> So almost always when the subjects are abstract nouns.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=AG+317&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0001

quicquid increpuerit, Catilinam timeri, – this is, I think, a condition without si. “[it is intolerable] to fear Catiline if anything will have made a loud noise,” i.e., to fear Catiline whenever there is a loud noise.

See A&G sec. 512a, Note:

a. The Protasis is regularly introduced by the conditional particle sī, if, or one of its compounds.

[*] Note.–These compounds are sīn , nisi , etiam sī , etsī , tametsī , tamenetsī (see Conditional and Concessive Particles, p. 138). > An Indefinite Relative, or any relative or concessive word, may also serve to introduce a conditional clause: > see Conditional Relative Clauses (§§ 519, 542); Concessive Clauses (§ 527).

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=AG+512&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0001

3

I understand your translation of the “dubitas vitare” sentence except that it seems as if the object in “whose minds and senses you offend” seems to be “mentis sensusque”, which are both in the genitive. I’ve been thinking myself into circles with this sentence so it may just be that I’m confused; I keep thinking I understand it but then I look again and no. Is “mentis” an alternate spelling of “mentes”, as with “omnis” for “omnes”?

Yeah, I mixed up “necare” and “nocere” in the middle one (although it turns out neither was correct).

4

mentis sensusque – both are accusative plural.

A&G sec. 71:

  1. Mixed i-stems have -em in the accusative and -e in the ablative singular, -ium in the genitive and > -īs or -ēs in the accusative plural. > They include the following:—

2> .Monosyllables in -s or -x preceded by a consonant: as, ars, pōns, arx.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0001%3Apart%3D1%3Asection%3D10%3Asubsection%3D2%3Asmythp%3D71

5

Okay, it makes perfect sense now. Thanks.

6

Not too much trouble with 19 and 20, but there are a couple of sentences I’m not sure about:

Catiline seeks to go into custody at a henchman’s house:

Sed quam longe videtur a carcere atque a vinculis abesse debere qui se ipse iam dignum custodia iudicarit?

(“But how far away from prison and chains does it seem he should be, he (the kind of person who?) who himself judged such a custodian to be deserving?” – I can’t quite make this work grammatically but the thought seems to follow)

Cicero urges Catiline to go:

Quae cum ita sint, Catalina, dubitas, si emori aequo animo non potes, abire in aliquas terras et vitam istam multis suppliciis iustis debitisque ereptam fugae solitudinique mandare?

("These things being so, Catiline, do you hesitate, if you cannot die with a tranquil spirit, to go away into other lands and to entrust that life of yours, with many just punishments and debts taken away, to flight and solitude?)

7

qui se ipse iam dignum custodia iudicarit – “someone who on his own [ipse] has already judged himself to be worthy of detention”

The difficulty in the first part of the sentence is that the English verb “must” doesn’t have an infinitive. So you have to translate videtur, the subject of which is actually [quisquam] qui, as an impersonal verb “does it seem”, as you’ve done. Or you could translate “how far away from prison and irons does someone who . . . seem he ought to be?”, which is more awkward but preserves the syntax of the Latin.

custodia is a fem. 1st decl. noun. The form here is ablative, with dignum, which normally takes an ablative complement.

See Lewis & Short, dignus:

http://perseus.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.3:1694.lewisandshort

and custodia:

http://perseus.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.2:6155.lewisandshort

“But how far from prison and chains does it seem that someone who on his own has already judged himself deserving of incarceration must be?”

Does this help?

aequo animo – more like English “equanimity” or maybe “firmness of mind”.

ereptam – this modifies vitam: “that life of yours, snatched away from so many just and well-deserved punishments”.

fugae solitudinique: fuga here means “exile”, and the phrase might be treated as a hendiadys: “the loneliness of exile”.

8

I probably ought to have gotten the second but I didn’t know about the ablative with “dignum”. In fact I didn’t think it with an object at all, but as meaning “worthy”, and the sentence before treats the proposed custody very ironically and I figured the next sentence would refer back to the proposed custodian. Thanks.

9

Never mind, I figured it out. Stumped by alternate forms again.