Primus et Romae et imperii conditor Romulus est, filius dei, Martis et Rhea Silviae. Romulum cum, Remo fratre in Tibernium rex, Amuluis, ictact. Sed infantes clamant et lupa pueros iuvat. Tum sub arbore Faustulus pastor pueros videt et portat in casam et educat.
What I come out with: (I will just translate the words directly, Can’t really figure out the first part) First both Rome and command founder Romlus is son of the gods Martis and Rheae Silvia. (This part I have trouble with also) Romulum with brother Remo in Tiberinum king, Amuliuis, throws.
But the infants shout and the she wolf helps the boys. Then, under the tree, Faustulus the sheperd, sees the small boys and carries them into the house and teaches them.
You have primus as an adverb in your sentence, but it is in the nominative here. It characterizes the next word in the nominative, conditor. So you have a conditor who is primus. So he was a conditor of what, you ask. Romae and imperii are clearly in the genitive, so there you are: you have a primus conditor of Romae and ingenii. What about this conditor? He is, est. What? Romulus. The comma suggests that you get an apposition with more information about him. He was a filius. Whose filius? The filius of the following genitive, dei. As Martis is in the genitive, too, this tells you who the dei is. But he is not only the filius of the dei Martis but also of Rheae Silvae.
So there you are:
the primus conditor of both Romae and imperii was Romulus who was a filius of dei Martis and of Rheae Silvae.
Hope this helps
Could you check you got sentence number two written down correctly - I think I know what it means but just to make sure…
Well, obviously, this sentence should mean that the two boys are thrown into the Tiber, - does it really say ictact? I asked if you could verify in your book or whatever.
