“Ut omittamus superiores, Marcone Crasso putas utile fuisse tum, cum maximis opibus florebat, scire sibi interfecto Publio filio exercituque deleto trans Euphratem cum ignominia ess moriendum?”
Granted we should ommit the prior men, Marcus, you think that when he was prospering with great wealth, that it was advantageous for Crasso to know then that he had to die with disgrace for the (advantage of?) Publius who himself was killed by his son, and for the army destroyed accross the Euphrates?
I don’t understand “Marcone Crasso”. According to my book, they’re the names of the same person, but one is vocative while the other is dative/ablative? Also, who’s Publius and was he killed by his son? I mabye get the meaning that Crasso or someone would have to die because their army or something was destroyed. Mabye. Or mabye its because he lost his rmy and publius (who was killed by fratricide) wanted to kill him?
Marcone Crasso - this is Marcus Crassus : Marco Crasso is a dative, complement of the adjective “utile?. Marco-ne: ne is an iterrogative particle. So “Marcone Crasso putas utile? = Do you think it was useful for Marcus Crassus…?
Publius is Marcus’ son. Publius, the son of Marcus, was killed and Marcus’ army was destroyed when Marcus has crossed the Euphrates to fight the Parths. Marcus died during this expedition too.
So you have something like that:
Do you think that it was useful to Marcus Crassus…to know that he would die with disgrace across the Euphrates after his son was killed and his (=Marcus’) army destroyed?