I have been neglecting my Latin in the past two months - but am now rectifying matters - and what follows may merely be evidence that I am forgetting what I previously learned. I crave your indulgence.
This is from Orberg’s LLPSI.
Igitur Latini, cum quibus Tullo regnante foedus ictum erat, sustulerant animos, et cum incursionem in agrum Romanum fecissent, repetentibus res Romanis superbe responsum reddunt — otiosum Romanum regem inter fana et aras regnum acturum esse rati.
I’m trying to clear something up here about what I think is the ablative absolute phrase - repentibus res Romanis.
My translation of this is: Accordingly the Latini - with whom, during the reign of Tullius, there had been a treaty - intended on war [idiomatic translation on my part of sustulerant animos - or perhaps something like bore an animus or grudge?] and, having made an incursion into Roman territory [and here’s where it gets tricky], the Romans having sought redress arrogantly / defiantly replied - believing the restful Roman king to be about to rule between the temple and the altar [i.e. was interested in religion and not in war].
Two questions:
-
If repetentibus res Romanis is ablative absolute then res is accusative plural, right?
-
and if it is then then shouldn’t Orberg have put a comma between Romanis and superbe to indicate its separateness from the rest of the sentence.