Hi there. I was wondering if someone could help me out with this sentence:
Exempla quoque ex historiis necessarium erat adiungi in quibus tam remuneratio obedientium quam poena transgressorum ante oculos ponerentur.
I’ve got the first part: Also, it was necessary that examples from history were added…
“It was also necessary for examples to be added from histories in which both the award of the obedient as well as the punishment of the transgressors would be set before eyes [i.e., set out for all to see].”
The construction “tam . . . quam” translates as “as much x as y” or “both x and y”. The final verb is probably in the subjunctive because it is a purpose clause, the purpose for which the examples were taken.
gratias tibi ago, vero omnes sunt magistri hic et sum discipulus.
Hi there, I was wondering why esset is subj. here, and the same for sit.
17 Et agnovi quod in his quoque esset afflictio spiritus, eo quod
18 in multa sapientia multus sit maeror;
et, qui addit scientiam, addit et laborem.
I believe that verbs of perception often take the subjunctive with verbs of perception/indirect speech in post-classical Latin. This is in place of the acc.+inf. construction you would expect. Notice here that you have a “quod” construction instead of acc.+inf. Esset is the past subjunctive because the writer is refering to something noticed previously. Sit is present subjunctive because it’s a general state of things. The second phrase relies on the “agnovi” in the first, thus, “[in] eo [agnovi] quod in multa sapientia multus sit maeror.” Classically this would probably be “eo agnovi in multa sapientia multum esse maerorem.” And in the previous sentence it would probably be “Et agnovi in his quoque esse afflictionem spiritus.”
Someone let me know if I’m wrong. I’m not entirely sure, as I haven’t covered the finer points of grammar as carefully as I’d like. I need to sit down and read a Latin grammar one of these days.
It all becomes so much clearer now! I have learned about the quod+subj construction before, it seems I need to revise thoroughly.
Hi there. This is not my translation, but someone else’s on a forum I go to, and I’m just asking some questions about their accuracy.
In h(onorem) d(omus) d(ivinae)/ deae sanctae Victoriae/ ob barbaros gentis Semnonum/ sive Iouthungorum die/ > VIII et VII kal(endarum) Maia(rum) > caesos /fugatosque a militibus prov(inciae)/ Raetiae sed et germanicianis/ itemque popularibus excussis/ multis milibus Italorum captivor(um)/ > compos votorum suorum> /[[M(arcus) Simplicinius Genialis v(ir) p(erfectissimus) a(gens) v(ices) p(raesidis)/ cum eodem exercitu]]/ libens merito posuit/ dedicata III idus Septemb(res) imp(eratore) d(omino) n(ostro)/ [[Postumo Au]]g(usto) et [[Honoratiano co(n)s(ulibus)]].
For the Honour of the holy house (of the emperor). For the holy goddess Victoria (this was made) because the barbarians of the tribe of the Semnones or the Iouthunges were defeated and made to flee > on the 24th or 25th of April > by the soldiers of the province Raetia and by the germaniciani (roman troop name probably meaning the german legions) and by the populares (roman troop name probably meaning local militia). Many thousand Italian captives were freed. Mighty of his vows, Marcus Simplicinius Genialis, the most perfect of men (vir perfectissimus, the title of a roman knight), acting instead of the preases (the senator in charge of the province), has with the same army done this happily and according to merit (laebens merito is a standard formula in roman inscriptions when thanking a deity for doing something). Dedicated on September 11th (in the year when) Imperator, our Master (and) Emperor Postumus and Honoratianus were consuls (260 AD).
Doing back of the napkin calculations, I got the VII/VII Kalends of May falling on the 23rd and 24th of April. Am I wrong here? Furthermore, who exactly is the votorum suorum referring to? This person translated it as mighty of his vows, I’m unsure how how this fits with the genitive plural.
A second question. I’m trying to translate the phrase Milk-Eyed Mender, as I understand it a mender with milky-eyes. AFAIK, there is no word in Latin for milky-eyes (and I want to retain the literal sense of the word, so I did not choose caecus), so I’d like some advice in constructing this word. For example one-eyed is unoculus (unus+oculus) so would milk-eyed be something like lacteculus (lacteus+oculus)?
Salve Nooj
Falsum est. “24th or 25th of April” verum est.
1 April = Kalendae Apriles
31 Mar = pridie Kalendas Apriles
30 Mar = dies tertius (III = die tertio) ante Kalendas Apriles
…
26 Mar = dies septimus (VII = die septimo) ante Kalendas Apriles
Vide http://discourse.textkit.com/t/latin-date-check/8283/1
oculus glaucus = “an over white eye” (secundùm Robert Ainsworth in suo Thesauro Linguae Latinae Compendiario (1808)