“Yet the oath of his own son and the evil deeds that it had wrought did injury to the design of the king, and he had less aid than should have been.”
Sed ius iurandum ipsius filii et scelera ex eo orta ita consilium regis laeserunt ut minus adiumenti comparandi acceperit.
I’m looking to determine whether “minus adiumenti comparandi acceperit” aptly translates the less-than-should comparison, and/or if there are alternative ways of expressing this idea (e.g.. how to do this with “quam”)?
Also, is “acceperit” (subj. perf.) the correct tense?
Perhaps “minus adiumenti quam debebatur acceperit”
I like the use of the ut subordination in the Latin sentence, but I see that in the English version it’s two independent clauses. If you weren’t trying to practice subordinating sentences in Latin, you could render it as “accepit minus adiumenti quam debebatur/merebatur”
Also, “he had less aide than should have been” is somewhat awkward in English. I think you need to add “given” or something at the end.
Actually, it never occurred to me there could be two independent clauses - the text goes on to describe the incidents that brought about the disaffection of the king’s allies, so, I always assumed it was a result clause. Nonetheless, I see your point.
Indeed, at times the text is awkward and archaic, but, that’s what attracted me to it in the first place. I often had to “translate” certain parts into contemporary English before I really grasped their meaning.
Maximas vobis, Thesaure Qimmikque, ambobus ob adiumentum ac praesertim exempla aptissima vestra.
ac praesertim exempla aptissima vestra.