In spite of Page I wonder whether it is best described as a dative of reference. Allen and Greenough describe the ethical dative as “a faded variety of the Dative of Reference.” I can’t get too worked up about exactly what sort of dative it is as the uses do merge and distinctions are not always easy to explain. Gildersleeve says that “its use is confined to the personal pronouns” (351). If you have Woodcock it’s worth reading what he says on p. 47 (“it is hard to find two examples that can be translated alike”).
So literally we can understand something like : now (my) hoary/white beard was already falling at the cutting. How you translate that into readable English is another question.
Coleman’s Green and Yellow commentary doesn’t mention this so it’s either so obvious we are missing something or its too difficult to explain or just not worth worrying about. Probably the latter. He is more interested in the unusual candidior as opposed to canus and explaining the imperfect cadebat.
Thank you very much! Yes, the use explained at 378.2 seems to be pretty similar to the one here, and thanks for the Allen and Greenough Latin Grammar link too! I didn’t know about that online grammar
Unfortunately I haven’t got any commentaries, and due to the Covid situation, I don’t have acess to my college library. But anyway, I have a better understanding of the verse now!
As for the translation, I’m Portuguese and my English can only go so far, so I wouldn’t risk translating it into proper English
PS: But, venturing a translation into improper English, couldn’t we also understand something like: ‘after (my) beard fell whiter for me when I shaved it’ (‘for me when I shaved it’ being my English translation of ‘tondenti’)
A brave effort which would eclipse anything I could manage in Portuguese. I think these poems are very hard to translate and impossible to translate literally in any meaningful way. Almost everyone here departs from the latin. For example the Loeb prints “when my beard began to whiten as it fell beneath the scissors”.
If you are returning to classics after a long break I think these poems are not an easy (re) introduction, especially without a commentary. Dickinson College also has an online commentary for Ovid Amores 1. which might prove a good alternative. But you must read what you enjoy! its easy enough to ask questions here and someone might be able to help.
This forum is certainly a blessing for those like me, who are trying to study by themselves, I will make sure to come here for help whenever necessary!
I found the Ovid commentary you mentioned, it does seems like a good alternative, and I will definitely try it (but now that I’m half-way through this first eclogue, I simply need to finish it )
My goal, at some point, is to switch to prose and read some of Cicero’s Orations, namely, Pro Archia. I remember studying it in college and trying to make sense of those long sentences. It made Marcel Proust look like Hemingway!
But, one step at the time, and I’ll see how far I can get!
PS: I absolutely agree with your statement on the fidelity of the translations. I suppose, in the end, the translator’s goal is to render the texts understandable for those who do not know Latin, otherwise it would be positively unreadable!
I am actually working on Virgil’s “Ecolgues” too! My method so far has been to do some background research, read a few translations and have a commentary by my side when it comes to a real translation.
Right now, I am just reading translations (the LOEB, David Ferry and C. Day Lewis). Once I have a mental grasp of these dense selections, I’ll start a real translation.
Tell me, what do you think of the first eclogue? It seems like a sad and beautiful moment in time. Melibeous laments the loss of his field and Tityrus celebrates the fact that he gets to keep his. There is a lot of humanity in the conversation. Despite being some thousands of years old, I can still get a sense of the lamentation. Looking forward to reading it a few more times, and really looking forward to translating!
Have there been any particular selections that have been enjoyable to translate?
As far as my ‘translation’ goes, maybe there’s a misunderstanding, I’m not actually going to publish any translation of the eclogue or anything like that.
I’m just reading it in the original (I have the ‘Belles Lettres’ edition) with a Latin dictionary next to me. I take notes on a notepad of every word I don’t know and then in the end I try to memorize them, in order to improve my vocabulary.
I haven’t really consulted any commentaries but, so far, I haven’t found that necessary (as far as this first eclogue goes) for a basic understanding of the text. Whenever I come across an insurmountable difficulty, I just ask about it here in the forum (usually it’s not something that prevents me from understanding what is being said, it’s just that I don’t understand it from a grammatical standpoint).
I’m really doing this from an amateur (in the etymological sense of the word) standpoint, as someone who loves Latin, so I’m not too worried about having a perfect understanding of every aspect of the text.
As far as my opinion on the Eclogue, well, like every single one of the Eclogues, it’s such a mysterious text!
Is Tityrus a ‘double’ of Vergil, or is Meliboeus his real ‘double’?
Is the text assuming a critical opinion against the expropriation of lands after the Civil War, or is it glorifying Augustus?
Is there actually, as you say, a lot of humanity in the text, or is there an implicit irony when Meliboeus tells Tityrus ‘Non equidem invideo, miror magis’, meaning that he’s surprised of how Tityrus can be sitting there playing music and enjoying himself, when there is such commotion all around him, people having to flee their land.
Does Tityrus actually invite Meliboeus to his house at the end when he says ‘Hic tamen hanc mecum poteras requiescere noctem’ or does the Imperfect Indicative ‘poteras’ mean that, alas, he cannot come to his house (‘you could have stayed at my house, but you cannot anymore, for you have to go’).
I can refer you to another thread on this forum, which you might find interesting
The description of the landscape by Vergil, namely the shadows mentioned in the end of the text, is very interesting too. I had a teacher in college who wrote an essay explaining how Vergil uses landscape as a literary resource to portray the characters psychology. Unfortunately the essay is written in Portuguese, but I can give you a link to it, if you like.
Then, there’s also the musicality of the text. That wonderful alliteration in ‘t’ in the beginning of the text (which I had not noticed myself, were it not for an endnote on the ‘Belles Lettres’ edition).
This alliteration imitates the sound of the ‘tenui avena’.
There are so many interesting and mysterious aspects of these texts, that you can keep reading and reading about them and there’s no end to the multiplicity of interpretations they produce.
But, for me personally, what interests me the most is the extraordinary concision of the Latin language.
How one can simply write in eleven words:
‘Libertas, quae sera tamen respexit inertem,
candidior postquam tondenti barba cadebat’
Something which, in every language that I know, would take at least 21 words or more to write.
I find this beautiful.
I like your comment about the landscape reflecting the characters. I’ll look more closely at that. And, to your point about irony, I am coming to see that Virgil’s “Eclogues” is definitely not some easy-going pastoral. There is a lot of bitterness, jealousy and name-calling! I find the first eclogue a good example of this.
If someone were to be told that it is a “pastoral poem”, one could easily just sweep by what is being said, for the landscape they are saying it in. It is actually quite a painful conversation!
I find it unique and multi-layered that Virgil would take the pastoral mode, and infuse it with anything except pastoral. There is a strangeness to it!