a living being, an
animal
bird (2 words)
cattle, sheep
dog
field
flower, bloom
flying
forest, grove
fruit, crops;
enjoyment, delight
grain
grove, forest
grow, increase
horn
horse
inhabit, cultivate
ox; gen. pl. boum
ploughed land,
field
tree
vine, wine
wild animal
wild, fierce
yoke; ridge, chain of hills
Label the images;
more than one word can be used with most pictures.
Schola Rōmāna I
Exercise [1]
Notes: Notes: Schola Rōmāna I
In the sentence Schola
Rōmāna iānuam nōn habet, what is the subject? Are the words schola
and iānuam in this sentence used in the same way? How is iānuam used?
In the English
sentence, He strikes the ball, ball is said to receive the action
of the verb strikes. In the same way in the sentence He has the ball
or He admires the ball, we say that ball receives the action of
the verbs has and admires. In all of these sentences he is
the subject of the verb and ball is the direct object,
often simply called the object of the verb.
When we see an
expression like he strikes or he praises, we think at once what
does he strike? or whom does he praise? Such verbs, which
need a direct object to make the sentence complete are called transitive verbs.
But not all verbs are transitive. Sentences like he smiles or I agree
are complete without a direct object. Such verbs are called intransitive
verbs.
In the Latin
sentence quoted above Schola Rōmāna iānuam nōn habet, the word iānuam
is the direct object of habet. Find other direct objects in the story.
What endings does each of these words have? Does each represent one thing or
more than one?
The word that
receives the action of a transitive verb is called the direct object of the
verb and is in the Accusative Case. Notice that the ending of the Accusative
singular is -am
Schola Rōmāna II
Exercise [2]
Notes: Schola
Rōmāna II
In the sentence Scholae
magistram et puellās dēlectant, how is the word magistram being
used? In what case and number is it? How is the word puellās being used?
If both magistram and puellās are used as direct objects, in what
case are they? Why are the endings different? Find other words being used as
plural direct objects. What ending do they have? The ending of the Accusative
Plural is -ās
Accusative Singular:
puellam
Accusative Plural:
puellās
Unit 02; Grammar
Exercise
Supply the proper
case endings:
[First Declension, Accusative Case]
Schola est schola Rōmāna. Parva est schola Rōmāna sed magna
est schola Americāna. Schola Romana iānuam nōn habet quod schola est aperta.
Antīqua schola fenestram nōn habet quod schola nōn est tēcta. Antīqua schola
mēnsam nōn habet. Schola Americāna mēnsam magnam habet. Schola antīqua magistram
Americānam dēlectat. Schola Rōmāna Iūliam et Corneliam dēlectat. Cūr schola
antīqua magistram Americānam dēlectat? Schola antīqua magistram Americānam
dēlectat quod schola est aperta.
Scholae magistram et puellās dēlectant. Antīqua schola
Rōmāna est. Nova schola Americāna est. Schola antīqua longās sellās habet.
Schola nova parvās sellās habet. Schola Rōmāna neque iānuam neque fenestram
habet. Schola Americāna et iānuās et fenestrās habet. Antīquae scholae sunt
apertae; sed novae scholae sunt tēctae. Schola Rōmāna puellās Americānās
dēlectat quod puellae Americānae scholās apertās amant.
amat: he/she/it loves; likes
amant: they love; like
antīqua: old; ancient
cūr: why
dēlectat: he/she/it delights; pleases
dēlectant: they delight; please
et...et: both...and
habet: he/she/it has
habent: they have
longa: long
neque: and … not; nor; neither
neque...neque: neither...nor
nova: new; fresh; recent; modern
quod: because
Rōmāna: Roman
tēcta: enclosed; covered
So far, we have looked at the ablative absolute with the perfect passive participle expressing ‘after / when / since something was / has been / had been done’. However, the ablative absolute can also be used with the present active participle which conveys two actions happening at the same time. The literal translation is with X ¦ Y-ing but, as before, there are more fluent alternatives.
[i] Begin with the nominative singular:
[1] boy [2] sleeping
> [1] puer [2] dormiēns i.e. the present active
participle from the verb dormiō, -īre: sleep
[ii] Transfer both words into the ablative case:
> [1] puerō [2] dormiente = ablative
absolute = literally: with X ¦ Y-ing = with the boy sleeping = while (since)
the boy is / was sleeping
[i] Puerō dormiente, ¦ [ii] servus pecūniam
abstulit. │ [i] With the boy sleeping / while (since) the boy was sleeping ¦ [ii]
the slave stole the money.
The participle ends in -e rather than -ī in the ablative singular.
[i] Begin with the nominative singular:
[1] boys [2] sleeping
> [1] puerī [2] dormientēs i.e. the present active
participle from the verb dormiō, -īre: sleep
[ii] Transfer both words into the ablative case:
> [1] puerīs [2] dormientibus = ablative
absolute = literally: with X ¦ Y-ing = with the boy sleeping = while (since)
the boy is / was sleeping
[ii] Puerīs dormientibus ¦ [ii] servus
pecūniam abstulit. │ [i] With the boys sleeping / while (since) the boys were sleeping
¦ [ii] the slave stole the money.
Again, tense
sequence will come into play in translation:
[i] Dominō
dormiente ¦ [ii] servī effugiunt │ [i] With the master sleeping /
while (since) the master is sleeping, [ii] the slaves escape.
[i] Dominō
dormiente ¦ [ii] servī effūgērunt│ [i] With the master sleeping / while (since) the master was
sleeping, [ii] the slaves escaped.
Examples giving different possible translations; note the
tense sequences in the translations in the last three examples.
The absolute construction + perfect passive participle refers to an action which took place before the action of the main verb . Regardless of the tense of the main verb in Latin, the absolute construction will always be the same. This, however, is not the case when translating the phrase into English since English sequences the tenses. This is not obvious if the basic “with X having been Y-ed” construction is maintained, but it will be obvious if a relative clause is used.
> With the city having been captured, the enemy destroyed
the temples.
> After the city had been captured, the enemy destroyed
the temples.
> With the words of the poet having been heard, the boys were
happy.
> After the words of the poet had been heard, the
boys were happy.
But the translation of the ablative absolute may not be the
equivalent of an English past perfect tense i.e. had:
> With the book having been written for the people, the
nobles praise the author.
> Since the book was / has been written for the
people, the nobles praise the author.
With that farmer’s loot having been found, you will
have the fields.
> Because that farmer’s loot was / has been found,
you will have the fields.
> Somebody will lead us to the altar with help
from the gods having been asked for.
> Somebody will lead us to the altar of the
temple, because help from the gods was / has been asked for.
> With the task having been done, we are now at
home.
> Since the task was / has been done, we are now at home.
[1] (After) having read the letter [2] she was very
touched.
[1] can only refer to [2] i.e. the subject of the
sentence.
Now look at a similar sentence in Latin:
[1] Litterīs acceptīs ¦ [2] imperātor valdē
īrātus est.
= [1] with the letter having been received, [2] the general
got really angry
= [1] after / when / since the letter had been received,
[2] the general got really angry
There is no grammatical connection between [1] and
[2]; there is no implication that it was the general who received it. Context,
however, may allow such a translation. In the first two examples below (both
quoted in Dickinson), the ablative absolute is obviously referring to Caesar
even though that is not directly stated:
Caesar, acceptīs litterīs, nūntium mittit (Caesar) │ Having
received the letter [literally: with the letter having been received],
Cæsar sends a messenger.
Quibus rēbus cōgnitīs Caesar apud mīlitēs cōntiōnātur
(Caesar) │ Having learned this [literally: with these thing having been
learned], Cæsar makes a speech to the soldiers.
Look, however, at the following examples:
Urbe dēlētā, cīvēs fūgērunt.
**Having destroyed the city** the citizens fled.” It is
highly unlikely that the citizens destroyed their own city! Therefore, the
original translation of the ablative absolute – with no connection to the
subject – would be the appropriate one:
Equō vēnditō agricola domum
rediit.
This is a good example where it is down to context:
[1] Either: After / when / since the horse had been sold,
the farmer returned home. / The horse had been sold and the farmer returned
home.
[2] Or: Having sold the horse, the farmer returned home.
In general, when translating the ablative absolute –
especially when you are still getting to grips with it – it is better to stick
with [1] because [1] is always correct whereas [2] could be a misinterpretation
of the Latin.
[IV] SLAYING THE LERNEAN HYDRA
Deinde Herculēs ab
Eurystheō iussus est Hydram occīdere. Itaque cum amicō Iōlāō contendit ad palūdem Lernaeam ubi
Hydra incolēbat. Hoc autem mōnstrum erat serpēns ingēns quae novem capita
habēbat. Mox is mōnstrum repperit et summō cum perīculō collum eius
sinistrā manū rapuit et tenuit. Tum dextrā manū capita novem abscidere incēpit,
sed frustra labōrābat, quod quotiēns hoc fēcerat totiēns alia
nova capita vidēbat. Quod ubi vidit, statuit capita ignī cremāre.
Hōc modō octō capita delēvit, sed extrēmum caput vulnerārī nōn potuit,
quod erat immortāle. Itaque illud sub ingentī saxō Herculēs posuit et ita
victōriam reportāvit.
[1] Iōlaō, abl. of
Iolaus, the hero's best friend.
[2] palūs, palūdis
[3/f]: marsh; swamp
[3] reperiō, -īre,
repperī, repertus [4]: find (out); discover
[4] … quotiēns hoc fēcerat totiēns alia nova capita vidēbat.
… however often
/ however many times
(whenever) he did that, just as often he would see other new heads.
[5] … quotiēns hoc
fēcerat totiēns alia nova capita vidēbat. Quod ubi vidit, … │ …
however many times he did that, just as often he would see other new heads. And
when he saw that, ….
Refer to the
previous post on connecting relatives; quod is not related to a specific
person or thing in the previous sentence but to the action described
i.e. the continual regrowth of the heads.
[6] extrēmum caput
vulnerārī nōn potuit │ the furthest head could not be injured
vulnerarī: passive infinitive
[1] literal translation
Tē īnspicit oblīquīs oculīs et sollicitātur. │ He observes / looks upon you with sidelong
eyes and is made anxious / disturbed
inspiciō, -ere, inspēxī [3-iō]: examine, inspect,
consider
obliquus, -a, -um: sidelong; slanting i.e. the dog is not looking directly, but with uncertainty or suspicion out the corner of his eye
Omnibus ipse placet, iūdicat ille simul. │ Everybody likes him [literally: he himself is pleasing to everyone], at the same time, he judges / passes
judgement
ipse [m], ipsa [f], ipsum [n]: himself, herself, itself
simul: at the same time; Engl. simultaneously
[2] less literal but I’ve tried to keep as close as possible
to the original meaning and mood:
Observing you with eyes askance and
Anxious look he’s liked
By all - and all by him are meanwhile
Judged.
[1]
["In parte flūminis Tamesae ubi fīnēs Cassivellaunī
erant ūnum tantum vadum erat. Quō cum Caesar adventāvit, cōpiās hostium ad
alteram rīpam flūminis collocātās spectāvit. "]
The following statements are false. Correct them.
[i] None of the territory of the Cassivellauni was by the
river.
[ii] The river had several shallow parts.
[iii] Caesar observed the enemy on the same side.
[2]
["Rīpa
autem sudibus acūtīs firmāta erat; et Britannī multās sudēs sub aquā quoque
occultāverant. Sed Caesar hostibus instāre nōn dubitāvit. Aqua flūminis
profunda erat, et mīlitēs capite solum ex aquā exstābant; "]
Complete each statement
with a single word or short phrase:
[i] The river was
defended by __________ which were __________ under the water.
[ii] Caesar did
not hesitate to __________.
[iii] Because the
water was __________ only the __________ of the Romans were visible.
[3]
["sed
Rōmānī sē aquae fortiter mandāvērunt, et Britannōs in fugam dedērunt.
"]
[i] How did the
Romans deal with the depth of the water? (2)
[ii] What happened
to the Britons? (1)
[4]
["'Oppidum'
Cassivellaunī nōn longē aberat, inter silvās palūdēsque situm, quō Britannī
magnum numerum hominum, equōrum, ovium, boum, congregāverant. Locum ēgregiē et
natūrā et opere firmātum Caesar ex duābus partibus oppugnāre properāvit:
oppidum expugnāvit et dēfensōrēs fugāvit."]
[i] Where was the town
of the Cassivellauni? (3)
[ii] What had the
Britons gathered there? (5)
[iii] Why was the
place very well defended? (2)
[iv] Describe Caesar’s attack and the outcome. (3)
"In parte flūminis Tamesae ubi fīnēs Cassivellaunī erant ūnum tantum vadum erat. Quō cum Caesar adventāvit, cōpiās hostium ad alteram rīpam flūminis collocātās spectāvit. Rīpa autem sudibus acūtīs firmāta erat; et Britannī multās sudēs sub aquā quoque occultāverant. Sed Caesar hostibus instāre nōn dubitāvit. Aqua flūminis profunda erat, et mīlitēs capite solum ex aquā exstābant; sed Rōmānī sē aquae fortiter mandāvērunt, et Britannōs in fugam dedērunt. 'Oppidum' Cassivellaunī nōn longē aberat, inter silvās palūdēsque situm, quō Britannī magnum numerum hominum, equōrum, ovium, boum, congregāverant. Locum ēgregiē et natūrā et opere firmātum Caesar ex duābus partibus oppugnāre properāvit: oppidum expugnāvit et dēfensōrēs fugāvit."
Vocabulary
sudis, -is [3/f]:
stake; log
īnstō, -āre, īnstitī
[1]: pursue
palūs, palūdis
[3/f]: marsh; swamp
Note
Quō: can be a question word or a conjunction
meaning ‘to / in which place’:
…, inter silvās palūdēsque
situm, quō Britannī magnum numerum hominum … congregāverant │ … situated
between the forest and marshes, in which place (where) the Britons had
gathered together a large number of men …
However, it can
also refer to the previous sentence:
Quō cum Caesar adventāvit …│ And when Caesar
arrived at that place / there …
[i] Vocabulary
review: match the Latin and English
acūtus, -a, -um
alter, -a, -um
bōs, bovis [3 m/f]
collocō, -āre,
-āvī, -ātus [1]
congregō, -āre,
-āvī, -ātus [1]
dubitō, -āre,
-āvī, -ātus [1]
ēgregiē
expugnō, -āre,
-āvī, -ātus [1]
exstō, -āre [1]
firmō, -āre, -āvī,
-ātus [1]
mandō, -āre, -āvī,
-ātus [1]
profundus, -a, -um
rīpa, -ae [1/f]
situs, -a, -um
tantum
vadum, -ī [2/n]
bank (of a river);
commit; deep; excellently; gather; head of cattle (e.g. cow, bull, ox); hesitate
/ doubt; only; place; shallow water; sharp; situated / positioned; stand out; strengthen;
fortified; take by storm; the other (of two)
[ii] Find the
Latin
[1] he observed
the troops positioned on the other side
[2] the bank had
been fortified ¦ by sharp stakes
[3] the Romans had
committed themselves to the water
[4] a large number
… of cattle
[5] the place, … naturally
… defended …
[6] from two sides (directions)
[1] Match the English with the Latin in the wordcloud
air
ashes, embers
blaze, glow; be
eager
breeze
fire
flame, fire
from or of heaven
light of day
moon
pure upper air,
ether, heaven, sky
sky, heavens
space
star
star,
constellation (2 words)
sun
torch
wind
[2] Label the images; more than one word can be used with each picture.
Exercise [1]
Quid est? │ What
is this?
Exercise [2]
Quis est? │ Who is
this?
Exercise [3]
Quālis? │ of what
kind?; used when an adjective or some form of description is needed in the
answer
Notes: Schola
Americāna I
A noun which is
used as the subject of a verb (the person / thing performing the action)
is said to be in the Nominative Case. The nouns in the story above, when
used as the subject of a verb, end in -a.
The words which
describe nouns are adjectives. These adjectives, like the nouns, end in -a
and are in the Nominative Case. They are said to agree with the nouns
which they describe.
The verb est is
often used to connect the subject with a noun or adjective, as in fēmina est
magistra (the woman is a teacher) or sella est parva (the
chair is small). Such a noun or adjective is also in the Nominative Case
and is called the predicate nominative or predicate
adjective.
Nouns that refer
to one person or thing are singular in number. The
ending of the Nominative Singular is -a. Nouns that end in -a
in the Nominative Singular are in a group call the first declension.
There are nouns with other endings in the Nominative Singular, but we will
cover them later.
Quid? and Quis? are also used as
subjects and therefore are in the Nominative Case.
There is no Latin
word for a, an (the indefinite article) or the (definite article).
Therefore fēmina means woman, the woman, or a woman. Use whichever
article works best for your translation.
Schola Amēricana
II
Exercise [4]
Quālēs? What kind
of (when referring to something or someone in the plural)
Notes: Schola
Americāna II
In the sentences
(1) Iūlia est discipula and (2) Puellae Amēricanae sunt discipulae,
‘Iūlia’ and ‘Puellae’ are the subjects, and are in the Nominative Case.
Nouns that refer
to one person or thing are singular in number.
Nouns that refer
to more than one person or thing are plural in number.
The ending of the
Nominative singular for the 1st Declension is -a
The ending of the
Nominative Plural for the 1st Declension is -ae
The verb ends in -t
if the subject is singular:
Magistra stat
│the teacher stands / is standing
The verb ends in -nt if the subject is plural:
Discipulae stant
│the pupils stand / are standing
Unit 01: Grammar
Exercise
[First Declension, Nominative Case]
Schola
Americāna I
Schola est schola
Americāna. Schola est magna. Iānua est clausa. Fenestra nōn est clausa.
Fenestra est aperta. Mēnsa est magna. Sella nōn est magna. Sella est parva.
Fēmina est
Americāna. Fēmina est magistra. Magistra stat. Puella est Americāna. Puella
magistra nōn est. Puella est discipula. Puella quoque stat. Puella est Iūlia.
Iūlia discipula bona est. Cornēlia est discipula. Cornēlia quoque discipula
bona est.
Sella nōn est
magna. Sella est parva. Mēnsā nōn est parva. Mēnsa est magna. Fenestra clausa
nōn est. Fenestra aperta est. Iānua nōn est aperta. Iānua est clausa.
Schola
Americāna II
Iūlia est
discipula. Cornēlia est discipula. Discipulae sunt Cornēlia et Iūlia. Puellae
Americānae sunt discipulae. Discipulae bonae sunt. Discipulae stant. Magistra
quoque stat. Scholae Americānae sunt magnae. Fenestra magnae sunt et iānuae
parvae sunt. Iānuae sunt clausae sed fenestrae sunt apertae.
Americāna:
American
aperta: open
bona: good
clausa: closed
Cornelia: Cornelia
discipula:
(female) student
est: he/she/it is;
sunt: they are
et: and
femina: woman
fenestra: window
ianua: door
Iulia: Julia
magistra: (female)
teacher
magna: big; large;
great
mensa: table
non: not
parva: small:
little
puella: girl
quoque: also
schola: school
sed: but
sella: seat: chair:
bench
stat: he/she/it
stands; stant: they stand
These examples show the way in which the ablative absolute phrase can be extended by the use of adjectives or demonstratives modifying the noun, or by phrases indicating, for example, where the action took place or when it took place or by whom it was done example:
cēterīs urbis captīs │ since the remaining cities
have been captured
pecūniā in
hortō inventā│when the money had been found in the garden
Urbe ab
hostibus captā, Rōmānī discessērunt. │ with the city having been captured by
the enemy, the Romans departed
Translate into English:
____________________
Translate into English, and take note of question [9] i.e. a deponent verb and so the ablative absolute is not expressed by a passive but active i.e. “having done (something)”
____________________
Other translations are possible, but the key point is to
convey that one action took place before the other.
[III] HERCULES
BECOMES SUBJECT TO EURYSTHEUS; HE STRANGLES THE NEMEAN LION
Itaque Herculēs Pȳthiae tōtam rem dēmōnstrāvit
nec scelus suum abdidit. Ubi iam Herculēs
finem fēcit, Pȳthia iussit eum ad urbem Tiryntha discēdere
et ibi rēgī Eurystheō sēsē committere. Quae ubi audīvit,
Herculēs ad illam urbem statim contendit et Eurystheō sē in servitūtem trādidit
et dīxit, "Quid prīmum, Ō rēx, mē facere iubēs?"
Eurystheus, quī
perterrēbātur vī et corpore ingentī Herculis et eum occīdī studēbat,
ita respondit: "Audī, Herculēs! Multa mira nārrantur dē leōne saevissimō
quī hōc tempore in valle Nemaeā omnia vāstat. Iubeō tē, virōrum omnium
fortissimum, illō mōnstrō hominēs līberāre." Haec verba Herculī
maximē placuērunt. "Properābō," inquit, "et pārēbō
imperiō tuō." Tum in silvās in quibus leō habitabat statim iter
fēcit. Mox feram vidit et plūris impetūs fēcit; frūstrā tamen, quod neque
sagittīs neque ūllō aliō tēlō mōnstrum vulnerāre potuit. Dēnique
Herculēs saevum leōnem suis ingentibus bracchiīs rapuit et faucīs eius omnibus
vīribus compressit. Hōc modō brevī tempore eum interfēcit. Tum corpus leōnis ad
oppidum in umerīs reportāvit et pellem posteā prō veste gerebat.
Omnēs autem quī eam regiōnem incolēbant, ubi fāmam dē morte leōnis ingentis
accēpērunt, erant laetissimī et Herculem laudābant verbīs amplissimīs.
[1] Tyrins; this
is an example of a Greek-type noun; some of these nouns have case endings that
are originally from Greek or the Greek ending is an alternative to the Latin:
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Tiryns
Notes on
Greek-type nouns:
https://adckl.blogspot.com/2024/06/080824-level-2-practice-in-reading.html
https://www.facebook.com/groups/latinforstarters/posts/473759851901955/
[2] Eurystheus was
king of Tiryns, a Grecian city, whose foundation goes back to
prehistoric times.
[3] Quae ubi
audīvit │ and when he heard these things
When we see forms
of quī, quae and quod, the immediate translation which
comes to mind is ‘who’ or ‘which’; in grammar this is known as a relative
pronoun as it is referring back to a person / thing in the same sentence (the
antecedent) i.e. they introduce a relative clause.
Tum in [i] silvās
[antecedent] ¦ [ii] in quibus leō habitabat [relative clause] ¦ statim
iter fēcit. │ Then he immediately travelled into the [i] forests ¦ [ii] in which
the lion lived.
[i] Omnēs [antecedent]
¦ [ii] quī eam regiōnem incolēbant [relative clause] ¦ erant laetissimī
│[i] Everyone ¦ [ii] who inhabited that region ¦ was very happy.
However, the
relative pronouns quī etc. can also start a sentence referring to
[a] a specific person or thing in the previous sentence or [b] the
entire idea of the previous sentence.
The relative pronoun, therefore, is making a connection with the preceding sentence which is why, in grammar, it is known as a connecting relative.
In this position
it is not translated as “who” or “which” but by a pronoun or demonstrative that
refers to the antecedent.
(a)
[i] Caesar
Rubicōnem trānsiit. [ii] Quī posterā diē adversus Rōmam profectus est. │
[i] Caesar crossed the Rubicon. On the next day [ii] he set out
towards Rome.
It is common in
translation to connect the two sentences with ‘and’:
Caesar crossed the
Rubicon, and he set out towards Rome on the next day.
[i] Ancilla
tandem advēnit. [ii] Quam ubi vīdī, laetissimus eram │ [i] The slave
girl arrived. When I saw [ii] her, I was very happy, or The slave
girl arrived, and when I saw her, I was very happy.
[i] Ille servus
effugit. [ii] Quem posteā captum graviter pūnīvī. │ [i] That slave escaped,
and afterwards, when he had been caught [ii] I punished him severely.
(b)
In the following
examples, the connecting relative does not refer to a specific noun, but to the
entire statement made in the preceding sentence:
[i] Canis equum
adiūvit. [ii] Quod ubi vīdimus, mīrātī sumus │ The dog helped the
horse. When we saw that, we were amazed, i.e. the connecting relative is
not referring to the dog or to the horse, but to the whole event.
Similarly:
[i] Mīlitēs
nostrī omnēs effūgērunt. [ii] Quod ubi vīdimus, laetissimī erāmus. │
[i] All our soldiers escaped. [ii] When we saw that, we were very
happy.
Note in the next
example the inclusion of verbīs to indicate that the connecting relative
is referring to something that was heard.
[i] Victōria
tandem Rōmae relāta est. [ii] Quibus verbīs audītīs omnēs
gāvīsī sumus. │ [i] The victory was finally reported in Rome, [ii] and with
these words having been heard [= and when these words had
been heard, we all rejoiced.
In the text we are
dealing with (b) i.e. the connecting relative referring to the whole preceding
sentence.
Pȳthia iussit eum ad urbem Tiryntha discēdere
et ibi rēgī Eurystheō sēsē committere. │ Pythia commanded him to depart to the
city of Tiryns and there commit / entrust himself to Eurystheus.
> Quae ubi audīvit, Herculēs ad illam urbem
statim contendit │ and when he heard these things Hercules
immediately hurried to that city.
[4] eum occīdī studēbat
│ was eager for him to be killed
occīdī: present
passive infinitive
https://adckl.blogspot.com/2024/10/110125-level-2-passive-voice-19-present.html
[5] illō
mōnstrō hominēs līberāre │ to free people from that monster; the ablative
of separation
neque ūllō aliō
tēlō mōnstrum vulnerāre potuit │ nor was he able to wound the monster with any
other weapon
[6] ūllus, -a, -um: any
[7] alius, -a, -ud: other
[8] prō: instead
of
This is the account to which below refers: the riot and bloodshed at the amphitheatre of Pompeii (AD59) reported by the Roman historian Tacitus. When dealing with an original Latin text, word order will become a major player, and so I have broken it up into clauses and phrases and then matched them with the English translation.
(1)
[1] Sub idem tempus ¦ [2] levī initiō ¦ [3] atrōx caedēs
orta ¦ [3] inter colōnōs Nucerīnōs Pompēiānōsque ¦ [4] gladiātōriō spectāculō ¦
[5] quod Livinēius Rēgulus, ¦ [6] quem mōtum senātū rettulī,
¦ edēbat.
[1] At about the same time ¦ [2] from a trivial beginning ¦
[3] arose terrible carnage / bloodshed ¦ [4] between the inhabitants of
Nucernia and Pompeii ¦ [4] at a gladiatorial show ¦ [5] which Livineius
Regulus ¦ [6] whom, as I have related, had been expelled from the
Senate ¦ was staging.
caedēs, -is [3/f]: slaughter; massacre; carnage; some
translations of atrōx caedēs are less dramatic e.g. “serious
affray” and “serious trouble”, but caedēs is stronger than
that, suggesting bloodshed and killing i.e. it wasn’t just a spot of
"trouble" because it reached the Senate and Tacitus wrote about it.
ēdō (with long /ē/), -ere, ēdidī [3]: give out; produce;
publish (from which there are the English derivatives editor and edition);
here it is referring to games organised, and presumably financed, by Livineius;
Note: edō (with short /e/), -ere, ēdī [3]: eat
īdem [m], eadem [f], idem [n]: the same
levis, -e: light, trivial, trifling
mōtus, -a, -um: (literally) moved; mōtum senatū:
expelled from the Senate
ortus, -a, -um: having arisen
referō, referre, retulī: (here) report; relate
(2) This section starts, in a sense, no differently from a
football match nowadays where the rival fans are shouting at each other, but it
soon turns nasty …
[1] quippe oppidānā lascīviā ¦ [2] in vicem incessentēs
probra, ¦ [3] dein saxa, ¦ [4] postrēmō ferrum sūmpsēre,
¦ [5] validiōre Pompēiānōrum plēbe, ¦ [6] apud quōs spectāculum edēbātur.
[1] For with unruliness typical of townsfolk ¦ [2] hurling
abuse in turns / at each other ¦ [3] they then took up stones ¦
[4] and finally weapons ¦ [5] with the people of Pompeii being / proving to be
the stronger [i.e. the Pompeians had the upper hand] ¦ [6] where (literally:
among whom / in whose presence) the show was being staged
ferrum, -ī [2/n]: iron, but can refer to any metal tool
including a weapon or a sword
incessō, -ere, incessīvī [3]: assault; attack; abuse
invicem or in vicem: in turns; alternately
lascivia, -ae [1/f]: can be positive i.e. playfulness, or
negative: wantonness; Tacitus writes that the incident grew from a trivial beginning
(levī intiō) and so, possibly, what simply began as light-hearted
“pot-shots” got out of hand
probrum, -ī [2/n]: insult; abuse
quippe: used to introduce an explanation or cause i.e. for,
indeed, in fact
sūmpsēre = sūmpsērunt: they took (up) < sūmō, -ere,
sūmpsī [3]: take
validus, -a, -um: strong; comparative: validior, -ius:
stronger
(3)
[1] ergō ¦ [3] dēportātī sunt in urbem ¦ (2) multī ē
Nucerīnīs ¦ [4] truncō per vulnera corpore, [5] ac plērīque līberōrum aut
parentum mortīs dēflēbant.
[1] Therefore, ¦ (2) many of the Nucerians ¦ [3] were
carried to the city ¦ [4] their bodies maimed through wounds ¦ [5] and most of
them were lamenting the deaths of parents or children.
dēfleō, -ēre, dēflēvō [2]: weep / cry over; lament
dēportō, -āre, -āvī [1]: (here) convey; carry
truncus, -a, -um: mutilated; maimed
(4)
[2] cuius reī iūdicium ¦ [1] prīnceps ¦ [3]
senātuī, ¦ [4] senātus cōnsulibus permīsit. [5] et rūrsus rē ad
patrēs relātā, [6] prohibitī ¦ [8] pūblicē in decem annōs ¦
[7] eius modī coetū ¦ Pompēiānī ¦ [9] collēgiaque
¦ [10] quae contrā lēgēs īnstituerant ¦ dissolūta;
[1] The emperor delegated ¦ [2] judgement
of this matter ¦ [3] to the Senate, (and) ¦ [4] the Senate to the consuls. [5]
And the matter having again been referred back to the Senators, ¦ [6] the
inhabitants of Pompeii were barred ¦ [7] from a gathering of this type
¦ [8] in public for ten years, ¦ [9] and associations ¦ [10]
which they had formed against the law ¦ were dissolved.
collēgium, -ī [2/n]: association; society
coetus, -ūs [4/m]: meeting; gathering; Pompēiānī … coetū … prohibitī (sunt)
│ The Pompeians were barred from (any) gathering
īnstituō, -ere, īnstituī [3]: establish; set up
patrēs: refers to patrēs concrīptī; literally:
conscript fathers, the term used to refer to members of the Senate
(rūrsus) relātus, -a, -um: (here) having been
referred back
(5)
[1] Livinēius et ¦ [2] quī aliī ¦ [3] sēditiōnem concīverant
¦ [4] exiliō multātī sunt.
[1] Livineius and ¦ [2] those others who ¦ [3] had provoked
the riot ¦ [4] were punished with exile.
concieō, -ēre, concīvī [2]: provoke
multō, -āre, -āvī [1]: punish
sēditiō, sēditiōnis [3/f]: rebellion; riot; uprising
When we read history books we are effectively reading about something that is over. At school that never really interested me (although it does now). What did interest me much later in life was a little letter in a modest frame in a quiet corridor in an English country house. The letter was in French, the writer simply talking about how she was spending her days, but, at one point (and I paraphrase) she mentioned that she didn’t know how the situation would end. I froze because I knew how it would end.
The letter was written by Mary Queen of Scots, now under
house arrest having been convicted of treason against Elizabeth I. The latter
was hesitant to authorise the execution since Mary was her cousin and a fellow
queen, and Elizabeth may also have feared the political consequences.
Nevertheless, Elizabeth I did eventually sign the death warrant, and Mary was
executed on February 8th, 1587, the headsman brutally inflicting two strokes of
the axe before she was finally decapitated.
As I read Mary’s letter, the history was “over” for me –
because I knew the outcome – but it wasn’t over for her, because she didn’t.
On the morning of her execution, Mary supposedly wrote
the following poem; the first line does exist in other religious works, but the
rest of the poem is only ascribed to Mary herself.
Ō Domine Deus! spērāvī in tē. │ Lord
God ! I have hoped in Thee.
Ō cāre mī Jēsū! nunc līberā
mē. │ My dear Jesus, now set me free.
In dūrā catēnā, in miserā poenā dēsīderō tē: │ In unyielding
chain, in wretched torment I long for Thee:
Languendō, gemendō, et genū flectendō,
│ In fainting, moaning, and bending at
the knee
Adōrō, implōrō, ut līberēs mē.
│ I adore, and implore that you might free me.
[i] Ō Domine Deus!; Ō cāre mī Jēsū!
Vocative case: addressing God and Jesus directly
Dominus > Domine; Iesus > Iesū; meus
> mi; cārus > cāre
[ii] languendum, gemendum, flectendum:
all examples of gerunds which describe the act of doing something
languendō, gemendō, et ¦ genū ¦ flectendō │ in (the
act of) fainting, moaning, and bending ¦ at the knee
[iii] implōrō, ¦ ut līberēs mē:
this is a subjunctive, used when you ask somebody to do something, the literal
translation being “I implore / pray ¦ that you might free
me
Image #1: Mary’s poem with a less literal translation than I’ve given above.
Image #2: copy of Mary’s death warrant, signed by Elizabeth I
Image #3: (left) Mary’s tomb at Westminster Abbey; (right) the
tomb of Elizabeth I, also at Westminster Abbey
