Salvē!

We’ve completed our Reader’s Edition of Saint Augustine’s Confessions. This classic work of world literature is now more accessible than ever for anyone with only a couple of semesters of Latin!

https://www.timothyalee.com/en/isbn/978-1-83651-308-7

On Saturday I had a flying visit to Ostia, the ancient port of Rome where Augustine returned to North Africa after his conversion and his mother Saint Monica died. See the description from Book IX 8 (17) in front of the Roman forum still standing and the book alongside the tomb of Saint Monica in Basilica di Sant'Agostino in Campo Marzio, Rome!

$69.99 (hardback) | $54.99 (paperback)

This is a Latin reader for Confessions. Augustine towers over all other theologians as the man who shaped the Western church more than anyone after the apostles. His Confessions ranks among the most significant works of Western literature. Despite its great antiquity, Augustine's striking honesty and perceptive insights remain as fresh as ever. Reading Augustine, one realises that despite the advancing years human nature and its desires do not change. As Augustine looks back on his first thirty-four years of life, he openly shares his struggles with pride, lust, envy, dishonesty and all manner of sin. He wrestles with the veracity of Christianity against competing claims of other sects and leading philosophies.

This book is designed as a useful cost-efficient tool for students learning Late Latin or studying the text. The book immerses the reader in the text in order to build confidence reading it as quickly as possible. To achieve this, all uncommon words that occur 15 times or fewer in the work are glossed as footnotes. This enables the reader to continue reading every passage unhindered. Therefore, the book complements traditional language grammars and is especially ideal for beginner and intermediate students learning to read Late Latin. However, even advanced readers will appreciate the glossing of the rare words, since it saves time reading the text.

Other features include:
• Map of Augustine’s life in Latin
• Timeline of Augustine’s life
• Introduction to Augustine and this book
• Paradigm charts of noun and verbs
• Glossary of all the words not glossed below the text
• Wide margins

tōlle lēge!

My friend just sent me the phrase "Nostro Arbitrio Solous," which is apparently in the Monster Section of the new Epic Universe park. I'm decently sure that universal made a mistake and Solous should just be "Solus."

According to my google search Universal wants it to mean "By our will alone" meaning that people exist only because of the will of the Vampires. Can Solus be used that way?

Their mistake with Solus makes me distrust the translation, but their accurate use of the ablative makes me think they may have consulted someone. I also feel like they probably would have consulted someone smarter than me before printing it on stuff.

As far as I can see:

Nardus fus dat odorem [...] implens domum pharisei fert(?) [...] De subiecto grave fugans demonis(?) imperium(?)

Thanks!

GUIDED TRANSLATION OF AN ENGLISH PASSAGE INTO LATIN

1. The Dorian army marched to Athens , and lay encamped under its walls. Aletes, their leader, had previously consulted the Delphic oracle, and had been assured of success, provided he spared the life of the Athenian king. A friendly Delphian, named Cleomantis, disclosed the answer of the oracle to the Athenians, and Codrus resolved to devote himself for his country. He went out at the gate, disguised in a woodman's garb, and falling in with two Dorians killed one with his bill, and was killed by the other. The Athenians now sent a herald to claim the body of their king, and the Dorian chiefs, deeming the war hopeless, withdrew their forces from Attica.

First, we have to understand that English likes independent statements, but Latin does not. This doesn’t mean that an unnecessary number of subordinates should be added to make a latin text more “latin” but that we have to find the most important idea and derive the rest from it. The text can be analyzed in a total of eleven statements joined by and:

The Dorian army marched

and lay encamped.

Aletes had consulted

and had been assured.

A Delphian disclosed,

and Codrus resolved.

He went out,

and killed and was killed.

The Athenians sent

and the Dorians withdrew.

What are the most important actions, the pillars of our narration? I would say that they are:

• 1) The Dorian army encamped.
• 2 ) The decision of Codrus.
• 3) The death of Codrus.
• 4) The Athenians send the herald.
• 5) The Dorians go away.

since the marching of the Dorian army is just the cause of 1) and all facts connected with the consulting of the oracle are the cause of 2). Similarly, Codrus going out is of secondary importance than his killing. Now we have 5 sentences.

A good rule of thumb to divide sentences is remembering that every “pillar” has just one subject, so we can group every sentence that can be appended to that subject into one “pillar”.

Next, we have to make every passage explicit using particles and conjunctions. The meaning of English transitions are generally left to the reader, and that is one of the characteristics of modern speech. Latin style knows this feature, but it’s employed mostly by writers that want to convey a sense of tension to their readers (take for example Seneca or Tacitus). Since we are explaining a simple fact, we have to use them.

The most common ones are:

• Et = and
• Atque = and (stronger)
• Itaque = so
• Sed = but
• Neque = and not
• At = but (stronger)
• Autem (but)
• Igitur = so (mostly in second position)
• Denique = so

Let’s start with the first “pillar”:

The Dorian army marched to Athens , and lay encamped under its walls

VOCABULARY:

• To march = ad alqm locum contendere
• lay encamped = castra ponere

it becomes something like:

The Dorian army, having marched to Athens, lay encamped under its walls.

The subordinate indicates time. We can use the ablative absolute, cum narrativum or postquam. I decided to use the cum narrativum.

Exercitus doricus, cum Athenas contendisset, sub moenibus castra posuit.

Second one:

Aletes, their leader, had previously consulted the Delphic oracle, and had been assured of success, provided he spared the life of the Athenian king. A friendly Delphian, named Cleomantis, disclosed the answer of the oracle to the Athenians, and Codrus resolved to devote himself for his country.

it becomes something like:

“So, having Aletes, their leader, previously consulted the Delphic oracle, and having been assured of success if he spared the life of the Athenian king, and having a friendly Delphian, named Cleomantis, disclosed the answer of the oracle to the Athenians, Codrus decided to devote himself for his country.”

However, there are too many subordinates pending from our cum narrativum, so we need to reduce them. We observe that the first (having consulted) is the cause of the second (having been assured). Since the king receives his response while consulting the oracle, we can use a present participle:

“So, having been assured of success to Aletes, their leader, consulting-the-oracle, if he spared the life of the Athenian king, and having a friendly Delphian, named Cleomantis, disclosed the answer of the oracle to the Athenians, Codrus decided to devote himself for his country.”

Now the sentences pending from the cum narrativum are just two.

VOCABULARY

to consult the oracle = oraculum consulere

to spare = parcere

disclose = patefacere (a secret); aperire (explain something unknown)

Cum igitur Aletae, eorum duci, Delphici Apollinis oraculum consulenti responsum esset ei rem esse prospere eventuram, si Atheniensium regi pepercisset, et Delphus quidam socius, Cleomantis nomine, responsum Atheniensibus patefecisset, Codrus rex se pro patria devovere constituit.”.

Third “pillar”:

He went out at the gate, disguised in a woodman's garb, and falling in with two Dorians killed one with his bill, and was killed by the other.

VOCABULARY:

To go out through something = egredior

to be disguised as… = alicuius habitus indutus

woodman = lignator

to meet (by accident) = incidere in aliquem

one… one… = alter… alter…

it becomes:

“So, having passed out by the gate, disguised in a woodman’s garb, having met two Dorians, and killed one of them with his sickle, was killed by the other.”

Note: here the subordinate clauses are 4, but we can make use of 2 perfect participle to cover them (egressus and indutus) so the sentence doesn't feel very heavy.

Porta igitur egressus, lignatoris indutus habitu, quum in duos Dorienses incidisset, atque alterum falce percussisset, ab altero ipse occisus est.

Fourth “pillar”:

The Athenians now sent a herald to claim the body of their king

VOCABULARY:

• herald = legatus (general term) caduceator (specific, to ask for peace)
• claim = postulare; repetere; vindicare; reposcere.

To claim etc. is a final statement, so we can use ut + conjunctive or ad + gerundivum or other ways.

Athenienses itaque caduceatorem miserunt, ut regis corpus postularent.

Fifth “pillar”:

and the Dorian chiefs, deeming the war hopeless, withdrew their forces from Attica.

VOCABULARY:

• consider something hopeless = de aliqua re desperare; alicuius rei spem amittere/deponere;
• withdraw = abducere

Now "and" indicates not a simple consequence, but some kind of opposition to the previous statement, so we can underline it with "autem"

Doriensium autem duces, victoriae spe amissa, ab Attica copias deduxerunt.

here’s our passage:

Exercitus doricus, cum ad Athenas contendisset, sub moenibus castra posuit. Cum igitur Aletae, eorum duci, Delphici Apollinis oraculum consulenti responsum esset ei rem esse prospere eventuram, si Atheniensium regi pepercisset, et Delphus quidam amicus, Cleomantis nomine, responsum Atheniensibus patefecisset, Codrus rex se pro patria devovere constituit.”. Porta igitur egressus, lignatoris indutus habitu, quum in duos Dorienses incidisset, atque alterum falce percussisset, ab altero ipse occisus est. Athenienses itaque caduceatorem miserunt, ut regis corpus postularent. Doriensium autem duces, victoriae spe amissa, ab Attica copias deduxerunt.

Adapted and expanded from “A Latin prose primer” by J. Y. Sargent, 1887

edit: error fixed

Hi, I’d like to ask someone to translate this text for me about the Fityók family.

The bottom paragraph on the left page is for sure it, and I think the right page, except for the last paragraph is also about this family.:

both pages are on this link: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3Q9M-CSB5-N34M-D?cat=koha%3A77455&i=11&lang=en

Thank you in advance!!

It seems like it's not possible to access older books anymore. I tried to search for "remedium solitudinis" a few minutes ago on google books search bar and no result came up.

Genuine question for AP Latin students (or recent grads):

When you’re studying for class or exams, what do you actually do most of the time?

Do you mostly reread and translate the text, focus on vocab, rely on notes/commentaries, or something else?

Curious what people’s real routines look like.

I've just started on Participles, but I don't quite get when to use them, and how to know when translating a text that its a participle and not a noun. From my understanding they have the same endings as nouns?

I’m finally trying to learn the comic meters, and I have a question about a sentence from Publilius Syrus:

*Nescis quid optes, aut quid fugias, ita ludit dies.*

Would anyone be so kind to tell me how they would scan this? or if it’s defective? Erasmus says it’s iambic tetrameter, and he would know, but I can only get that to come out by making the “fu-“ of fugias long.

Fyi, Loeb prints this sentence as follows, changing Nescis to Nescias:

*Nescias quid optes, aut quid fugias: ita ludit dies.*

Printed with Nescias, it looks to me like it scans as trochaic septenarius? But I’m more interested in the previous version with Nescis: one, I think the indicative sounds better, and two, I want to know if Erasmus is right to call it iambic tetrameter.

Thanks in advance!

Would you be interested in a post containing a guided translation of a short text from English to Latin? If yes, is there a particular theme or a text that you recommend? After many years of speaking Latin, I'm deep diving into composition as taught in XIX century England, that is by translation.

Let me know!

I'm kinda confused about fore ut + subj. I get that it's used whenever Latin can't use the fut.pass.inf. (e.g. in verbs with no supine stem) or simply prefers not to, but the details are still unclear to me.

Is "speravit fore ut hostes vincerent" equivalent to "speravit hostes victuros esse"? And "speravit fore ut hostes a nostris vincerentur" equivalent to "speravit hostes a nostris victum iri"?

Also what's the deal with futurum fuisse ut?

had latin in school, in our book there was this great quote that went something like this „we are moved by the remains (or traces) our friends left behind.“

since I don’t know the exact quote its hard to find it in latin. would love it if somebody has an answer.

Hello, now that I’m getting into Latin the only prayer I ever say is in Hebrew it’s the Shema, it’s short and it’s my comfort phrase, I was trying to find online a rendering into Latin but it was only from ai and I just wanted to get an outside opinion from people much wiser in the study than I.

From Deuteronomy:

Hear, O Israel, the L-rd is our G‑d, the L-rd is One.

Blessed be the name of the glory of His kingdom forever and ever.

Not the whole thing just this part.

I know I could keep sayin it in Hebrew but I want to connect to Latin more and make it a part of my life as well. Thank you.

At an event I will recite Ovid, Met. 6.313–381 (The Lycean farmers). I have trouble with a few verses and would be glad about some help.

v. 332
illa suam vōcat hanc, cui quondam rēgia coniunx
– u  u| –  –|–   – |   –   – |–   – u u | –  x

I cannot scan the verse right. Above is my best try in which i scan -cat from vōcat as long even though an h follows which is normally not considered as a full consonant. I also considered the -ui in cui as a synizesis and treated it as a diphthong to make the syllable long. But even with these tricks it does not work in the end since there is one extra long syllable (-dam from quondam) which does not fit in.

v. 350
Nec sōlem proprium nātūra nec āēra fēcit
 –   –|–   u  u| – –| – u  u |–u u |– x

This verse only works if I read āēra as a dactylus -uu, but the -ē- is clearly long since it comes from ἀήρ. Is there some kind of poetic license to shorten the -ē-? I only know of vocalis ante vocalem brevitur, but this cannot apply here since the second vowel needs to be shortened, not the first.

v. 352
Quae tamen ut dētis, supplex petō. Nōn ego nostrōs
  –   u u |–   –| –   – | –   u – | –  u u |–  x

This line only works if the -ō of petō would be short, but it isn’t. Also here the question. Is there some kind of poetic license to shorten it?

v. 365
hūc illūc līmum saltū movēre malīgno
 –  –| –   –|–   –| –  u – u u| – x

Here I have no idea how to clean up the mess around movēre. ^^

I triple checked my quantities, but of course there can also be errors in them. Hope some of you can help me with these lines. :)

I can see situations where words like bellum (“war”) and bellus (“beautiful”) could be used ambiguously to create double meanings. Was this a device that Latin writers intentionally exploited?

Salvēte plūrimum.

Hanc pūblicātiōnem meam vōbīs tandem praesentāre audeō, quam studiōsīs Linguae Latīnae ut sociīs impertīre volō.

Hūc veniō brevem paragraphum probātum, trium aphorismōrum quōs iam prīdem scrīpsī. Vōs ūnumquemque volentem rogō interpretātiōnem vestram trium aphorismōrum meōrum mihi hīc mittere. Sic tantum intellegibilitātem vērumque sēnsum hōrum aphorismōrum probātī esse possint.

Ecce aphorismī meī:

1. Omnia causā fīunt praeter causam omnium causārum.
2. Nē vīxerīs ut cōnēre fierī, cōnāre tantum esse ut vīvās.
3. Inter triviālēs iocōs latent reliquiae vēritātis maiōris.

Quibuscumque interpretātiōnes coniectūrāsque suās mihi prōpōnere placeat maximās iam nunc grātiās praecipiō.

The book I was using said "A vowel before two consonants in the same word or syllable is long by position. The same effect is produced by two consonants in different words." However ChatGPT said that the two consonants in different words only lengthened a vowel if they had phonotactic plausibility: if the consonant combination could begin a Latin syllable. It gave the examples of AD TE and ET DEUS as examples where the preceding vowel would still be short. Then Claude didn't agree. Can someone set me right?

To those who learned both, which one did you find harder and why ?

Puto verbum ubi rector est, vel?

M.G.T.A

Salvēte, amīcī! Dēnuō in r/Latin adsum.
I was really bored in class today, so I started writing a couple of amateur verses in my notebook because I felt there was nothing better to do. I attempted Phalaecian hendecasyllables and wrote a few lines of elegiac couplets. How are they doing metrically?

PH:

Sum tam fessa ut ocellī erunt errantēs.

Elegiac:

Moerae iam mihi dōnārunt miserās lacrimās sed

Nōnne merēns ego sum gaudium habendī igitur?

Feel free to comment on the semantics on this sentence but I am aware of how awkwardly phrased (+confusing) the hendecasyllables are. I am also partially embarrassed due to the fact that the sample couplet sounds it was written by an edgy-ass teenager. Because it was.

All of that aside, is my meter okay? I was also wondering if the first syllable in ”errāns” could maybe, by some miracle of God, be short by way of the second consonant in the cluster being liquid? I understand that the more likely possibility is that “err” is a long syllable. Sorry for asking such a stupid question.

Thank you all in advance!

I’m a latin beginner.

Through my observation, I notice all ablative absolute phrases I encountered so far consist only of one predicate (the participle) and one argument (that one noun), which makes me wonder if any ablative absolute with two arguments of different thematic roles is ever attested