Andria vs. 164 - 171

[Deleted member 13757]

Ok... I think the mystery is solved. As Pacis puella hinted, and my initial reaction of "punishment"

The complete protasis and apodosis look something similar to this (maybe not as colorful ):

SI. si sensero hodie quicquam in his te nuptiis
fallaciae conari quo fiant minus,
aut velle in <ea> re ostendi quam sis callidus,
verberibu' caesum te in pistrinum, Dave, dedam usque ad necem,
ea lege atque omine ut, si te inde exemerim, ego pro te molam.

si sensero...

if I learn that... you had anything to do with this... I'll f' you up so bad...

in pistrinum dare/mittere servum = send to the mills, so that the slave works there as an ass.

 

[limetrees]

Line 165-7
sin eveniat quod volo,
in Pamphilo ut nil sit morae, restat Chremes
cui mi expurgandus est: et spero confore

But if it all works out as I hope, that there’s no objection on Pamphilius’ part,

there’s still Chremes that I have to make my excuses to, and I’d be confident I can do that [that that will happen].

 

[Pacifica]

Line 165-7
sin eveniat quod volo,
in Pamphilo ut nil sit morae, restat Chremes
cui mi expurgandus est: et spero confore

But if it all works out as I hope, that there’s no objection on Pamphilius’ part,

there’s still Chremes that I have to make my excuses to, and I’d be confident I can do that [that that will happen].

Not really "to make my excuses to", but "to excuse him (= Pamphilus) to". (cui mi (Pamphilus) expurgandus est.)

 

[Matthaeus]

"nil est morae" roughly means that "there's no objection"? Lit. "there's no delay", right?

 

[Pacifica]

It has the sense of "hindrance/obstacle" rather than "delay" here (he fears that Pamphilus would like to prevent the thing from happening, not just delay it).

 

[limetrees]

Not really "to make my excuses to", but "to excuse him (= Pamphilus) to". (cui mi (Pamphilus) expurgandus est.)

Yes. I was thinking about this today, knowing I had been a bit hasty, and trying to remember the line, and wondering had it been "cui expurgandus sum".

But are you taking "mi" as "mihi" [dative of agent], which is what I would say, or as a form of "meus", as your sentence here seems to be suggesting]?
So literally, "there's still Chremes, to whom he [Pamphilus] has to be excused by me." Is this what you mean? I think it's what I mean.

 

[Matthaeus]

dat of agent, yes