Livy: conjunction

It seems to be (though I may be wrong) that there are two different objects: Profugi adorti Hannibalem and Profugi turbaverunt agmen. So, I would put a conjunction to join both ideas. Is it wrong?
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima

  • Aedilis

Location:
Belgium
Adorti is a participle, "having attacked". It is not a finite verb, "they attacked", which would be adorti sunt (unless there was an ellipsis of sunt, as can happen, but it isn't the case here).
 
 

Godmy

Sīmia Illūstris

  • Censor

Location:
Bohemia
Rule of thumb, Gabriel:

anytime the original/Roman* Latin you read seems wrong, it's 95-99% probable the error is not in the text but, in fact, in your mind.

Now, a really proficient Latinist, who has read with fluency many works, may spot some 'lacuna' or a place that both doesn't make sense AND is happens to be disputed across critical editions of the text in question. But, as a relative novice (albeit reading Livy), always believe that ultimately, the reader is always wrong, not the text :) Consider the text you read as "sacred" as it being practically impossible that you could of your own volition either add or remove a word to make it better.

It is true that once a upon a time (in a very different age), Latin words would be written together, almost no if any spaces used in the text, neither any kind of interpunction, so the sentences or paragraphs looked like a giant infinite word: and there one had to wonder where a new clause begins etc, but you can trust me that is almost never the case with texts you come in contact today.

*often times, the same rule will apply though even with medieval or later Latin, if done by some reputable authors, at least; they are often indeed smarter than you/the reader ;P
 
Top