Finished Divum Claudium! Whoopee!

[gerases]

A question about a sentence:

Non multoque post testamentum etiam conscripsit ac signis omnium magistratuum obsignavit. Prius igitur quam ultra progrederetur, praeventus est ab Agrippina, quam praeter haec conscientia quoque nec minus delatores multorum criminum arguebant.

How should quam praeter haec be interpreted:

1. "whom besides these, conscience also and not less informers of many crimes accused" or
2. "whom, in addition, this conscience also and not less informers accused of many crimes.

I.e., is "praeter" a preposition (1) or an adverb (2) here? If the former, than I don't get what "these" he is referring to; if (2), "in addition" to what?

The literary translation is this:

who was being accused besides of many other crimes both by her own conscience and by informers

But I want to understand how the translator got there, so if somebody could do it as literally as possible, that would help greatly.

 

[Godmy]

Hello, this is my understanding of the sentence:

(click on it, to zoom)

late edited picture (the original one had from some reason multorum criminum connected wrongly, which has affected discussion in first 10 posts)


So as you can see:
- praeter is a preposition and accepts only one accusative: neuter plural haec (these things... -> besides this)
- conscientia and delatores multorum criminum** are two subject for arguebant
- quam stands for Agrippina in accussative, which is an object for arguebant



**Late Edit: (I changed the picture, which changes also the thing we are discussing below; explanation in the post number #11)

 

[gerases]

That's a cool diagram! Great idea.

But to what noun does haec refer exactly?

 

[Godmy]

You can make the diagrams yourself THREAD: new-latin-syntax-graph-generator

"Haec" - these stuff, these things, these facts... or in English just "this"
And, as they are facts, it depends what have been said before... maybe in the preceding chapter I haven't read [yet]

 

[gerases]

Great tool. I will definitely keep it in mind. Sometimes, I come across a sentence I've seen before and go through the same pain. It would be even greater if this was somehow linked to the text you read -- like on Perseus or something. By the way, Perseus is so slow, I wouldn't link anything to it But I can imagine the amount of work that went into it [Perseus] (but the tool as well).

And, as they are facts, it depends what have been said before...

Precisely! But there is nothing I see in the immediate vicinity of that paragraph except for praeventus est ab Agrippina. Which it could refer to, but that's a singular occurrence?

 

[Godmy]

Great tool. I will definitely keep it in mind. Sometimes, I come across a sentence I've seen before and go through the same pain. It would be even greater if this was somehow linked to the text you read -- like on Perseus or something. By the way, Perseus is so slow, I wouldn't link anything to it But I can imagine the amount of work that went into it [Perseus] (but the tool as well). ]

You could write that into that thread so I could react

Precisely! But there is nothing I see in the immediate vicinity of that paragraph except for praeventus est ab Agrippina. Which it could refer to, but that's a singular occurrence?

It could refer to the future murder, but I'm not sure - still looking....

 

[Godmy]

(Edited)

My best guess is that it EITHER refers probably to the content of his will/testament, which is not in her favour OR to that just mentioned infidelity from her side
1) praeter haec in testamento scripta -> praeter res in testamento scriptas quoque conscientia nec minus delatores eam arguebant
2) praeter haec dicta: se impudicam fuisse....

(Btw.: I PMed you the login info to that diagram site.)

Edit2: I also thought it could refer to that future murder, but I'm less inclined to that now.

 

[gerases]

I like will idea especially.

2) praeter se impudicam fuisse....

Se?

 

[Godmy]

I like will idea especially.

I'm not sure which one of them I like

Se?

Yes, you would say: quam/eam arguebant se impudicam fuisse and not quam/eam arguebant eam impudicam fuisse; "se" reflects on that already mentioned object. (in our sentence it's "quam")

Edit: or you don't mention it at all resulting in "eam/quam arguebant impudicam fuisse"

"besides that she was shameless" (but that just what I've written)
(btw: probably rare to have acc-inf with praeter..)

 

[gerases]

Yes, you would say: eam arguebant se impudicam fuisse and not eam arguebant eam impudicam fuisse; "se" reflects on that already mentioned object. (in our sentence it's "quam")

Oh, I see. Could it be just:

Quam arguebant impudicam fuisse

I think quam suffices, no? But this doesn't matter. What's important is that you also think that haec refers to something outside the sentence and that it is kind of difficult to find. Although check out the official translation one more time:

who was being accused besides of many other crimes both by her own conscience and by informers

I might be wrong, but besides here is an adverb and I think the translator made haec into own. But even so, there still needs to be something said about her "crimes" before that point, which could very well be what you suggested.

Btw.: I PMed you the login info to that diagram site.

Thanks, Godmy. Will definitely check it out.

 

[Godmy]

I just late edited the picture in the first post, because I spotted that "multorum criminum" is a second object to "arguebant" .

As the L&S dictionary says, it can be: "To accuse somebody of something":
1) arguo aliquem aliqua re
2) arguo aliquem alicuius rei
3) arguo aliquem de aliquā re

So it means, that haec probably is: praeter haec crimina (see the first picture edited)
... Agrippina, quam conscientia nec minus delatores arguebant multorum criminum praeter haec (crimina) / hoc crimen

(and it seems to refer to the thing that she prevented him)

 

[gerases]

(and it seems to refer to the thing that she prevented him)

It must be so except it's strange he chose haec and not hoc.

It would be really cool if the connections between words in your tool had arrows or something else to indicate the subordination of one to another. Maybe even numbers to indicate the suggested word order.

 

[Godmy]

It must be so except it's strange he chose haec and not hoc.

It doesn't have to... It's not directly connected to anything. IT IS still "besides these things/these stuff/these facts" (or in English simply "besides this" / "besides that") and it just CONTEXTUALLY refers to other crimina or some facinora of hers (crimina are easiest to reach there).
- just as "besides this" would.

And when you don't specify something in a phrase (like in this prepositional phrase) then no matter the number, you just use the neuter plural as you know (so it can aswell point indirectly to one crimen)

(or this is how I feel it, anyway the sentence should be clearer now I hope And congratulations for finishing it )

- Oh, I reacted here on the suggestions of yours regarding the tree diagram

 

[Imber Ranae]

Oh, I see. Could it be just:

I think quam suffices, no? But this doesn't matter. What's important is that you also think that haec refers to something outside the sentence and that it is kind of difficult to find.

Yes, that should suffice. I don't think se should be used here because the context doesn't call for a reflexive, either direct or indirect.

Although check out the official translation one more time:

I might be wrong, but besides here is an adverb and I think the translator made haec into own. But even so, there still needs to be something said about her "crimes" before that point, which could very well be what you suggested.

No, he's just not translating word for word. The adverb praeter without quam or quod is pretty rare. Though in English it often sounds better to just say "besides" rather than "besides this/these", Latin almost requires the haec. Difference of idiom, that's all.

 

[gerases]

Thanks, Imber and Godmy for your input. Really helpful.

 

[/Yks/]

Late contribution to solve the question: quid sibi vult "praeter haec" ? It refers to the paragraph imediately before, where Suetonius wrote, that Claudius would have given signs of regretting the mariage with Agrippina and the Adoption of Nero. Suetonius then gives an example of an allusion Claudius made while condemning a woman of Adultery - Moreover Claudius would have tried to prepare little Britannicus as his successor, though Britannicus was even to small to wear a toga. Also, Claudius would have said about Britannicus in Greek: "the one who vulnerated will heal" - maybe Claudius meant "the one who offended" i.e. "is, qui Agrippinam laesit, (eam?) sanabit".
Anyway, right after "this stuff" or "these matters" your cited passage follows:

XLIV. Non multoque post testamentum etiam conscripsit ac signis omnium magistratuum obsignavit. Prius igitur quam ultra progrederetur, praeventus est ab Agrippina, quam praeter haec conscientia quoque nec minus delatores multorum criminum arguebant.

As you see the narration is somehow cut off by the modern paragraphs and "haec" simply resumes every things (sic!) said from the allusion in court up to the testamentum obsignatum ("etiam" clearly adds this new action of Claudius to the others before). You could fill in "...(haec), quae modo diximus,..."
Haec satis lucida sunt

sed praeter haec "praeter se impudicam fuisse....", quod scripsit Godmius, equidem non dixerim: Non enim pronomen istud ad o b iecta sed subiecta vel eiusdem sententiae vel eandem 'regentis' refferri solet.

Valete