Est odio ceu proditum

Rocit

Member


The text in the circle says: "You will unjustly despise the traitor, not the treachery", but as for the epigram it's so strangely composed, that it doesn't make sense neither way of reading.

From just God thus (?) a traitor and the author of that very evil deed receive one punishment.

Still I'm not sure what might "est odio ceu proditum" be referring to...?
 

Laurentius

Civis Illustris
Could proditum mean proditio? If so it could be "The traitor is hated by the just God as the treachery and (its) author pay one price for the same evil deed." Not sure really. But ceu would sound weird maybe. :confused: I have no idea.
 

Rocit

Member
Yeah, the sense is so obscure... The treachery and its author pay the same price? Can treachery "pay a price"?
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
No, there doesn't seem to be any "treachery" in there.

Maybe:

By the just God the betrayer is hated just like the thing betrayed, and the author is hated in the same measure as/for (?) the evil act itself; they both get the same salary (i.e. punishment).

Not sure of the interpretation of ad ipsum malum, but maybe it's rather the first one "in the same measure as".
 

Imber Ranae

Ranunculus Iracundus
In what way is the thing betrayed hated, though? By the betrayer?

It isn't clear to me that ad ipsum malum goes with est odio and not with ferunt stipendia.
The sic at the beginning would also seem to suggest that ceu introduces a new clause.
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
In what way is the thing betrayed hated, though? By the betrayer?
By God.
It isn't clear to me that ad ipsum malum goes with est odio and not with ferunt stipendia.
The sic at the beginning would also seem to suggest that ceu introduces a new clause.
I really think that ceu introduces only proditum. God hates the betrayer (i.e. the one who delates a wrongdoing) as much as (he = God hates) the thing betrayed (i.e. the wrongdoing). Sic proditor odio est ceu proditum.

Edit: Or maybe ceu proditum et auctor then...

Maybe you're right about ad ipsum malum going with ferunt.

Then it would give us something more like:

By the just God the betrayer is hated just like the thing betrayed and its author, they get a salary for the one same wrongdoing (?) OR to the one same pain (i.e. both get punished to the same degree of severity?).

Still not sure what ad ipsum malum means, really...
 

Imber Ranae

Ranunculus Iracundus
Could you explain what you think the sentiment is? You seem to feel it is obvious, whereas to me it isn't at all.
By God.
I really think that ceu introduces only proditum. God hates the betrayer (i.e. the one who delates a wrongdoing) as much as (he = God hates) the thing betrayed (i.e. the wrongdoing). Sic proditor odio est ceu proditum.
How is the thing betrayed a wrongdoing, though? I really don't understand what you mean by that.
Edit: Or maybe ceu proditum et auctor then...

Maybe you're right about ad ipsum malum going with ferunt.

Then it would give us something more like:

By the just God the betrayer is hated just like the thing betrayed and its author, they get a salary for the one same wrongdoing (?) OR to the one same pain (i.e. both get punished to the same degree of severity?).

Still not sure what ad ipsum malum means, really...
The auctor is undoubtedly auctor ipsius mali, which is the betrayal itself, so he is the proditor, no?
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
Auctor and proditor are two different persons.

Let's say that someone steals apples on a market: this is the auctor of the wrongdoing. Another guy sees him and goes to a policeman to delate him "hey, I saw that guy steal apples": this is the proditor. The proditum is the stealing of the apples. As I understand it, the proditor would be as hated by god as the theft of the apples or the thief.
 

Imber Ranae

Ranunculus Iracundus
So a just God hates snitches? Are you getting this context from the picture, by any chance? I just don't see it.
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
No, not from the picture.
 

Imber Ranae

Ranunculus Iracundus
I suppose your interpretation could be correct, but the sentiment remains as strange to me as ever.


ETA: Perhaps Aurifex could give us his opinion.
 

Laurentius

Civis Illustris
If here we have the proditum and the theft, maybe we can say that that "ad ipsum malum" doesn't mean "for the same evil deed". Also not sure about "salary", in L&S there are 2 instances with fero and confero and in both of them it means "tribute". What do you think?
Anyway reminds me some of jingle kids sing here about snitchers. :D
 

Imber Ranae

Ranunculus Iracundus
If here we have the proditum and the theft, maybe we can say that that "ad ipsum malum" doesn't mean "for the same evil deed". Also not sure about "salary", in L&S there are 2 instances with fero and confero and in both of them it means "tribute". What do you think?
Anyway reminds me some of jingle kids sing here about snitchers. :D
The idea is probably the same as in Romans 6.23 stipendia enim peccati mors "the wages of sin is death", and so ferunt would just mean "receive", like getting one's just deserts.
 

Aurifex

Aedilis
Staff member
This emblem seems to be up to the usual standard of clumsy obscurity.
Whatever way the Latin is intended to hang together, and whatever precise sense we're meant to make of it, the "emblem" in question seems to be based on the Latin expression amo proditionem sed odi proditorem, the source of which is apparently Plutarch.
There's a different version with ferant not ferunt here - not that this changes things much.
 

Imber Ranae

Ranunculus Iracundus
Is the German a translation by any chance?
Doesn't seem like it. "Traitors and betrayals are to both God and men anathema/an abomination".
 

Aurifex

Aedilis
Staff member
Is the German a translation by any chance?
It'd be nice if it was. It seems to be merely an interpretation of the essential message.
Verräthers, und Verräthereyen Sind beyde? Gott dem Herren Greuel.
I think this is meant to say "Both traitors and treasons are an abomination unto God the Lord."
Ed. Or probably what IR says instead.
Ed. 2: Yes, it's not Gott dem Herren, which would be "to God the Lord".
 

Laurentius

Civis Illustris
It'd be nice if it was. It seems to be merely an interpretation of the essential message.
Verräthers, und Verräthereyen Sind beyde? Gott dem Herren Greuel.
I think this is meant to say "Both traitors and treasons are an abomination unto God the Lord."
Ed. Or probably what IR says instead.
Sounds like it is about the picture maybe.
 
Top