Martini Cromeri ex vicesimo altero de origine & rebus gestis Polonorum nonnulli loci dubii

Matthaeus

Vemortuicida strenuus
1633516434300.png


Cum Cruciferis adhuc pendebant indutiae, necdum pax certa confecta erat. Sigismundus quoque imperator, ne quid ex inveterato in Polonos odio, violataque saepius cum Iagellone amicitia, contempta pueri aetate moveret, cavendum erat.

It isn't clear whether there's an object of Sigismundus. The verb would have made more sense had it been moveretur.

Now, juggling the clauses around a bit, would this order have been more usual:

Cavendum erat ne quid ex inveterato in Polonos odio Sigismundus quoque imperator, violataque etc., contempta pueri aetate moveret.

I have highlighted the main parts of the sentence. Am I understanding it correctly?
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
It isn't clear whether there's an object of Sigismundus. The verb would have made more sense had it been moveretur.
Quid is the object of moveret. The meaning is "lest he should put something in motion"—that is, lest he should attempt something, make a hostile move or the like.
would this order have been more usual:
Not really. But I guess it might have been the default order out of context, if no emphasis on Sigismundus had been meant.
I have highlighted the main parts of the sentence. Am I understanding it correctly?
Yes, those are the main parts.
 
Last edited:

Matthaeus

Vemortuicida strenuus
1633677333690.png


Sub ipsis radicibus montium, qui ad Varnam terminantur, lacus sinui maris continens, vallem mile passuum latam in medio inter se et montes relinquit.

I'm having trouble parsing this.

lacus continens - nom.
sinui - dat.
maris - gen.

A lake enclosed by a gulf of the sea???
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member

Matthaeus

Vemortuicida strenuus
Yes, I guess that would make more sense, as in L&S II.A.1.
 
Top