Can you give us some more? Your interpretative skills are better than mine.Seditiones populus Romanus facturus est ... (?) iactat multitudo quae etiam vos atque domos vestras, cognatosque familiasque pugnare potest.... ouch....
Assuming you and LCF have given faithful transcripts of the speech, I'd say there are more than two. The ambition to write in Ciceronian Latin shines through in every line, and nearly every line leaves me wondering what on earth the writer is trying to say.I see two mistakes.
Assuming you and LCF have given faithful transcripts of the speech, I'd say there are more than two. The ambition to write in Ciceronian Latin shines through in every line, and nearly every line leaves me wondering what on earth the writer is trying to say.
Since I've already said that nearly all of it leaves me wondering what the writer is trying to say, it would be far more logical for those who find it largely meaningful to attempt a translation. We can then examine whether the Latin really can mean what the translation implies it means.Bring up the things you find odd. We can examine closer.
No need for causa.Equidem nullum aliud consilium nisi mali vestri impediendi(causa)teneo
Indeed I hold this counsil for no reasen other then to prevent the crap that's to come to you.
I can't make sense of the Latin as it is.Vobis rusticae villae sunt qua() si iam vos fugere, ut utile sit.
You have farms at the coutry, to which if you run it would be useful to you.
You really need quin there. We hear qu(a)e but I think his tongue has just slipped.*Nec dubito que/quae/quin, pro virtute in qua tibi nihil sit
I don't doubt that for the virtue, in which would you have nothing
Optativus libertatem is wrong. Optativus doesn't mean "who wishes".optativus (tu) libertatem ita egeris
You who wanted libery was acting in such a way,
Forgiveness and impunity, to be precise.venia atque impunitas detur
forgivness will be given,
Maybe it sounds like quae and abrogantur, but the sense requires qui and abrogentur: you indeed, who want Caesar's acts to be revoked (have you wondered who etc)...Tu quidem, quae acta Caesar(i)a abroge/antur, sentis?,
Which acts of Caesar do you think should be abolsihed?
This is definitely wrong. You'd need quis ad magistratim te mandasset or quis magistratum tibi mandasset.num quaesisti quis ad magistratum tibi mandasset
did you ask who brought you to this office?
We will all lose most of what we have and our magistracy.omnes pleraque et magistratus perdemus.we will loose it all... (I have some issue here with latin)
By what authority, if it were so, would you decide about the republic, about the state, about the people of Rome?Quanam auctoritate, si ita sit
de republica, de civitate, de populo Romano statuatis?
I don't know have English here...
since the acts of the one who offered them (the lands) are now revoked.cum abrogata iam sint illius acta qui has donaverit
I have an issue with Latin here
Yeah sure ok. it's not like I was giving a dot by dot translation. That's not the point here. The point here is that we look at latin.Equidem nullum aliud consilium nisi mali vestri impediendi(causa)teneo
No need for causa.
Things to explore here for interest:No need for causa.
Vobis rusticae villae sunt qua* si iam vos fugere, ut utile sit.
I can't make sense of the Latin as it is.
Yeah sure re quin. "in qua tibi nihil sit" is an unfamiliar locution.Nec dubito que/quae/quin, pro virtute in qua tibi nihil sit
I don't doubt that for the virtue, in which would you have nothing
You really need quin there. We hear qu(a)e but I think his tongue has just slipped.
No other sense you can give other then "he who wishes". This is definetly a made up locution. Nothing I could find other than in referense to grammatical form.optativus (tu) libertatem ita egeris
You who wanted libery was acting in such a way,
Optativus libertatem is wrong. Optativus doesn't mean "who wishes".
That's not the sense that I read. The sense that I read is this: Quae acta Caesaria abrogentur tu sentis?.Tu quidem, quae acta Caesar(i)a abroge/antur, sentis?,
Which acts of Caesar do you think should be abolsihed?
Maybe it sounds like quae and abrogantur, but the sense requires qui and abrogentur: you indeed, who want Caesar's acts to be revoked (have you wondered who etc)...
I agree.num quaesisti quis ad magistratum tibi mandassetdid you ask who brought you to this office?
This is definitely wrong. You'd need quis ad magistratim te mandasset or quis magistratum tibi mandasset.
I'll have to listen to the thing again.Things to explore here for interest:
* fugere as a contruction in plural second.
* ut illae(c) sit is a possible read (illic, illiae)
* quasi iam fugere
Yeah, and I'm not sure the whole pro virtute in qua tibi nihil sit makes much sense.Yeah sure re quin. "in qua tibi nihil sit" is an unfamiliar locution.
Yeah, you're right, "expressing a wish", I don't know if it's usual applied to a person, but it can make sense.No other sense you can give other then "he who wishes". This is definetly a made up locution. Nothing I could find other than in referense to grammatical form.
The defense for useage would derive from Optativus Modus... the wanting mood, the mood that wants...
Look at the whole:That's not the sense that I read. The sense that I read is this: Quae acta Caesaria abrogentur tu sentis?.
You're right, I find no example.Sentio with a subordinate iussive? Is this done?
I don't see what's wrong there personally.omnes pleraque et magistratus perdemus. That strikes me as very harsh Latin.Would it really have been a legitimate way of saying "We will all lose most of what we have and our magistracy/-ies"?
Nothing to supply, it's there: crebriores in dies conveniunt Caesaris veterani, a quibus terras etc.Caesaris veterani, a quibus terras rei publicae reddendas esse, cum abrogata iam sint illius acta qui has donaverit, quis autem vestrum palam his dicere audeat?
What verb are we to supply with the presumed nominative Caesaris veterani?
Dicere.What verb of speaking or thinking is reddendas esse dependent on?
Not sure about that.Where does autem come in?
Fine. Now please make sense of the complete sentence: crebriores in dies conveniunt Caesaris veterani, a quibus terras rei publicae reddendas esse, cum abrogata iam sint illius acta qui has donaverit, quis autem vestrum palam his dicere audeat.Nothing to supply, it's there: crebriores in dies conveniunt Caesaris veterani, a quibus terras etc.