Nunc in ipso discrimine

[john abshire]

Nunc in ipso discrimine ordinis iudiciorumque vestrorum, cum sint parati qui contionibus et legibus hanc invidium senatus inflammare conentur, reus in iudicium adductus est C. Verres, homo vita atque factis omnium iam opinione damnatus, pecuniae magnitudine sua spe ac praedicatione absolutus.

Now on the crisis itself of the judges order and your own since they are prepared who tried to inflame this senate hatred by speeches and laws, the party in evidence brought up C. Verres, a man life and all the facts already condemned from opinion, monies released by greatness, hope, and commendation.

Please correct my translation

 

[Pacifica]

Let's do it one bit at a time as usual.


Nunc in ipso discrimine ordinis iudiciorumque vestrorum

Iudiciorum is a form of iudicium, not of iudex.

-que gets attached to the word that would be preceded by et. So ordinis iudiciorumque vestrorum = ordinis et iudiciorum vestrorum.

"On the crisis itself": maybe rather "in the very crisis".

 

[john abshire]

Let's do it one bit at a time as usual.


Nunc in ipso discrimine ordinis iudiciorumque vestrorum

Iudiciorum is a form of iudicium, not of iudex.

-que gets attached to the word that would be preceded by et. So ordinis iudiciorumque vestrorum = ordinis et iudiciorum vestrorum.

"On the crisis itself": maybe rather "in the very crisis".

Nunc in ipso discrimine ordinis iudiciorumque vestrorum
Now in the very crisis of order and our judgements
Edited

 

[Pacifica]

our

*your (a typo maybe)

Vestrorum agrees with the noun closest to it but its meaning also applies to ordinis. So the English possessive needs to change place to reflect that.

 

[john abshire]

*your (a typo maybe)

Vestrorum agrees with the noun closest to it but its meaning also applies ordinis. So the English possessive needs to change place to reflect that.

Nunc in ipso ordinis iudiciorumque vestrorum
Now in your crisis of order and judgements
How do you know it’s not “crisis of order and (of) your judgements”? How would you write the latter?

 

[Pacifica]

Now in your crisis of order and judgements

That's the wrong placement. There's no way vestrorum could apply to discrimine since it's in a different case and not in the same phrase.

How do you know it’s not “crisis of order and (of) your judgements”?

It just doesn't make sense here.

How would you write the latter?

You could write it the same way, or if there were a risk of ambiguity you could change the placement of vestrorum to make it more likely to be taken only with iudiciorum: ordinis vestrorumque iudiciorum.

 

[john abshire]

That's the wrong placement. There's no way vestrorum could apply to discrimine since it's in a different case and not in the same phrase.

It just doesn't make sense here.

You could write it the same way, or if there were a risk of ambiguity you could change the placement of vestrorum to make it more likely to be taken only with iudiciorum: ordinis vestrorumque iudiciorum.

Nunc in ipso ordinis iudiciorumque vestrorum
Now in the very crisis of your order and judgements

 

[Pacifica]

Good! But add "very" for ipso.

Next:

cum sint parati qui contionibus et legibus hanc invidiam senatus inflammare conentur

You've got part of it right already: "to inflame this senate hatred by speeches and laws" conveys the right meaning. "Since" also is a correct translation for cum. Your problem is that you don't know how to handle cum sint parati qui... conentur. The relative clause (qui... conentur) is a relative clause of purpose; that's why the verb is subjunctive. And note that it isn't in a past tense. You may have to add a couple of words to the beginning (sint parati) to make it work in English. The point is that there are some people ready for the stated purpose.

 

[john abshire]

Good! But add "very" for ipso.

Next:

cum sint parati qui contionibus et legibus hanc invidiam senatus inflammare conentur

You've got part of it right already: "to inflame this senate hatred by speeches and laws" conveys the right meaning. "Since" also is a correct translation for cum. Your problem is that you don't know how to handle cum sint parati qui... conentur. The relative clause (qui... conentur) is a relative clause of purpose; that's why the verb is subjunctive. And note that it isn't in a past tense. You may have to add a couple of words to the beginning (sint parati) to make it work in English. The point is that there are some people ready for the stated purpose.

Nunc in ipso discrimine ordinis iudiciorumque vestrorum, cum sint parati qui contionibus et legibus hanc invidiam senatus inflammare conentur,

Now in the very crisis of your order and judgements, since some people are prepared to (who may) try and inflame this senate hatred by speeches and laws,

I don’t think that this is correct, but it is all I can think of.
Edit: added; I looked up relative clause of purpose, but I don’t understand how the relative pronoun fits into the translation,
Edited

 

[Pacifica]

Now in the very crisis of your order and judgements, since they are prepared to try and inflame this senate hatred by speeches and laws,

That's acceptable; but perhaps better would be "some people are prepared".

I don’t think that this is correct, but it is all I can think of.
Edit: added; I looked up relative clause of purpose, but I don’t understand how the relative pronoun fits into the translation,

Rather literally it is "[some people] are ready who may try..."; that is, some people are ready for the purpose of trying.


Next:

reus in iudicium adductus est C. Verres

Pay attention to the cases of words, especially Verres. Also note the voice of adductus est.

 

[john abshire]

That's acceptable; but perhaps better would be "some people are prepared".

Rather literally it is "[some people] are ready who may try..."; that is, some people are ready for the purpose of trying.


Next:

reus in iudicium adductus est C. Verres

Pay attention to the cases of words, especially Verres. Also note the voice of adductus est.

“the thing in judgment was brought to C. Verres”
?
Except iudicium is not ablative. Verres has to be accusative (or nominative) plural, unless his name is spelled that way in nominative singular.

 

[Pacifica]

No. How could C. Verres mean "to C. Verres" when it's nominative?

Start with this; we'll add reus later:

in iudicium adductus est C. Verres

 

[john abshire]

No. How could C. Verres mean "to C. Verres" when it's nominative?

Start with this; we'll add reus later:

in iudicium adductus est C. Verres

I meant: unless C. Verres is nominative plural (in this form), then C. Verres doesn’t mean “to C. Verres”.
In iudicium adductus est C. Verres
“C. Verres was brought into judgment”
Edit: C. Verres has been been brought to trial.
(Assuming C. Verres is nominative singular)

 

[Pacifica]

“C. Verres was brought into judgment”
(Assuming C. Verres is nominative singular)

That's about right. But the present perfect tense "has been brought" would fit the context better, because Cicero is talking about "now" (nunc). Also, "brought to trial" would be a more usual way to express the idea than "brought into judgment".

Now to add reus: that means "(as) a defendant".


Next:

homo vita atque factis omnium iam opinione damnatus

Once again, pay attention to the cases of words. For example, factis omnium can't mean "all the facts" since the two words don't agree. Omnium is genitive (plural) and goes with opinione.

 

[john abshire]

That's about right. But the present perfect tense "has been brought" would fit the context better, because Cicero is talking about "now" (nunc). Also, "brought to trial" would be a more usual way to express the idea than "brought into judgment".

Now to add reus: that means "(as) a defendant".


Next:

homo vita atque factis omnium iam opinione damnatus

Once again, pay attention to the cases of words. For example, factis omnium can't mean "all the facts" since the two words don't agree. Omnium is genitive (plural) and goes with opinione.

Present perfect? Isn’t adductus est perfect passive? The ppp plus present form of sum?

 

[Pacifica]

Present perfect? Isn’t adductus est perfect passive? The ppp plus present form of sum?

Yes, adductus est is perfect passive.

The present perfect is an English thing. It's "have/has" + past participle. The Latin perfect can correspond either to the English preterit/simple past tense (e.g. "I did it") or to the present perfect (e.g. "I've done it"). There's no difference in Latin and the appropriate English translation depends on context.

 

[john abshire]

Present perfect? Isn’t adductus est perfect passive? The ppp plus present form of sum?

(As) a defendant (reus) C. Verres has been brought to trial.
Edit: C. Verres has been brought to trial as a defendant.

 

[Pacifica]

"As a defendant" would fit better at the end, but yes.

 

[john abshire]

That's about right. But the present perfect tense "has been brought" would fit the context better, because Cicero is talking about "now" (nunc). Also, "brought to trial" would be a more usual way to express the idea than "brought into judgment".

Now to add reus: that means "(as) a defendant".


Next:

homo vita atque factis omnium iam opinione damnatus

Once again, pay attention to the cases of words. For example, factis omnium can't mean "all the facts" since the two words don't agree. Omnium is genitive (plural) and goes with opinione.

How does omnium agree with opinione? Omnium is genitive plural and opinione is ablative singular….?

 

[john abshire]

That's about right. But the present perfect tense "has been brought" would fit the context better, because Cicero is talking about "now" (nunc). Also, "brought to trial" would be a more usual way to express the idea than "brought into judgment".

Now to add reus: that means "(as) a defendant".


Next:

homo vita atque factis omnium iam opinione damnatus

Once again, pay attention to the cases of words. For example, factis omnium can't mean "all the facts" since the two words don't agree. Omnium is genitive (plural) and goes with opinione.

Homo vita atque factis omnium iam opinione damnatus
Man life and fact (Gen.) all (Gen. plural) now opinion (abl sing) (having been) condemned.
I may can get “all the condemned opinion”, knowing omnium goes with opinione.