Ad Fam VII.3

[Matthaeus]

persaepe mihi cogitanti de communibus miseriis, in quibus tot annos versamur et, ut video, versabimur, solet in mentem venire illius temporis, quo proxime fuimus una;

Where is the object of this genitive? The misfortunes mentioned earlier?

signa tirone et collecticio exercitu cum legionibus robustissimis contulit; victus turpissime amissis etiam castris solus fugit.

He compared military standards with recruits, a hastily gathered army, and the strongest of legions? But what is being compared comes only after cum, no?

 

[rothbard]

Where is the object of this genitive? The misfortunes mentioned earlier?

Yes.

He compared military standards with recruits, a hastily gathered army, and the strongest of legions? But what is being compared comes only after cum, no?

Signa conferre cum aliquo means to attack (see here).

 

[Matthaeus]

Ah, but of course! Me stultum! Gratias!
So would this be something along the lines of, "He engaged a hastily gathered recruit army with the strongest of legions. After he was conquered and the troops were lost most disgracefully, he even fled from camp alone?"

 

[Pacifica]

Where is the object of this genitive? The misfortunes mentioned earlier?

Yes.

I'm not sure what you guys mean by the object of a genitive. The word it's modifying? There is none here. The expression venit in mentem can simply be constructed with a genitive (similarly to memini and other such verbs). Here Cicero is saying that he is reminded of the time when etc.

Ah, but of course! Me stultum! Gratias!
So would this be something along the lines of, "He engaged a hastily gathered recruit army with the strongest of legions. After he was conquered and the troops were lost most disgracefully, he even fled from camp alone?"

Etiam goes with amissis castris. For the rest, your translation conveys the sense well enough. Alternatively you could perhaps say "he attacked the strongest of legions with a hastily gathered recruit army".

 

[Matthaeus]

I'm not sure what you guys mean by the object of a genitive. The word it's modifying? There is none here. The expression venit in mentem can simply be constructed with a genitive (similarly to memini and other such verbs). Here Cicero is saying that he is reminded of the time when etc.

ok that makes more sense now, didn't know that expression can be constructed with a genitive object.

 

[Matthaeus]

hunc ego mihi belli finem feci nec putavi, cum integri pares non fuissemus, fractos superiores fore; discessi ab eo bello, in quo aut in acie cadendum fuit aut in aliquas insidias incidendum aut deveniendum in victoris manus aut ad Iubam confugiendum aut capiendus tamquam exsilio locus aut consciscenda mors voluntaria. certe nihil fuit praeterea, si te victori nolles aut non auderes committere.

I think I've seen the indicative instead of the subjunctive in the apodosis of si-clauses. Is this normal in classical Latin?

vetus est enim, ubi non sis qui fueris, non esse cur velis vivere.

"For it's an old saying, whenever you're not what you used to be, that there is no reason why you should wish to live."
Did I get that right? Sounds kind of awkward.

 

[Pacifica]

I think I've seen the indicative instead of the subjunctive in the apodosis of si-clauses. Is this normal in classical Latin?

The indicative is sometimes used instead of the subjunctive in the apodosis of contrary-to-fact conditions to emphasize how close something was to being the case. But that's not really what we've got here. We've got a simple statement of fact: "there was no other option". The verbs in the protasis are subjunctive because their subject is a general "you" (they can apply to anyone in general, and only potentially to the actual addressee) and that typically triggers the subjunctive in classical Latin.

"For it's an old saying, whenever you're not what you used to be, that there is no reason why you should wish to live."
Did I get that right? Sounds kind of awkward.

Yes. Perhaps it could be rephrased more beautifully, but you've got the meaning.

 

[Matthaeus]

Gratias tibi, Puella!