De Bello Civili

[Quaeso]

Reliquae copiae missis ad Varum noctu legatorum numero centurionibus sese ei dediderunt. -DBC II.XLIV

The rest of the troops sent their centurions as deputies to Varus at night, and surrendered themselves to him.

Thank you, is numero (as/in the place of a troop of ambassadors) dative of purpose or maybe ablative of manner?

 

[Pacifica]

I take it as ablative.

 

[Quaeso]

Itemque praetoribus tribunisque plebis rogationes ad populum ferentibus nonnullos ambitus Pompeia lege damnatos illis temporibus, quibus in urbe praesidia legionum Pompeius habuerat, quae iudicia aliis audientibus iudicibus, aliis sententiam ferentibus singulis diebus erant perfecta, in integrum restituit, qui se illi initio civilis belli obtulerant, si sua opera in bello uti vellet, -DBC III.II

He likewise restored to their former condition (the praetors and tribunes, first submitting the question to the people) some persons condemned for bribery at the elections, by virtue of Pompey's law, at the time when Pompey kept his legions quartered in the city (these trials were finished in a single day, one judge hearing the merits, and another pronouncing the sentences), because they had offered their service to him in the beginning of the civil war, if he chose to accept them;

Thank you, does ambitus (genitive) modify lege?

 

[Pacifica]

No, it modifies damnatos. The crime that one is condemned for or accused of etc. can go in the genitive. This is the "genitive of crime".

 

[Quaeso]

Itemque praetoribus tribunisque plebis rogationes ad populum ferentibus nonnullos ambitus Pompeia lege damnatos illis temporibus, quibus in urbe praesidia legionum Pompeius habuerat, quae iudicia aliis audientibus iudicibus, aliis sententiam ferentibus singulis diebus erant perfecta, in integrum restituit, qui se illi initio civilis belli obtulerant, si sua opera in bello uti vellet, proinde aestimans, ac si usus esset, quoniam sui fecissent potestatem. -DBC III.I

He likewise restored to their former condition (the praetors and tribunes, first submitting the question to the people) some persons condemned for bribery at the elections, by virtue of Pompey's law, at the time when Pompey kept his legions quartered in the city (these trials were finished in a single day, one judge hearing the merits, and another pronouncing the sentences), because they had offered their service to him in the beginning of the civil war, if he chose to accept them; setting the same value on them as if he had accepted them, because they had put themselves in his power.

Thank you, is sui in the genitive? I believe the possessor would be condemnati, but what is the thing possessed? Their service? "Because they had made an availability of their service"?

 

[Pacifica]

This sui is the genitive form of se, so literally "of themselves".

 

[Quaeso]

Hoc unum Caesari ad celeritatem conficiendi belli defuit. Atque hae ipsae copiae hoc infrequentiores imponuntur, quod multi Gallicis tot bellis defecerant, longumque iter ex Hispania magnum numerum deminuerat, et gravis autumnus in Apulia circumque Brundisium ex saluberrimis Galliae et Hispaniae regionibus omnem exercitum valetudine temptaverat. -DBC III.II

This [the scarcity of shipping] was the only thing that prevented Caesar from putting a speedy conclusion to the war. And even these troops embarked very short of their number, because several had fallen in so many wars in Gaul, and the long march from Spain had lessened their number very much, and a severe autumn in Apulia and the district about Brundusium, after the very wholesome countries of Spain and Gaul, had impaired the health of the whole army.

Thank you, what is that second hoc doing there? An adverb like huc meaning "there", or "at that place"?

 

[Pacifica]

It's the ablative of the demonstrative pronoun.

It's correlated with quod:

Hoc ... quod = "by this (fact) ... that" or "the (+ comparative) ... because."

 

[Dantius]

Cf. from near the beginning of De Bello Gallico: Id hoc facilius iis persuasit, quod undique loci natura Helvetii continentur. It's more often found with eo instead of hoc.

 

[Quaeso]

Vibullius his expositis [Corcyrae] non minus necessarium esse existimavit de repentino adventu Caesaris Pompeium fieri certiorem, uti ad id consilium capere posset, antequam de mandatis agi inciperetur, atque ideo continuato nocte ac die itinere atque omnibus oppidis mutatis ad celeritatem iumentis ad Pompeium contendit, ut adesse Caesarem nuntiaret. III.XI

Vibullius, having received this commission from Caesar, thought it no less necessary to give Pompey notice of Caesar's sudden approach, that he might adopt such plans as the circumstance required, than to inform him of Caesar's message; and therefore continuing his journey by night as well as by day, and taking fresh horses for dispatch, he posted away to Pompey, to inform him that Caesar was marching toward him with all his forces.

Thank you, would you say that minus is correlated with antequam?

 

[Pacifica]

Hmmm... my first instinct was to say "no" but I see what you mean; it's a bit of a mixed construction—if feels as if the sentence ended up somewhere in between non minus necessarium esse existimativit de repentino adventu Caesaris Pompeium fieri certiorem ... quam de mandatis agi and necessarium esse existimavit de repentino adventu Caesaris Pompeium fieri certiorem ... antequam de mandatis agi inciperetur.

 

[Quaeso]

Quibus rebus neque tum respondendum Caesar existimavit, neque nunc, ut memoriae prodantur, satis causae putamus. Postulabat Caesar, ut legatos sibi ad Pompeium sine periculo mittere liceret, idque ipsi fore reciperent aut acceptos per se ad eum perducerent. Dbc III.XVII

To this, Caesar did not then think proper to make any reply, nor do we now think it worth recording. But Caesar required "that he should be allowed to send commissioners to Pompey, who should suffer no personal injury; and that either they should grant it, or should take his commissioners in charge, and convey them to Pompey.

Thank you, is fore in paraphrasis with acceptos as an acc. inf. clause? But then why the strange placement?

 

[Pacifica]

Thank you, is fore in paraphrasis with acceptos as an acc. inf. clause?

No. Idque ipsi fore reciperent and acceptos per se ad eum perducerent are separate clauses.

Id fore is an accusative-and-infinitive clause dependent on reciperent. Acceptos modifies the (implied) object of perducerent (viz. legatos).

 

[Quaeso]

idque (iter ad Pompeium) ipsi (nominative not dative) fore reciperent (undertake, accept, take it upon themselves)

Thank you, so something like, "and that they themselves undertake that it was about to be [done]"?

 

[Pacifica]

Thank you, so something like, "and that they themselves undertake that it was about to be [done]"?

Yes. That is, promise so.