Need help with syntax

[Kymopoleia]

Hello guys, hope you are doing Well. I’m currently working on some Text and I got stuck with syntax and nominative and accusative with infinitive. Myb you could help me better understand it and find it, I have hard time understanding it. Tried to find help but sadly no one was Happy to do it. Thank you in Advance.

„Die XX februarii 1397. Indictione V. Radoslaus Radmillouich de Bielgrad de Neuissigna facit manifestum quod ipse se locat et operas suas Jurcho Petrouich marinario presenti et conducenti ipsum Radoslauum ad nauigandum cum ipso Jurcho et ipsi seruiendum et laborandum usque duos annos proxime futuris, promittens eidem fideliter seruire et facere quecumque ei possibilia commisserit facienda et eius res et bona fideliter saluare et custodire et non facere furtum nec volenti facere consentire et non recedere ab eo absque eius licencia usque ad dictum terminum duorum annorum.
Pro quo Radoslaus Hostoya Mirchouich marinarius constituit se plegium et paccatorem dicto Jurcho si dictus Radoslaus aufugent ab eo ante dictum terminum de omni furto et dampno quod fecisset ipsi Jurcho.
Et ex aduerso dictus Jurcho obligauit se dicto Radoslauo facere eidem expensas victus et ipsum bene tractare secundum condicione eius parium famulorum et eidem dare pro toto dicto tempore pro eius mercede et labore tunichas tres et xochas tres de rassa et tres biretas et chaligarum paria tria et chamisias et brachas ei oportunas pro usu competenter per totum dictum tempus et yperperos decem, videlicet, pro primo anno yperperos quatuor et pro secondo yperperos sex. Renuntiando”

 

[Pacifica]

What exactly is your question about nominative and accusative with infinitive?

 

[Kymopoleia]

Actually, when I need to find the main verb in the sentence, in order to connect both cases with the infinitive, I get lost and I don't know how to find it, basically, I don't know how to recognize in the sentence that there are both or one of the constructions.. Thank you for replying

 

[Pacifica]

I'm sorry, your question is unclear. Can you point out precisely which part of the text your question applies to?

 

[Kymopoleia]

Sorry, this one - Die XX februarii 1397. Indictione V. Radoslaus Radmillouich de Bielgrad de Neuissigna facit manifestum quod ipse se locat et operas suas Jurcho Petrouich marinario presenti et conducenti ipsum Radoslauum ad nauigandum cum ipso Jurcho et ipsi seruiendum et laborandum usque duos annos proxime futuris, promittens eidem fideliter seruire et facere quecumque ei possibilia commisserit facienda et eius res et bona fideliter saluare et custodire et non facere furtum nec volenti facere consentire et non recedere ab eo absque eius licencia usque ad dictum terminum duorum annorum.

 

[Pacifica]

There isn't actually any accusative-and-infinitive clause there. Do you need me to point out which subjects and which objects etc. go with which verbs?

 

[Kymopoleia]

If you would be so kind, it would help me a lot to get the point across..

 

[Pacifica]

Radoslaus Radmillouich de Bielgrad de Neuissigna is the subject of facit, which is the main verb of the whole sentence.

The object of facit is the quod clause, and that quod clause is what Radoslaus makes manifestum.

---
In ipse se locat et operas suas Jurcho Petrouich marinario presenti et conducenti ipsum Radoslauum ad nauigandum cum ipso Jurcho et ipsi seruiendum et laborandum usque duos annos proxime futuris:

Ipse (referring back to Radoslaus) is the subject of locat.

Se et operas suas is the direct object of that same verb, and Jurcho Petrouich marinario is the indirect object, which presenti et conducenti agrees with.

Ipsum Radoslaum is the direct object of conducenti.

Ad navigandum etc. is the purpose of the hiring. Ipsi refers to Jurchus and is the indirect object of servire (that verb takes the dative) and laborare.

---
In promittens eidem fideliter seruire et facere quecumque ei possibilia commisserit facienda et eius res et bona fideliter saluare et custodire et non facere furtum nec volenti facere consentire et non recedere ab eo absque eius licencia usque ad dictum terminum duorum annorum:

Promittens refers to Radoslaus (he's the one promising what follows).

What Radoslaus is promising to do is:

- Eidem fideliter seruire, wherein eidem is the indirect object of servire and refers to Jurchus.

- Facere quecumque ei possibilia commisserit facienda, where the whole relative clause quecumque ei possibilia commiserit facienda is the direct object of facere. Within that relative clause, the verb is commiserit, the subject is (implicitly) Jurchus, the direct object is quecumque, and the indirect object is ei (referring to Radoslaus). Possibilia and facienda agree with quecumque.

- Eius res et bona fideliter saluare et custodire, where eius res et bona is the direct object of salvare et custodire. Eius refers to Jurchus.

- Non facere furtum, where furtum is the direct object of facere.

- Nec volenti facere consentire, where volenti (referring to anyone) is the indirect object of consentire. Facere goes with volenti, and furtum is implied as the direct object of facere.

- Non recedere ab eo absque eius licencia usque ad dictum terminum duorum annorum: here you just have non recedere with three prepositional phrases (ab eo, absque eius licentia, usque ad dictum terminum duorum annorum). Eo and eius refer to Jurchus.