# The ambassador said that he ought to confess that he had received many benefits



## Lamb67

Legatus dixit se debere confiteri se accepisse multa beneficia ex Scipio, quia fuisset liberatus ex tribuno quod solveret vicinae genti, et quia cum esset suus filius captus remissus fuisset sibi ex Scipio.Quae fecisset in bello fecisse non sua, sed fuisse coactum a suis viris ut pugnaret castra Romani. Hispanos habere communem consilium; ipsam hanc diem dictam fuisse hibernis pugnandis Scipiorum, ne ullas copias subvenirent secundae legioni
Pay due attention to Latin only.It might be indirect statement through and through. 
The ambassador said that he ought to confess that he had received many benefits from Scipio, because he had been freed from the tribute which he used to pay to the neighbouring tribe, and because his son when captured had been sent back to him by Scipio. What he had done in war he had not done of his own accord, but had been compelled by his own men to attack the Roman camp. The Hispani had a common plan; this very day had been appointed for attacking Scipio's winter-quaters, in order that no troops might come to the help of the second legion.


----------



## relativamente

Hi!

This seems a fairly nice text.Anyway is not perfect.Scipio is nominative with preposition e or ex must take ablative Scipione.
Also tribunus has nothing to do with tributus.I have doubts also about the form solveret.


----------



## Lamb67

' he used to pay', so imperfect solvebat instead; tributo instead.


----------



## Lamb67

on second thought 'which he used to pay'- a subordinate clause, so 'solveret' instead


----------



## Lamb67

Lamb67 said:


> Legatus dixit se debere confiteri se accepisse multa beneficia ex Scipio, quia fuisset liberatus ex tribuno quod solveret vicinae genti, et quia cum esset suus filius captus remissus fuisset sibi ex Scipio.Quae fecisset in bello fecisse non sua, sed fuisse coactum a suis viris ut pugnaret castra Romani. Hispanos habere communem consilium; ipsam hanc diem dictam fuisse hibernis pugnandis Scipiorum, ne ullas copias subvenirent secundae legioni
> Pay due attention to Latin only.It might be indirect statement through and through.
> The ambassador said that he ought to confess that he had received many benefits from Scipio, because he had been freed from the tribute which he used to pay to the neighbouring tribe, and because his son when captured had been sent back to him by Scipio. What he had done in war he had not done of his own accord, but had been compelled by his own men to attack the Roman camp. The Hispani had a common plan; this very day had been appointed for attacking Scipio's winter-quaters, in order that no troops might come to the help of the second legion.


----------



## J.F. de TROYES

Lamb67 said:


> Legatus dixit se debere confiteri se accepisse multa beneficia ex Scipione, quia (_fuisset _)liberatus *esset *ex (_tribuno_ ) trib*uto* quod solveret vicinae genti, et quia cum esset suus filius captus remissus (_fuisset_) *esset*  sibi (_ex_)* a* Scipione.Quae fecisset in bello fecisse non sua, sed esse coactum a suis viris ut pugnaret castra Romanorum. Hispanos habere communem consilium; ipsam hanc diem dictam esse hibernis pugnandis Scipiorum, ne ullas copias subvenirent secundae legioni
> quote]
> 
> Pay attention to passive pluperfects : remissus erat ( esset), but not "remissus fuerat (fuisset) "


----------



## Lamb67

'Ne ullae copiae' for ' No troops' instead, or ' Ne ullae copiarum'  because it should be a nominative subject in the clause.

Maybe 'se fecisse non sua,' instead, added as the infinitive verb's subject. Similarly another 'se' before the first reddened esse as in above message.- he had been compelled


----------



## Lamb67

Legatus dixit se debere confiteri se accepisse multa beneficia ex Scipione, quia liberatum *esset *ex trib*uto q*uod solveret vicinae genti, et quia cum esset filium captum remissum *esset *sibi *a* Scipione.Quae fecisset in bello fecisse non sua sponte, sed esse coactum a suis viris ut pugnaret castra Romanorum. Hispanos habere communem consilium; ipsam hanc diem dictam esse hibernis pugnandis Scipiorum, ne ullas copias secundae legioni subvenirent.

It is a very tedius reading, I am sure.Because the whole passage is supposed to be an accusative and infinitive construction indicated by ' dixit' at the beginning.( I said it is an indirect statement which I have to deny now).

Only one question: for attacking Scipio's winter-quarters= gerundive as used above.
or ad pugnandum hiberna Scipiorum, both are right. Am I correct here ?

And I just noticed that ' Quae fecisset in bello fecisse non sua sponte '=' what he had done in war he had not done of his own accord.'' which sounds very unlikely to be a Latin sentence given its circumstances- in an acc and inf construction.But who can judge it for me ?


----------

