# quibusdam negotiis



## cherine

Hi,

I'm translating a French text about the Middle ages, and there are a few Latin expressions here and there. Unfortunately, I didn't study Latin, so any help would be highly appreciated.
Here's a sentence I'm having trouble with: le roi chargeait [son ministre] de se rendre _ad certas partes pro quibusdam negotiis_.

If I rely on my French, I can guess that the king ordred his ministre to go to a certain place to make negotiations. How correct, or incorrect, is my guess? 

Thanks for all the help.


----------



## Scholiast

Greetings

I wonder whether cherine could supply a little more historical and indeed textual context?

As an interim answer, _ad certas partes_ should mean 'to certain particular districts/regions', and _pro quibusdam negotiis_ means 'for some specific matters of business/dealings/negotiations'. _negotium_ does not necessarily mean 'negotiations', though of course in Arabic 'business' and 'negotiations' may be the same word.

Σ


----------



## Glenfarclas

Scholiast said:


> and _pro quibusdam negotiis_ means 'for some specific matters of business/dealings/negotiations'. _negotium_ does not necessarily mean 'negotiations', though of course in Arabic 'business' and 'negotiations' may be the same word.



In case it wasn't clear from Scholiast's thorough reply, there is no reason that _negotium _has to have any connection at all with what we think of as business or deals. It may simply mean "matters, affairs."  Without knowing anything more about the context, I would probably translate _pro quibusdam negotiis_ as "to deal with certain affairs."


----------



## wandle

cherine said:


> ad certas partes pro quibusdam negotiis


I would say 'to certain areas for various duties': unless the context suggests a more specific meaning.


----------



## cherine

Hello,

Sorry for the late reply, and thank you very much, everyone, for your help. I'm also sorry that the context I gave wasn't enough, I wasn't sure how much French the members of the Latin forum speak so I just gave a short summary of it. The historical context is about the quarrel between the French king Philippe le Bel (Pilip IV) and Pope Boniface  VIII, when the king decided to accuse the Pope of being illegaly ellected and to send some men to arrest him. The text I have says that the king asked his councilor Nogaret de go to Italy:
"cinq jours avant l'assemblée du Louvre, le 7 mars 1303, le roi chargeait celui-ci [Nogaret] de se rendre _ad certas partes pro quibusdam negotiis_. M. Renan conclut de ce document que, dès cette date, Nogaret reçut l'ordre de préparer l'enlèvement de Boniface. Peut-être l'ordre ne fut-il pas aussi précis; peut-être Nogaret dut-il uniquement se rendre en Italie et, tout en s'assurant d'auxiliaires pour un coup de main, y attendre les évènements."

I found a Wikipedia page that translates this sentence as: to "go to certain places ... and make such treaties with such persons as seemed good to them" but I don't know if making treaties is the right translation. Maybe the Latin expression is not very precise or very specific.

Thanks again for the help.


----------



## Scholiast

Greetings once again

In the light of this clarification from cherine (# 5), my impression is that the Latin has been left deliberately vague, indeed the fact that it is been put into Latin in the first place suggests a conscious avoidance of the particular or specific details—certainly a desire for diplomatic discretion. 'Five days after the Louvre meeting on 7th March 1303, the King instructed [Nogaret] to go to _certain districts to attend to some particular arrangements_.' From the document, Renan draws the conclusion that, from that date, N. received the order to arrange the removal from office of Boniface. The order may perhaps not have been phrased quite so exactly....

Does this make historical sense?

Σ


----------



## cherine

Judging from the Wiki page to which I linked above, and from a couple of other resources I checked, yes it makes sense.
As for using Lating, wasn't that the norm at the time? You wouldn't expect a royal document in the 14th century to be written in French, but I don't know much about Latin anyway.


----------



## Scholiast

Greetings once more


cherine said:


> As for using Latin[g], wasn't that the norm at the time?


Yes, for diplomatic or governmental communication throughout Europe, Latin was at that time the standard language. Even as late as the 17th century we can find Elizabeth I (of England) corresponding in Latin with the court of Philip II of Spain.

Σ


----------

