# in der Waage halten



## jacktsonis

Hallo. I kann diesen Satz nicht genau verstehen, und suche eine gute englische Übersetzung. Danke im Voraus.

"Bei Cicero hält dieser einseitigen Parteinahme gegen ihn einigermaßen die Wage die aufrichtigte Bewunderung seiner Genialität, zumal seiner Redegewalt und seiner Redekunst."

Ich kann auch nicht eine gute Übersetzung im Wörterbuch für "Wage" finden... bin ich dumm? Bedeutet es vielleicht "Wagemut"? Es ist altes akademisches Deutsch. Ich bin verwirrt.
Danke noch mal.

Jack.


----------



## Frank78

I think it should be "Waage" - "etwas ist in Waage" - "something is balanced"

Where´s this sentence from?


----------



## berndf

I agree with Frank. It is definitly a typo and should be "Waage"="scale" (the instrument for weighing). "Sich die Waage halten" is a very frequent idiomatic expression meaning "being in balance", "being equal", "neither is outweighing the other".


----------



## jacktsonis

Thanks guys. I have checked the text and I have not misspelled it, the book has. I'm quite surprised though, its from a work called _Die Real-Encyklopädie der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft_ from around 1920. I'm still a little unsure of exactly what the sentence means if it is "die Waage".

Cheers. 

Jack.


----------



## Frank78

I´m unsure myself. The sentence doesn´t state 2 things which could be in balance.


----------



## berndf

I suppose "ihn" (him) refers to Caesar. It means that
_Cicero's political opposition to Caesar is about as strong as his genuine admiration for Caesar's genius_.
I.e. the two are _in balance_.


----------



## Frank78

berndf said:


> I suppose "ihn" (him) refers to Caesar. It means that
> _Cicero's political opposition to Caesar is about as strong as his genuine admiration for Caesar's genius_.
> I.e. the two are _in balance_.



Wouldn´t it be something like this then? :


"Bei Cicero hält *sich * *diese* *einseitige* Parteinahme gegen ihn einigermaßen die Waage die aufrichtigte Bewunderung seiner Genialität, zumal seiner Redegewalt und seiner Redekunst."

Further I think this characterization applies more to Cicero himself.


----------



## jacktsonis

OK, here is the sentence before it. It is also a little confusing, especially "sie" (because they are talking about a man, and I can't work out what else it might refer to... surely not the "Darstellung"?):

"Von der Darstellung des Gaius bei Poseidenios lehren die bei Diodor erhaltenen Proben, dass sie ganz erfüllt war von dem Geist des Hasses und der Rache, der die römische Nobilität der sullanischen Zeit gegen den Vorkämpfer der Demokratie beseelt. Bei Cicero hält dieser einseitigen Parteinahme gegen ihn einigermaßen die Wage die aufrichtigte Bewunderung seiner Genialität, zumal seiner Redegewalt und seiner Redekunst."

It's really tricky. I am translating it for an article I am writing and occassionaly I find sentences like these, which are very difficult.

Thanks, Jack.


----------



## jacktsonis

I have translated the first sentence: "The portayal of Gaius in Poseidonios informs the specimens which are left to us in Diodor, that he was greatly filled with the spirit of hate and revenge, which the Roman Nobility of the Sullan time enlivened against this champion of democracy."

But I'm not entirely sure if it's correct. 
Jack.


----------



## berndf

Frank78 said:


> "Bei Cicero hält *sich **diese* *einseitige* Parteinahme gegen ihn einigermaßen die Waage die aufrichtigte Bewunderung seiner Genialität, zumal seiner Redegewalt und seiner Redekunst."


The sytactic structure is:
_Sie (die Bewunderung, _nominative_) hält ihr (die Parteinahme, _dative_) die Waage._



Frank78 said:


> Further I think this characterization applies more to Cicero himself.


The additional text mankes it clear now. It is about Sulla, not about Ceasar. But otherwise I think my interpretation was correct.


----------



## Frank78

I think it means:

There´s no such partisanship against Cicero (who was a member of the nobility as well) because he admired Cicero´s genius and his rhetoric skills.

Actually the German sentence is awful. I first thought Cicero wasn´t partisan.


----------



## Hutschi

It is an old style. I will try to rephrase it:

"Bei Cicero (hält _die aufrichtigte Bewunderung seiner Genialität, zumal seiner Redegewalt und seiner Redekunst_*)  (*_dieser einseitigen Parteinahme gegen ihn)_ (einigermaßen) die Wage ."

Here the form is "sie (Nominativ) hält ihr (Dativ) die Waage.

"Bei Cicero hält _die aufrichtigte Bewunderung seiner Genialität, zumal seiner Redegewalt und seiner Redekunst_* mit *_dieser einseitigen Parteinahme gegen ihn_ (einigermaßen) die Wage ."

("Mit" is not necessary but makes it more clear.)

In the modern standard language you can not move "die Waage" more to the beginning, because it belongs to the verb and the second part of the verb has to go to the end. But the movement more to the front was very common for centuries and is regionally spread even now.


----------



## berndf

Hutschi said:


> Here the form is "sie (Nominativ) hält ihr (Dativ) die Waage.


Exactly, see #10. 



Frank78 said:


> I think it means:
> 
> There´s no such partisanship against Cicero (who was a member of the nobility as well) because he admired Cicero´s genius and his rhetoric skills.


Rereading the two sentences carefully, I now agree with you that it is about the perception *of* Cicero and not about the perception *by* Cicero.

But I think that your interpretation is still not correct. The sentence means:
_The nobility *is* opposed to him. But this opposition is *counterbalanced* by their genuine admiration for his genius_.



Frank78 said:


> Actually the German sentence is awful. I first thought Cicero wasn´t partisan.


It is not awful; just different. People from 1920 would have similar problems with our modern sentence structures.


----------



## Frank78

berndf said:


> It is not awful; just different. People from 1920 would have similar problems with our modern sentence structures.



I doubt that this is just a matter of time. I´ve a couple of scientific books, esp. about history and I normally don´t have to read it a couple of times. Perhaps the author is a philosopher. That would explain it. 

Cicero was a defender of the republic and an enemy of Caesar, I doubt strongly that he was opposed to the nobiltly or the nobility was opposed to him. Caesar was the man of the plebs and the nobility were the protectors of the traditional republic. It surly depends on the time we´re talking about, at least during the Roman Civil War he was opposed the Caesar.


----------



## berndf

Frank78 said:


> Cicero was a defender of the republic and an enemy of Caesar, I doubt strongly that he was opposed to the nobiltly or the nobility was opposed to him. Caesar was the man of the plebs and the nobility were the protectors of the traditional republic.


Cicero was a bit older than Caesar. We are talking about the time of Sulla at which Cicero was already a well-known political figure:





> die römische Nobilität der sullanischen Zeit gegen den Vorkämpfer der Demokratie beseelt.


Contrary to Caesar, Sulla had the support of a large part of the nobility, especially the members of the equestrian order who where the main beneficiaries of Sulla’s reforms. Sulla was not the champion of the plebs. Cicero was first and foremost, as you rightly pointed out, a defender of the institutions of the Republic which where under threat by Sulla.


----------



## jacktsonis

Thanks guys, it is becoming much clearer to me now. I should also have mentioned that this comes from a piece on Gaius Gracchus, the revolutionary tribune of the plebs from 123BC. 
Thus Münzer, the author, must be describing how "In Cicero the one-sided partishanship against him [Gaius] is balanced by his genuine wonder of his brilliance, especially his passion and his skill in oratory."

What do you guys think? 

I am also still a little unsure as to the grammatical structure of the first sentence: "Von der Darstellung des Gaius bei Poseidenios lehren die bei Diodor erhaltenen Proben, dass sie ganz erfüllt war von dem Geist des Hasses und der Rache, der die römische Nobilität der sullanischen Zeit gegen den Vorkämpfer der Demokratie beseelt"

In the context it makes sense if "sie" is "er", because then it would seem to mean that "he [Gaius] was greatly filled with the spirit of hate and revenge which the roman nobility of the sullan time enlivened against this champion of democracy." Is that the right sense? It seems like the two sentences are unrelated now that I understand the second one (Bei Cicero...).

In this section he is discussing the source material on Gaius Gracchus.

Thanks again for all your help.


----------



## berndf

jacktsonis said:


> "Von der *Darstellung*





jacktsonis said:


> ** des Gaius bei Poseidenios lehren die bei Diodor erhaltenen Proben, dass *sie* ganz erfüllt war von dem Geist des Hasses und der Rache, der die römische Nobilität der sullanischen Zeit gegen den Vorkämpfer der Demokratie beseelt"


"Sie" refers to "Darstellung" ("Darstellung" is a feminine noun, hence you use "sie" whereas in English you would use "it"):
_It [, the description, was] completely steeped in the spirit of hate and revenge._


----------



## jacktsonis

Thanks Berndf. The only other thing is that I am still struggling to see how the three clauses in this sentence fit together - I can't quite make sense of it:

- Von der Darstellung des Gaius bei Poseidenios lehren die bei Diodor erhaltenen Proben-
[Does this mean something like: the fragments of Diodor inform us about the portrayal of Gaius in Poseidenios,] 

- dass sie ganz erfüllt war von dem Geist des Hasses und der Rache- 
[which was greatly steeped in the spirit of hate and revenge]

- der die römische Nobilität der sullanischen Zeit gegen den Vorkämpfer der Demokratie beseelt"
[I'm not sure how to put this].

J


----------



## berndf

The first two are correct. The third one is tricky. I leave it to you to find the correct words in English. The meaning is:
_This spirit of hate and revenge against the precursor of democracy [i.e. Gaius Gracchus] prevailed with the Roman nobility of Sulla's time._


----------



## jacktsonis

berndf said:


> _This spirit of hate and revenge against the precursor of democracy [i.e. Cicero] prevailed with the Roman nobility of Sulla's time._



Ah, I understand it now. 

Just to clarify then: "Vorkämpfer" here is "precursor" - could it also be "champion"? Because I think he is talking overall about Gaius Gracchus, who was of course one of the great champions of democracy.

also: "beseelen" here is "prevail"?


----------



## berndf

jacktsonis said:


> Just to clarify then: "Vorkämpfer" here is "precursor" - could it also be "champion"? Because I think he is talking overall about Gaius Gracchus, who was of course one of the great champions of democracy.


No, not really. A _Vorkämpfer_ is someone who campaigns or struggles or fights for an idea before anybody else does it.




jacktsonis said:


> also: "beseelen" here is "prevail"?


No. I didn't find a suitable translation. "Seele" is "Soul" and "X beseelt Y" means that "X enters the soul of Y" or "X becomes the soul of Y" or "Y is possessed by X". But in this case the more literal translation "the nobility was possessed by this spirit" would be much too strong. So take my translation as representing the meaning of the entire relative clause and not of the individual words.


*EDIT: please not the change to my previous post: After what you explained in #16 I now think that "precursor of democracy" refers to Gaius Gracchus and not to Cicero.*


----------



## Frank78

berndf said:


> *
> EDIT: please not the change to my previous post: After what you explained in #16 I now think that "precursor of democracy" refers to Gaius Gracchus and not to Cicero.*



This should be clear. Although it might lead to misunderstanding. At ancient times a democracy had a bad connotation since it was (or maybe still is) the rule of plebs. A man like Cicero would have never spoken in favor of a pure democracy. The classical idea was a mixed constitution (republic) of monarchy, aristocracy and democracy (first described by Aristotle).
Even today´s "democracies" are rather a republic than a classical demoracy.


----------



## jacktsonis

Yes, there has been a great deal of debate in Roman studies about the use of the term "democracy" - but it was fashionable at the time Münzer was writing.

Thanks a lot for all the help with these tricky sentences.

Jack.


----------



## Frank78

jacktsonis said:


> Yes, there has been a great deal of debate in Roman studies about the use of the term "democracy" - but it was fashionable at the time Münzer was writing.
> 
> Thanks a lot for all the help with these tricky sentences.
> 
> Jack.



I think democracy has been staying the same but there has been a greater change in the meaning of the word "republic". Today every state which is not a monarchy is a republic. That was different up until the early modern times.


----------

