# abi in malam crucem



## alexacohen

Hello,

This is a silly one. 
I have never read or heard "abi in malam crucem" anywhere. A friend told me yesterday that it was a phrase said by Roman soldiers on some historical ocassion. 

He was, however, unable to specify more. I have checked the sentence and I have indeed found it but I haven't found any historical or literary reference at all.

If someone is acquainted with it, I would like to know the context, and also if "go and get hanged" is a common translation (I have found it several times). 

Wouldn't it be more accurate to translate it "go and crucify yourself"?

Thank you all

Ale


----------



## Probo

Salue: ueniam tuam peto, quoniam locum ubi haec sententia sit dare non possum. At, ut credo, sunt hae uerba quae Noe coruo dixit cum diluuium finem habuit: "Vete y no vuelvas" aut, ut Plautus dixit "Vete enhoramala", uulgo dicto, "Vete a la mierda". Cura ut ualeas.


----------



## alexacohen

Sendo galego, millor "vaite o carallo", non si?


----------



## Probo

alexacohen said:


> Sendo galego, millor "vaite o carallo", non si?


Pois si. Un bico.


----------



## wonderment

Hola: I don't know the exact historical context for this quote either, but it's a very common Latin expression, used in Roman comedy (not surprisingly). For instance, Plautus, _Persa_ 2.4.17: _abin hine in malam crucem?_ You can translate it as "Go and be hanged (i.e. on the cross, not with a noose)." Crucifixion was a standard form of punishment for criminals back then. Saludos.


----------



## alexacohen

Hi Wonderment.

I know of course the crucifixion bit (Life of Brian and Spartachus and Quo vadis? and Ben Hur and.... ).

Thanks for the Plautus tip. I don't remember Persa at all, but at least now I know where to check.


----------



## Miguel Antonio

alexacohen said:


> Sendo galego, millor "vaite o carallo", non si?


Gallaeciae lingua melior dicunt: vade per illum caraculum  (_vai pr'o C)_


----------



## taylorgma

alexacohen said:


> Hello,
> 
> This is a silly one.
> I have never read or heard "abi in malam crucem" anywhere. A friend told me yesterday that it was a phrase said by Roman soldiers on some historical ocassion.
> 
> He was, however, unable to specify more. I have checked the sentence and I have indeed found it but I haven't found any historical or literary reference at all.
> 
> If someone is acquainted with it, I would like to know the context, and also if "go and get hanged" is a common translation (I have found it several times).
> 
> Wouldn't it be more accurate to translate it "go and crucify yourself"?
> 
> Thank you all
> 
> Ale


I saw this in Stephen Dando-Collins book Caesar's Legion:The epic saga of Julius Caesar's tenth legion and the armies of Rome. In 54 BC the 14th legion was ambushed by the Eburones under Ambiorix. About a 100 legionnaires who managed to make it back to their camp took their own lives. It is said they uttered the phrase " Abi In Malam Crucem "


----------



## wandle

taylorgma said:


> It is said they uttered the phrase " Abi In Malam Crucem "


Who said they did? That is just an invention.
The only source we have for these events is Caesar's Commentaries on the Gallic War. See Bk 5, Chap 37. 

What Caesar tells us is that most of the Roman force of a legion and a half (say, 8,000 men) died in the ambush set by Ambiorix and the rest made their way back to their camp. Some died fighting there against much greater numbers. The rest, all to a man, killed themselves in desperation during the night. A few others who had escaped the battle reached the winter quarters of Labienus (Caesar's second-in-command) and reported the news. 

Seeing that the survivors of the ambush, although heavily outnumbered, had been able to retreat to the camp and reoccupy it for the night, their numbers must still have been considerable, perhaps a thousand or two thousand. It was that sort of number who slew themselves, not just a hundred. There is no record at all of actual words spoken on that occasion.

*Abi in malam crucem* is an insulting imperative. _*Abi*_ is the singular imperative, which means it is a remark addressed to one person. 
It literally means, 'Go off on to the bad cross': in other words, 'Go and be crucified'. 

It is comparable to modern expletives such as 'Go and be hanged' or 'Go to hell'.
It means you are telling someone offensively where to go. You would use it to swear at someone you wanted to get rid of. 

It is not equivalent to 'Oh, hell!' or other exclamations of despair or disgust. It is not appropriate to the situation described.  
Men killing themselves in despair might well be swearing oaths, but they would hardly be telling each other to go and be crucified.
Each man's feelings towards his fellow would be sympathetic and supportive, rather than hostile or offensive.


----------



## wandle

On reflection, the numbers in my first post (based on a legion strength of 5,000+) are too high. By the fifth year of the Gallic War, the initial strength of each legion had been reduced by losses and may have been no more than 3,500. Thus the force of a legion and a half which marched into Ambiorix' ambush was probably around 5,000. Hence the number who survived the ambush and struggled back to the camp may have been no more than a thousand, perhaps less.

This link to Stephen Dando-Collins' book Caesar's Legion: The Epic Saga of Julius Caesar's Elite Tenth shows that the author used the expression _*abi in malam crucem*_ in relation to the battle of Munda in the Civil War, where he says that Pompey's veterans, surrounded and being slaughtered, would, if offered quarter, probably have uttered that oath.
That is obviously a speculation and is about a different army, in a different situation, in a different battle, in a different war.


----------



## wandle

As a further note, Dando-Collins in the chapter dealing with the ambush by the Eburones gives the figure of 8,000 for the number of Romans who met their fate on that occasion, but it is in fact an overstatement, caused by calculating from the nominal size of a legion.

The Society for Ancient Languages quotes from Kelsey's introduction to _Caesar's Gallic War_, where he gives the evidence for the size of Caesar's legions. He says:


> The normal strength of a legion at the end of the Republic was 6000 men; but the average number of men in Caesar's legions probably did not exceed 3600.


The reason for this is that battle losses were replaced by raising a whole new legion at a time, not by new recruits to an existing legion. Thus each legion grew progressively smaller as the war went on.


> In the fifth year of the war we find two legions averaging barely 3500 men each (Bel. Gal. V. xlviii, xlix).


That reference is to De Bello Gallico Book 5, Chaps 48 & 49.


----------

