Chapter 2
¶ 1
Leave a comment on paragraph 1 4
Iam Phoebus breviore via contraxerat ortum
lucis, et obscuri crescebant tempora somni,
iamque suum victrix augebat Cynthia regnum,
et deformis hiemps gratos carpebat honores
divitis autumni, iussoque senescere Baccho
carpebat raras serus vindemitor uvas.
¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 4 Puto magis intellegi, si dixero: mensis erat October, dies III idus Octobris. Horam non possum certam tibi dicere, facilius inter philosophos quam inter horologia conveniet, tamen inter sextam et septimam erat.
¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 2 Nimis rustice inquies: cum {or <adeo his> adquiescunt} omnes poetae, non contenti ortus et occasus describere, ut etiam medium diem inquietent, tu sic transibis horam tam bonam?”
¶ 4
Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0
Iam medium curru Phoebus diviserat orbem
et propior nocti fessas quatiebat habenas
obliquo flexam deducens tramite lucem:
While Seneca uses carpebat twice in the imperfect active indicative, I would argue that each use should have a different meaning. Our book translator chooses “snatching” in line 4, and “plucking” in line 6. Both have similar meanings, though snatching implies more force. I found the definition “devour/eat” for carpo which I prefer in line 4. This pairs more closely with the Bacchanalian quality of the winter: the winter rain devours the riches gained from the autumn.
Thus, I would translate line four as “and the deformed/foul winter was devouring the beloved honors/adornments of a rich autumn”.
This more forceful definition of carpebat helps contrast between a Bacchanalian force in line four and the meeker grape picker in line 6. After all, Bacchus leaves and the force of the word should diminish drastically after iussoque senescere Baccho. As the translation stands in the book, that contrast doesn’t seem apparent enough.
Regarding regnum in line 3 – Perseus suggests that it is a neuter nominative singular noun, but wouldn’t it make more sense that regnum be in the accusative and the direct object? The book gives a translation of “Cynthia was already triumphantly extending her sway,” but I feel as though a closer translation would be “victorious Cynthia was already increasing her kingdom” creating a sentence structure with regnum as the direct object.
I find it extremely interesting that within this section of verse, Seneca personifies and deifies the sun, the moon, and wine with the names of Gods. These Gods are everyday, natural experiences. The purpose of this text is to make Claudius himself a part of nature, however satirical that may be. These Gods are already established as the sun, the moon, and wine, while this section of verse furthers Claudius’ ascendance into heaven and transformation into the pumpkin.
I noticed that our book chose to use arcum instead of ortum in the line Iam Phoebus breviore via contraxerat ortum lucis. I read the commentary, which claims it is impossible for it to be ortum, but I didn’t really understand their reasoning. I took that line to mean “Phoebus had already drawn in the rising of light with a shorter path,” which makes just as much sense to me as “the arc of light.” Is there any way to know which word Seneca intended?