I ran across a fun little exemplum from a large collection (Compilatio singularis exemplorum) that contains an episode of a master in arts (clericus magister in artibus) under examination, who gets the best of his examiner. Enjoy!

1. Quidam clericus magister in artibus a quodam archidiacono nimis rigide examinatus est. Qui credebat ipsum parum scire et uidens ipsum optime respondisse de magnis questionibus de paruis, ut eum caperet, examinare cepit querens: "'Ego' cuius generis?" Qui exasperatus respondit: "Vos estis filius sacerdotis et monialis." Et uerum erat. Et sic accepit pro nimia exasperatione confusionem. (ed. Loose, CCCM 308)

Is it wrong to want to know how to refer to modern things in Latin, things that the ancient Romans had no need for?

Plodding along through the Book of Psalms for my recording of the Clementine Vulgate for Librivox. All previously released parts are here. Cheers!

So I know that monosyllables are forbidden before the caesura of a pentameter unless it is preceded by another monosyllabic word, ór it is preceded by a pyrrhic word (‘short-short’; u u), ór it is est and elided

onto the preceding word.

I dont know if this applies to the hexameter as well.

I have seen it before, but I want to know if it is common or not as common as any other normal verses.

Are there certain wordtypes authors especially avoid?

For example: prepositions like in, ab, ex...; nouns like spem, vir, pes,...; verbs like sum, vis, do, das, ī....; or even pronouns like mī, tī, se, id...

Has anyone done any research on this.

I had debated making this one an LLPSI-style reader, like Selectae Sanctorum Vitae, which is coming next week, but decided a Latin edition with facing English paragraphs would be better, since this was requested for students going through RCIA.

I used to be a catechist at a fairly large church, and while some things have definitely changed over the years, it's interesting to see how these sacraments were celebrated in Milan and how Ambrose explains their theology. It's still a pretty solid explanation of what's going on today.

We'll probably be handing these out toward the end of the process, as we get closer to the Easter Vigil. I know plenty of young people seem interested in Latin and willing to learn the basics, so hopefully they'll get some use out of it.

Let me know what you think.

TLDR: I'm looking for recordings of individual words in classical pronunciation, ideally that I can use to make my own practice app with. Googling and asking AI haven't really helped. Is anyone aware of a resource?

Longer version: One day I'll come to the community to ask what everyone thinks about the value of 'grinding' on vocab and grammar concepts (type the imperfect of 'ponēre'), but I use it for myself and have made tools for my students (who learn English) to use it.

Now, my son showed an interest in Latin and I wanted to let him use my practice tool... and I think if I personally keep crapping on him about his pronunciation, it's demotivating. But, if the review tool just plays the word (no text) and asks for the English translation, he'll learn it that way.

For that, I think I need someone else who is confident in their pronunciation. It feels like the kind of thing that already exists... I just don't know where. (I'm in chapter XXI of LLPSI and he's in chapter I, it's not like I feel qualified to be a Latin teacher.)

If I get to make wishes of the universe, this would be something I could access via an API... but I'm game to individually download files. I'd rather not have to pirate something by screengrabbing individual seconds of YouTube videos...

I wanted to ask about this method of rote memorisation of all the paradigms within Latin

I am a user of the LLPSI course, alongside some of it's supplementary texts within the series (the conversations book and fables) , but I want to improve my independent output without always needing to think of the tables or whatnot

Is this method efficient? Or is there something better for the paradigms as I understand that Luke ranieri, while Incredibly good at Latin, does ultimately lack any actual qualification in Latin or education in general

I do not mind the intensity, I have the time to spend with any idea

Thanks for any advice

I added captions to "Skeleton Frolic" [Lascivia Larvarum], a Columbia pictures animated short from 1937. If you'd like to see a vocabulary list for the captions, there's one available on my blog. Also, earlier this month I published a list of eerie, spooking, criminal, or mysterious Latin passages as suggestions for what to read in October.

I'm just curious if there's any rhyme or reason for using what I'd call the synthetic (one-word) superlative vs. the bare adjective with maxime. Here's an example I just saw:

Quo mihi rectius videtur ingenii quam virium opibus gloriam quaerere et, quoniam vita ipsa, qua fruimur, brevis est, memoriam nostri quam maxime longam efficere. (Sallust, Bellum Catilinae, 1.3)

If I had composed this myself, thinking back on my lessons on the superlative with quam, I would surely have written quam longissimam for "as long as possible". Is there a subtly meaningful syntactic difference here, or is maxime longam completely interchangeable with longissimam, and this is just a stylistic thing?

I'm not really a latin-learner, i sometimes read familia romana till it gets too difficult for me. But i need to look up latin words like "prehendere", "licere", "juvare/iuvare", etc. for better understanding complicated words i learn in another language. I would also like to get a broader understanding of the word if this is possible without having a fundamental understanding of latin.

But in general i just need a really good dictionary that shows me reliably the definition of the word i would look up. I know only navigium.de that i can trust 100%, but it is in german and i would prefer an english pendant of it.

Hello, could anyone help me translate the chapter on cats and mice from Thomas von Cantimpré’s Liber de naturis rerum?

I use Helmut Boese’s version; as he never published the second volume he had planned, there is no translation by him.

De musione vel murilego, qui et cattus dicitur.

Musio sive murilegus aut cattus Grece quasi astutus dictus, ut dicit Jacobus, tam acute cernit, ut etiam in antris tenebrosissimis velut in die mures videat et, ut certum est, carbunculosis oculis et fulgore luminis vincit tenebras noctis. Animal immundum est et odiosum. Mures et omne eorum genus persequitur. Quibus captis lusibus primo afficit, deinde illusas manducat. Sunt et venenosi buffones, cum quibus dimicare dicuntur. Post pugnam vero nisi citius aquas ad bibendum invenerint, siti arescunt. Cum serpentibus etiam pugnare dicuntur, quorum licet venenatis aculeis repungantur, non tamen necantur. Ut dicit Experimentator, musio tempore coitus libenter silvester efficitur. Loturam faciei lambendo prioribus pedibus imitatur. Dentes habent ad modum serre. Pugnant inter se crudelissime et hoc frequentius, ut terminos consuetos sue venationis obtineant. Ad ludum ab hominibus facillime provocantur. Gaudent blanditiis; loca calida diligunt, unde ex nimia pigritia pelles suas comburunt. Pilos longos circa ora habent, quibus ablatis audaciam perdunt. Manu hominis contrectate gaudent, unde suo modo cantandi gaudium exprimunt. Insidiantur illis pellifices, et ideo cautum est, ut tondeantur. Libidine impatientissime accenduntur. Murilegus domesticus cum silvescere ceperit, amputantur illi aures, ut scilicet locis aurium patentibus infusioni guttas noctis vel pluvie sustinere non possit ideoque cogatur domus tecta repetere.

(Murilegus circa simile sibi tanto amore afficitur, ut si super puteum steterit et umbram suam in aqua putei fuerit contemplatus, ut similis sui societate fruatur, sponte ab alto cadens decidat in profundum et sic umbre vanitate deceptus aquis obruentibus submergatur. Hoc fit maxime, cum femina marem requirens libidine impatientius accen-duntur, et hoc precipue in iunioribus cattis, qui minus experti pericula non noverunt.)

De mure.

Mures bestiole sunt, ut dicit Liber rerum, panis cupide et eorum etiam, que ex frugibus ad pastus humanos fiunt. Odor eorum elephantes vexat. In perquirendis cibis sollertissimi sunt et pro his plerumque nulla vitant pericula. Hoc licet tarde et tractim fiat, ciborum tamen cupidine duriores solidasque materias demoliuntur. Ut dicit Aristotiles, mus si aquam biberit, moritur; et hoc quia valde humide nature sunt mures. Et notandum, quod Plinius dicit murem Libicum, qui non bibit, non omnem forte murem generaliter intelligendum. Sed quoniam certum est quod mus mingit, probabile est, quod cibus quem comedit vertitur in urinam, sicut de quibusdam hominibus certum est, qui fere nichil biberunt et tamen mutatis cibis in liquidam substan-tiam urinam plurimam faciebant. Ut dicit magnus Basilius: In Egyptiacis Thebis si pluvias largiores estivo tempore fuderit celum, mox infinitis muribus regio tota repletur. Mus plurimos caseos in uno loco reperiens, omnes attemptat et quem optimum invenit, illum comedit et deteriores dampnans indicat postponendos. Haud dubium est, mures albos esse in quibusdam partibus, ruffos autem nonnullos; nigri vero sunt quos communiter orbis habet. Mures voces edunt luna plena; in interlunio mute sunt, ut dicit Plinius. Est etiam quoddam eorum genus, sed multo maius, quos rattos appellamus. Hee bestiole adeo perniciose sunt, cum libidine accenduntur, ut si urina eorum hominis partem nudam attigerit, carnes eius usque ad ossa putrescere faciat nec plaga vulneris eius in cicatricem amodo reducatur. Hiis in plena luna iecur crescit, sicut dicit Ysidorus, sicut quedam marina animalia augentur, ut conche sunt, que rursus minuente luna deficiunt. Generationem eorum lambendo con-stare, non coitu, Plinius dicit, et salis gustu fieri pregnantes. Subito oriri multitudinem et repente occidere manifestum est; nec tamen exanimes reperiuntur. Lapillos etiam candidos cum fetibus eorum inveniri frequentius certum est, sed ob quam causam incertum, nisi quod vulgus edocuit eas non posse parere nisi presente lapillo. Troade incolas, ut Historia habet Grecorum, mures fugasse manifestum est siccatis eorum proventibus.

(Mures necabis, ut dicit Palladius, si panem vel caseum facias, cui elleborum nigrum admixtum est, et offeras comedenti. Idem et de rattis dicimus. In oriente mures sunt, ut lacobus dicit, magni ut vulpes, qui animalia perimunt et homines, licet non occidant, tamen morsibus illos molestant. In Arabia invenitur mus magnus et pedes illius anteriores sunt magni, unius scilicet palme, et posteriores unius digiti.)

Basically what the title states. I’ve invested so much time into Latin learning; finished Familia Romana; got through the first few chapters of Roma Aeterna; did many of the exercises and pensums; and still, I cannot pick up books that people say I should be able to read by now and understand them even a bit. Many have said you should be fine (vocabulary not wanting) to begin De Bello Gallico, and I can’t even understand it; it all just seems so complicated. I understand all the grammatical concepts taught by FR (deponent verbs, gerunds, all conjugations and tenses, participles, subjunctive, etc.), and yet when I pick up even a medieval scholastic text, that’s allegedly easy Latin, I can’t even understand it—it’s like I learned nothing. I can understand easily all of Familia Romana, and have gotten through it fairly quickly, but it’s almost like knowing it did not even help at all in being able to read authentic Latin. Idk if I am just complaining or being childish, but it sucks how I’ve invested so much time and energy into learning Latin, only to get poor ROI (return on investment) with it. I just feel defeated yall. I feel like I’ve fallen behind and am pushing through an invincible wall that does not want to break.

While Latin verbs with objects usually have the object in the accusative case, there are various verbs that require the dative or ablative instead. So, for example, the verb utor (use) has the object noun (the thing being used) be put in the ablative, not accusative as is usually the case with verbs.

The difficulty I'm having is finding a source that will conveniently tell me what case each verb uses. Textbooks like the Cambridge Latin Course were pretty good at specifying that, but that's limited to only the specific vocabulary they teach. For words they don't mention, you have to look at dictionaries, but the ones I've looked at only give meanings, but don't specify when the object noun should be rendered in a non-accusative case. Sometimes if they give an example quotation you can see the case of the noun, but you have to figure that it yourself rather than them just telling you, and even then they don't necessarily do that.

Is there any book/site/other resource that will let you look up a verb and it will tell you if it requires the object noun to be put in something other than the usual accusative?

I finished the bilingual edition of Sulpicius Severus's Life of St Martin. This is the first in my Church Fathers in Latin and English series.

While this project originally started out with publishing the LLPSI inspired readers that I had created, I wanted to make bilingual editions for myself because I loved what other publishers had done with Aquinas and Augustine.

I know some people prefer the LLPSI style readers for comprehensible input but I wanted to give an option for those who prefer Latin and English side by side as well.

The books are in a larger format than my readers because they needed to accommodate the dual paragraph layout and still allow me to put the translation notes at the bottom. Fewer printed pages also means I can sell them for cheaper.

Also, I think I figured out a good format to make this into a decent eBook. I spent a crazy amount of time trying to figure out the best way to do it. Originally I was going to have each English paragraph have a link to its Latin counterpart in the back of the book, but that would've catered to a more English-focused audience at the expense of those learning Latin (who are my priority).

So now it goes from the Latin paragraph to the English paragraph. I've indented them separately so it's easy to ignore the Latin or English paragraphs if that's how you feel like reading it and the numbered paragraphs help you if you get lost.

I think this way works best. If you end up hating the format, send an email to the editor. I'm always open to feedback.

Hello. I’ve been on and off studying Latin for years and always forget what I learned. I love the Latin language a lot, though. Especially ecclesiastical Latin in hymns and chants.

I’ve been working on a little project that involves a song sang in Latin in the style of a sort of Gregorian chant in some sense. It all pertains to the lore of an indie show on YouTube I really like. So I’m wondering if my translations are accurate to what they’re meant to mean. Keep in mind that most of the translations came from current research rather than knowledge I had when studying.

——————

Salva nos, Deus

(Save us, God)

Nos neglege amplius

(Ignore us furthermore)

Bibe cum regibus

(Drink with kings)

Cur abiisti, dominus

(Why did you leave, lord?)

-

Cur, dominus

(Why, Lord?)

Servi sumus

(We are slaves)

Illi servimus

(We are slaves to her)

Each line is meant to rhyme with -us

And thanks for at least giving this a read 👍

Im a freshmen in highschool taking latin and we're about to go from 1st declension gender to 2nd declension gender and what does that even mean? Like what's the difference and how do you even tell if its 2nd or 1st and 1 more question for some reason in my school we dont learn the 6th latin case (vocative) I asked my latin teacher and he said its because it's not important is that true? And how do you guys remember so much latin endings im done for my memory is bad.

Hello !! I am currently working on a painting that is a contemporary translation of the classical art tradition of the Vanitas painting (which is a sub genre of the 'memento mori' tradition), and have a large book spine that I would like to put a relevant latin quote. Unfortunately I am VERY picky about this and it has to be absolutely perfect, but my knowledge of latin literature is limited and the quotes on websites are often more death focused. These are my current top contenders, and if you spot an error or a quote that is associated with something dicey PLEASE let me know !!! ( I have been googling my butt off trying to fact check)

"Vivere est Mori" (to live is to die)

"Pulvis Et Umbra Sumus" (we are but dust and shadow)

- this quote is my current favourite, as the working title of the body of work is " returning to the dust from which you were raised", so I felt it particularly fitting, although the poem it is from is perhaps not the most suitable.

"Vanitas Vanitatum, omnia vanitas" - (vanity of vanities, all is vanity) - this is almost too on the nose.

memento vivere is also under consideration !! but that feels too obvious.

Anyway, if you have read this far, I truly appreciate any and all ideas !! and if you would like more information on my project, feel free to read my essay on the concept here!

oh and here is the painting !! it isn't done yet but I am very excited nonetheless !!

Nuntii Latini praeteritae hebdomadis.

+
Below is a beautiful Latin sermon on Mary's pondering heart by St. Laurence Justinian.

There is a new rosary devotion to Mary's pondering heart called the Florilegium Cordis Conferentis. It is a scriptural rosary with a verse from the Nova Vulgata for each Ave—just like the Angelus—taken from the Church's Liturgia Horarum. This sermon is taken from the website.
+
Conferente secum Maria
de omnibus quae legendo, audiendo, videndo, cognoverat, 
o quantum crescebat in fide, augebatur meritis,
sapientia illustrabatur 
magis magisque caritatis cremabuatur incendio! 
Ex redivia siquidem sacramentorum caelestium 
reseratione promota, 
complebatur laetitia, Spiritu fecundabatur nimium, 
dirigebatur in Deum, 
et humilis custodiebatur in se. 
Tales prorsus divinae gratiae sunt profectus 
ut de imis elevent ad summa, 
et de claritate in claritatem transforment. 

Beata plane mens Vrginis, 
quae per inhabitantem Spiritum ac magisterium, 
Verbi Dei semper in omnibus parebat imperio. 
Non sensu proprio, non suo ducebatur arbitrio; 
sed quod intus sapientia innuebat ad fidem, 
foris hoc corporis ministerio peragebat. 

 Decebat utique divinam Sapientiam, 
quae sibi ad habitandum domum aedificabat Ecclesiae, 
ut de legis custodia, de purificatione mentis, 
de humilitatis norma, et de spirtali oblatione, 
Mariae sanctissimae medio uteretur. 

Ipsam tu, o fidelis anima, imitare. 

Ut enim spiritaliter purificeris 
et a delictorum valeas emundari contagiis, 
in templum cordis tui ingredere. 
Ibi affectum in cuntis quae agimus 
Deus potius attendit quam opus. 
Quamobrem, sive per contemplationis studium 
mente excedimus Deo atque vacamus, 
seu per virtutum incrementa et commendabilium negotiorum opera 
promximis nostris sobrii esse satagimus, 
id taliter perficiamus, 
ut tantum Christi caritas urgeat nos. 

Haec plane est spiritalis purificationis accepta oblatio, 
quae non in manufacto, sed in cordis persolvitur templo, 
in quod Dominus Christus gratanter ingreditur. 
+

Ex sermonibus sancti Laurentii Iustiniani in Festo Purificationis, 
ad Officium lectionis, in Liturgia Horarum,
Sabbato Immaculati Cordis Beatae Mariae Virginis."

For other such ecclesiastical readings, search for the Latin website Novum Rosarium Florilegium

As a gift for someone I know who loves both Agatha Christie and Latin, I've been trying to find a translation of Agatha Christie's books into Latin, yet unfortunately I haven't found anything except supposed books on Amazon that were made by Google Translate. Hence, I wanted to ask if anyone here knows where I might find such. Any help is greatly appreciated.

The name in the last photo seemingly doesn’t appear on the title page, so I can’t with confidence date the title page inscriptions as 1733 also. However, my guess is the inscriptions are before 1733. The book is heavy annotated with numerous Latin passages and words. This is a miniature however, so everything is incredibly small and leaves little room for anything written to be legible especially on the pages full of text. This book is a censored version of the original edited by The Society of Jesus, also known as the Jesuit Order/Jesuits. Published in Antwerp, which I believe at the time of this book’s year, 1749, was part of the Holy Roman Empire. It would be much appreciated if someone can clarify that claim as well.

Question for more experienced Latinists. I was trying to use the Hackett audio of LLPSI to help make sure my pronunciation is correct and I noticed neither audio seems to fit with the pronunciation guides I find online. For instance, their Ecclesiastical one says magnus like mag-noos not mon-yoos which is how I thought it was pronounced and their classical pronunciation pronounces Vs as Vs not like a W although I think that may be because it’s old so it might just be an earlier version of classical maybe? I also am a noob to Latin so I imagine I’m totally wrong but I don’t want to use it if it is going to give me bad habits. So my question is: how good are the Hackett recordings?

Context: Urania is talking about the wonders of the Sun and asking Aesculapius about the wonders of the body.

I'm having difficult with the paragraph above, maybe someone can help me. There's two parts I can't put syntatically together. That's how I see the whole text in a more direct order:

Caeterum, Sol tuus pater, oblectamentum rerum omnium degentium sub Lunae sphera, et fons perennis luminis necnon caloris, nuncupatus imago divinae intelligentiae Pythagoricis, et Socrati (Platone teste) filius visibilis dei, exoriens mane detersa caligine noctis , et, ubi atollitur, derepente illustrans universum hemisphaerium, et omnia modificans luce et radiis, necnon vi tacita, et motu, Peripateticis uti etiam Academicis, invitans quotidie homines insuper ad consuetas operas quasi de classico οὐρανόθεν, quid per Iovem (revoco verbum Aesculapi) de tota supellectile corporum humanorum expressissime mihi figurabit?

How can I relate the first part, full of participle presents referring to the Sun, in itallic, with the second part, in bold, beginning with "quid"? It seens odd to me. If the participles and "sol" were in the ablative I would interpret the first part in an adverbial sence, but since they aren't, I'm stuck.

Please, help me!