The Livy Passage: Cum, Ablative Absolute and a Historic Infinitive
In the last 20 minutes of Paper I you have a ten-line Livy passage worth 12 marks about a Roman defeat. Your working translation reads: Cum hostes appropinquarent, signo dato, nostri terga verterunt et fugere coeperunt; imperator, ubi id animadvertit, equites misit. You have a dictionary and a grammar table but no commentary. The mark scheme awards 4 marks for syntax, 4 for vocabulary and 4 for fluent English. You notice that cum could be temporal (when) or causal (since), that signo dato could attach to the cum-clause or to the main clause, and that fugere coeperunt can be rendered began to flee or simply fled. A classmate's version begins With the signal having been given..., and your teacher has warned that this kind of literalness loses fluency marks even when the grammar is recognised.
1. Parse `cum hostes appropinquarent` and `signo dato`. Decide the most defensible rendering of each in this sentence, and justify your choice by reference to syntax, context and English style.
Read the worked answer
Cum hostes appropinquarent is a subordinate clause with cum plus the imperfect subjunctive. In narrative Latin, cum with the subjunctive can be temporal (when, while) or causal (since, because). The imperfect suggests background or ongoing action, so the natural starting point is temporal: when the enemy were approaching. A causal reading is grammatically possible, but it would make the approach the reason for the signal, and the sentence already has signo dato to supply the trigger. Signo dato is an ablative absolute: noun plus perfect passive participle, syntactically detached from the main clause. It most naturally belongs with the main clause, giving the sequence: enemy approaches, signal is given, Roman line breaks. Rendering it as with the signal having been given is accurate but unidiomatic. Better English is at the signal or when the signal was given. A defensible version is: When the enemy were approaching, the signal was given, and our men turned and fled. This keeps the temporal frame, treats the ablative absolute as a circumstance, and avoids a clumsy English absolute.
2. Explain the aspect of `fugere coeperunt` and propose a rendering that is both accurate and idiomatic. Why is `they turned their backs and began to flee` risky?
Read the worked answer
Coepi takes a complementary infinitive and is inceptive: it marks the beginning of an action, so fugere coeperunt literally means they began to flee. The difficulty is that terga verterunt already means they turned their backs, which in battle narrative is close to they fled. Adding began to flee produces a pleonasm in English: the reader hears the same idea twice. The safest exam rendering preserves the inceptive force without repeating flee: they turned their backs and broke into flight or they turned and began to run. These keep the sense that the collapse was sudden, which is what coepi contributes. If the mark scheme has a vocabulary item for coeperunt, dropping it entirely may cost a vocabulary mark, so a phrase such as broke into flight is a good compromise because it still conveys the beginning of flight. If fluency is weighted heavily, they turned and fled is acceptable, but the candidate should recognise that the inceptive nuance has been lost.
3. A candidate writes: `When the enemy approached, with the signal having been given, our men turned their backs and began to flee.` Identify two strengths and two weaknesses against the 4-4-4 scheme, then revise the sentence.
Read the worked answer
Strengths: the candidate has recognised cum plus subjunctive as temporal and has attempted to represent the ablative absolute rather than ignoring it; the inceptive coeperunt is also represented. Weaknesses: first, with the signal having been given is a literal English absolute that is awkward and leaves the relation to the main clause vague; second, turned their backs and began to flee is tautological, so fluency suffers even though the Latin words are accounted for. Under a 4-4-4 scheme this might score well on syntax and vocabulary but lose fluency marks, and the vague attachment of the absolute could weaken the syntax mark. A revised version: When the enemy were approaching, the signal was given, and our men turned and fled. This is clear and idiomatic. If the candidate wants to show the ablative absolute more explicitly, At the signal, as the enemy approached, our men turned and fled keeps the sequence without the un-English absolute. The revision sacrifices the literal inceptive, so the candidate should decide whether the mark scheme rewards began; in a fluency-weighted question, clear English is the better judgement.