Cum-Clause: Temporal, Causal, or Concessive?
Comprehension passage, 12 lines, adapted Livy. Sentence: 'Cum milites portas clauderent, hostes tamen intrare conati sunt.' A candidate translates: 'When the soldiers closed the gates, the enemy nevertheless tried to enter.' The teacher says the translation is not impossible but misses the point: the passage has just said the gates were already barred by a tribune, and the enemy knew it. The candidate argues that 'cum' plus imperfect subjunctive usually means 'when' in narrative. The teacher asks him to consider 'tamen', the prior sentence, and the difference between 'clauderent' as an attempted or repeated action and 'clausissent' as a completed one. The candidate must choose a rendering and defend it, then explain what would change if the verb were 'clausissent'.
1. Explain the range of meanings of cum + imperfect subjunctive in past narrative. Which rendering best suits this sentence, and why?
Read the worked answer
'Cum' + imperfect subjunctive in past narrative can be temporal ('when'), causal ('since/because'), concessive ('although'), or purely circumstantial. The imperfect often describes an ongoing or repeated situation rather than a single completed act. Here 'tamen' is the strongest signal: it marks the main clause as contrary to expectation. If the soldiers were closing the gates, the enemy's attempt to enter is surprising, so 'although the soldiers were closing the gates' is the best fit. 'When' is grammatically possible but flatter and leaves 'tamen' under-translated. 'Because' would make the enemy's attempt the expected result, which clashes with 'tamen'. The prior sentence about the gates already being barred supports the idea that closure is an obstacle, not new information.
2. What difference would 'cum milites portas clausissent' make? Consider tense, aspect, and the likely translation.
Read the worked answer
'clausissent' is pluperfect subjunctive, so the closing is completed before the main verb: 'when/after the soldiers had closed the gates' or, with 'tamen', 'although the soldiers had closed the gates'. The pluperfect makes the closure a finished fact and strengthens the concessive reading: the obstacle is fully in place. The imperfect 'clauderent' can suggest an ongoing, attempted, or repeated closing; it is more vivid and less settled. If the previous sentence says the gates were already barred, the pluperfect would align neatly with that fact, while the imperfect might imply that the soldiers were still in the process or were trying to close them. The difference is aspect, not just time.
3. Rewrite the sentence in English so that the logical relation is clear without overtranslation, and identify one word in the Latin that most controls your choice.
Read the worked answer
'Although the soldiers were closing the gates, the enemy nevertheless tried to enter.' The controlling word is 'tamen'. It does not prove concession by itself, but it strongly favours a concessive main clause because it marks contrast. I would avoid 'because', which has no Latin support here, and I would avoid adding 'even' unless the Latin has 'etiam' or 'vel'. If the examiner prefers a neutral narrative rendering, 'When the soldiers were closing the gates, the enemy nevertheless tried to enter' is defensible, but it is less sensitive to the particle. The revision should keep the imperfect's ongoing sense: 'were closing', not 'closed'.