Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

OCR AS Latin Language F361 24th May 2013

That Lucius Cassius, whom the Roman people used to consider a most impartial and able judge, used to ask constantly at trials, "to whom it had been any advantage?" The life of men is so directed that no one attempts to proceed to crime without some hope of advantage. Those who were about to be tried avoided and dreaded him as an investigator and a judge; because,although he was a friend of truth, he yet seemed not so much inclined by nature to mercy, as drawn by circumstances to severity. I, although a man is presiding at this trial who is both brave against audacity, and very merciful to innocence, would yet willingly suffer myself to speak in behalf of Sextus Roscius, either before that very acute judge himself, or before other judges like him, whose very name those who have to stand a trial shudder at even now.

How did people find it?

I found a rough translation of the Cicero section (it's rather loose, so it's more of a ball park idea of what's going on):

That Lucius Cassius, whom the Roman people used to consider a most impartial and able judge, used to ask constantly at trials, "to whom it had been any advantage?" The life of men is so directed that no one attempts to proceed to crime without some hope of advantage. Those who were about to be tried avoided and dreaded him as an investigator and a judge; because, although he was a friend of truth, he yet seemed not so much inclined by nature to mercy, as drawn by circumstances to severity. I, although a man is presiding at this trial who is both brave against audacity, and very merciful to innocence, would yet willingly suffer myself to speak in behalf of Sextus Roscius, either before that very acute judge himself, or before other judges like him, whose very name those who have to stand a trial shudder at even now.

For when those judges saw in this cause that those men are in possession of abundant wealth, and that he is in the greatest beggary, they would not ask who had got advantage from the deed, but they would connect the manifest crime and suspicion of guilt rather with the plunder than with the property

(edited 10 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

strangephenomena

I think overall the paper was okay. I did the Passage A translation with the English to Latin sentences (question 3). The English to Latin was a lot better than I thought it would be. The past papers often required ablative absolutes and more complicated constructions than the ones in this paper.
The main translation was easy in my opinion because the narrative was simple to follow, unlike the GCSE papers which are often based on myths and ludicrous stories. I was bit confused by 'hic nullum' because I forgot 'hic' could mean 'the latter'. If I translated 'imperium' as 'empire' instead of 'imperial command' would that count as an error?

If someone could please post an unofficial mark scheme I would extremely grateful :smile:

Reply 2

piguy

The official OCR list gives imperium as 'command, power, empire', so that would be perfectly fine (just putting 'imperium' would probably be OK too anyway, as it means pretty much the same thing in english, like Robert Harris' book).

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 3

melloid

hrmm it seemed to be ok, didnt like the hic nullum bit or the occupo bit following the result clause, i may well have messed them up. what else did people find tricky? (in both sections)

Reply 4

ohmygosh

I found the 'veriti ne galbus munis liberalis esset' or something like thatso confusing, also the hic nullum, and pretty much all of the cicero. a bit of a disaster i think. what was the general gist of the cicero translation?

Reply 5

melloid

i think that bit was something like: 'fearing that galba might be less generous' or similar variations but i cant remember exactly what it was :frown:

Reply 6

ohmygosh

Original post by melloid

i think that bit was something like: 'fearing that galba might be less generous' or similar variations but i cant remember exactly what it was :frown:

oh right, i couldn't remember what munis meant i thought it was something like gifts :confused:

oh well never mind

Reply 7

Crimson Goose

My Cicero was only very slightly similar to the one above, the story was the same more or less though. I was feeling quite confident but am now very worried.

Reply 8

Crimson Goose

Should the "hic nullum" have meant essentially "Galba gave them nothing"?

Reply 9

squash

Original post by Crimson Goose

My Cicero was only very slightly similar to the one above, the story was the same more or less though. I was feeling quite confident but am now very worried.

Mine was a little different as well. I think that the text might have been adapted slightly so it was a shortened version of the actual text? I have looked on the Latin Library and the text there seems different to the one on the paper. I might be wrong though? I'm a bit worried I might have got the wrong end of the stick though :confused:

Reply 10

Razer_M

This was one of the easiest papers i've done! Left the hall half an hour early haha!

For the hic nullum bit - "This man nothing" ie, Galba gave them nothing yes.

Only part I'm worried about is the prose composition: forgot how to say "very many citizens" - plures? plurssimi/es? cives :frown:

Also for the last part of section 3, the last sentence, was an if clause (with would/should/could) so subj in both halves, but was it Si or Nisi at the start (it was a negative if clause??)

Reply 11

strangephenomena

'hic' can mean 'this (man)' or perhaps more appropriately 'the latter'.

So the sentence would along the lines of:

The soldiers of the praetorian guard favoured Ortho more than Galba, because he had promised them many gifts, the latter promised nothing.

Reply 12

strangephenomena

Original post by Razer_M

Also for the last part of section 3, the last sentence, was an if clause (with would/should/could) so subj in both halves, but was it Si or Nisi at the start (it was a negative if clause??)

I can't remember what the sentence was exactly, but to answer the subj + nisi thing, this is what I put:

nisi..... ____isset, necatus esset

(Pluperfect act subj, pluperfect pass subj)

....would...., ....would have.... = pluperfect subjunctive in both clauses.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 13

Crimson Goose

I once read somewhere that making clear to whom pronouns refer is important, so in Cicero for Example i translated illos as the 2 guys in the paragraph. Do you guys know if this is correct or whether I have lost yet more marks :P

Reply 14

enimpri

I translated 'hic nullum' as more of a repetition of the previous phrase: Because he had promised them any gifts, this man (Galba) had promised none.

English to Latin! Didn't think vocab was a problem, I took a bit longer on some of the verbs (i.e. subjunctive passive pluperfect!) but think it was generally okay.

Original post by Razer_M

This was one of the easiest papers i've done! Left the hall half an hour early haha!

Only part I'm worried about is the prose composition: forgot how to say "very many citizens" - plures? plurssimi/es? cives :frown:

Also for the last part of section 3, the last sentence, was an if clause (with would/should/could) so subj in both halves, but was it Si or Nisi at the start (it was a negative if clause??)

That is so lucky! How come they let you leave/?

I put plurimi cives ?

Wasn't the English something like if he had not ......., he would have been killed?
It was a nisi clause :smile:

Reply 15

Razer_M

Original post by strangephenomena

Brilliant! That is exactly what i put!

I've never been told about "hic" meaning the latter :O Not on the vocab sheet either :frown:

What happened was I had maths C2 just before it and so did 2 others. So everyone in the hall left (only people sitting maths and latin were there) leaving 3 of us who do both maths and latin alone!

And I'd finished, checked over, and the teacher just came and asked me if i'd done and if i wanted to go :biggrin:

I said thank you..so so much..

Reply 16

melloid

my latin teacher said that it was plurimi cives :smile:

Reply 17

strangephenomena

Original post by Razer_M

I've never been told about "hic" meaning the latter :O Not on the vocab sheet either :frown:

Oops, sorry! It said in the John Taylor grammar book that 'hic' did mean 'latter'. Of course, OCR will be marking it as 'this' or 'this man'. Sorry about the confusion.

Reply 18

strangephenomena

How was 'ille vero, dum Romam progeditur' meant to be translated?

I put 'indeed, while he approached Rome', so I think I got 'progreditur' wrong in meaning and tense :frown:

Reply 19

enimpri

Original post by strangephenomena

Esset is imperfect subjunctive thought? I put the same but put necatus fuisset

Original post by Crimson Goose

If you have a look through previous mark schemes you'd find out for definite but from what I remember from reading them yesterday they do allow suppling a name instead of 'hic' or equivalent because it sometimes doesn't make sense in English otherwise! Various examples in In Verrem for the prose that prove that!