# Help with Latin translation? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 28, 2005, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-with-latin-translation/328373 "2005-10-28T21:55:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Agent\_Foxtrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc29f/32.png) [@Agent\_Foxtrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Agent_Foxtrot)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2005, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-with-latin-translation/328373/1 "2005-10-28T21:55:42Z")
I’ve been working on a little project recording the [physical appearances of notable medieval persons](http://freepages.misc.rootsweb.com/~byzantium/Mdv.html), based on contemporary or near-contemporary accounts, when possible. For this project, I’ve been translating some passages in Latin, a language I am not at all proficient at. So with this in mind I request a spot of help with the following passage regarding Simon de Montfort, the Parlimentarian. _Eret miles strenuus, in corpore procerus et facie formosus_. That’s what the chronicle of Lanercost has to say about Simon de Montfort. I have translated this as “[He was a] vigorous soldier, in body tall and beautifully formed in appearance.” However, I have not been able to find a translation for “eret”. Any comments, notes, suggestions? ---
**Author:** ![Mississippienne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d2c977/32.png) [@Mississippienne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mississippienne)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2005, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-with-latin-translation/328373/2 "2005-10-28T21:56:21Z")
Sorry guys. The above post belongs to me. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2005, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-with-latin-translation/328373/3 "2005-10-28T22:03:00Z")
Typographical error for “erat”, third-person singular imperfect of “to be”? Thus “[He] was a vigorous soldier…” etc.? ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2005, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-with-latin-translation/328373/4 "2005-10-28T23:42:02Z")
Good translation. And I agree with Kimstu, _eret_ is a spelling error for _erat_. ---
**Author:** ![Orual](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/779978/32.png) [@Orual](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Orual)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2005, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-with-latin-translation/328373/5 "2005-10-28T23:50:59Z")
I concur with **Kimstu** and **Walloon**. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2005, 8:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-with-latin-translation/328373/6 "2005-10-29T08:40:28Z")
Concur. ‘He was a tough soldier, tall and handsome too.’ ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2005, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-with-latin-translation/328373/7 "2005-10-29T15:11:33Z")
“Eret” certainly COULD be a typo for “erat” which means, simply, “he was.” But often, when Latin verbs end in “eret,” we’re expressing something conditional, or something that OUGHT to be. “Eret” may mean the soldier “should be” all those things. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2005, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-with-latin-translation/328373/8 "2005-10-29T16:41:09Z")
-eret is also the 3rd person singular imperfect subjunctive ending for an e-stem verb. [See here](http://www.math.ohio-state.edu/~econrad/lang/lv3e.html) ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2005, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-with-latin-translation/328373/9 "2005-10-29T17:03:33Z")
But “eret” in this case is not an ending for a verb, it _is_ the verb. There is no conjugation for the Latin verb, _esse_ (“to be”) which looks like “eret.” You can see the entire table of comjugations [here](http://www.informalmusic.com/latinsoc/verbs/#sum). I concur with those who say that it’s probably a typo for _erat_. “He was…” It makes perfect sense in context and requires the most economical explanation. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-with-latin-translation/328373/10 "2005-10-31T21:59:48Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > But “eret” in this case is not an ending for a verb, it _is_ the verb. There is no conjugation for the Latin verb, _esse_ (“to be”) which looks like “eret.” You can see the entire table of comjugations [here](http://www.informalmusic.com/latinsoc/verbs/#sum). Very true. However, we don’t know the origin of the text. If it were taken from a column or similar then the words would have been run together and the OP might have split them incorrectly. ---
**Author:** ![Helen\_s\_Eidolon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Helen\_s\_Eidolon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Helen_s_Eidolon)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-with-latin-translation/328373/11 "2005-10-31T23:18:03Z")
My first thought is absolutely that it’s a variant/typo of erat. I’ve just checked a morphological analysis, and there’s no other possibility that it came up with. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2005, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-with-latin-translation/328373/12 "2005-10-31T23:32:14Z")
> [@astorian](#): > > “Eret” certainly COULD be a typo for “erat” which means, simply, “he was.” But often, when Latin verbs end in “eret,” we’re expressing something conditional, or something that OUGHT to be. > > “Eret” may mean the soldier “should be” all those things. It apparently should be _erat_, if imperfect indicative (“He was…”) or _esset_ if imperfect subjunctive (“He should be…” or other contrary-to-fact meaning). However, I am wondering: Imperfect subjunctive **endings** are found in -r- and -ss- forms, both being accurate. Might it be possible for a “caballus”-type Latin, one influenced by the vulgar usage, to have adopted a quasi-regular “erem/eres/eret” imperfect subjunctive form for esse alongside the “proper” essem forms? Similar developments did occur with reference to Latin irregulars as the language evolved through the first millennium A.D. ---
**Author:** ![Mississippienne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d2c977/32.png) [@Mississippienne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mississippienne)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2005, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-with-latin-translation/328373/13 "2005-11-02T00:14:36Z")
Sorry to cause so much debate, I was able to double-check the Lanercost chronicle, and it’s definitely _Erat_. I must’ve copied it down wrong, or mistaken my handwritten “a” for an “e”. Woe is me. Thanks for the help!