In the classical period, olive oil was considered a must-have piece of equipment for an athlete. The exact details of its use aren't known perfectly, but it appears that it was coated on an athlete's body and then covered with fine sand, in preparation for competition (especially wrestling). This would protect the body, especially from heat.
Athletes in ...
Horace, or Quintus Horatius Flaccus as he is known in Latin, wrote in Classical Latin.
He lived 65–8 BCE, whereas the era of Classical Latin is considered to be roughly 75 BCE–300 CE.
As his entire life falls within this period, he should be considered a classical writer.
Horace is among the most highly esteemed writers of ancient Rome.
You could well say ...
Horace's poem here is about a pretty young girl, Pyrrha, and I understand the phrase to describe how unfortunate (miseri) the men are who have not been able to touch (tempto/tento) her.
I might translate it as follows: "Poor guys, for whom you [Pyrrha] shine, you who are untouched [by them]" -- I've expanded the participle into a relative clause.
I have looked into this some more and think I can now give a precise answer to the question. The earliest published translation of Horace 1,11 to render “carpe diem” as “seize the day” is in THE WORKS OF HORACE. TRANSLATED LITERALLY INTO ENGLISH PROSE, BY C(hristopher) SMART, 1761 and many reprints. It reads as follows:
INQUIRE not, Leuconoe (it is not ...
They are Etruscans. Atavi here does not mean any specific ancestor (i.e. pater abavi), but in general "ancestors." Horace makes the connection explicit later (Odes 3.29.1):
Tyrrhena regum progenies
Tyrrhenian progeny of kings
Note: Tyrrhenus, from Tyrrheni, and is the Greek designation for the Etruscans; also, that the adjective goes with ...
It is easy to forget how different cultural assumptions can be. Nowadays, a bath is for hygienic purposes, and private. For the Romans, though, a visit to the baths was social and cultural; the actual ablutions consisted of rubbing olive oil on the skin and then scraping it off (together with the accumulated dirt and sweat) using a strigil.
So this may be ...
Horatius describes a "combined animal" with human's head, horse's neck, bird's feathers and fish's rear end.
This creature ends in a fish: instead of legs it presumably has a fishtail.
No details of the fish are given; just that the creature contains a fish-like part.
The translation available at Perseus (the Latin version is there, too) puts it like this:
Just a brief comment on the verb carpo - here's a screenshot of the entry in the OLD:
So, carpo as "seize" is even in the OLD. It makes sense - if time fleets (or runs or flies), you may want to capture or seize a moment (or any period of time).
Do not read too much into word order in poetry.
The metric constraints on language distort the word order quite a bit.
Not all freedom is lost, but it is difficult to see what was the author's design and what was limitations of the medium.
Adhering to the metric structure does give a certain benefit, so sacrificing some freedom to that end is reasonable.
This is how it is read.
But as for the “sacrificial” tradition, it is not a sacrifice but a votive offering in a tradition still practised in many parts of the Latin-speaking world. You promise God or a saint to make an offering to get you out of a sticky spot. The offering is of apposite form and nature.
For health troubles it might be an eye or an ear ...
The question is misconceived: 'Seize the day' isn't a mistranslation at all. This is an example of the perennial problem for any translator, that of transforming style and idiom into language that is understood by a reader of his translation in exactly the same way as did the intended readers of the original. This applies, not just for Latin into English, ...