has montezumas tomb been found ...?

[lamar]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

Dear cactusjumper;
I wrote my reply, in Latin and this is what it translates to mean:
"Do you know Latin, my friend? If (you do) not, (then) my references would be worthless (to you)."
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[cactusjumper]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

Dear Lamar,

I had, pretty much, figured out your Latin message to me:

"Operor vos teneo Latin, meus amicus? Nisi, tunc meus referos es nequam vobis"


Operor to be active, do
Operor to work, labor, toil, take pains

Vos accusative and dative (nominative vós, oblique vós)

(to) you (dative plural second-person personal pronoun)
You (accusative plural second-person personal pronoun)
Yourselves (reflexive plural second-person personal pronoun)

Teneo to grasp, know, understand
Teneo to hold, keep, possess, maintain
Teneo to keep on, persist, persevere, endure
Teneo to occupy, keep, hold
Teneo iter to hold one's course, conceive

Latin

Meus my

Amicus friend
Amicus friend, comrade

Nisi if not, unless, except

Tunc then, at that time, next, and then

Meus my

Referos: references, sources

Es "equidem (adv) indeed, truly, for my part" esse be
Esse nature of being
Esse suae potestatis to be one's own master

Nequam vile
Nequam worthless, good for nothing, bad


Vobis (abl.) you who knows more than you? I do!
Vobis (dat.) you I'm talkin' to you, yeah, talkin' 'bout cind
_________________________________________

Obviously I don't know Latin, but it's possible these days to muddle through many languages. I got the overall gist of the message, with a few major misinterpretations.

Thanks for your reply,

Joe

 

[lamar]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

Dear cactusjumper;
First, you've used classical latin, and while that might get you in the ballpark, it will also get you into hot water before you know it. I use a version of Medieval latin, which is a highly evolved form called Ecclesiastical Latin, which is also the latest and most refined form of the language. Also, all Church documents written after the 10th century were done so in Ecclesiastical Latin Latin, therefore that is the preferred form to use. Please be aware that Ecclesiastical Latin is not nearly as common as the classical, or early latin, form which is usually the predominate Latin form taught in public schools today.

Also, there exists Vulgar Latin, which was the Latin form used by the commoners of Europe during the Roman Conquests, which later evolved into the currunt Romance languages, plus many lesser forms of Latin used at various times and locales.

Keep practicing, it gets easier with time and application (effort) my friend.
Your friend;
LAMAR

BTW; the word AMICUS does not mean friend, it means a male friend. See what I am talking about, my (male) friend? Plenty of room for mistakes if you are not very familiar with both language and form.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

Lamar, you posted --> my (male) friend. not my (mail) friend? snicker Of course as you know, in spanish it is clarifed by the ending "o" or "a". tu eras me amigo gossy es mi amiga. (where is she?)

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[lamar]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

Estimado OroBlanco;
Claro q. si, mi amigo! Espanyol utilizes las formas de masculinos y femininas for casi todos de las palabras, por eso, sigues igual en la lingua latin! Espanyol es una forma de latin de criollo, pero, por todos modos, eran cambiando cuando eran el invasion de los morros. Por eso, espanyol no es muy cerca de la lingua de latin original. Catalan is much mas cerca de su propio forma de latin.
Su amigo;
LAMAR

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

Dear Lamar,

I don't believe I got into any hot water, but realized there were many ways to read your message. That's why I posted all the variables.

If amicus means my male friend, how does that apply to an amicus brief? I think it has more to do with "masculine", rather than a man.

I could return the favor, by posting to you in Jicarilla Apache, but prefer to exchange ideas so that both sides are understood.......without having to cast about for meanings.

Take care,

Joe

 

[lamar]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

Dear cactusjumper;
You asked:
If amicus means my male friend, how does that apply to an amicus brief? I think it has more to do with "masculine", rather than a man.
The phrase amicus curiæ means literally, "friend of the court", that is to state a person who is not connected to either side of a case which is on trial, however the outcame of the trial may affect this persons' interests in some fashion.
To continue on:
I don't believe I got into any hot water, but realized there were many ways to read your message. That's why I posted all the variables.

Once more, you can not really do a direct *word for word* translation from Latin into English, my friend. Also, you can not *plug in* Latin text into an online translation program and ever hope to recieve even semi-accurate results. This is where you will find yourself in hot water. And no, in all reality there are NOT many ways to read the message which I wrote to you. A Latin scholar would have known immediately what I was attempting to state.

Continuing on, if I were to have assumed that you were a female, I would have replaced the word *amicus* with *amicae* and also, it's supporting word structure would have been altered to reflect the change in gender from male to female. Also, please note that the word *amicae* (female friend) is sometimes shortened into just *amica* in modern Latin, however the pronounication remains unchanged.

And now, to sum up, I have neither the time nor the inclination to start giving free online Latin courses, my friend. I am sorry but you will just have to muddle through it on your own, at least for the time being. As the Romans would say Bonus fortuna, meus amicus!

And by the way, the word *AMICUS* does NOT mean *COMRADE*. The correct word for COMRADE in Latin would be COMES. Once again, the water is starting to get decidedly warm.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

Dear Lamar,

Thank you for all the explanations.

Since the message was directed to me, I felt I should make every effort to decipher it. The different meanings were all cut and pasted, with your message in bold. I would say that the online interpretation was very close to what you said.

Beyond that, if you don't want to give lessons in Latin, perhaps it would be more prudent to stick to English. That seems to be the dominant language being used on TN. I assume your point in posting here, is to exchange your ideas with others. Not many people speak or read Latin these days, and even less are likely to be familiar with "Medieval Latin".

Having said that.......I appreciate the short language lesson.

Take care,

Joe

 

[lamar]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

Dear cactusjumper;
I have no problem communicating with others in English as this is my primary language, howere at times I wonder about some other members. Please allow me to explain myself even further since you obviously seem to be missing the point entirely in regards to my use of Latin.
You asked me:
Can you name the exact "historical archives" that dispute his account? Is there some place where they are available to the public?

My reply to you was that if you are unable to read, write and understand Latin, then my reference material would be about as useful to you as an ashtray on a motorcycle, my friend. In other words, all of the data which I use was written in Latin and as far as I am aware none of it has ever been translated into English, or any other language, for that matter. Clear enough now, my friend?
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

Dear Lamar,

It has been clear all along. What isn't clear, is why you wrote your message to me in Latin. If I write a message to you in Jicarilla, it's no message at all. If you want me to get/understand the message, you will need to come down to my level of communication.

Everyone here knows you speak and write Latin. No need to keep advertising it. I prefer to exchange ideas and conclusions on history with you, as opposed to the level of our respective educations.

At this point in time, the readily available history says the Jesuits, were imprisoned and in some cases tortured. Until you are ready to produce your own, restricted, history, that will be my only guide.
It's not that I doubt you, but your evidence should be tested for authenticity by those you would have accept it in the face of documented history.

At the same time, the historical documentation indicates that the Jesuits, for the most part, wore black robes in the New World. The term "Black Robes" is used descriptively in almost every historical writing to describe Jesuits....at least that is so in the books that I have.

If your point was: If you can't read this Latin message, my source is useless to you........How would I know?

Thanks for your reply,

Joe

 

[Cubfan64]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

There's just so much "friendliness" going on around here I can't stand it Then again, I sense just a smidgen of sarcasm and condescension or is that just me?

On another note, something you mentioned Lamar struck me and I wanted to ask you about it. You said earlier:

Please be advised that my sources come strictly from historical archives and as such I disclude personal accounts and journals as viable sources of research material.

While I agree wholeheartedly that historical archives are quite literally FULL of amazing and interesting information (and I'm reminded of that almost daily these days), I am surprised that as a researcher you sound as though you totally discount any personal accounts (journals, diaries, etc...). I personally think one can make a very strong case for the importance of EACH source of information when trying to glean the truth of a matter.

People quite often are more apt to "bare their souls" privately in personal accounts (most likely never thinking anyone other than themselves will find it interesting) and say truthful things they may have MANY reasons for not wanting to share in public. I won't argue that personal accounts can also be tainted and exaggerated by the writer, but I'm quite certain historical archives can be manipulated as well.

I guess what I'm asking is why you discount personal accounts when doing your research? Is it because past experience has convinced you that these accounts mostly lead nowhere and have no value, or is it just a personal opinion that you've taken?

I'm honestly not trying to start an argument here or anything, just curious?

 

[lamar]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

Dear Cubfan64;
You asked a very valid question, my friend! You asked:
I guess what I'm asking is why you discount personal accounts when doing your research? Is it because past experience has convinced you that these accounts mostly lead nowhere and have no value, or is it just a personal opinion that you've taken?

My answer is that because through experience, personal accounts have been shown to have been fraught with errors. Please be aware that these errors were most likely committed through ignorance and as such they were not committed intentionally. If all possible I prefer to use offifically archived documents, if they happen to be available. In the case of the new World colonies there exists abundant official information, rendering most personal accounts as either redundant or unnecessary.

Also, throughout the modern era, scores of amateur researchers have latched onto copies of these private journals and have attempted to translate them without a thorough knowledge of what they were doing beforehand. Of course, all this accomplishes is to compound the errors of the original document! The reason WHY these amateurs continue using private accounts of historical events is because they happen to be widely attainable, as most secular and ecclestical archives are restricted, due to the very delicate nature of the documents themselves. Therefore these amateur researchers attack these personal diaries like vultures spying a dead horse, and the result is that they butcher the the translation until it barely resembles the original work. I hope this answers your question, my friend.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

HI Cuber: ****/1/2 *. decipher that and collect the other 1/2. h ehe h e. Much of the data on Tayopa and the adjacent activities, will be in the form of a personal account, mine, since there are no others yet written or available. But tomorrow, they will be "the" historically impeccable references.

Incidentally, official accounts or achived data, in many cases are written or presented and flavored by the one (s) in power at the time.. Even present day legal battles are subject to many interpretations. To assume that ANY document is absolutely and completely without mistakes or does not have a bit of personal opinion or flavor of the archivist, is unacceptable under today's understanding of human psychology

I have found that even professional translators often get things out of intended text. Just today I had to rewrite a Spanish language mining contract between French, Spanish, and English participants.

Our mutual friends both seem to have taken a bit of unimportant data out of intended context. I clearly understand the stand taken by both, and why.

I would suggest both relaxing a bit or I will give cubber a fat lip. It is his fault anyways.

Don Jose de La Mancha Keeper of blind justice's balance.

p.s. ORO will you hold cuber for me while I -----------X?

 

[Cubfan64]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

Dear Cubfan64;
You asked a very valid question, my friend! You asked:
I guess what I'm asking is why you discount personal accounts when doing your research? Is it because past experience has convinced you that these accounts mostly lead nowhere and have no value, or is it just a personal opinion that you've taken?

My answer is that because through experience, personal accounts have been shown to have been fraught with errors. Please be aware that these errors were most likely committed through ignorance and as such they were not committed intentionally. If all possible I prefer to use offifically archived documents, if they happen to be available. In the case of the new World colonies there exists abundant official information, rendering most personal accounts as either redundant or unnecessary.

Also, throughout the modern era, scores of amateur researchers have latched onto copies of these private journals and have attempted to translate them without a thorough knowledge of what they were doing beforehand. Of course, all this accomplishes is to compound the errors of the original document! The reason WHY these amateurs continue using private accounts of historical events is because they happen to be widely attainable, as most secular and ecclestical archives are restricted, due to the very delicate nature of the documents themselves. Therefore these amateur researchers attack these personal diaries like vultures spying a dead horse, and the result is that they butcher the the translation until it barely resembles the original work. I hope this answers your question, my friend.
Your friend;
LAMAR

Thank you for answering my question. While I don't necessarily agree with you in discounting personal accounts, I certainly understand your point, and the fact that you've come to that conclusion based on your own personal experience, I can respect that.

As I consider myself one of those amateur researchers you referenced, it's quite possible I'll come to the same conclusion one day in the different areas I look into.

For now I find myself investigating whatever sources I can find (be they private, public, personal, historical, archival, etc...), and whenever possible corraborate one with another and so on.

Just in the little research I currently do, I can see where I might find myself spending much valuable time trying to verify a story by finding multiple sources that agree with one aother, only to find that the original "fact" turned out to be nothing more than a rumor or legend with no real basis. I imagine the more that happens to me, the less inclined I will be to put alot of faith in non-archival sources. Until that happens however, I find research to be much like putting together a massive puzzle and I'm still willing to grab a piece from wherever I can as long as it fits and helps complete the final image.

Thanks again for the response.

 

[Cubfan64]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

RDT said:

Incidentally, official accounts or achived data, in many cases are written or presented and flavored by the one (s) in power at the time.. Even present day legal battles are subject to many interpretations. To assume that ANY document is absolutely and completely without mistakes or does not have a bit of personal opinion or flavor of the archivist, is unacceptable under today's understanding of human psychology

In a nutshell RDT, you nailed what I would say is my main personal argument for looking at ALL possible sources when researching and not just locking oneself into a single perspective.

For example, take something such as a well known local battle near me which occurred at Turner's Falls, MA during King Phillip's War.

You don't need to know the specifics of this battle to understand my point. Basically it was a fight which took place between a group of New England settlers and a group of Native Americans.

There are archival and historical records which give specific information as to the tribe(s) involved, the names and number of settlers involved, the names and number of settlers wounded and killed and the specific locations at which some of the events occurred. These are documented records which tell a story, however at one time or another, the people who documented them did so as they were given information by those who were there. Some of the information is of course indisputable, but in my opinion that's simply a small glimpse of the full event.

What do you think the story would be like from the mouths of the Native American's who were involved? How about the story from the mouths of those who led the settlers? Would it differ from the accounts of some of those settlers who fought? What about the account as described by local newspapers at the time - how would that differ?

Hopefully you understand my point - to have the best chance of piecing together the ENTIRE puzzle of what happened, I believe one must view the facts from every possible perspective. If takes a great deal of effort to do so, and one must constantly compare stories and look for similarities and differences and then weigh the evidence, but if one only reads the historical archives documented by the military Captain who led the settlers, I hazard a guess that one would not be seeing the entire picture.

In my personal opinion, it's no different in any other research efforts one undertakes to try to get to the truth. Find all the pieces of the puzzle, see which ones fit and which ones don't, but don't just finish 1/3 of the puzzle and believe you can tell everything there is to know about it.

Just my opinion

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

Dear friend Lamar,

"Also, throughout the modern era, scores of amateur researchers have latched onto copies of these private journals and have attempted to translate them without a thorough knowledge of what they were doing beforehand. Of course, all this accomplishes is to compound the errors of the original document! The reason WHY these amateurs continue using private accounts of historical events is because they happen to be widely attainable, as most secular and ecclestical archives are restricted, due to the very delicate nature of the documents themselves. Therefore these amateur researchers attack these personal diaries like vultures spying a dead horse, and the result is that they butcher the the translation until it barely resembles the original work."

As there are "scores" of these "vultures", can you give us the names of a few, so that we can avoid their misrepresentations in the future, and correct any conclusions we have come to based on their work.

By the way, you have misspelled ecclesiastical badly. I only bring your attention to that fact, so that you can avoid future serious posts that might be misunderstood, and "fraught with errors".

I would really like to know who these "amateur researchers" are. I believe in always seeking out the truth.

Thank you in advance,

Joe

 

[lamar]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

Dear cactusjumper;
Congratulations! You've just made it onto my IGNORE list! Have a nice day!
LAMAR

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

Dear Lamar,

Even though you have put me on "ignore", I want to make this post to you and to those who have been following our conversation. My sense of humor is often biting, and not everyone takes it kindly. It is especially hard for those who don't really know me that well. I just turned 64, and don't expect I will change all that much in the years ahead.

I really love history, and even though I don't have the kind of sources that you have, I take the knowledge that has come my way with great respect. Having said that, it follows that I hold the people who have worked their tails off to gather that history and blend it into the books that have held me enthralled since I was a preteen, in very high regard.

I have personal friends who are authors and I know the great lengths they went to to gather the most accurate information they could. Like all of us, they made mistakes. Because of their own love for what they were doing, those mistakes were few and minor. They detracted nothing from the overall value of their work.

When someone denigrates the historical authors, they denigrate one of the real passions in my life. You are not the first to do that, and probably won't be the last. However, my reaction will always be the same....to my last breath.

I have the books of: Bolton, Ducrue, Prescott, Castaneda, (Fay Jackson Smith, John L. Kessell, and Francis J. Fox), Dunne, Polzer, Diego Duran, Manfred Barthel, Carrasco Sessions, Francisco Garces, Marc Simmons, Joseph Och, Jacobo Sedelmayr, Translated and annotated by Peter Masten Dunne, "Letters of Cortes" translated by Francis Augustus MacNutt, Malachi Martin, Paul Roca, Pradeau & Rasmussen, "California Voyages" Translation of original documents by Henrt R. Wagner, David Weber, Cynthia Radding, Diana Hadley, Susan M. Deeds, Michael D. Coe, Michael E. Smith..........etc.

Many of these works needed to be translated from the original. I have often contacted a number of these authors and have always found them to be very open, friendly and respectful of my novice standing. I have faith in their works. In my case, there is no other choice and I am fine with that.

I tried to soften my barbs towards you with a small bit of humor. It is my failing that you did not see that.

My apologies for any thoughtless insults, perceived or real.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Oroblanco]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

HOLA amigos,
My apologies for not replying sooner, (it is calving season here) seems we have had some interesting discussion and misunderstanding. First, to reply:

Lamar wrote

Estimado OroBlanco;
Claro q. si, mi amigo! Espanyol utilizes las formas de masculinos y femininas for casi todos de las palabras, por eso, sigues igual en la lingua latin! Espanyol es una forma de latin de criollo, pero, por todos modos, eran cambiando cuando eran el invasion de los morros. Por eso, espanyol no es muy cerca de la lingua de latin original. Catalan is much mas cerca de su propio forma de latin.
Su amigo;

Usted está correcto mi amigo. Mi español es muy limitado pero estoy aprendiendo. El latín ha sido muy provechoso en esto.

<For our English speaking friends - "You are correct my friend. My Spanish is very limited, but I am learning. Latin has been very helpful in this.">

I still have trouble with getting pronunciation correct and often the correct gender for objects, which some friends seem to find quite amusing!

Lamar and Cactusjumper - I hope we can reach an understanding here as the discussion has been quite interesting and informative. I have read a post and taken it as insult when there was none really (all too often, to be honest) sometimes when something is questioned it comes across as borderline hostility when in reality it was just a question. I read through these replies and it appears that is what has happened. I hope we can remain friends, especially when we have so many common interests. You both have much to add to these discussion forums, that would benefit all.

Good luck and good hunting amigos, I hope you all find the treasures that you seek.
Oroblanco

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: has montezuma's tomb been found ...?

Roy,

Thank you for your thoughts.

I have no hard feelings towards Lamar, and never have. There are times when it seems important to question people's facts. I don't feel I am attacking the person, but their "evidence". I don't always agree with what he says, but do respect his opinions. Come to think of it, I believe we have been down that same road before.

It should be obvious that I enjoyed our conversations, and to be honest, I always felt he was way above me in any discussion. As you know, I don't always let that respect lighten my heavy handed replies.

Hope all is well with you and Beth.

Take care,

Joe