Latin Question

Question

Since I first saw this motto: "Crede Byron", it's been setting off my Bad Latin alarm.  It's supposed to mean: "Believe Byron".  But "credo" takes the dative, and "Byron" isn't dative. Moreover, "crede" is the singular imperative.

IF it means anything, I think it ought to mean:  "Byron, believe."

Anyone have another take on this one?

Comments

Many "foreign" names were treated as undeclinable in medieval Latin, and I'm sure Byron falls into this category, as it doesn't have any of the usual Latin nominative endings.

Or to put it another way: how _would_ you decline Byron?

---

Byron

Byronis

Byroni

Byronem

Byrone

On the model of "Simon" and "Platon"

---

I didn't think of Simon.

Still, more "lazy Latin" than "bad", I think.

---

I'd like to know who passed it

---

Common problem with records in Latin,They were written with Quill pens and they were hard too decipher.NatL Library

of Ireland.Is laboring on deciphering these records.

---

I'm curious why you think being written with a quill pen has any relevance whatsoever to the readability of records, in whatever language.

---

This Latin is the motto on a coat of arms, so printed.

---

I think you're over-analysing this. It just means: Believe (in) or Trust Byron. They didn't decline proper names.

---

They did indeed decline proper names.

Answer 1

You should try reading a will or Baptism written with a Quill

Pen.You will see.It is a real mess.

Comments

It really depends on the clerk and not the quill. Same happens with more modern writing instruments. I've read lots of documents that would have been written with a quill that were quite easy to read. Others not so easy. A quill is easier/smoother to write with than the steel pen nibs that came later.

---

Again, what on Earth do you think a quill pen has to do with readability or lack thereof? Have you ever even looked at a medieval manuscript? Yes, there are ones that were sloppily written, but the really nice ones, where someone paid to have it decorated ("illuminated") have absolutely drop-dead gorgeous writing. And yes, all of it, 100%, was written with a quill pen. Even today, if you want to produce really beautiful calligraphy, you use a quill pen, because it gives you unparalleled flexibility and the ability to control line thickness and direction in ways that no metal nib can replicate.

(Also, the ballpoint pen is probably responsible for way more unreadable chicken scratches in public records than any quill pen.)

---

M, I agree with you. The ballpoint pen was the beginning of the end in handwriting. My wife has used quills and a friend teaches calligraphy with a quill. I have to echo your comment about the illuminated manuscripts. Wonderful examples of what could be done with a quill.  Really good scribes/clerks practiced writing and made it very legible. Some (many?) were only adequate at writing. I've been working through some 17th/18th century church registers and handwriting will be excellent and extremely readable then the priest changed and it is difficult to read. A few years later things get good again. it is entirely the scribe's ability that comes into play. Also, steel nibs didn't really come into common use until some time in the 19th century.

---

Also, readability isn't the issue here at all, it's grammar.

---

Ah, yes, grammar. Especially when you have Latin, probably from someone only partially literate with it.  The arms were created in the 17th century. You would have to see what the English rules for mottos associated with arms were at the time. They may well have declined to decline names so checking with heraldry sources might help.

---

I haven't seen any attempt to decline surnames in registers or wills from  the 17th cent. If latin was used they usually declined  Christian names.  ( Edwardus filius Edwardi, Maria filia Mariae etc)

---

My understanding is that in the 17th century mottos were a relatively newfangled addition to a coat of arms. But I don't know if this one was new to the Barony or if it was part of the family's arms before that.