Talk:Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius.

French?

When researching for this article, I came across this source which said the phrase was spoken in French. It doesn't seem to be a reliable source or offer a French translation, so I didn't include it, but it might be something to look out for in other sources. --BDD (talk) 19:08, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Why is the verb "Novit" at the front of the sentence

Isn't the verb usually at the end? Was this done for any significant reason? Shiggity (talk) 00:35, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

The verb is also at the beginning in the Vulgate text of the Letter to Timothy to which the saying alludes. Word order is free in Latin, but the choices do have meanings. This word order puts a strong emphasis on the verb. English would do it with sentence stress (or with italics in printed text): "The Lord knows those who are his." This emphasis is more relevant to the argument in the Letter to Timothy than it is to the saying attributed to Arnaud Amalric, but retaining the Biblical word order would have made it clearer that this is a quotation. Andrew Dalby 21:04, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

quoting the KJV

Why is the Scriptural reference taken from the KJV? It should be from the Vulgate, with English translation taken from the DRB. Arnaud Amalric would only have used the Vulgate, and the KJV did not even exist at that time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.224.128.11 (talk) 03:27, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Arnaud Amalric quoted the Vulgate (fairly closely), as you say, but since this is the English Wikipedia, we need to give the quotation in English. So the question is, which translation? KJV is familiar to many, and it's not inaccurate. Why use a different translation? Andrew Dalby 20:52, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

After writing that, I checked whether he might have quoted the Vetus Latina rather than the Vulgate. But both Latin translations are identical at this point, if the Vetus Latina manuscript I looked at (copied not far from Béziers at about this time) is a valid example. It's here. Andrew Dalby 09:01, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

I agree. I don't see the logical of quoting the KJV.--Jack Upland (talk) 00:39, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Bias

The discussion of the authenticity of this quotation is biased. The only certainty here appears to be that it was recorded some time after the event. Everything else is speculation and argumentation.--Jack Upland (talk) 10:09, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Claim that Arnaud Amalric commanded the entire crusade

I feel like if were true, someone besides Michael Coston would have noticed this at some point prior to 1997. For example, Britannica doesn't even mention Amalric by name in their article on the crusade.[1]. Does anyone know what Coston's credentials are and where he got this notion? -- 146.115.188.68 (talk) 22:52, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

I could care less what Britannica states, considering it is considered by many as unreliable and is a tertiary source.

• "..the overall commander of the crusade, Arnald Amalric, a Cistercian abbot." -- Kill Them All: Cathars and Carnage in the Albigensian Crusade, Sean McGlynn, page 59.
• ", placed Arnaud Amaury in command of a volunteer force..." -- Crusade and Christendom, Jessalynn Lea Bird, ‎Edward Peters, ‎James M. Powell, University of Pennsylvania Press, page 69.
• "to stop the armies of crusaders which had massed in the north of France under the supreme command of Arnaud Amaury .." -- European Civilization, Edward Eyre, Oxford University Press, page 379.
• "Crusaders organized under the supreme command of one of the surviving papal legates: Arnold, the Abbot of Cisteaux. He led them southward to the city of Béziers, south of Lyon, across the Hérault river." -- The History of the Renaissance World, Susan Wise Bauer, page 238.
• "The refusal of Philip Augustus to participate left the command to Arnold Aimery as legate of " -- Heresy, Crusade, and Inquisition in Southern France, 1100 - 1250, Walter L. Wakefield, University of California Press, page 96
• "Under the general command of the new legate Arnold Amalric , the crusading army moved south in the early summer of 1209." -- Western Europe in the Middle Ages, 300-1475, Brian Tierney, page 321. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:47, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
• "The nominal leader was the papal legate, Arnaud Amaury of Citeaux..." -- The Albigensian Crusades, Joseph R. Strayer, The University of Michigan Press, page 53. --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:00, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
• "Arnau Amalric, abbot of Citeaux, archbishop (and duke) of Narbonne (d.1225): Catalan Cistercian monk, papal legate to Provincia, ardent leader of the Albigensian Crusade..." -- Crusade and the Battle for Christendom, Mark Gregory Pegg, Oxford University Press, page xviii
• "..papal legate Arnald Amalric, Abbot of Citeaux, appointed leader of crusade.." -- The Cathars: Dualist Heretics in Languedoc in the High Middle Ages, Malcolm Barber, page 254.
• "..the words of the leader of the Crusade against Cathar heretics in thirteenth - century southern France , Arnold Amalric, abbot of Citeaux.." --Medieval Religion: New Approaches, Constance H. Berman, page 3. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:01, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
• "The crusaders assembled under the leadership of the papal legate Arnauld Amaury, Abbot of Cîteaux (1200–1212) in 1209 and advanced into central Languedoc in early summer." -- The Southern French Nobility and the Albigensian Crusade, Elaine Graham-Leigh, page 2. --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:53, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps the IP should explain their initial statement of, "not sure where this strange claim that he was an army commander is coming from, certainly not the source given.". Which has been proven false. Continued statements will be considered disruptive. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:53, 19 June 2023 (UTC)