The irregularities of irregular verb sum, esse do far surpass the regular conjugations of most Latin verbs; for it is true sum, esse does not retain a stem during conjugation, but its characteristic ‘es’ appears throughout most of its forms: including the imperatives (except for suntō, the third-person future imperative). Although rarely used, imperatives of sum, including this certain one, appear simultaneously in the wide collection of Latin literature, both classical and ecclesiastical, showing the diversity of its range and usage during the centuries of generations who spoke and wrote Latin. Estote, this imperative, shows command that implies something to be accomplished with a futuristic perspective, whereas its literal translation differs from its more idiomatic way of translation, which is simply just, ‘be.’
In the entire encompassment of Latin literature, estote most frequently appears in the Vulgate, being especially abundant in the New Testament. [In a search on the Perseus Online Digital Library, of the forty-eight search results for the term estote, twenty-eight search results were from St. Jerome’s Vulgate. Including the apocrypha, estote appeared in much of the New Testament (five times in the book 1 Corinthians; four times in Luke; three times in 1 Peter, Ephesians, James and Matthew; two times in Colossians, and once in Romans, Acts, Philippians, Jude, Galatians and 2 Corinthians) and some in the Old Testament, among others.] However, several classical authors are noted for use of this rare imperative. Publius Ovidius Naso (known as Ovid) uses estote in two samples of his writing—once in Metamorphoses and the other in Fasti. In Metamorphoses, perhaps his most illustrious literary masterpiece, Ovid writes:
Hoc tamen amborum verbis estote rogati,
o multum miseri meus illiusque parentes,
ut quos certus amor, quos hora novissima iunxit,
componi tumulo non invideatis eodem.
(Ovid, Metamorphoses; 4.154-157)
“Nevertheless, you shall be asked for this to the words of both this thing,
O my most wretched parents and of him,
So that you do not envy which certain love, whom the last hour joins
To be placed in the same tombs.”
Here, estote can be translated as most Latin authorities translate it. Allen and Greenough’s New Latin Grammar for Schools and Colleges translates estote as ‘be ye’ (you shall be), telling the reader to start paying attention to the upcoming words; if you substitute ‘be ye’ and replace ‘you shall be,’ you achieve the translation ‘you shall be introduced to etc.’ implying how the reader will be introduced to the next statements.
Another verse from the Vulgate, although from the apocrypha, also shows the power of the future imperative of sum, esse. “Animæquiores estote filii et proclamate ad Deum erit enim memoria vestra ab eo qui ducit vos.” [Translated into Latin by Eusebius Hieronymus (St. Jerome), Editio Vulgata (the ‘Vulgate’), Baruch 4:27.] “Be sons of good courage and proclaim to God indeed, your remembrance will be from him who leads you.” The translation in sense of this apocryphal verse is self-explanatory, in that estote once again bears the highly literal translation of, ‘be (from this point on) sons of good courage, etc.’
Estote also appears in other authors, such as C. Suetonius Tranquillus wrote in Vitellius. “Nec ante in prætorium rediit quam flagrante triclinio ex conceptu camini, cum quidem consternates et quasi omine adverso anxiis omnibus: ‘bono,’ inquit, ‘animo estote!’” [C. Suetonius Tranquillus, Vitellius, Chapter 8, Section 2.] “First, he neither returned to the general’s tent until the dining-room was flaming because of the furnace’s catching fire, indeed, with consternation and just as if by an unfavorable omen, he said to everyone anxious, ‘be ye with a good mind!’” This translation is again straightforward; but, a different translation of estote can be found in Ovid’s Fasti.
At quicumque nefas ausi, prohibere deorum
numine, polluerant pontificale caput,
morte iacent merita, testes estote Philippi
et quorum sparsis ossibus albet humus
(Ovid, Fasti, 3.706-709)
But mind you, whatsoever sinner dared, to prohibit in the divine will
Of the gods, they had profaned the head of the pontiff,
They lie down in death, (having been) deserved, destroy the witnesses of Philippi
And they whose bones, having been scattered, whiten the ground.
Here, we are exposed to another definition of the word estote. This word used above is not part of the irregular verb sum, esse, but rather another irregular: edo, ēsse. Although edo, ēsse has a wide scope of definitions, its two most general are ‘consume’ (as in the sense of ‘eating’ as well as ‘destroying’) and ‘destroy’ (as in to ‘demolish’); hence, in line 708 above, we can determine by context of the sentence that the witnesses of Philippi are destroyed, because of the reference to the bones on the ground. Estote (of edo, ēsse), in this context, is the same flavor of imperative as estote (of sum, esse)—both are future imperatives, introducing that the witnesses will be destroyed, etc.
With these examples, estote can either have two definitions—each separately different from each other. From sum, esse (the most common of the two), estote is correctly the second-person plural, future imperative, translating ‘you shall be,’ ‘be ye,’ or simply ‘be.’ Upon the imperative chart of sum, esse, esto (the singular, second-person future imperative) sits across from estote; by adding the ‘-te’ onto esto, signifies plurality. From edo, ēsse, estote has a variety of definitions. It too implies a futuristic twist onto the definition, whereas ēsse means (courtesy to William Whitaker’s Words) to eat/consume/devour; eat away (fire/water/disease); destroy; and spend money on food; then estote could translate, ‘you shall eat/consume/devour etc.’ or simply ‘eat/consume/devour etc. from this point forward.’
When you look at the similarities between sum and edo, the conjugations charts seem to appear identical. In the indicative, present tense conjugation of edo, the second-person singular and plural and the third person singular are exactly identical to sum, not to mention the imperfect subjunctive, where all the forms are the same. The imperative chart both are conjugated the same [the third-person singular imperative is eso, not at all identical to sum’s third-person singular imperative], but there is a difference. Because the infinitive of edo has the long ‘ē,’ (ēsse), that ‘ē’ is retained mostly throughout the conjugation tables, except for future and imperfect indicative active (edo has a passive system as well). Although estote is spelled the same and have the same macron over the ‘o,’ (estōte), context is definitely the answer in translating, but estote of sum, esse is far more common, as William Whitaker’s Words includes the ‘early’ sign next to the entry of estote as an imperative of edo, ēsse.
When viewed in Latin literature, both classical and ecclesiastical, estote appears very rarely—mostly in the Latin Vulgate (which includes the apocrypha), and a few other classical works, such as Ovid and Tranquillus. Yet, it is true that estote is uncommon, as even Latin textbooks, like Wheelock’s Latin, do not include it—along with the other imperatives and participles (such as ens, entis) of sum. Even though estote and others of its kind are not taught and learned like other irregular forms, nevertheless the Latin literature of antiquity will always have a place for this obscure, future imperative: estote.
