Textkit Logo

Agrippa, -ae (f)

Here's where you can discuss all things Latin. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get translation help and more!

Moderator: thesaurus

Agrippa, -ae (f)

Postby pmda » Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:52 am

In Cap 36 LLPSI: Orberg habet:

Eodem tempore Pantheum, altum templum rotundum, in campo Martio extructum est a M. Agrippa, duce illustri qui classi Augusti praefectus erat, itemque magnae balneae quae ab eodem thermae Agrippae vocantur.

'.....itemque maganae....... also the great baths which are named the baths of Agrippa after the same man'... I'm a bit confused by two things in terms of syntax.

1) Does 'ab eodem' .... referred to 'named by' or 'named after' or even 'named for'?

2) Also I'm taking it that Agrippae is masculine genitive. 'the baths of Agrippa' rather than an adjectival use 'the Agrippan baths'... or some such....?
pmda
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 5:15 am

Re: Agrippa, -ae (f)

Postby GJCaesar » Sat Mar 08, 2014 11:21 am

Ab eodem refers to Agrippa.

quae ab eodem thermae Agrippae vocantur'=
Which, by that same Agrippa/Agrippa himself were named/called the thermae of Agrippa.

GJC
vincatur oportet aut vincat
GJCaesar
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon May 20, 2013 12:16 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Agrippa, -ae (f)

Postby Shenoute » Sat Mar 08, 2014 12:29 pm

1/ I understand ab eodem as "after him" not "by him". The use of a present tense (vocantur) while the rest of the sentence is set in the past (extructum est) seems to support this in my opinion.

"He built the baths which are called the baths of Agrippa after him" makes better sense to me than "he built the baths which are called by himself the baths of Agrippa".

2/ Yes, I understand it as you do. I think the adjective would be Agrippinus, a, um.
Shenoute
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 12:23 pm

Re: Agrippa, -ae (f)

Postby GJCaesar » Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:21 pm

Shenoute wrote: "He built the baths which are called the baths of Agrippa after him" makes better sense to me than "he built the baths which are called by himself the baths of Agrippa".


I mean that he was the one who gave the thermae the name ''thermae Agrippiae''. But I do understand the ambiguity of 'ab eodem', and accept your point of view. The question we must ask ourselves is if Agrippa was cocky enough to give the baths the name ''thermae Agrippae''. Since he was the one that did so much for the culture and all, I presume HE called them ''thermae Agrippae''. He had so much power, it would be weird if someone else gave it the name ''thermae Agrippae''. I think we need a historian's view on this.
vincatur oportet aut vincat
GJCaesar
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon May 20, 2013 12:16 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Agrippa, -ae (f)

Postby Shenoute » Mon Mar 10, 2014 8:56 am

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree then :)

As I said the change in tense, from past to present, is to me an indication that the baths are called Aggripae because of the name of their creator. "He built them and he himself calls them baths of Agrippa" strikes me as weird...As if the author wanted to emphasize that even now Agrippa himself still calls the baths "baths of Agrippa".

Plus, the chapter of Familia Romana is a guided tour of 2nd(?) century (post-Flavian a least), Agrippa is long dead at that time which renders the use present tense even more strange if it means "are called by him".
Shenoute
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 12:23 pm

Re: Agrippa, -ae (f)

Postby GJCaesar » Mon Mar 10, 2014 9:32 am

Shenoute wrote:Well, we'll have to agree to disagree then :)

As I said the change in tense, from past to present, is to me an indication that the baths are called Aggripae because of the name of their creator. "He built them and he himself calls them baths of Agrippa" strikes me as weird...As if the author wanted to emphasize that even now Agrippa himself still calls the baths "baths of Agrippa".

Plus, the chapter of Familia Romana is a guided tour of 2nd(?) century (post-Flavian a least), Agrippa is long dead at that time which renders the use present tense even more strange if it means "are called by him".


Well, in that case, I have to take my hat off and salute you. I had no information about the 2nd century stuff, so that 'kills' the ambiguity of the sentence, and shows that your interpretation was the right one. (obviously, a dead Agrippa wouldn't turn in his grave)

Now it's monday morning, and I read my comment, and I do realise that is was not the right interpretation at all.

Thanks for the counter-comment!

GJC
vincatur oportet aut vincat
GJCaesar
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon May 20, 2013 12:16 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Agrippa, -ae (f)

Postby pmda » Mon Mar 10, 2014 6:37 pm

Many thanks guys - Agripp(in') stuff.
pmda
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 5:15 am


Return to Learning Latin

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: hlawson38, jldecker87, Majestic-12 [Bot] and 75 guests