Gender of vitrix, vitricis

[ascii]

Hello, I would like to know the gender of vitrix, vitricis.

Thanks in advance.

Rodrigo

[benissimus]

Do you mean victrix, -icis? The ending -trix is the feminine version of -tor (as in victor, -oris).

[ascii]

No, I meant what i wrote. Vitrix, vitricis.

[benissimus]

Where have you seen it then?

[ascii]

I don't know. I have to decline it. They gave me some nouns and (I think they've forgot to) write the gender of this one. They haven't gave me the translations, so I don't know what else can I say. :S

[benissimus]

I think it is a typo for victrix then. Regardless of what word it is, the ending suggests that the noun is most likely feminine.

[ascii]

So you are saying they've made the same typo twice in a row?

[annis]

So you are saying they've made the same typo twice in a row?

Do not underestimate the malign influence of cut-and-paste!

[ascii]

Alright. Let's say it's victrix, icis. What paradigm will it follow?

N. victrix
G. victricis
D. victrici
A. victricem
V. victrix
Ab. victrice

N. victrices
G. victricum
D. victricibus
A. victrices
V. victrices
Ab. victricibus

Right?

[Lucus Eques]

Muy bien, Rodrigo! perfecto, creo.

Quiero preguntar, ¿en qué lenga está escrita tu firma?

[ascii]

It's written in lithuanian.

[ascii]

Today I asked my teacher. She said it wasn't a noun, it's an adjective. That's why she wrote no gender.

[Lucus Eques]

¿Y qué dijo del error en la ortografía?

[ascii]

Oh sorry, she said it meant virgin, apparently no mistake.

[Lucus Eques]

Oh sorry, she said it meant virgin, apparently no mistake.

I find that hard to believe. Can anyone confirm this? The only place I can find the word "vitrix" is as an inscriptional mispelling of "victrix."

You may ask her to show you the entry in a dictionary. Then scan an image of it for us! I would love to see it.

[ascii]

Well, I won't see her till next week. And I don't think it is possible to bring a scanner to class. Though I'd love to
Nevertheless I'll ask her to show me the dictionary entry.
So how do you say virgin?

[Bob Manske]

virgo, virginis

[adrianus]

Salve Ascii88,
The author of this German site translates "vitrix -icis" from a church inscription of 1647 as "Kirchenpropsten" or "church provost" (male) -- http://www.gottschee.de/Dateien/Literat ... el/A05.htm -- In the 19th century, the word was used in this sense by the American order of E Clampus Vitus as a title of office ("provost" in "clamps vitrix", alongside other impressive titles such as "Royal Gyascutis" and Roisteror Iscutis". The Clampers' motto was "credo quia absurdum".
Also, Andrée de Claustre (Dictionnaire portatif de mythologie, pour l'intelligence des poëtes, 1765, p.579 @ books.google.co.uk, ) says Vitrix was Venus's surname derived from the word "vitta" (headband), with which Venus bound lovers (--nothing to do with "victory"). According to L&S, the vitta (a head band) was a symbol of chastity worn by brides (and vestal virgins). So indeed, vitrix = virgin. I don't think VITRIX is an inscriptional misspelling if Vitrix indeed refers to the cognomen and 'VITRIX' or 'VITRICIS' is what was chiselled (and not just 'V' abbreviated).

De inscriptione anni 1647, auctor illius sitûs germanicè "vitrix =-icis" vertet ut "Kirchenpropsten", anglicè "church provost".

"Hoc altare R. D. Joannes Hess una cum vitricibus Peter Springer Mert Knaphl totaque vicinitate ejusdem pagi fieri curavit anno 1647"

Apud André de Claustre, hoc verbum cognomen est.

"Vitrix, surnom de Venus. On fair venir ce mot de Vitta, bandalette, parceque Venus lioit les amans."

Apud Lewis & Short, a nuptis et vestalibus vittam portando, pudicitiae signum erat. Ergo vitrix (quae vittam portat) virginem dicere vult.

[adrianus]

The first "i" of Vitrix is long, so "vittrix" is an alternative spelling (especially if the word does come from vitta). If you search online for "vittrix" and "vittricis", you find loads of OCR errors that arise because of the ligature between "ct" in old fonts. That means you do come across lots of places where "victricis" was written and not "vittricis", but when you look at the page image you can see which books do refer to the word "vittrix -icis" and which do not. For example, Neue Beiträge zur Geschichte deutschen Altertums By Hennebergischer Altertumsforschender Verein, Meiningen ( http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=mFAO ... &ct=result ) gives lots of references to the "provost" use (e.g., p.274). This is in addition to the legitimate use of "vitrix" with a single "t" and long first "i".

Lucus is right about "vitricis" being a typo for "victricis" if he's referring to inscriptions about the VIth and XXth Roman legions in Britain but the inscriptions themselves only give "V" for "Victricis", e.g.,

D(is) M(anibus) P(ublio) Rustio / Fabia Crescen(ti) Brix(ia) / mil(iti) leg(ionis) XX V(aleriae) v(ictricis) / an(norum) XXX stip(endiorum) X / Groma heres / fac(iendum) cur(avit)

yet you find it written as "Vitricis" in some places on the web.

I see confirmation for De Claustre, because Early medieval chants from Nonantola By James Matthew Borders, Lance William Brunner, Abbazia di Nonantola (Italy),
[http://books.google.co.uk] gives "vitricem palmam" ("beautiful palm branch), i.e., "vitrix" as adjective from "vitta", used a lot in Gregorian chant elsewhere noted (just search for "vitricem"). So "Venus vitrix" YES for "beautiful pure Venus" (or "vitta-wearing Venus", emphasizing pure love), as well as "Venus victrix" (emphasizing all conquering love), but "legio vitrix" NO for "beautiful pure legion" (that's definitely a typo).

[metrodorus]

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Q_EIAAAAQAAJ

In Adam's "Compendious deictionary of the latin Tongue", page 839,

Under victrix - victricis
feminine - (rare)


Grant (pg 19, "Institutes of Latin Grammar"
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=CLlDAAAAIAAJ
notes that victrix is feminine in the singular, is seldom neuter, and in the plural is either fem or neuter.

Verbals in ix take on the nature of substantives and adjectives.
They correspond, as feminines, to masculines in -or

They take their ablative in E or I, when added to a neuter noun, I is preferred.

eg ferro vitrici

As a neuter substantive and adjective, meaning victorious.

Then follow a long list of citations.

[metrodorus]

The word occurs I see in Pliny, and is noted here:
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=AhBTAEKpfNMC
on page 131
"VITRIX" - Lat. as forming unions
i.e. some sort of tying or binding.

In Dictionnaire abrege de la fable, pg 407
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=tQAGAAAAQAAJ
the entry agrees, and says
VINCTRIX, la meme que Vitrix.

VITRIX c'est a dire, qui noue, qui fait des noeds, surnom de Venus.

In other words, it means 'knot-maker" and is a cognomen of Venus.

[adrianus]

Grant says "ferro victrici", not "ferro vitrici", Metrodorus.
The 1823 Classical Manual seems to borrow heavily from De Claustre (1765) who describes "vitrix" better as deriving from "vitta".
Where is vitrix in Pliny, Metrodorus, because the work you cite doesn't refer to Pliny at all, but is the commentary of 1823 on Homer and Virgil?
Chompré's 1808 book (or the 1823 Manual), which says vinctrix = vitrix, isn't strictly correct, I think, because vinctrix comes from vincio, "to bind". Although Venus could be called also Venus Vinctrix post-classically.

Dicit Grant "ferro victrici". "Ferro vitrici" non dicit.
Hoc opus, Classical Manual: Or, A Mythological, Historical, and Geographical (1823), ut opinor, opere auctoris De Claustre utitur.
Ubi apud Plinium "vitricem" legis? Plinium non refert opus quod refers.

[metrodorus]

You're correct, I saw this in the notes on Pliny, here:

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=etUIAAAAQAAJ
on page 5783
The quote in the notes is
"Inter veneris cognomina hoc unum fuit; nam 'Vitrix' etiam vocabatur a ligando.

I don't have the OLD. That would clear things up.

[adrianus]

It's not in OLD. (I have it.)
In OLD vocabulario (quod habeo) non est.

[adrianus]

Amavit in juventa Glyceram municipem suam, inventricem coronarum...

In your 1826 source, the author thinks "invitricem" should be read where "inventricem" is written in the manuscripts. Sadly, whether Pliny intended it, we can't know for sure. It seems very possible.
In fonte tuo 1826 anni, auctor se rogat, in manuscriptis ubi "inventricem" scribitur, an Plinius "invitricem" verbum intenderet. Ità intendum esse credit. Improsperè, pro certo scire non possumus. Quidem pote quit, ut videtur.