Gender of vitrix, vitricis

Here you can discuss all things Latin. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Latin, and more.
metrodorus
Textkit Fan
Posts: 337
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 7:19 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Vitrix as opposed to victrix

Post by metrodorus » Mon Jun 23, 2008 6:26 pm

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
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Post by adrianus » Mon Jun 23, 2008 11:32 pm

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
Textkit Fan
Posts: 337
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 7:19 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Pliny

Post by metrodorus » Tue Jun 24, 2008 10:32 am

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
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Post by adrianus » Tue Jun 24, 2008 9:22 pm

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

adrianus
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Post by adrianus » Tue Jun 24, 2008 10:39 pm

Pliny, [i]Naturalis Historiae[/i], XXXVo in libro, XLo capitulo wrote: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.

Post Reply