Civis Illustris
Come on, it's but a typo. Look at the original, it's ũ instead if i, why should that be improbable?


Civis Illustris
Never trust other people.
That's actually true. I was just too lazy to do the research :D Obviously, I didn't even read the whole wikipedia page.

It sounds very much like the kind of story where you pays your money, you takes your choice.
Ah. The two passages you quote both refer to a book by O. Niccoli from 1990, who seems to have looked into this more deeply ... I suppose.
The author mentioned in the second passage, Peter Martyr d'Anghiera, is the author of the sentence in question.

As I said, I cannot find any other instances of conjugata meaning "nun" ... then again, I cannot find any other instances of the word conjugata in his entire collection of letters, so I can't get any clues as to whether he has a particular understanding of it or not.
The interpretation that this is about sexual immorality seems a little bit helpless to me ... but maybe Niccoli explained it deeper than that one wikipedia sentence does. The author didn't pay much attention to the fact that the woman was married ... he just mentions it in passing in a grammatically dubious sentence. Nor does he write anything about sexual morality – and apart from that, wouldn't it also have been immoral in that time if the woman had been unmarried?
My problem with "married woman" is that his account seems to be the only one that talks about a married woman and not about a nun, which must have been the original and most widely spread version ... but maybe it's true that he considers the sexual act of the nun illegitimate and therefore refers to her as conjugata.

:puzzled: Then I'm lost!
ex + ablative can only go with verbs of origin (ex aliqua nasci/oriri etc.) as an ablativus originis.
afferri and other passive verbs would require ab + ablative, as Pacifica said.

Ex Italia monstri allatum depictum simulachrum Ravennae ortum, ex coniugata

ex Italia allatum simulachrum | from Italy came a picture
monstri simulachrum | a picture of a monster
simulachrum Ravennae ortum | a picture that appeared in Ravenna
That's how I took it at first, but as Pacifica explained, that wouldn't make much sense ... apart from that, the story is that a woman bore that monster.

Would it then be:
monstri simulachrum ex coniugata (nati)? Because there's no way ortum is with the monster, unless there was some misspelling, right?
I suppose ortum is a misspelling for orti.

Come on, it's but a typo. Look at the original, it's ũ instead if i, why should that be improbable?
I guess so, too. It comes from a letter, so it was probably handwritten in the original. Easy to mistake for the one who wants to print it later.

It's unlikely that anyone with a good command of Latin, as this author seems to be in spite of his possible lapse with ortum for orti, would get ab and ex confused in this function. It is also unlikely that the woman brought the image herself.


Civis Illustris
:thumb-up: I think I got the idea. Thanks, people! This was really helpful!

I'm really not that fond of Renaissance texts (so far, at least)... But friends ask me to put my eyes on these things, so, you know...