Skip to content
1882
Volume 59, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 0068-4023
  • E-ISSN: 2034-6476

Abstract

Abstract

Pseudo-Aristotle’s is one of the main authoritative texts in the field of ancient and medieval physiognomy. After its thirteenth century translation into Latin by Bartholomew of Messina, the treatise was widely diffused across Europe. Nevertheless, its medieval reception and use remains largely unexplored. The present paper aims to fill this gap and offers a new inventory of all the medieval commentaries written on pseudo-Aristotle’s . The newly discovered material allows us to demonstrate that this physiognomic text was more widely read and commented upon than was previously accepted, which inevitably changes the picture of medieval physiognomy in general.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1484/J.BPM.5.115836
2017-01-01
2025-12-06

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. J. Agrimi, Ingeniosa scientia nature: Studi sulla fisiognomica medievale (Millennio medievale 36), Firenze 2002.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. I. Bekker, Aristotelis Opera, Berlin 1831.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. C. Beneduce, Natural Philosophy and Medicine in John Buridan, with an edition of Buridan’s Quaestiones de Secretis Mulierum, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Università di Pisa and Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen 2017.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. P. De Leemans, “Medieval Latin Commentaries on Aristotle’s De Motu Animalium. A contribution to the Corpus commentariorum medii aevi in Aristotelem Latinorum”, in Recherches de Théologie et de Philosophie médiévales 67 (2000), 272-360.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. F. Del Punta, “The Genre of Commentaries in the Middle Ages and its Relation to the Nature and Originality of Medieval Thought”, in Was ist Philosophie im Mittelalter?, hrsg. v. J.A. Aertsen und A. Speer (Miscellanea Mediaevalia 26), Berlin-New York 1998, 138-151.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. L. de Rijk et O. Weijers, Repertorium commentariorum medii aevi in Aristotelem latinorum quae in bibliothecis publicis Neerlandicis asservantur, Amsterdam 1981.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. L. Devriese, “Physiognomy in Context: Marginal Annotations in the Manuscripts of the Physiognomonica”, in Recherches de Théologie et Philosophie médiévales 84.1 (2017), 107-141.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. L. Devriese, “An Inventory of Anonymous Medieval Physiognomic Treatises” (forthcoming).
    [Google Scholar]
  9. J. Eastman, “Die Werke des Aegidius Romanus”, in Augustiniana 44 (1994), 209-231.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. S. Ebbesen, C. Thomsen Thörnquist and V. Decaix, “Questions on De sensu et sensato, De memoria and De somno et vigilia. A Catalogue”, in Bulletin de Philosophie Médiévale 57 (2016), 59-115.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. S. Ebbesen, “Radulphus Brito on Memory and Dreams. An Edition”, in Cahiers de l’Institut du Moyen-Âge grec et latin 85 (2016), 11-86.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. E. Faral, “Jean Buridan: Notes sur les manuscrits”, in Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Âge 15 (1946).
    [Google Scholar]
  13. M. Garbaczowa, “Mikolaja Z Brzegu Komentarz do De Physionomia Pseudo-Arystotelesa w Zbiorach Rekopismiennych Biblioteki Jagiellonskiej”, in Studia mediewistyczne 19.2 (1978), 127-164.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Guilelmus de Aragonia, De nobilitate animi, ed. W.D. Paden et M. Trovato (Harvard studies in medieval Latin 2), Cambridge 2012.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. G.B. Korolec, Repertorium commentariorum medii aevi in Aristotelem Latinorum quae in Bibliotheca olim Universitatis Pragensis nunc Státní Knihovna ČSR vocata asservantur, Wrocław-Warszawa-Kraków-Gdańsk 1977.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. C. Luna, “Bemerkungen über die Handschriften der Werke des Aegidius Romanus in der Amplonianischen Bibliothek zu Erfurt”, in Die Bibliotheca Amploniana. Ihre Bedeutung im Spannungsfeld von Aristotelismus, Nominalismus und Humanismus, hrsg. v. A. Speer (Miscellanea Mediaevalia 23), Berlin-New York 1995, 257-300.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. M. Markowski et S. Wlodek, Repertorium commentariorum medii aevi in Aristotelem Latinorum quae in Bibliotheca Iagellonica Cravociae asservantur, Wrocław-Warszawa-Kraków-Gdańsk-Łódz 1974.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. M. Markowski, Repertorium commentariorum medii aevi in Aristotelem Latinorum quae in Bibliotheca Amploniana Erffordiae asservantur, Wrocław-Warszawa-Kraków-Gdańsk-Łódz 1987.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. M. Markowski, Repertorium Commentariorum Medii Aevi in Aristotelem Latinorum quae in Bibliothecis Wiennae asservantur, Wrocław-Warszawa-Kraków-Gdańsk-Łódz 1987.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. M. Markowski, “Die Aristoteles-Kommentare in den mittelalterlichen Handschriften der Bibliothek des Metropolitankapitels zu Prag”, in Acta Mediaevalia. 30-ème anniversaire de la création de l’Institut de la Culture Médiévale, éd. S. Wielgus et S. Markowski, Lublin 1999, 227-270.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. M. Markowski, Repertorium commentariorum medii aevi in Aristotelem Latinorum qui in bibliothecis autriacis asservantur, Kraków 2008.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. J.F. Meirinhos, “A atribuição a Petrus Yspanus das Sententie super libro de physonomia de Guillelmus Hispanus, no manuscrito Vaticano, Urb. lat. 1392”, in Mediaevalia. Textos e Estudos 7-8 (1995), 329-359.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. B. Michael, Johannes Buridan: Studien zu seinem Leben, seinen Werken und zur Rezeption seiner Theorien im Europa des Späten Mittelalters, Berlin 1985.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. C.H. Lohr, Latin Aristotle Commentaries I. Medieval Authors, Firenze 2010-2013.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. C.H. Lohr, “Aristotelica Britannica”, in Theologie und Philosophie 53 (1978), 79-101.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. C.H. LohrAristotelica Gallica: Bibliothecae M-Z”, in Theologie und Philosophie 63 (1988), 79-121.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. C.H. Lohr, Aristotelica Helvetica. Catalogus codicum latinorum in bibliothecis Confederationis Helveticae asservatorum quibus versiones expositionesque operum Aristotelis continentur, Freiburg 1994.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. C.H. Lohr, “Aristotelica Hispalensia”, in Theologie und Philosophie 50 (1975), 547-64.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. A. Pattin, Repertorium Commentariorum medii aevi in Aristotelem Latinorum quae in Bibliothecis Belgicis asservantur, Leuven-Leiden 1978.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. W. Schum, Beschreibendes Verzeichniss der Amplonianischen Handschriften-Sammlung zu Erfurt, Berlin 1887.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. W. Seńko, Repertorium Commentariorum Medii Aevi in Aristotelem Latinorum quae in Bibliothecis Publicis Parisiis asservantur, Warszawa 1982.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. M. Stanek, Jana Burydana. Quaestiones super Parva naturalia Aristotelis. Edycja krytyczna i analiza historyczno-filozoficzna, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Silesia, Katowice 2015.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. J. Thomann, Studien zum Speculum physionomie des Michele Savonarola, Zürich 1997.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. R. Thomson, Catalogue of medieval manuscripts of Latin commentaries on Aristotle in British libraries, Turnhout 2011-2013.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. L. Thorndike and P. Kibre, A Catalogue of Incipits of Medieval Scientific Writings in Latin, London 1963.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. P. Val Naval, Estudio, Edición Crítica, Traducción y Comentario de la Summa supra phisonomiam de Guillermo de Aragón (c. 1300), Universidad de Zaragoza [Doctoral dissertation] 2006.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. O. Weijers, “La structure des commentaires philosophiques à la Faculté des arts: quelques observations”, in Il commento filosofico nell’Occidente latino (secoli XIII-XV). Atti del colloquio Firenze-Pisa, 19-22 ottobre 2000, organizzato dalla SISMEL (Società Internazionale per lo Studio del Medioevo Latino) e dalla SISPM (Società Italiana per lo Studio del Pensiero Medievale), sotto l’egida della SIEPM, a cura di G. Fioravanti, C. Leonardi e S. Perfetti, Turnhout 2002, 17-41.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. O. Weijers, “Un type de commentaire particulier à la Faculté des arts: la sententia cum questionibus”, in La tradition vive. Mélanges d’histoire des textes en l’honneur de Louis Holtz, éd. P. Lardet (Bibliologia 20), Paris-Turnhout 2003, 211-222.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. E. Wickersheimer, Dictionnaire biographique des médecins en France au Moyen Âge, Genève 1979.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. J. Ziegler, “Text and Context: On the Rise of Physiognomic Thought in the Later Middle Ages”, in De Sion exibit lex et verbum domini de Hierusalem, ed. H. Yitzhak, Turnhout 2001, 159-182.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. J. Ziegler, “Médecine et physiognomonie du xive au début du xvie siècle”, in Médiévales 46 (2004), 89-108.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. J. Ziegler, “Philosophers and Physicians on the Scientific Validity of Latin Physiognomy, 1200-1500”, in Early Science and Medicine 12 (2007), 285-312.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. J. Ziegler, “The Beginning of Medieval Physiognomy: The Case of Michael Scotus”, in Kulturtransfer und Hofgesellschaft im Mittelalter: Wissenskultur am sizilianischen und kastilianischen Hof im 13. Jahrhundert, hrsg. v. G. Grebner und J. Fried (Wissenskultur und gesellschaftlicher Wandel 15), Berlin 2008, 299-319.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. J. Ziegler, “Physiognomy, Science, and Proto-Racism 1200-1500”, in The Origins of Racism in the West, ed. M. Eliav-Feldon, B. Isaac and J. Ziegler, Cambridge 2009, 181-199.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Online:
    Online catalogueJordanus: An International Catalogue of Mediaeval Scientific Manuscripts”.
/content/journals/10.1484/J.BPM.5.115836
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field.
Please enter a valid email address.
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An error occurred.
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error:
Please enter a valid_number test
aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYnJlcG9sc29ubGluZS5uZXQv