Skip to content
1882
Volume 1, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 3118-3123
  • E-ISSN: 3041-5063
file format pdf download PDF
read_more Read side by side viewer icon HTML

Abstract

Abstract

The oldest textual form of the first recension of the can be reconstructed thanks to a precise comparison between the Armenian translation, Latin translation y, and one single Greek manuscript, (Moscow, GIM, Sinod. Gr. 467). The strange placement of the chapter on the lizard at the beginning of the collection in both and the Armenian translation can be explained by assuming a codicological accident in their common ancestor. The chapter on the lizard is the last in the collection in the Latin version y of the and the model of the , and this must have been its original position. The folio on which that chapter was written fell off and was wrongly put at the beginning rather than the end of the book in the ancestor of and the Armenian version. The placement of the lizard in the second position, as in the majority of Greek manuscripts, can be interpreted as an attempt at correcting the misplacement that had occurred in the model of . In accordance with that hypothesis, all Greek manuscripts (except ) and the Ethiopic translation as well as Latin x depend upon a unique hyparchetype. This conclusion completely changes our views on the textual history of the .

© 2025 Brepols Publishers n.v.
This is an open access article made available under a cc by-nc 4.0 International License.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1484/J.MEMAS.5.150233
2024-12-01
2025-12-04

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/memas/1/2/j.memas.5.150233.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1484/J.MEMAS.5.150233&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Aydin, Sami. 2021. “The Syriac Tradition of the Physiologus”. In MLP, 197–236.
  2. Batovici, Dan. 2020. “Reading Aids in Early Christian Papyri”. In From Scrolls to Scrolling: Sacred Texts, Materiality, and Dynamic Media Cultures, ed. Bradford A. Anderson. Berlin: De Gruyter, 35–49.
  3. Bernabò, Massimo. 1998. Il Fisiologo di Smirne. Le miniature del perduto codice B. 8 della Biblioteca della Scuola Evangelica di Smirne. With the collaboration of Glenn Peers and Rita Tarasconi. Firenze: SISMEL / Edizioni del Galluzzo.
  4. Boodts, Shari and Caroline Macé. 2021. “The Latin Tradition”. In MLP, 109–58.
  5. Carmody, Francis James. 1939. Physiologus Latinus. Éditions préliminaires: versio B. Paris: Droz.
  6. ———. 1941. “Physiologus Latinus Versio Y”. University of California Publications in Classical Philology 12/7, 95–134.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Cox Miller, Patricia. 2018. In the Eye of the Animal. Zoological Imagination in Ancient Christianity. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
  8. Draelants, Isabelle and Arnaud Zucker. 2019. Le Physiologus. Manuscrits anciens et tradition médiévale = RursuSpicae, 2. https://journals.openedition.org/rursuspicae/411
  9. Gebert, Bent. 2010. “Der Satyr im Bad: Textsinn und Bildsinn in der Physiologus-Handschrift Cod. Bongarsianus 318 der Burgerbibliothek Bern, mit einer Edition der Versio C des Physiologus latinus”. Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 45, 353–403. http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:352-2-1lx2df0thftab8
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Gemeinhardt, Peter. 2022. Geschichte des Christentums in der Spätantike. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
  11. Gippert, Jost. 2021. “The Georgian Tradition”. In MLP, 307–50.
  12. Grant, Robert McQueen. 1999. Early Christians and Animals. London: Routledge.
  13. Grimm-Stadelmann, Isabel. 2020. Untersuchungen zur Iatromagie in der byzantinischen Zeit: zur Tradierung gräkoägyptischer und spätantiker iatromagischer Motive. Berlin: De Gruyter.
  14. Henkel, Nikolaus. 1976. Studien zum Physiologus im Mittelalter. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.
  15. Holl, Karl. 1922. Epiphanius, Ancoratus und Panarion, vol. 2. Leipzig: Hinrichs. https://archive.org/details/epiphanius-panarion-and-ancoratus-greek-critical-edition-3-vols-in-1-holl-1915-1922-1933
  16. Hommel, Fritz. 1877. Die aethiopische Uebersetzung des Physiologus nach je einer Londoner, Pariser und Wiener Handschrift, herausgegeben, verdeutscht und mit einer historischen Einleitung versehen. Leipzig: Johann Conrad Hinrichs. https://archive.org/details/b24878261
  17. Hurtado, Larry W. 2006. The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Origins. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
  18. Ihm, Sibylle. 1995. Der Traktat περὶ τῶν ἰοβόλων θηρίων καὶ δηλητηρίων φαρμάκων des sog. Aelius Promotus. Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert.
  19. Irigoin, Jean. 1986. “Accidents matériels et critique des textes”. Revue d’histoire des textes 16, 1–36 [reprinted in 2003: see the next reference, 79–131].
     [Google Scholar]
  20. ———. 2003. La tradition des textes grecs: Pour une critique historique. Paris: Belles Lettres.
  21. Kaimakis, Denis (ed.). 1974. Der Physiologus nach der ersten Redaktion. Meisenheim am Glan: Anton Hain.
  22. ———. 1976. Die Kyraniden. Meisenheim am Glan: Anton Hain.
  23. Karneev, Aleksandr. 1894. “Der Physiologus der Moskauer Synodalbibliothek. Ein Beitrag zur Lösung der Frage nach der Vorlage des armenischen und eines alten lateinischen Physiologus”. Byzantinische Zeitschrift 3, 26–63.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Kindschi Garský, Zbyněk and Rainer Hirsch-Luipold (eds). 2019. Christus in natura. Quellen, Hermeneutik und Rezeption des Physiologus. Berlin: De Gruyter.
  25. Land, Jan Pieter Nicolaas. 1875. Anecdota Syriaca, vol. 4: Otia Syriaca. Leiden: Brill. https://archive.org/details/anecdotasyriaca0304land
  26. Lazaris, Stavros. 2016. Le Physiologus grec, vol. 1: La réécriture de l’histoire naturelle antique. Florence: SISMEL/Edizioni del Galluzzo.
  27. ———. 2021. Le Physiologus grec, vol. 2: Donner à voir la nature. Florence: SISMEL/Edizioni del Galluzzo.
  28. Le Boulluec, Alain. 2012. “Pierre d’Alexandrie”. In Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques, ed. Richard Goulet, vol. 5/1. Paris: CNRS Éditions, 619–21.
  29. Macé, Caroline. 2017. “The manuscript Π of the Greek Physiologus”. Scriptorium 71, 121–23.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. ———. 2020. “Animals in Pseudo-Eustathius of Antioch’s Chronicle”. In Von der Historienbibel zur Weltchronik. Studien zur Paleja-Literatur, ed. Christfried Böttrich, Dieter Fahl and Sabine Fahl. Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 205–22.
  31. ———. 2021a. “The Greek Tradition of the First Recension (Phys. Gr. I)”. In MLP, 49–107.
  32. ———. 2021b. “The Pelican in the Physiologus”. In MLP, 411–27. https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPM-EB.5.122294
  33. ———. 2021c. “The Panther in the Physiologus”. In MLP, 493–510. Turnhout: Brepols. https://www.brepolsonline.net/doi/abs/10.1484/M.IPM-EB.5.122295
  34. ——— and Jost Gippert. 2021. “Preface”. In MLP, 14–25.
  35. Marr, Nikolay Yakovlevich. 1904. Физиолог. Армянско-Грузинский извод [Physiologus: The Armenian-Georgian Recension]. St Petersburg: Imperial Academy of Sciences.
  36. Mugridge, Alan. 2016. Copying Early Christian Texts: A Study of Scribal Practice. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
  37. Muradyan, Gohar. 2005. Physiologus. The Greek and Armenian Versions with a Study of Translation Technique. Leuven: Peeters.
  38. ——— and Aram Topchyan. 2021. “The Armenian Tradition”. In MLP, 281–303. https://doi.org/10.1484/M.IPM-EB.5.122290
  39. Nutton, Vivian. 2006. “Aelius Promotus”. In Brill’s New Pauly Online, ed. Hubert Cancik, Helmuth Schneider, and Manfred Landfester. https://doi.org/ [Crossref]
  40. Odorico, Paolo. 2020. “Une chronique byzantine inconnue”. In Von der Historienbibel zur Weltchronik. Studien zur Paleja-Literatur, ed. Christfried Böttrich, Dieter Fahl, and Sabine Fahl. Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 188–204.
  41. Offermanns, Dieter (ed.). 1966. Der Physiologus nach den Handschriften G und M. Meisenheim am Glan: Anton Hain.
  42. Pakis, Valentine A. 2008. “A Note in Defence of ‘The Partridge’” (Exeter Book 97v)”. Neophilologus 92, 729–34.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. ———. 2010. “Contextual Duplicity and Textual Variation: The Siren and Onocentaur in the Physiologus Tradition”. Mediaevistik 23, 115–86.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Perry, Ben Edwin. 1937. “Review of Sbordone 1936”. The American Journal of Philology 58/4, 488–96.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. ———. 1941. “Physiologus”. In Paulys Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, neue Reihe, 20/1. Stuttgart: J. B. Metzler, 1074–1129.
  46. Pires, Álvaro. 2023. “A Fiction of Nature and the Nature of Fiction: The Role of Fictionality in the Allegorical Hermeneutics of the Greek Physiologus”. In On the Diffusion of Zoological Knowledge in Late Antiquity and the Byzantine, ed. Oliver Hellmann and Arnaud Zucker. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag, 13–36.
  47. Pirtea, Adrian. 2021. “The Arabic Tradition – Second Part: Phys. Arab. α”. In MLP, 263–80.
  48. Sbordone, Francesco. 1936. Physiologus. Milan: Dante Alighieri di Albrighi, Segati [reprinted in 1991, Hildesheim: Olms].
  49. Schneider, Horst. 2021. “Introduction to the Physiologus”. In MLP, 31–47.
  50. Scott, Alan. 1998. “The Date of the Physiologus”. Vigiliae Christianae 52, 430–41.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Sirinian, Anna and Francesco D’Aiuto. 2017. “Nuove osservazioni filologiche e paleografiche su antiche traduzioni armene dal Greco”. In Philologie, herméneutique et histoire des textes entre Orient et Occident. Mélanges en hommage à Sever J. Voicu, ed. Francesca P. Barone, Caroline Macé, and Pablo A. Ubierna. Turnhout: Brepols, 269–87.
  52. Stoykova, Ana. 2021. “The Slavonic Physiologus”. In MLP, 351–86.
  53. Stroppa, Marco. 2011. “Un papiro inedito del Fisiologo (PSI inv. 295)”. In I papiri letterari cristiani. Atti del convegno internazionale di studi in memoria di Mario Naldini, ed. Guido Bastianini. Florence: Istituto papirologico “G. Vitelli”, 173–92.
  54. ———. 2013. “L’uso di rotuli per testi cristiani di carattere letterario”. Archiv für Papyrusforschung und verwandte Gebiete 59/2, 347–58.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. ———. 2016. “The Physiologus and the Greek Papyri”. Reinardus. Yearbook of the International Reynard Society 28, 168–84.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. ———. 2019. “The Physiologus and the Papyri from Egypt”. In Kindschi Garský and Hirsch-Luipold 2019, 39–52.
  57. Verheyden, Joseph. 2011. “Epiphanius of Salamis on Beasts and Heretics: Some Introductory Comments”. In Heretics and Heresies in the Ancient Church and in Eastern Christianity: Studies in Honour of Adelbert Davids, ed. Joseph Verheyden and Herman Teule. Leuven: Peeters, 143–73.
  58. Villa, Massimo. 2021. “The Ethiopic Tradition”. In MLP, 159–96.
  59. Vollenweider, Samuel. 2019. “Der Erlöser im Tarnanzug. Eine Studie zur Christologie des Physiologus, zu seiner Datierung und zur Rezeptionsgeschichte von Psalm 24 (23LXX)”. In Kindschi Garský and Hirsch-Luipold 2019, 93–132.
  60. Wiener, Leo. 1921. Contributions toward a History of Arabico-Gothic Culture, vol. 4: Physiologus Studies, Philadelphia: Innes.
  61. Zambon, Francesco. 2018. Bestiari tardoantichi e medievali. I testi fondamentali della zoologia sacra cristiana. Firenze: Bompiani.
  62. Zöpfl, Friedrich. 1927. Der Kommentar des Pseudo-Eustathios zum Hexaëmeron. Münster: Aschendorff.
/content/journals/10.1484/J.MEMAS.5.150233
Loading
The Original Text Form and Chapter Order of the Physiologus, with an Edition of the Chapter on the Lizard in Π
https://doi.org/10.1484/j.memas.5.150233
/content/journals/10.1484/J.MEMAS.5.150233
/content/journals/10.1484/J.MEMAS.5.150233
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): accident; archetype.; Armenian; codex; codicology; Greek; Latin; Syriac; translation
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