Tvær dæmisögur Esóps og latnesk skrifaravers í formála Adonias sögu og tengsl þeirra við latínubrotin í Þjms frag 103,104 og AM 732 b 4to

Gripla ◽

10.33112/gripla.32.5 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 32 ◽

pp. 135-149

Author(s):

Gottskálk Jensson

Keyword(s):

Latin Version

The author of this article conclusively traces the source of the two Aesopic fables retold in the prologue to Adonias saga to the medieval collection of Latin fables known as Anonymus Neveleti (alias Romulus elegiacus), fragments of which are preserved in two Icelandic vellum bifolia (Þjms frag 103 and 104) that probably originate from the Benedictines monastic houses of North Iceland. In a review of various ancient and medieval collections of Aesop’s fables, the author concludes that the unknown Icelandic author of Adonias saga must have been familiar with the two fables in this particular Latin version, even though his Icelandic rendering of them is free and likely based on memory. A parallel to a Latin couplet cited in the prologue is furthermore identified in a bilingual encyclopædic manuscript, AM 732 b 4to, also associated with the northern Benedictines. The author of the article suggests the possibility that the incorporation of two Aesopic fables in the prologue to Adonias saga, a riddarasaga, is an indication that such sagas ought to be interpreted like fables, that is not only read as entertainment but also as ethical instruction.

Download Full-text

“Missa Grecorum” “Missa Sancti Iohannis Crisostomi”: The Oldest Latin Version Known of the Byzantine Liturgies of St. Basil and St. John Chrysostom

Traditio ◽

10.1017/s0362152900017529 ◽

1943 ◽

Vol 1 ◽

pp. 79-137 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Dom Anselm Strittmatter

Keyword(s):

Twelfth Century ◽

The Other ◽

Special Significance ◽

Other Hand ◽

John Chrysostom ◽

Ancient Manuscripts ◽

Latin Version

The following Latin version, hitherto unpublished, of the Byzantine Liturgies of St. Basil and St. John Chrysostom was generously placed at my disposal by my confrère, the late lamented Dom André Wilmart, O.S.B., who about seventeen years ago discovered and transcribed it from a manuscript purchased at London in 1899 by the Bibliothèque Nationale:Nouv. Acq. lat. 1791Since the manuscript was written in the second half of the twelfth century, this translation is—to put it roughly—at least as old as that of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom (= X) made at Constantinople about 1180 by the Pisan interpreter, Leo Tuscus, or that of the Liturgy of St. Basil (= B) made shortly afterward by Nicholas of Otranto. But it is important to note at the outset that the present translation represents a considerably earlier redaction of the Liturgies than do the two aforesaid versions, for we have here, as in the earliest of our manuscripts, theBarberinum S. Marci(=BSM), and several others, the prayers of the celebrant only and a corresponding minimum of rubrics. Of special significance, moreover, are the two following facts: first, the precedence given to B, an arrangement found in comparatively few manuscripts, among them the oldest which we know; and secondly, the occurrence in this same Liturgy of ancient rubrics and of the ancient form of at least one exclamation of the deacon, which point to a very early recension as the original from which the translator worked. On the other hand, over against this ancient form stands a relatively modern text, for not only are certain prayers which appear in the most ancient manuscripts only, missing from this translation, but in those few prayers also in the tradition of which it is possible to distinguish an older from a more recent set of readings, it is the latter which are almost invariably found. Similarly, the indication of certain acclamations by the initial words only (an ancient trait) and the writing out of the ἐκΦωνήσ∊ις in full (a very late practice) constitute another combination of ancient and recent features. But to attempt on the basis of these characteristics to fix the date of either the original or the translation, is to face possibilities only, concerning which it would be useless to speculate.

Download Full-text

Note per l’attribuzione a Massimo il Confessore di parte degli Scholia al Corpus Dionysiacum

Augustinianum ◽

10.5840/agstm20216119 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 61 (1) ◽

pp. 237-262

Author(s):

Alberto Nigra ◽

Keyword(s):

Maximus The Confessor ◽

Pseudo Dionysius ◽

Latin Version

This article intends to provide a further contribution to the attribution of the Greek Scholia on the Corpus Dionysiacum by examining the Latin version by Anastasius Bibliothecarius. In particular, some Latin manuscripts have recently been identified, which retain many of the critical signs used by Anastasius in order to mark the scholia dating back to Maximus the Confessor. The collation of these cruces not only allows us to identify the contribution of Maximus as a scholiast of the Corpus Dionysiacum, but also to ascertain further the work of John of Scythopolis and to point out a possible way to research the contribution of other commentators of Pseudo-Dionysius.

Download Full-text

Translation or Alteration? Grosseteste's Latin Version of Aristotle's Account of Natural Justice

Journal of the History of Philosophy ◽

10.1353/hph.2018.0069 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 56 (4) ◽

pp. 601-627

Author(s):

José A. Poblete

Keyword(s):

Natural Justice ◽

Latin Version

Download Full-text

Rhyming Latin version of the song on Robin Goodfellow

Notes and Queries ◽

10.1093/nq/s1-iii.82.402 ◽

1851 ◽

Vol s1-III (82) ◽

pp. 402-404

Author(s):

S. W. Singer

Keyword(s):

Latin Version

Download Full-text

THE BASIS OF THE TEXT OF PLATO'S CHARMIDES

Mnemosyne ◽

10.1163/15685250252989715 ◽

2002 ◽

Vol 55 (2) ◽

pp. 131-158

Author(s):

David Murphy

Keyword(s):

Horizontal Transmission ◽

Latin Translation ◽

Latin Version

AbstractBuilding on the classification of manuscripts established in Mnemosyne 43 [1990], 316-40, this paper examines the relations among textual witness to the Charmides. Despite horizontal transmission of variants, the primary MSS. form a bipartite stemma: B|WQ || T (sc. Oxon. Bodl. Clarke 39, Vind. suppl. gr. 7, Par. gr. 1813, and Ven. Marc. gr. app. cl. 4.1). Against recent doubts, Q's independence is supported by its maiuscule errors that the first hands of B or W correct, by its freedom from false corrections introduced by those hands, and by a host of minor W errors of the sort that correctors generally overlook. The known Greek exemplars of Ficino's Latin version lack words that he did translate. These recur in the W tradition, of which he may have used Flor. conv. soppr. 54. Poliziano's fragmentary Latin translation rests on a copy of T. Both translators solve certain textual problems. No new source of Cornarius' translation shows itself. Stobaeus confirms the antiquity of certain variants, which agree most often with B. The few quotations in other ancient authors are too scanty to reveal their place in the tradition.

Download Full-text