Le Meditationes Vitae Christi in volgare secondo il codice Paris, BnF, it. 115 Edizione, commentario e riproduzione del corredo iconografico

The Pseudo-Bonaventuran Meditationes vitae Christi is one of the most influential devotional narratives of the late middle ages. It was written in Tuscany in the early fourteenth century and survived in several Latin and vernacular manuscripts and early prints. An extensive discussion has engaged the scholars, especially about the issue of the first linguistic version of the text. Even if the Latin version seems to be the original text, the vernacular manuscript Paris, BnF, it. 115 stays as one of the most important and interesting witnesses of the work. One of the earliest surviving codices, it conserves the first Italian translation (penned in the Pisan area) of the text, enriched by a wonderful set of illustration. The present volume, which is the outcome of an international and interdisciplinary collaboration, offers the first critical edition of the text, the reproduction of all images, the edition of the instructions given to the artist, accompanied by detailed philological and art-historical commentaries, glossaries, and seven interdisciplinary introductory essays.

The Arabic “Theology of Aristotle”

The Theology of Aristotle is an Arabic adaptation of parts of Plotinus’s Enneads IV–VI. Both the translation into Arabic of treatises from these Enneads and their reworking, which originated the text known as Theology of Aristotle, were produced within the first philosophical circle of the Arabic-speaking world: that which was animated in the ʿAbbasid Baghdad by Abu Yusuf Yaʿqub ibn Ish aq al-Kindi (d. c. 870). Together with another adapted translation, that of Proclus’s Elements of Theology that originated the so-called Liber de causis, the Theology conveys under Aristotle’s name the Neoplatonic doctrines of the One-Good as the first cause of reality as a whole, of the Intellect as a separate substance near the One, and of the Soul both as a cosmic principle endowed with the power to rule nature, and as the rational immortal principle of human beings. The first chapter of the Theology of Aristotle contains a long introduction independent of Plotinus, which reflects the convictions of the milieu it stems from. The work is described as Aristotle’s “Theology” (transliterated from the Greek as Uthulujiya) plus the “commentary” by Porphyry. Then “Aristotle” takes the floor, introduced by the words “The Sage says.” He declares his intention to complete by this theological account his previous treatment of the four causes—material, formal, efficient, and final cause; this treatment, says “Aristotle,” has been already provided in the Metaphysics. The Uthulujiya will now be devoted to the three higher principles: the One, the Intellect, and the universal Soul. The causality of the One expands over reality in its entirety but first over the Intellect; then, through the mediation of the Intellect, over the universal Soul; then again, through the mediation of the Intellect and Soul, over nature, which in its turn contains the things that come to be and pass away. This doctrine forms the backbone of “Aristotle’s” Uthulujiya (henceforth ps.-Theology). The ps.-Theology has come down to us in Arabic and in a Latin version, dating from the Renaissance, that differs from the Arabic on various counts. The Arabic text comprises ten chapters, each of them dependent upon sections of Plotinus’s treatises that are reorganized in a layout often very different from the Greek original. Not only the order of the treatises is altered, but also Plotinus’s wording and doctrines are modified to convey the idea that the One is pure Being and the Creator all of reality. The ps.-Theology deeply influenced the subsequent development of Arabic-Islamic philosophy: al-Farabi (d. 950) structured his work Opinions of the Inhabitants of the Perfect City according to the Neoplatonic hierarchy described in it, and Avicenna (d. 1037) commented upon it. In the Western Muslim world, Averroes rejected Avicenna’s emanationism, but was still committed to the doctrine of the Agent Intellect, a doctrine which is rooted in the ps.-Theology at least as well as it is in Alexander of Aphrodisias’s interpretation of Aristotle’s De Anima (see Doctrine).

Untying Knots: A New Interpretation of Irenaeus, Adversus haereses 3.22.4

Adversus haereses 3.22.4 is one of the key texts for Irenaeus’ views about the virgin Mary’s role in the “economy” of salvation. Among the many interpretative riddles of this passage, this paper discusses the function of the metaphor of the knots in Irenaeus’ argument. A close analysis suggests that the lines in question are not the conclusion of the preceding section (as implied by the Latin version—and modern interpreters), but the opening of a concluding development that sums up the role of the New Adam and the New Eve. As a result, the metaphor of knots should not be understood in exclusive connection with Mary: it applies to both Christ and her— though it is particularly fitting for expressing Mary’s role as New (and Anti-) Eve.

The Septuagint in the Latin World

Greek Old Testament texts were being translated into Latin by the second century ce, with a complete Old Latin version extant by the third century. Tertullian was aware of Latin translations but typically consulted the Greek directly. The Old Latin version underwent revisions and textual diversification in the third and fourth centuries, reflecting updates in style and adjustments based on evolving Greek texts. In 391–405 Jerome produced his Latin translations based on the Hebrew. Although he doubted the inspiration of the LXX and promoted the hebraica veritas, Jerome never ceased commenting on the LXX and sometimes acknowledged its traditional ecclesial status. In contrast, Augustine consistently affirmed the inspiration of the LXX, although he eventually recognized the value of the Hebrew. Over time the Old Latin version steadily lost ground to Jerome’s Hebrew version, although elements of the LXX were preserved in Latin through the deuterocanonical books and Jerome’s Gallican Psalter.

From mythology to science: the development of scientific hydrological concepts in the Greek antiquity and its relevance to modern hydrology

Whilst hydrology is a Greek term, it has not been in use in the Classical literature but much later, during the Renaissance, in its Latin version, hydrologia. On the other hand, Greek natural philosophers created robust knowledge in related scientific areas, to which they gave names such as meteorology, climate and hydraulics. These terms are now in common use internationally. Within these areas, Greek natural philosophers laid the foundation of hydrological concepts and the hydrological cycle in its entirety. Knowledge development was brought about by search for technological solutions to practical problems, as well as by scientific curiosity to explain natural phenomena. While initial explanations belong to the sphere of mythology, the rise of philosophy was accompanied by attempts to provide scientific descriptions of the phenomena. It appears that the first geophysical problem formulated in scientific terms was the explanation of the flood regime of the Nile, then regarded as a paradox because of the spectacular difference from the river flow regime in Greece and other Mediterranean regions, i.e., the fact that the Nile flooding occurs in summer when in most of the Mediterranean the rainfall is very low. While some of the early attempts to explain it were influenced by Homer’s mythical view (archaic period), eventually, Aristotle was able to formulate a correct hypothesis, which he tested through what it appears to be the first in history scientific expedition, in the turn from the Classical to Hellenistic period. This confirms the fact that the hydrological cycle was well understood during the Classical period yet it poses the question why Aristotle’s correct explanation had not been accepted and, instead, ancient and modern mythical views had been preferred up to the 18th century.

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

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.

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

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.