Frühmittelalterliche Rezeptarien (1925); H. Fischer, Mittelalterliche Pflanzenkunde (1929; repr. 1967);
A. Önnerfors, Pliniana (1956); B. Löfstedt, Studien über die Sprache der langobardischen Gesetze (1961).
John ScarboroughPhysiognomista Latinus (350 – 400 CE)
Composer of a book on physiognomy, based on and extensively translating and para-
phrasing P, using also L and “Aristotle” (i.e. the A C
P), as he states in the first sentence. An attribution by Albertus Magnus to
A was once discussed (cf. Rose 77–86), but has been rejected by André (31–34) and
Repath (549–550), who, because of its language, instead suggest the date we give. The
treatise has four main parts: 1–15: an introduction on the theory and method of physi-
ognomy which closely follows the methodical introduction in the Aristotelian Corpus
Physiognomy; 16–89: the signs from head to feet and the characters they signify, according
mostly to Polemo ̄n, especially for the eyes (20–43); 90–117: several character types who bear
combinations of the signs, including a brief chapter on the importance of the “overall
impression” (epiprépeia), following the Aristotelian Corpus Physiognomy and Polemo ̄n; finally,
118 – 133: the characteristics of animals, according mostly to Loxos.
Ed.: V. Rose, Anecdota Graeca (1864) 1.59–102 (introduction) and 103–169 (text); J. André, Anonyme Latin:
Traité de physiognomonie (CUF 1981); I. Repath, “Anonymus Latinus, Book of Physiognomy,” in Swain
(2007) 549–635.
Sabine Vogt
Physiologos (100 – 400 CE)
Greek Christian anonymous collection of brief animal portraits, originated in Alexandria
or Palestine, widely distributed throughout the Greco-Roman world until late Middle Ages.
With a wide range of texts of variable length and material, the Physiologos (i.e. “Expert-in-
nature”) has no standard form and is rather a genre than a work. It usually presents a
twofold description of one or several features of an animal, first naturalistically, and then
allegorically and symbolically, with regular scriptural quotations, revealing how nature
(phusis) itself expresses Christian realities and spiritual truths. On the basis of some
80 MSS, Sbordone distinguished three main Greek recensions: ancient (immediately post-
dating the gospels), Byzantine (5th/6th c.), and a so-called Basilean (10th/11th c.), errone-
ously attributed to B C. Traditionally ascribed to various heterogeneous
authors (e.g., the Christian bishop E, the pagan naturalist A, or the
Hebrew king Solomon), this very popular syncretic digest of Egyptian lore, Greek natural
history and Judeo-Christian exegesis was early translated into the main ancient Eastern
languages (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Georgian, etc.), and Latin. All medieval Bestiaries
(books of beasts) or Aviaries (in Latin as in vernacular versions) originate from one of the
numerous Latin recensions (B, Y, A, C, etc., produced before 500 CE). This extensible
collection with an average of 45 chapters (cumulatively treating some 80 different creatures
in the ancient versions) is not even strictly zoological, including also plants (sycamore and
the peridexion tree) and stones (adamas, magnetite, fire-flints, etc.). This cultural medley
abounds in popular beliefs and ethology (with many parallels in Aristotle, A and
K), sometimes misconceived animal behavior (the beaver’s autocastration, the
fox’s simulating death, the crow’s monogamy, the snake’s hibernation, etc.), and theological
interpretations: the ichneumon covering himself with mud to kill the snake becomes thus a
PHYSIOLOGOS