Copyright © 2019 Sorbonne Université, agissant pour le Laboratoire d’Excellence « Observatoire de la vie littéraire » (ci-après dénommé OBVIL).
Cette ressource électronique protégée par le code de la propriété intellectuelle sur les bases de données (L341-1) est mise à disposition de la communauté scientifique internationale par l’OBVIL, selon les termes de la licence Creative Commons : « Attribution - Pas d’Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 3.0 France (CCBY-NC-ND 3.0 FR) ».
Attribution : afin de référencer la source, toute utilisation ou publication dérivée de cette ressource électroniques comportera le nom de l’OBVIL et surtout l’adresse Internet de la ressource.
Pas d’Utilisation Commerciale : dans l’intérêt de la communauté scientifique, toute utilisation commerciale est interdite.
Pas de Modification : l’OBVIL s’engage à améliorer et à corriger cette ressource électronique, notamment en intégrant toutes les contributions extérieures, la diffusion de versions modifiées de cette ressource n’est pas souhaitable.
[@ana="story"] : récit de la fable.
[@ana="epimythium"] : moralité de la fable, apparaissant à la fin.
[@ana="promythium"] : section du texte présent avant le récit.
[@ana="comment"] : commentaire de l'auteur.
[@ana="epigraph"] : épigraphe.
[@ana="analysebiblio"] : analyse bibliographique propre à l'édition numérique.
Fabuliste romain de l’antiquité tardive (ee
Pour un recensement (incomplet) des éditions modernes du recueil d’Avianus, voir
aussi L. Hervieux, Les fabulistes latins…, t. III : Avianus et ses anciens imitateurs, op. cit., p. 123‑144 (inventaire de
trente-sept éditions entre 1494 et la fin du e
C.R. : J. Küppers, Gnomon, nº 53, 1981, p. 239‑245.
C.R. : Jean G. Préaux, L’Antiquité classique, vol. 28 (nº 2), 1959,
p. 435‑437 (Persée).
C.R. : John E. B. Mayor, The Classical Review, vol. 1 (nº 7), 1887,
p. 188‑193 ; Walter Ashburner, The American Journal of Philology,
vol. 9 (no 3), 1888, p. 359‑362 ; O. Crusius, Jahrbücher für classische Philologie, nº 139, 1889, p. 641‑656.
Lenghty discussion of the twenty-seven fables from the Avianus collection that Steinhöwel chose and translated for his 1476-1477 Ulm edition. Textual problems as well as the choice of fables are discussed with an analysis of those fabular motif in Avianus, which had already appeared in early sections of Steinhöwel’s collection. Tables of concordance and keys to Halm. Extensively discussed are P70 (« The Oak and the Reed » (A-T 28C ; TMI J832) and P525 « Bald Man and the Fly » (TMI J2102.3) (P.C.).
The medieval rewritings and prose paraphrases of Avianus during the Middle Ages are discussed. The use of Avianus in schools as a medium for the instruction of Latin is highlighted (P.C.)
Avianus is confirmed as the proper name of the fourth-century fable-poet, the carrier of the Babrian tradition, very popular during the Middle Ages. Fairly extensive analysis of the arguments for and against the name and reasons for the many variants of the name found in the manuscript tradition. Good bibliography (P.C.).
Comparative study of the use of various differing terms within specific semantic categories results in a very specific close relationship between the two poets. There can be no doubt of the influence of Babrius on Avianus, the author concludes although the exact nature of this influence is not yet definable (P.C.).
An attempt to reconstruct the social and artistic milieu for the classical fabulists : Phaedrus, Babrius, and Avianus by means of lexical frequency counts (P.C.).
This article attempts to describe and evaluate the interpersonal relationships in the fables of Phaedrus, Babrius, and Avianus by means of a close analysis of the nouns used in the fables which describe or otherwise contain information about the nature of various relationships. A clear idea of the social-psychological atmosphere of each poet is determined by a construct of nine types of relationships among which the lexical items are distributed. The authors suggest that this work is potentially important for research in other Problems connected with these fabulists (P.C.).
Dating Avianus is aided by Claudian’s De bello gildonico (398) : Theodosius identified with Macrobius. Cameron
suggests that Avianus used a Latin translation of Babrius (by Julius Titianus), which
solves many Problems. Contains a good survey of the cluster of problems of Avianus’
name and concludes that the proper form is Avienus. (P.C.)
Very comprehensive review of Ellis’ Oxford edition of Avianus. Crusius praises Ellis although he suggests that Ellis might have spent more time with the manuscripts and should have provided an overview on the comparative relationship between Avianus and Babrius. Crusius sees an intermediary of Titian’s Latin prose paraphrase between Avianus and Babrius. Long list of emendations, corrections. (P.C.)
Treated Avianus and his dates and the « apologi » fables. The paraphrase of Avianus, for which Heidenhain had claimed a more complete text had been used, is demonstrated to be a relatively simple paraphrase of Avianus from a text that basically the same of our received text. Therefore we can learn little to help the Avianus tradition itself. Ends with a number of notes for the Avianus fables. (P.C.)
Various theories of the time and person of Avianus are discussed, including an extensive reviex of the ideas of Ellis and Cannegieter. The 42-fables Avianus collection is described in terms of its relationship to Babrius, followed by a summary of the life of the collection and its diffusion. (P.C.)
Various notes on the verse forms of Avianus’ fables as reconstructed in part from the corrupt received forms. (P.C.)
Der dritte Band der « Kostbarkeiten der Stadtbibliothek Trier » stellt den « Trierer Äsop » vor, eine reichlich illustrierte Handschrift aus der Zeit um 1380. Der Kodex enthält illustrierte Ausgaben der Fabeln des Äsop und des Avian, jeweils in mittelalterlichen Bearbeitungen sowie ausgestattet mit knappen Auslegungen. Text und Illustrationen verweisen auf eine Verwendung im Bereich der Schule. Man vermutet, dass der Kodex im Unterricht der Trierer Abtei St. Matthias eingesetzt wurde, wo er auch entstanden sein könnte. Die Fabeln des Äsop gehören der Rezension des « Romulus » an. Sie repräsentieren den ältesten vollständig erhaltenen Überlieferungsträger dieser Rezension aus dem Mittelalter. Die Trierer Handschrift fällt in eine Phase starker Überlieferung des Äsop. Zahlreiche Handschriften und Inkunabeln aus Trierer Klöstern bezeugen eine intensive Rezeption des Textes im 14./15. Jahrhundert, sowohl in Versform wie in Prosa, kommentiert oder glossiert, als reine Textausgabe wie mit Illustrationen versehen. Darüber hinaus dokumentiert der « Trierer Äsop » exemplarisch die Transformation paganer Literatur in einen christlichen Verwendungszusammenhang (présentation d’un libraire).
Investigates the sources of Babrius and his relationship to Aesopic tradition. Babrius’ connection to Phaedrus and to Avianus is outlined. Now superseded by Perry and Küppers (P.C.).
A study of a Carolingian manuscript (Ms. lat. nouv. acq. 1132 in the BN) used as the basis for the study of various illumination techniques for fables from the fifth through the fifteenth centuries. The manuscript itself is described in detail : 40 folios, written in Carolingian miniscule, with a seventeenth- or eighteenth-century binding, unknown earlier history. Full illustrations in facsimile and Goldschmidt has added headings to facilitate study with comparisons drawn from various illuminated manuscripts and the Bayeux Tapestry. (P.C.)
Discusses the twenty-two Avianus fables in Boner to
demonstrate that, in opposition to Schönbach, Boner did not depend upon the prose
paraphrases, the Apologi Aviani, rather used the fables in the
received form (P.C.)
An edition of the epimythia of Avianus with extensive commentary and notes in an attempt to determine their authenticity. (P.C.)
This essay begins with a survey of the direct tradition and the quoted and paraphrased tradition of Avianus’ fables and therewith establishes the existence of two separate recensions of the fables. These two traditions, however, show a tendency to recombine in the late Middle Ages. Guaglianone provides a list of the known manuscripts in two categories, according to the recension to which they belong. (P.C.)
A note on the relationships among the Bruxelles 11193, BM Add. 33781, and Parisinus Lat. 1594 manuscripts of Avianus. (P.C.)
The apologi Aviani are prose
reworkings of the fables of Avianus, found in two manuscripts of the Bibliothèque
Nationale (Cod. Lat. 347 A and B) without nos. 19, 25, 26 and 38. Often the
paraphrases are somewhat better motivated than the originals. Heidenhain feels he has
found an older tradition than the verse fables in the received tradition. Avianus 9,
P65 « Travelers and the Bear » (A-T 179 ; TMI J1488), for example, has a lion in the
paraphrase, which is taken as evidence of an earlier tradition (P.C.).
Assumes that Avianus used a text as his source that was fundamentally the same as that we have today and deduces from that that a more « complete » text of Avianus lies at the basis of the text we have received. The author uses Greek loan words and seemed to know the « Romulus » tradition, having used the latter at the end of P230 « Turtle and the Eagle » (A-T 225A; TMI J512, J657.2). (P.C.)
Collation of MSS 340 and 140 of the Musée Plantin-Movetus (P.C.)
The comedy of Querolus is supposed to be the last work by the fabulist Avianus (P.C.)
The « Œuvres » of Avianus consist not only of the
fables but also of the comedy Querolus and some poems. The fables
are discussed in detail in the introduction in which the authenticity of the morals is
also dealt with. (P.C.)
—, « Notes sur le texte d’Avianus », Latomus, nº 28, 1969,
p. 669-680.
A series of notes to his edition of Avianus. The
first section comprises various textual notes to the fables; the second on the
putative authorship of Querolus ; and the third on the « poems » of
Avianus (P.C.).
Avianus’ Preface and some twenty-nine fables are found in Karlsruh Codex LXXIII from the tenth Century. The manuscript appears to have no new variant readings, but the collation has value for determining the family tree of a group of manuscripts. (P.C.)
Presents variant readings of distiches from Avianus 22, 10-16; 21, 22; 31 and 32. (P.C.)
Works out a complex classification scheme to categorize and evaluate the known manuscripts of Avianus. (P.C.)
Suggests the possible identification of Avianus with Flavianus, who was supposedly in favor with the Emperor Theodosius, to whom the fables of Avianus appear to have been dedicated. (P.C.)
Küppers spends much energy in reordering Avianus research by setting aside the previous work of Ellis and Herrmann especially, and to a lesser extent, Crusius and Cameron, as well as Jones and Thraede. Küppers deals with all the major issues : the name of the poet, the Theodosio problem, and the origin of the fables themselves. Küppers deals with the divergences from the Babrian original as Avianus’ own artistic contribution and argues for Avianus’ translation as Coming directly out of the Greek, rather than through a Latin intermediary. Full and useful bibliographies and indices. (P.C.)
Textual notes to P325 « Lark and Farmer » (A-T 93; TMI J1031). (P.C.)
Notes on various manuscripts of Avianus’ fables (P.C.)
Contains, among much eise, an extensive listing of the manuscripts of Avianus and evaluates their availability at various times and places during the Middle Ages, especially the ninth Century. Lists and describes six manuscripts from the ninth Century, five from the tenth, seven from the eleventh, nine from the twelfth and seven from the thirteenth. (P.C.)
This posthumously-appearing work lists those
classical authors mentioned in library catalogs from the Middle Ages to 1933. Lists
Phaedrus and « Aesopus » (i.e. the Romulus tradition), with special
attention given to the very widespread Avianus tradition. (P.C.)
Textual notes to a passage in Avianus; concludes that no reading is clearly indicated but that some are more difficult to support. (P.C.)
Traces the history of Avianus scholarship, with
particular regard to the establishment of the corpus. Lists numerous manuscripts and
the Heinrich Steinhöwel’s Esopus which contains twenty-seven fables from Avianus and
which is the first known (partial) edition, as well as a number of florilgeia and other collections. Five newly noted medieval texts and
introductions to Avianus are described as are six collections of imitations and
paraphrases. (P.C.)
Lists materials not found in Hervieux or incompletely described there. Issues a cali for a systematic bibliography of Avianus, including all incunabula and prose re-workings during the Middle Ages. (P.C.)
Builds on Rand’s assumption that the Codex Leidensis Vossianus Lat. Q 86 came from Fleury. Oldest known manuscript comes from St. Gallen from which emanate three branches in the manuscript tradition. (P.C.)
The author and editors present here the text of the Walter of England collection of sixty-five fables in Latin verse accompanied by a French translation from the fourteenth Century, presented in three clearly related manuscripts called Isopet I. That portion which stems from the Avianus tradition is treated separately and called the Avionnet. The collection dates ultimately from the twelfth Century. The lengthy introduction contains an extensive discussion of the history of the fables and their interrelationships as well as a description of the manuscripts and their illustrations. With tables of correspondences, an index of proper names, a Latin glossary, and a series of illustrations from the manuscripts. (P.C.)
A concise survey of Avianus’ life and works insofar as these facts are known. Avianus’ forty-two fables are characterized as coming from Babrius. Bibliographical notes. The article is followed by a note by Kurt Ranke (P.C.)
The manuscript used for this edition was chosen as the best representative of the group of medieval Avianus commentaries, some 47 in number, that cannot be resolved to a single text. After statements of editorial principles, Avianus’ position in education and the intellectual life of the middle ages is discussed, as well as the specific uses of the fable in various medieval forms and by various authors. (P.C.)
Satan’s boast from Isaiah and Piers
Plowman in paraphrase is also to be found in commentaries on Avianus,
specifically on fables two and four, with the paraphrase found twenty-nine times. The
use of the paraphrase is discussed in terms of the importance of Avianus in medieval
culture. (P.C.)
Text and commentary on the Apologi
Aviani [sic], now for the most part superseded by Küppers and
Gaide. (P.C.)
On the poet’s name and time (suggested dates are not past the fourth Century) ; relationship between the fables of Babrius and Avianus. Reviews the textual Problems, the medieval paraphrases. Extensive bibliography. (P.C.)
Textual notes on two fables in Avianus. (P.C.)
Sees a unifying consistency of theme and form for each of the four collections. Phaedrus used his fables for literary polemic; Avianus’ collection is seen as a program for an individual’s advance toward self-improvement. Marie de France is characterized as writing fables as court propaganda. La Fontaine’s collection as a whole comprises a « theater of the world » filled with constant surprise. (P.C.)
The Avianus collection as a whole forms a structure the design of which is revealed in the intellectual milieu in which they were produced. Neoplatonic, anti-Christian, but intellectual is the poet. (P.C.)
Unrein, Otto, De Aviani aetate. Dissertation,
Universität Jena, 1885. 64 p.
Unrein concludes that Avianus lived at the end of the fourth Century or the beginning of the fifth Century A.D. The most important evidence is Avianus’ relationship to Titianus, but linguistic evidence is evaluated as well. Excellent survey of critical literature up to his time. (P.C.)
Aesop’s fables’ popularity as a subject for illustrations is here attributed to the popularity of the form itself and its “fitness to pictorialization.” The article provides a cursory overview of picture cycles that demonstrate illustrated Aesop manuscripts in classical antiquity. P1 « Fox and Eagle » (TMI K2295) and P158 « Wolf and Nurse » (TMI J2066.5) are shown in various illustrations. (P.C.)
Suggests that Lachmann’s dating of Avianus ought to be put down. Earliest possible date seems to be the second half of the fourth Century because of the metrics the poet used. (P.C.)
Dubitanti mihi, Theodosi optime, quonam litterarum titulo nostri nominis memoriam mandaremus, fabularum textus occurrit, quod in his urbane concepta falsitas deceat et non incumbat necessitas ueritatis. Nam quis tecum de oratione, quis de poemate loqueretur, cum in utroque litterarum genere et Atticos Graeca eruditione superes et latinitate Romanos ? Huius ergo materiae ducem nobis Aesopum noueris, qui responso Delphici Apollinis monitus ridicula orsus est, ut legenda firmaret. Verum has pro exemplo fabulas et Socrates diuinis operibus indidit et poemati suo Flaccus aptauit, quod in se sub iocorum communium specie uitae argumenta contineant. Quas Graecis iambis Babrius repetens in duo uolumina coartauit. Phaedrus etiam partem aliquam quinque in libellos resoluit. De his ergo ad quadraginta et duas in unum redactas fabulas dedi, quas rudi latinitate compositas elegis sum explicare conatus. Habes ergo opus quo animum oblectes, ingenium exerceas, sollicitudinem leues totumque uiuendi ordinem cautus agnoscas. Loqui uero arbores, feras cum hominibus gemere, uerbis certare uolucres, animalia ridere fecimus, ut pro singulorum necessitatibus uel ab ipsis [in]animis sententia proferatur.
Haec sibi dicta putet seque hac sciat arte notari femineam quisquis credidit esse fidem.
Sic quicumque noua sublatus laude tumecit dat merito poenas, dum meliora cupit.
Metiri se quemque decet propriisque iuuari laudibus, alterius nec bona ferre sibi, ne detracta grauem faciant miracula risum, coeperit in solis cum remanere malis.
Haud facile est prauis innatum mentibus ut se muneribus dignas supplicioue putent.
Contentum propriis sapientem uiuere rebus, nec cupere alterius, nostra fabella monet, indignata cito ne stet Fortuna recursu atque eadem minuat quae dedit ante rota.
Haec nos dicta monent magnisw obsistere frustra paulatimque truces exsuperare minas.
Conuenit hoc illis quibus est permissa potestas an praestare magis, seu nocuisse uelint.
Viribus haec docuit quam sit prudentia maior, qua coeptum uolucris explicuisset opus.
Haec illos descripta monent, qui saepius ausi, numquam peccatis abstinuere manus.
Sic qui cuncta deos uno male tempore poscunt, Iustius his etiam uota diurna negant.
Quisquis torpentem passus transisse iuuentam nec timuit uitae prouidus ante mala confectus senio, confectus senio, postquam grauis affuit aetas, heu frustra alterius saepe rogabit opem.
Sic multos neglecta iuuant atque, ordine uerso, spes humiles rursus in meliora refert.
Est hominum sors ista, magis felicibus ut mors sit cita, cum miseros uita diurna regat.
Haec poterunt miseros posthac exempla monere Subdita nobilibus ut sua fata gemant.
Sic quotiens duplici subeuntur tristia casu, expedit insignem promeruisse necem.