ELEPHANTS and BEARS THROUGH the EYES of SCHOLARS: a CASE STUDY of PLINY's ZOOLOGY in the 15TH–16TH CENTURIES* Ekaterina

ELEPHANTS AND BEARS THROUGH THE EYES OF SCHOLARS: A CASE STUDY OF PLINY’S ZOOLOGY IN THE 15th–16th CENTURIES*

Ekaterina Ilyushechkina

Summary

This article focusses on 15th- to 16th-century commentaries on Pliny written by Sabellicus, Aquaeus, Gelenius, Pintianus, and Dalecampius. These commentators not only worked on the textual problems of the Natural History, but also tried to discuss and comment specifically on Pliny’s zoological knowledge. As a case study for her analysis, the author singles out the various comments on certain passages from the eighth book of the Natural History that deal with elephants and bears. The paper argues that not only did the educational background of the scholars and the different goals they had in mind with their editions influ- ence their assessments of Pliny, but so did the explosion of zoological and other types of knowledge gained after the “first wave” of geographic discoveries in the 16th century.

Introduction

In 1685, in the Dedicatio to his commentary on Pliny’s Natural History,1 the French scholar and Jesuit Jean Hardouin (1646–1729) emphasizes – perhaps a bit exaggeratedly – the diversity and the importance of Pliny’s work: If you would desire either elegant Latin language, or majestic purposes, or stylistic sharpness, or finally plenty of topics – all this by right could be fulfilled by Pliny alone.2

* The article is the result of my part of the research in the research program The New Management of Knowledge in the Early Modern Period: The Transmission of Classical Latin Literature via Neo-Latin Commentaries, directed by Karl Enenkel, and founded by the Neth- erlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO). I would like to thank professor Karl Enenkel for his inspiring enthusiasm and invaluable feedback throughout my research. 1 Caii Plinii / Secundi / Naturalis Historiae / libri XXXVII. / Interpretatione et notis illus- travit / Joannes Harduinus soc. Jesu, / jussu / Regis Christianissimi / Ludovici Magni, / in usum / serenissimi Delphini / Parisiis, / Apud Franciscum Muguet, Regis et Illustrissimi / Archiepiscopi Parisiensis Typographum. / MDCLXXXV [. . .]. 5 vols. See Catalogus Transla- tionum et Commentatorium, vol. IV, 315. 2 Hardouin, “Dedicatio”, fol. <+4> v: ʻSive Latini sermonis elegantiam, sive sententiarum majestatem, sive stili acumen, seu rerum denique uberem copiam desideres, unus omnium vicem praestare Plinius iure possitʼ. 364 ekaterina ilyushechkina

And if for many scholars the compilation of Pliny was and still remains far from a model of elegant style or stylistic sharpness,3 for Hardouin he was one of the most important authentic ancient authors, along with Homer, Herodotus, Cicero, Vergil, and Horace (interestingly, Hardouin viewed the rest of the ancient classical Greeks and Romans as spurious).4 Hardouin the scholar and his commentary both embody an extraordi- nary phenomenon. On the one hand, Hardouin is the very last humanist to have the courage to comment on the entire Natural History (after his heroic deed, certain scholars commented only on certain of Pliny’s books, but not on the entire work). On the other hand, Hardouin’s edition is the apogee of the Renaissance and Early Modern studies on Pliny that were carried out over several decades, or even centuries, and conducted by many generations of previous scholars. Hardouin gives a list of his predecessors in his dedication, paying tribute to each of them, including the scholars who rediscovered, revived, and cor- rected the monstrously corrupted text of the Natural History, and those who studied and explained anew Pliny’s work; they are, in order of appearance in the text, Johannes Andreas, Ermolaus Barbarus, Sigismundus Gelenius, Beatus Rhenanus, Stephanus Aquaeus, Ferdinandus Nuñnez de Guzman Pincianus, Jacobus Dalecampius, Philippus Beroaldus, M. Antonius Cocceius Sabellicus, Robertus de Valle, Raphael Volaterranus, Guillelmus Budaeus, Hadrianus Turnebus, Antonius Nebrissensis, Christophorus Longolius, and Claudius Salmasius. In this article, I will focus on Pliny commentaries from the 15th–16th centuries as listed by Hardouin, especially commentators who worked not only on the text critical problems, but as well discussed and explained Pliny’s zoological knowledge. As a case study for the analysis I will single out passages about elephants and bears from the eighth book of the Natu- ral History. An elaborate description of elephants opens this book about terrestrial animals (Natural History VIII, 1–12, 1–34): ‘they [elephants] are not only the biggest among the land animals, they are also closest

3 The famous quotation of Eduard Norden: ʻSein Werk gehört, stilistisch betrachtet, zu den schlechtesten, die wir haben. Man darf nicht sagen, daß der Stoff daran schuld war. [. . .] Plinius hat es einfach nicht besser gekonntʼ (Norden E., Antike Kunstprosa (Stuttgart: 101995) 314), see also Bodson I., “La zoologie romaine d’après la NH de Pline”, Helmantica 37 (1986) (107–116) 107–108; Healy J.F., Pliny the Elder on Science and Technology (Oxford: 1999) 79–81, 97, 99, 111 f. 4 For more, see Grafton A.T., Bring out your Dead. The Past as Revelation (Cambridge [MA]: 2001) 181–207 (chapter 10: “Jean Hardouin: The Antiquary as Pariah”).