This is an excellent addition to the study of Aesop, a field that has been burgeoning in the last few decades. The book is primarily an edition of the version of the Aesopic Vita from the manuscript family that Grammatiki Karla designates MORN; in the mode of the Loebs, Greek text (and apparatus criticus) appears on left-hand pages with an attendant facing English translation supplied by the late David Konstan, in what I assume will be (one of) the last of his works of scholarship to be published. Karla is well-positioned to have produced this edition, as she has previously published an edition of the BPThSA manuscript family of the Vita: Vita Aesopi. Textüberlieferung, Sprache und Edition einer frühbyzantinischen Fassungdes Äsopromans.[1] I noticed shortly before submitting this review that an edition of the G (Perriana) manuscript of the Vita tradition, also produced by her, is appearing in the Budé series. In addition, she has published widely on Aesop.
Given the boom in Aesop studies, new, more accessible editions of the Vita tradition are a desideratum. Although editions of the fables can easily be found in Loeb editions and elsewhere, for the Vita tradition it has been necessary mostly to refer to Benjamin Perry’s midcentury magnum opus, Aesopica, which collected all Aesopic material known to him: Vita, fables, and testimonia. But it is increasingly difficult to get ahold of this volume, and so new more accessible editions, updated with newer scholarship as well, are to be applauded. The appearance of this text in SBL’s Writings from the Greco-Roman World series is especially to be commended since it means that it is affordable enough even for students to acquire if they desire (though, it should be noted, this book does not aspire to be a student edition).
The MORN family, along with BPThSA, forms the W (Westermaniana) Version of the Vita tradition. It is probably later than the G Version but serves an important role in literary history in that Maximos Planudes (13th cent.) used it as the basis for his widely known version of the Aesopic Vita and fables. As Karla notes, W is shorter than G but includes more material than is found in G (6-7); moreover, MORN differs from BPThSA in that it also is missing several episodes that are included in BPThSA and in turn includes several episodes not found in the larger family (44).
The book includes a general introduction to the Aesopic vita tradition; an account of the manuscript filiation of MORN within W; a brief discussion of Karla’s editorial methodology; sigla for the manuscripts, codices, and papyri; a translator’s note; the text and translation; a commentary; and a very brief index.
Since Karla has already produced the standard edition of BPThSA with extensive accounting of her editorial processes of it in relationship to W, the preliminary material found here is quite brief in comparison. The general introduction is especially short (a mere 13 pages) and makes clear that Karla’s primary goal with this book is editorial rather than hermeneutical or interpretative. Moreover, it introduces no new thesis or argument. While brief, the introduction is up to date on scholarship, informative, and establishes Karla’s outlook of borrowing from Eco’s concept of an “open text” as a perfect description for the Aesopic Vita tradition (8). Although I noted that this edition is accessible for students, unfortunately the introduction is probably not full enough for students first getting acquainted with the text.
The manuscript filiation section is much fuller though still dwarfed by her earlier work. It persuasively establishes how the different manuscripts that make up MORN are related; her views on the matter mostly align with Perry’s (as is also clear looking through the apparatus and commentary), though she differs from Perry (I think rightly) in seeing papyri containing fragments of the Vita tradition as representing versions not attested in our extant full manuscripts (54).
After acknowledging the difficulty of editing an “open text” in accordance with the principles of classical textual criticism, Karla announces that she uses MS M as the primary basis for the text produced here (62). Chapter divisions follow Perry’s numeration and standard orthography is used for the text.
Konstan’s translator’s note announces that his method was to translate literally for the most part (64). His intention was to indicate the roughness of the original Greek, but I would point out that this also serves the dual purpose in that it helps students (who may not be acquainted with any Greek but Classical Attic) check their own understanding of the text against a reliable translation. And, in my estimation, Konstan mostly keeps to his promise to translate literally, and, despite his protestations, the translation still generally reads quite smoothly. However, I did note a few peculiarities. For example, Konstan translates δίκελλα as a “pitchfork” (72), but Aesop immediately begins to dig with the implement. A quick survey on TLG of passages where the word appears reveals that the context of all of them involve digging; accordingly, a δίκελλα is quite obviously a digging fork, not a pitchfork (LSJ and Brill both give “fork,” but Cambridge gives a “mattock”). Moreover, I noted a failure to translate καὶ τίμιοί μου (chap. 89). However, as is clear, these are quite minor errors, and the translation is generally reliable.
The Greek text is also quite reliable and free from any mistakes that I could find. As I noted above, Karla generally follows Perry in the presentation of the text, although she is able to rely extensively on more recent scholarship and so is able to supersede Perry’s insights in many places. However, as Karla notes (63), her commentary is not “literary-hermeneutical” but rather justifies her editorial decisions, which are generally persuasive. Indeed, I did not note any interpretative commentary unless it served justifying an editorial decision. Although again I generally found her justifications persuasive, at times she can be too terse in her discussions in the commentary. For example, the expression for “pair” is printed as σὺν δύο in chap. 17 but as σύνδυο in chap. 19. Nothing relevant appears in the apparatus at either point, but perplexingly the commentary for chap. 19 merely reads: “The word is recorded in many sources (see LSJ, s.v.). In both manuscripts (MO) it is attested as two separate words: σὺν δύο.” It is entirely unclear to me the justification for emending the manuscript reading here but not at chap. 17. Perry prints both as σύνδυο and includes nothing in his notes concerning divergences in orthography. Of note also, Karla consistently only refers to LSJ and does not make recourse to the new and up-to-date Brill Dictionary of Ancient Greek and Cambridge Greek Lexicon. But such perplexing editorial decisions (and their justifications) are the exception and not the rule.
Again, I can heartily recommend this new edition of one of the sources of the Aesopic Vita tradition. Although it is not intended for a student audience primarily, it can be used by students with supplementation of resources, especially since it is relatively cheap and readily available. Perhaps the book’s only true lack is that it does not present a fuller “literary-hermeneutical” introduction or commentary, which could have been a great boon both to students as well as established scholars. In any case, this edition meets an extreme need in the field for better access to Aesopic sources and continues to establish Karla as one of the premiere contemporary scholars of Aesop.
Notes
[1] Reviewed very favorably in these pages here: https://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2004/2004.09.39/