Libreria Alberto Govi

descriptions of the beast attributes sometimes refer to texts from classical Greece to
validate their authenticity. For each chapter Ponce de León has provided commentary,
which is usually many times longer than the Physiologus text itself. In this commentary
Ponce de León notes references to Biblical texts, early church writers, and Classical
Greek works. He also comments on the text itself, and on the translation from Greek
to Latin.
All of the Physiologus illustrations are
copperplate engravings drawn by Pieter
van der Borcht, who did many such
illustrations for Plantin’s print shop. It
is unclear if van der Borcht also did the
engraving or etching; his early drawings
were usually engraved by specialists
(Jean Wiericx and Antoine van Leest,
among others), but by 1588 he was doing
some of his own engraving and etching,
signing at least one of his works “Petrus
van der Borcht invenit et fecit” (cf. A.J.J.
Delen, Histoire de la Gravure dans les
Anciens Pays-Bas et dans les Provinces
Belges. Deuxième Partie: Le XVIe Siècle, les
Graveurs-Illustrateurs, Paris, 1969, pp. 88-
91). Although van der Borcht sometimes
signed his drawings with his initials
(PB), no such signature has been found
in the Physiologus illustrations. Delen (p.
91) says of van der Borcht’s illustrations
for the book: “Les 26 planches de Sancti
Epiphanii ad Physiologum, paru chez
Plantin en 1588, montrent une autre
face du talent de Van der Borcht. Dans
de petites compositions carrées, il met en scène des animaux divers, chaque fois
devant un fond de paysage, pittoresque et amusant. D’une pointe fine et légère, il
gratta ici sur le cuivre des tableautins spirituels qui comptent parmi ses illustrations
les plus captivantes.” Delen and Voet also suggest that van der Borcht might have
copied the illustrations from the 1587 edition woodcuts, and a comparison of the two
sets of images supports this idea to some extent. However, while many of van der
Borcht’s illustrations are similar to the woodcuts, and some have almost identical
compositions, it is clear that van der Borcht did not merely copy what he saw. Even
where the pose of the animals is identical, the van der Borcht illustrations are much
more lifelike and detailed. The backgrounds in the woodcuts are for the most part
simplistic, while in the copperplate engravings they are fully realized landscapes.
Van der Borcht also had a much better grasp of perspective than the woodcut artist.
Copperplate engravings allow for a much higher level of detail than the woodcuts
used for the original 1587 edition, and van der Borcht took full advantage of this. The
lines and the cross hatching used for shading are sharp, and the ink has not filled in
large black areas, as happened with the woodcuts. This ability to engrave fine lines
allowed van der Borcht to produce printed illustrations with great detail, and with
variable shading that gives the impression of grays rather than just black and white. In
the animal illustrations the animal is the center of attention, placed directly in front of
the viewer. However, unlike most bestiary illustrations in medieval manuscripts, each
animal is depicted in front of a complex background. The background usually recedes
into the distance, giving a sense of depth. These images are reminiscent of landscapes