the mystical theology of valentin weigel - DataSpace at Princeton ...

Although we cannot say exactly which edition of Dionysius that Weigel used, I
have narrowed down the many early modern Dionysius editions to a much smaller set,
and focus only the subset of editions that Weigel might have read. The first criterion by
which some Dionysius editions can be eliminated is the translation that Weigel used. By
1550, there existed four complete Latin translations of Dionysius—by Hilduin and
Eriugena (both ninth century), John Saracennus (twelfth century) and the most recent
translation by Ambrogio Traversari Calmadulensis (early fifteenth century)—as well as a
partial translation by Marsilio Ficino (late fifteenth century) of the Mystical Theology and
the Divine Names, and finally the so-called Extractio Vercellensis (paraphrase) by
Thomas Gallus (thirteenth century). 532 Weigel, it seems, was using Traversari’s
translation: even allowing for changes Weigel would have made in paraphrasing,
Traversarius translation is a very close fit with what Weigel has copied. In addition to the
overall syntax and structure, there are a few individual words that are found only in
Traversarius’ version, making it clear that his was the translation Weigel was using. I am
assuming that Weigel worked with a printed copy of Dionysius’ works rather than with a
manuscript. 533 Moreover, Dionysius first appears in Weigel’s work in 1570, which leaves
532 Charles L. Stinger, Humanism and the Church Fathers: Ambrogio Traversari (1386-1439) and
Christian Antiquity in the Italian Renaissance (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1977), 159-
161.
533 This assumption could perhaps be challenged with much more archival work on the Dionysius
manuscripts circulating in Germany in the 16 th century. However, for the purposes of this study, there is no
reason not to think that Weigel was using a printed book. There is, to my knowledge, no work on the postmedieval
Dionysius manuscripts, and this understudied area could, I suspect, produce interesting findings
in future work. On the manuscript transmission of Dionysius’ work, see for the Byzantine (pre-medieval
and non-Western) tradition see Dionysius Areopagite, Corpus Dionysiacum, ed. Beat Regina Suchla, Vol. 1
(Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1990). For the early medieval era see David Luscombe, Denis the Pseudo-
Areopagite in the Middle Ages from Hilduin to Lorenzo Valla, Vol. 1, in Fälschungen im Mittelalter:
Internationaler Kongress der Monumenta Germaniae Historica, München, 16.-19. September 1986
(Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 1988). For the Middle Ages see H. F. Dondaine, Le corpus dionysien
de l'Université de Paris au XIIIe siècle (Rome: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 1953). However, this study
is limited to Paris and to the 13 th century. See also Mystical Theology: The Glosses by Thomas Gallus and
the Commentary of Robert Grossetests on De Mystica Theologia (Leuven: Peeters, 2003).
192