¹ Origen Cels. 4.98 (SC 136. 428.3–4 and 9); the translation is from Origen Contra Celsum (trans. Henry Chadwick; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1953) 261. I thank Mr. Zlatko Pleše for helpful suggestions.

² Origen Horn, in Jer. 17.1 (GCS 6. 143.7–8 = SC 238. 160).

³ Origen Cels. 1.37 (SC 132. 176.16), trans. Chadwick.

⁴ Origen Horn, in Cant. 2.11 (GCS 33. 56.24–28); see also Wellmann, Max, Der Physiologos: Eine religiongeschichtlich-naturwissenschaftliche Untersuchung (Philologus suppl. 22.1; Leipzig: Dieterich, 1930) 7Google Scholar.

⁵ Origen Cels. 4.92 (SC 136. 414.17), trans. Chadwick.

⁶ Compare Origen's citation of unnamed “experts” explaining the causes of thunder(Horn, in Jer. 8.4 [GCS 6. 60.1–8]), his references to mineralogists, τoῖς περὶ λίθων πραγματευσαμένoις (Comm. in Matt. 10.7 [GCS 40. 7.6–7 and 9.13]), to botanists, “hi, quibus intellectus herbarum pigmentorumque peritia”(Horn, in Cant. 1 [GCS 33. 106.8–9], compare Horn, in Cant. 3 [GCS 33. 192.9–16]), and to those, “qui medicinae peritiam gerunt,” (Horn, in Num. 17.1 [GCS 30. 154.25]).

⁷ In general see Neuschäfer, Bernhard, Origenes ah Philologe (Basel: Reinhardt, 1987)Google Scholar.

⁸ The ninth book seems to have been derived in large part from Theophrastus's De animalium prudentia et moribus; it was cited as Aristotle's from an early date, see Regenbogen, O., “Theophrastos,” PWSup 7 (1940) 1424Google Scholar; Dieraurer, Urs, Tier und Mensch im Denken der Antike (Amsterdam: Grüner, 1977) 107Google Scholar. For a different opinion see Balme, David M., ed. and trans., Aristotle. History of Animals. Books VII–X (LCL; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991) 10–13Google Scholar.

⁹ The only earlier interpretation I can find is in Hippolytus(Demonstratio de Christo et antichristo 54) who says it refers to the devil; Origen will have the same interpretation.

¹⁰ Origen Horn, in Jer. 17.1 (GCS 6. 143.10–44.6 = SC 238.160).

¹¹ Pseudo-Aristotle Hist. An. 9.8 (613b17–614a3); the translation is from The Works of Aristotle, vol. 4: Historia Animalium (trans. Thompson, D'Arcy Wentworth; Oxford: Clarendon, 1910)Google Scholar.

¹² Thompson, D'Arcy Wentworth, A Glossary of Greek Birds (2d ed.; London: Oxford University Press, 1936) 235–36Google Scholar; Terian, Abraham, ed. and trans., Philonis Alexandrini De Animalibus: The Armenian Text (Studies in Hellenistic Judaism 1; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1981) 151Google Scholar.

¹³ The deceit is generally attributed to “partridges” in Philo De animalibus 35; Antigonus Historium mirabilium collectio 39 [45]; Scholia on Aristophanes Aves 768 (see White, John William, ed., The Scholia on the Aves of Aristophanes [1914; reprinted Hildesheim/New York: Olms, 1974] 146)Google Scholar.

¹⁴ So in Callimachus frag. 415 (see Pfeiffer, Rudolf, ed., Callimachi Fragmenta nuper reperta [Bonn: Marcus & Weber, 1923]Google Scholar), and the Geoponica 14.20 (see Beckh, Henricus, ed., Geoponica [Leipzig: Teubner, 1895]Google Scholar 424.11–21).

¹⁵ Origen Horn, in Cant. 2 (GCS 33. 155.16–20); the translation is from Origen, The Song of Songs: Commentary and Homilies (trans, and ed. Lawson, R. P.; ACW 26; Westminster, MD: Newman, 1957) 146Google Scholar.

¹⁶ Pseudo-Aristotle Hist. An. 9.7 (612b32–34 [pigeon]; 613a14–16 [turtle-dove]).

¹⁷ So Philo Quis rerum divinarum heres sit 234; Physiologus 28 (see Sbordone, F., ed., Physiologus [Rome: Dante Alighieri-Albrighi, Segati, 1936] 92–93Google Scholar; Offermanns, D., Der Physiologus nach den Handschriften G und M [Meisenheim am Glan: Hain, 1966] 96–97Google Scholar; Kaimakis, D., Der Physiologus nach der ersten Redaktion [Meisenheim am Glan: Hain, 1974] 80–81)Google Scholar; Cyranides 43 (see Kaimakis, D., ed., Die Kyraniden [Meisenheim am Glan: Hain, 1976] 231Google Scholar); Basil Homiliae in Hexaemeron 8.6 (SC 26. 458); also Origen Horn, in Lev. 2.2 (SC 286. 94.9–12).

¹⁸ See Heine, Ronald E., “Can the Catena Fragments of Origen's Commentary on John be Trusted?” VC 40 (1986) 118–34Google Scholar, esp. 131.

¹⁹ 2 Kgs 25:7.

²⁰ 2 Kgs 25:8–9.

²¹ Origen frag. 3 In Jer. (GCS 6. 199–200); for Pierre Nautin's strong reservations about authenticity see SC 232. 29–30. Erich Klostermann cites parallels to this passage in Pseudo-Eustathius, but the latter apparently has used Origen as a source: see Zoepfl, Friedrich, Der Kommentar des Pseudo-Eustathios zum Hexaëmeron (Münster: Aschendorff, 1927) 23Google Scholar.

²² Pseudo-Aristotle Hist. An. 9.44 (629b27–29).

²³ So Polybius Historiae 34.16.2 = Pliny Hist. Nat. 8.18.47. Polybius assures us that some of these lions were crucified as an example to the others.

²⁴ Aristotle Hist. An. 3.7 (516b10–12); idem Part. An. 2.9 (655a14–16); later writers include Aelian Nat. An. 4.34.

²⁵ Supplementum Aristotelium, vol. 1, part 1: Excerptorum Constantini De Natura Animalium Libri Duo. Aristophanes Historia Animalium Epitome (ed. Lambros, S. P.; Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca; Berlin: Reimer, 1885) 93Google Scholar. 10–13; see also Wellmann, Physiologos, 9, who collects parallels between Origen and Timotheus. For earlier writers see Wellmann, Max, “Timotheos von Gaza,” Hermes 62 (1927) 179–204Google Scholar.

²⁶ It was systematically mined by Antigonus in Historiarum mirabilium collectio 27–60 (32–66) (see Regenbogen, “Theophrastos,” 1407), and is also frequently cited in PseudoAristotle Mirabilium auscultationes (see Fraser, P. M., Ptolemaic Alexandria [3 vols.; Oxford: Clarendon, 1972] 2Google Scholar. 1077 n. 378).

²⁷ See Origen Cels. 5.57 (SC 147. 156.5–9); 6.8 (SC 196. 10); Origen frag. In Ps. 118 (ed. Cadiou, Rene in “L'ile Topaze, fragment de Xénocrate d'Éphèse,” Mélanges offerts à A. M. Desrousseaux par ses amis et ses élèves [Paris: Hachette, 1937] 27–33Google Scholar).