Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a2239edbad052c82

Jump to content

Talk:Bestiary

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Dumbox in topic Bestiarium vocabulum

Additions

[edit]
[edit]

Hi, I'd like to add a link to The Book of Barely Imagined Beings, a 21st Century Bestiary (http://barelyimaginedbeings.blogspot.com/) to the links section, and tried to do so without logging in. A bot removed the new link as spam, but I think it's a legitimate addition. There is already a link to at least one other contemporary bestiary on the page. Caspar81 (talk) 16:31, 25 April 2008 (UTC) Caspar HendersonReply

==Wiki Education assignment: The Middle Ages== This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 12 January 2022 and 13 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kambelle5252 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Bowmanbk, Acalva2.

Bestiarium vocabulum

[edit]

The Latin "bestiarium vocabulum" doesn't really make much sense to me. Literally, it's "the term bestiary". I know it is widely used in gaming these days, but I suspect it is all based on a misunderstanding. There appears to be a medieval manuscript (which, alas, I have no access to) that contains the phrase "bestiarium vocabulum proprie convenit leonibus, pardis..." which would translate as "the term bestiary is proper for lions etc.". This, in turn, is almost literally taken from Isidore of Seville, XII, 2, "bestiarum vocabulum proprie convenit leonibus, pardis...". Note, however, the missing i in the first word, which makes it the plural genitive of bestia: Isidore says "the word 'beasts' is proper for lions...". The medieval copyist may inadvertently have put the second i in, if it is indeed in the manuscript. No big deal, the suffix -arium for a collection of things is good Latin. Nevertheless, "bestiarium vocabulum", taken on its own, is quite bizarre. Dumbox (talk) 06:08, 12 September 2024 (UTC)Reply