HISTORIOGRAPHY OF STUDIES OF THE WORK OF FULGENTIUS THE MYTHOGRAPHER

Fabius Planciades Fulgentius is a unique late Antique author of the Latin West. An analysis of the works of various authors of that time shows that the classical tradition is reflected in their worldview in different ways. For example, the greatest influence on creativity and reflection of the ideas and realities of antiquity can be seen in the mentality and style of Sidonius Apollinaris and Blossia Emilia Draconcia, Pauline Nolansky.

Fulgentius, in contrast to the above-mentioned authors, shows a slightly different mindset, to some extent divorced from antiquity. His work shows that the legacy of the classics is already dead, with full dedication to Christianity. However, "he revives it, breaks it down into its component parts and uses those elements that meet the tasks of establishing a highly moral image of a Christian" [17, p. 186]. He does this for the sole purpose of putting the classics at the service of a new era.

This view of the classical tradition gave rise to his new approach to mythography. His main work — "Mythologies" remained one of the main works in this genre until almost the XIV century. His popularity was so high that his name became a household name [12, p. 326]. It was only in the nineteenth century that Fulgentius ' works began to be subjected to critical analysis, to identify the main themes, and to find inaccuracies in them.

Criticism of Fulgentius, his canon, as well as some prehistory of his work begins with the work of the German scholar M. Zink "The Mythology of Fulgentius: a contribution to the history of Roman literature and African Latin grammar" [10]. The research was continued by a series of E. Jungman from those books [4; 5; 6], A. Reifferscheid [7], and R. Helm [3]. The studies published during this period are mostly polemical in nature regarding the authorship of some of Fulgentius ' works. The second most important issue studied was the identification of the personality of Fulgentius the Mythographer, the possibility of identifying him with his contemporary Fulgentius, Bishop of Ruspi.

The first work that attempted to translate Fulgentius was written by Rudolf Helm. However, since the language of the mythographer is complex, and Helm practically did not give comments on the translation, this was a significant drawback of the work.

This is where the interest in translating the works of Fulgentius came to a certain end. We can count about 15 publications on specific, narrow issues related to Fulgentium, and mainly to its influence on subsequent medieval culture. The research was conducted mainly in England, Germany, France, and Italy. At the same time, a scientist from Soviet Ukraine, Mikhail Grushevsky, wrote an article about Fulgences in the Carolingian era in 1928 [8, p. 10]. But this is a single work for Russian historiography.

The next major study was published in 1971 by Leslie George Whitbread [8]. It is noteworthy that he is grateful to a professor at the University of North Carolina, Dr. Hadison Jr., who provided him with his translation. Therefore, we can conclude that there was still interest in Fulgentius ' texts among researchers, but this did not lead to the writing of any qualitatively new commented translations or their publication.

Whitbread's monograph is still one of the most fundamental studies on Fulgency. In addition to making the first translation into English of all five works attributed to Fulgentius, the scholar also tried to preserve their meaning by paraphrasing the most complex stylistic moments of the Mythographer. In addition to the translation, the book examines issues raised in earlier studies concerning Fulgentius, as well as reviews his life, gives a historical background, analysis and comments on the works.

In Russian historiography, I would like to mention a number of researchers whose works are of a general nature, but still play a significant role in understanding Fulgentius, whose legacy they partially affect: These are G. G. Diligensky [13], V. S. Durov [14], I. N. Golenishchev-Kutuzov [11]. V. I. Ukolova [22].

Domestic research directly on the Fulgence itself begins with an important article by G. Ch. Huseynov (1988)" Interpretation of mythology at the turn of Antiquity and the Middle Ages from the book of a Latin grammarian of the V–VI centuries "[12], in addition to which excerpts from the "Three Books of Mythologies" were translated. In Russian, this is the first study to provide the most comprehensive overview of the author's life and work.

Then, in the book "The First Vatican Mythographer" (2000), V. N. Yarkho [27] examines Fulgentius as a writer from whom the first and second Vatican mythographers made many borrowings. It also examines the author's influence on the development of subsequent literature.

The most comprehensive domestic research was conducted by E. V. Litovchenko in her 2007 PhD thesis " Classical Tradition in the works of Late Roman Intellectuals (late IV-early VI centuries) "[17] and three articles published from 2008 to 2010 [18; 19; 20]. She focuses on the Mythographer as the first representative of the reception of antiquity in the Latin West.

N. N. Bolgov translated Fulgentius ' Mythologies and published them in the collection Classical and Byzantine Tradition." [23; 24; 25; 26].

In general, we can note the increased interest in Fulgentius ' work in recent decades both abroad — such researchers as Gregory Hayes [2], Emily Albu [1], Etienne Wolf [9], and in Russia.

In the last few years, literary studies articles have been published that analyze individual subjects in Fulgentius — Yu. G.Kotaridi [16], A.V. Protopopova, and I. A. Protopopov [21]. Kislin [15] and others. In addition, in many scientific articles, Fulgentius ' "Mythologies" serve as a vivid example of the first reception of antiquity in the mediaevalizing culture of Europe.