The Ethiopian native lexicographic corpus (the so-called sawāsǝw) and the traditional commentaries (the ʾandəmtā corpus) are intended to explain, with different strategies and expectations, the meaning of poorly understandable Gǝʿǝz words and canonical or non-canonical passages. This paper intends to offer an unprecedented evaluation of the role of the Physiologus as a literary source for both traditions. The influence of the small naturalistic treatise on the sawāsǝw compilations appears far less significant than previously believed. Several pieces of evidence prove that for most zoonyms treated in the native vocabularies a derivation from the Scriptures is to be privileged. It is known, by contrast, that a variety of accounts from the Physiologus were embedded into several Amharic commentaries. A thorough look at their textual features displays a certain closeness to one particular recension of the Physiologus, i.e. Et-α. The survey has also highlighted the repeated and intentional reuse of the same literary material in newly-composed commentaries, a phenomenon that might have implications for understanding the historical development of the traditional exegetical literature.