  Note.—Of several references to the same matter the more important are shown by heavy type.
De bello et excidio urbis Comensis, ii. 189-90 Ovid’s works interpreted by, ii. 230 THE END Printed by R. & R. Clark, Limited, Edinburgh. WORKS ON PHILOSOPHY THE ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE MORAL IDEAS. By Edward Westermarck, Ph.D. Two vols. 8vo. 14s. net each. A SHORT HISTORY OF ETHICS. By Reginald A. P. Rogers, Fellow and Tutor of Trinity College, Dublin. Crown 8vo. [Spring, 1911. THE PHILOSOPHY OF GASSENDI. By G. S. Brett. 8vo. 10s. net. HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY. With Especial Reference to the Formation and Development of its Problems and Conceptions. By Dr. W. Windelband. Translated by J. H. Tufts. 8vo. 17s. net. HISTORY OF THE PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY. By Paul Janet and Gabriel SÉailles. Translated by Ada Monahan, and Edited by Henry Jones, LL.D. Two vols. 8vo. 10s. net. each. IDOLA THEATRI: A Criticism of Oxford Thought and Thinkers from the Standpoint of Personal Idealism. By Henry Sturt. 8vo. 10s. net. PERSONAL IDEALISM. Philosophical Essays. Edited by Henry Sturt. 8vo. 10s. net. HUMANISM. Philosophical Essays. By F. C. S. Schiller, M.A., D.Sc. 8vo. 8s. 6d. net. STUDIES IN HUMANISM. By F. C. S. Schiller, M.A., D.Sc. 8vo. 10s. net. PHILOSOPHICAL REMAINS OF R. L. NETTLESHIP. Edited, with Biographical Sketch, by Prof. A. C. Bradley. Second Edition. Extra Crown 8vo. 8s. 6d. net. LECTURES ON THE REPUBLIC OF PLATO. By R. L. Nettleship. Edited by G. R. Benson. Extra Crown 8vo. 8s. 6d. net. A HANDBOOK OF MORAL PHILOSOPHY. By Rev. Henry Calderwood, LL.D. Third Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s. MACMILLAN AND CO., Ltd., LONDON. Footnotes: [1] See post, Chapter XXXVI., I. [2] Lev. xxi. 20; Deut. xxiii. 1. [3] Lucan, Pharsalia, viii. 94. [4] HeloÏse here in mediaeval fashion cites a number of examples from Scripture showing the ills and troubles brought by women to men. [5] Again she quotes to prove this, from Job and St. Gregory and Ambrose. [6] HeloÏse’s last problema did not relate to Scripture, and may have been suggested by her own life. “We ask whether one can sin in doing what is permitted or commanded by the Lord?” Abaelard answers with a discussion of what is permissible between man and wife. [7] This letter of HeloÏse is not extant. [8] The Tristan of Gottfried von Strassburg and the Parzival of Wolfram von Eschenbach have been given. One may also refer to works of older contemporaries, e.g. to the Aeneid of Heinrich von Veldeke, translated (1184) from a French rendering of Virgil; and the two courtly narrative poems, the Erec and Ivain (Knight of the Lion) taken from ChrÉtien of Troies by Hartmann von Aue, who flourished as the twelfth century was passing into the thirteenth. [9] On Walther von der Vogelweide, see Wilmann, Leben und Dichtung Walthers, etc. (Bonn, 1882); SchÖnbach, Walther von der Vogelweide (2nd ed., Berlin, 1895). The citations from his poems in this chapter follow the Pfeiffer-Bartsch edition. [10] No. 3 in the Pfeiffer-Bartsch edition. [11] 184. [12] 33. [13] 22. [14] 14, 16, 69. [15] 18. [16] 39. [17] See Lieder, 46, 51, 56, 59, 61, 62, 71, 72, 75, 76, 77. [18] A lucid account of this struggle is given in Luchaire, Innocent III., vol. iii. (“La PapautÉ et l’Empire”), Paris, 1906. [19] 81. [20] From “Freidank in Auswahl,” in Hildebrand’s Didaktik aus der Zeit der KreuzzÜge, p. 336 (Deutsche Nat. Lit.). [21] 85, cf. 164. [22] 110. [23] 113, cf. 111, 112. [24] 115, 116. [25] 133. My statement of the opposition to the papacy might be much more analytical, and contain further apt distinctions. But this would remove it too far from the anti-papal feeling of the common man; and the period, moreover, is not yet that of Occam and Marsilius of Padua—as to whom see Gierke, Political Theories of the Middle Age, trans. by Maitland (Cambridge, 1900). [26] 88, 137. [27] 158. Walter shared the crusading spirit. The inference that he was himself a Crusader is unsafe; but he wrote stirring crusading poems, one opening with a line that in sudden power may be compared with Milton’s “Avenge, O Lord, Thy slaughtered saints.” [28] 87. [29] Parzival, i. 824. [30] 186. [31] 188. [32] While an allegory is a statement having another consciously intended meaning, metaphor is the carrying over or deflection of a meaning from its primary application. According to good usage, which has kept these terms distinct, allegory implies a definite and usually a sustained intention, and suggests the spiritual; while metaphor suggests figures of speech and linguistic changes often unconscious. Language develops through the metaphorical (not allegorical) extension or modification of the meanings of words. The original meaning sometimes is obscured (e.g. in profane or depend), and sometimes continues to exist with the new one. In a vast number of languages, such words as straight, oblique, crooked, seem always to have had both a direct and a metaphorical meaning. Moral and intellectual conceptions necessarily are expressed in phrases primarily applicable to physical phenomena. [33] Cf. Taylor, Classical Heritage, p. 97 sqq. [34] Ante, Chapters IV., V. [35] Contra Faustum, xxii. 1-5. [36] Contra Faustum, xxii. 66-68. [37] Augustine’s method in this twenty-second Book is first to consider the actual sinfulness or justification of these deeds, and afterwards to take up in succession their typological significance. So, for example, he discusses the blamefulness of Judah’s conduct with Tamar in par. 61-64 and its typology in 83-86. [38] Contra Faustum, xxii. 87. St. Ambrose, in his Apologia Prophetae David, cap. iii. (Migne 14, col. 857), written some years before Augustine’s treatise against Faustus, finds Bathsheba to signify the “congregatio nationum quae non erat Christo legitimo quodam fidei copulata connubio.” [39] Quaestiones in Vet. Testam. in Regum II. (Migne 83, col. 411). Isidore died A.D. 636 (ante, Chapter V.) [40] Comment. in Libros IV. Regum, in lib. ii. cap. xi.; Migne, Pat. Lat. 109, col. 98 (written in 834). On Rabanus and Walafrid see ante, Chapter X. [41] Glossa ordinaria, Lib. Regum, ii. cap. xi. (Migne 113, col. 571, 572). [42] Comment. in Matthaeum (Migne 107, col. 734). [43] Migne 114, col. 67. [44] It was the way of Bede in his commentaries to speak briefly of the literal or historic meaning of the text, and then give the usual symbolical interpretations, paying special attention to the significance of the Old Testament narratives as types of the career of Christ (see e.g. the beginning of the Commentary on Exodus, Migne 92, col. 285 sqq.; and Prologue to the allegorical Commentary on Samuel, Migne 92, col. 501, 502). For example, in the opening of the First Book of Samuel, Elkanah is a type of Christ, and his two wives Peninnah and Hannah represent the Synagogue and the Church. When Samuel is born to Hannah he also is a type of Christ; and Bede says it need not astonish one that Hannah’s spouse and Hannah’s son should both be types of Christ, since the Mediator between God and man is at once the spouse and son of Holy Church: He is her spouse as He aids her with His confidence and hope and love, and her son when by grace He enters the hearts of those who believe and hope and love. In Samuelam, cap. iii. (Migne 91, col. 508). Bede’s monastic mind balked at the literal statement that Elkanah had two wives (see the Prologue, Migne 91, col. 499). [45] Com. in Exodum, Praefatio (Migne 108, col. 9). [46] Migne 112, col. 849-1088. A number of these dictionaries were compiled, the earliest being the De formulis spiritalis intellegentiae of Eucherius, Bishop of Lyons, who died in 450, ed. by Pauly 1884. In the later Middle Ages Alanus de Insulis (post, Chapter XXIX.) compiled one. [47] These distinctions, not commonly observed, are frequently reiterated. Says Hugo of St. Victor (see post, Chapter XXVIII.) in the Prologue to his De sacramentis: “Divine Scripture, with threefold meaning, considers its matter historically, allegorically, and tropologically. History is the narrative of facts, and follows the primary meaning of words; we have allegory when the fact which is told signifies some other fact in the past, present, or future; and tropology when the narrated fact signifies that something should be done.” Cf. Hugo’s Didascalicon, v. cap. 2, where Hugo illustrates his meaning, and points out that this threefold significance is not to be found in every passage of Scripture. In ibid. v. cap. 4, he gives seven curious rules of interpretation (Migne 176, col. 789-793). In his De Scripturis, etc., praenotatiunculae, cap. 3 (Migne 175, col. 11 sqq.), Hugo speaks of the anagogical significance in the place of the tropological. [48] Raban’s Latin is “Ligabit earn ancillis suis”—the verse in Job xl. 24 reads “Ligabis earn ancillis tuis?” In the English version the verse is Job xli. 5, “Wilt thou bind him for thy maidens?” [49] “Per fidem me cognoverunt”; I surmise a non is omitted. [50] The Scriptural citations are omitted. Rabanus wrote an allegorical De laudibus sanctae crucis (Migne 107, col. 133-294), composed in metre with prose explanations, which explain very little. The metrical portion is a puzzle consisting of twenty-eight “figures,” or lineal delineations interwoven in hexameter verses; the words and letters contained within each figure “make sense” when read by themselves, and form verses in metres other than hexameters. The whole is as incomprehensible in meaning as it is indescribable in form. Angels, cherubim and seraphim, tetragons, the virtues, months, winds, elements, signs of the Zodiac, and other twelvefold mysteries, the days of the year, the number seven, the five books of Moses, the four evangelists, the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit, the eight beatitudes, the mystery of the number forty, the sacrament shown by the number fifty,—all these and much besides contribute to the glory of the Cross, and are delineated and arranged in cruciform manner, so as to be included within the scope of the cross’s symbolical significance. [51] Since allegory and the spirit of symbolism pervaded all mediaeval thought, the present and two following chapters aim only at setting forth the elements (with pertinent examples) of this quite limitless subject. [52] See prefatory epistle to Speculum ecclesiae, Migne 172, col. 813. Compare the prefatory epistle to the Gemma animae, ibid. col. 541, and the Preface to the Elucidarium, ibid. col. 1109. Probably Honorius died about 1130. [53] We have these sermons only in Latin. Presumably a preacher using them, gave them in that language or rendered them in the vernacular as he thought fit. [54] “Ommia legalia Christus nobis convertit in sacramenta spiritualia” is Honorius’s apt phrase (which may be borrowed!), Migne 172, col. 842. His special reference is to circumcision. [55] Ps. xxxi. Vulgate; Ps. xxxii. 2, Authorized Version. [56] Speculum ecclesiae, “Dominica XI.” (Migne 172, col. 1053 sqq.). [57] Yet, curiously enough, near the time when I was making the following translation, I heard an elderly country clergyman preach substantially this sermon of Honorius—wherever he may have culled it, perhaps from some useful “Homiletical” Commentary. [58] Speculum ecclesiae, “Dominica XIII.” (Migne 172, col. 1059-1061). [59] Speculum ecclesiae, “Dominica in Septuagesima” (Migne 172, col. 855-857). Honorius may have forgotten the weariness of his supposed audience; for his sermon goes on with further admonition as to how the victory is to be won. The allegorical interpretation of Scripture is exemplified in the whole limitless mass of mediaeval sermons. Illustrations from St. Bernard’s sermons on Canticles are given in Chapter XVII., also post, in Chapter XXXVI., II. [60] For the Eucharist in the Carolingian period see ante, Chapter X. Berengar of Tours is spoken of in Chapter XII., IV. [61] Many members in one body, one body in Christ (Rom. xii. 4, 5). [62] Cf. post, Chapter XXXIII., V. [63] The works of Hugo of Saint-Victor are contained in Migne’s Patrologia Latina, 175-177 (Paris, 1854; the reprint of 1882 is full of misprints). The Prolegomena (in French) of Mgr. Hugonin are elaborate and valuable. Mignon, Les Origines de la scholastique et Hugues de Saint-Victor (2 vols., Paris, 1895), follows Hugonin’s writing and adds little of value. An exposition of Hugo’s philosophy is to be found in StÖckl, Geschichte der Philosophie des Mittelalters, Band I. pp. 305-355 (Mainz, 1864). On the authenticity of the writings ascribed to him see HaurÉau, Les Œuvres de Hugues de Saint-Victor (2nd ed., Paris, 1886). For Hugo’s position in the history of scholasticism and mysticism see post, Chapter XXXVI., II. [64] Post, Chapter XXXI., I. [65] Hildebert’s letter is given post, Chapter XXX., III. [66] On the neighbouring schools of Notre-Dame and St. Genevieve see post, Chapter XXXVII. [67] At the opening of his Expositio in regulam beati Augustini, Migne 176, col. 881, Hugo explains that the precepts under which a monastic community lives are called the regula, and what we call a regula is called a canon by the Greeks; and those are called canonici or regulares, who “juxta regularia praecepta sanctorum Patrum canonice atque apostolice vivunt.” Thus the “regular canons” of St. Augustine were monks who lived according to the rule ascribed to that saint. In the case of the Victorines the rule was drawn up chiefly by Abbot Gilduin. See Prolegomena to the works of Hugo, Migne 175, col. xxiv. sqq. [68] See the Prolegomena to the works of Hugo de Saint-Victor, by Hugonin, Migne 175, col. xl. sqq. [69] Didascalicon, vi. 3 (Migne 176, col. 799). Other contents of this work are given post, Chapter XXXVI., I. [70] His death is touchingly described in a letter of Osbert, the canon in charge of the infirmary. See Migne 175, col. xlvii and clxi. [71] Hugo, De arrha animae, Migne 176, col. 954. Yet Hugo sometimes was stung with an irrelevant pang for the German fatherland, which he had left: “I have been an exile since my boyhood, and I know how the mind grieves to forsake some poor hut’s narrow hearth, and how easily it may then despise the marble hall and fretted roof” (Didascalicon, iii. 20; Migne 176, col. 778). Compare the single letter of Hugo that has a personal note, Ep. i. (Migne 176, col. 1011). [72] The De sacramentis Christianae fidei is printed in Migne 176, col. 174-618. It is thus a lengthy work. [73] Hugo evidently refers to his De Scripturis et scriptoribus sacris praenotatiunculae, and his various Adnotationes elucidatoriae, which will be found printed in vol. 175 of Migne’s Patrologia Latina. In chap. v. of the work first mentioned (Migne 175, col. 13) he speaks sensibly of the folly of those who profess not to care for the literal historical meaning of the sacred text, but, in ignorance, spring at once to very inept allegorical interpretations. [74] De sacramentis, Prologus (Migne 176, col. 183-185). A more elementary statement may be found in De Scripturis, etc., cap. xiii. (Migne 175, col. 20). [75] God is perfect and utterly good. His beatitude cannot be increased or diminished, but it can be imparted. Therefore the primal cause for creating rational creatures was God’s wish that there should be partakers of His beatitude. This reasoning may be Christian; but it is also close to the doctrine of Plato’s Timaeus, which Hugo had read. [76] Hugo also takes a wider view of the “place” of mankind’s restoration, and finds that it includes (1) heaven, where the good are confirmed and made perfect; (2) hell, where the bad receive their deserts; (3) the fire of purgatory, where there is correction and perfecting; (4) paradise the place of good beginnings; and (5) the world, the place of pilgrimage for those who need restoring. [77] “Sacramentum est corporale vel materiale elementum foris sensibiliter propositum ex similitudine repraesentans, et ex institutione significans, et ex sanctificatione continens aliquam invisibilem et spiritalem gratiam” (pars ix. 2; Migne 176, col. 317). In spite of Hugo the old definition held its ground, being adopted by Peter Lombard and others after him. [78] Here we see clearly that the works of the Creation have the sacramental quality of similitude and, in a way, the quality of institution, since their similitude to spiritual things was intended by the Creator for the instruction of man. They lack, however, the third quality of sanctification, which enables the material signum to convey its spiritual res. [79] e.g. the material of the sacrament, which may consist in things, as in bread and wine, or in actions (as in making the sign of the cross), or in words, as in the invocation of the Trinity. He also shows how faith itself may be regarded as a sacrament, inasmuch as it is that whereby we now see in a glass darkly and behold but an image. But we shall hereafter see clearly through contemplation. Faith then is the image, i.e. the sacrament, of the future contemplation which is the sacrament’s real verity, the res. [80] De sacr. lib. i. pars xi. cap. 1. The sacraments of the natural law included tithes, oblations, and sacrifices. Hugo also considers the good works which the natural law prescribed. This period ceases with the written law given implicitly through Abraham and explicitly through Moses. See De sacr. lib. i. pars xii. cap. i. Hugo appears to me to vary his point of view regarding the natural law and its time, for sometimes he regards it as the law prevailing till the time of Abraham or Moses, and again as the law under which pagan peoples lived, who did not know the Mosaic law. [81] De sacr. lib. i. pars xi. cap. 6 (Migne 176, col. 346). [82] Whoever should wish for further illustration of Hugo’s allegorical methods may examine his treatises entitled De arca NoË morali and De arca NoË mystica (Migne 176, col. 618-702), where every detail of the Ark, which signifies the Church, is allegorically applied to the Christian scheme of life and salvation. With these treatises, Hugo’s De vanitate mundi (Migne 176, col. 703-740) is connected. They will be referred to when considering Hugo’s position in mediaeval philosophy, post, Chapter XXXVI., II. [83] See Duchesne, Origines du culte chrÉtien. [84] See the epitaph from his tomb in S. Maria sopra Minerva in Rome, given by Savigny, Geschichte des RÖmischen Rechts, v. 571 sqq., who also gives a sketch of his life. With the work of Durandus, the Gemma animae of Honorius of Autun (Books I. II. III.; Migne 172, col. 541 sqq.) should be compared, as marking a somewhat earlier stage in the interpretation of the Liturgy. It also gives the symbolism of the church and its parts, its ministers, and services. [85] Every article worn or borne by the bishop (or celebrating priest) has symbolic significance. [86] All this (which is taken from Book IV. of the Rationale) is but the first part of the Mass. The maze of symbolism increases in vastness and intricacy as the office proceeds. [87] Neh. iv. [88] Matt. xix. 17. [89] Many parts of the church have more than one significance. The windows were said before to represent hospitality and pity. [90] Post, Chapter XXXV., I. [91] The application of Vincent’s work to the sculpture and painting of a Gothic cathedral is due to Didron, Iconographie chrÉtienne, histoire de Dieu, Introduction (1843). Other writers have followed him, like Émile Male in his L’Art religieux du XIIIe siÈcle en France (2nd ed., Paris, 1902), to which the present writer is much indebted. It goes without saying, that the sources from which Vincent drew (e.g. the works of Albertus Magnus) likewise form a commentary upon the subjects of Gothic glass and sculpture, and may even have suggested the manner of their presentation. [92] The opening verses of John’s Gospel account for this. Christ, or God in the person of Christ, is shown in Old Testament scenes as early as the fourth century upon sarcophagi in the Lateran at Rome. [93] These subjects illustrated the series of events celebrated in the calendar of church services. [94] Post, pp. 86 sqq. [95] Ante, Chapter XXVII. [96] So the composition and the arrangement of topics in the cathedral sculpture and glass have scarcely the excellence of natural grouping. The arrangement is intended to illustrate the series of successive acts making up God’s own artist-composition, itself symbolical of His purpose in the creation and redemption of man. [97] Adam’s hymns are edited with notes and an introductory essay by L. Gautier, Œuvres poÉtiques d’Adam de S.-Victor (3rd ed., Paris, 1894). A number of his hymns will be found in Migne 196, col. 1422 sqq.; and also in Clement’s Carmina e poetis christianis excerpta. On Adam’s verse see post, Chapter XXXII., III. [98] Dante draws much from Richard of St. Victor. [99] See post, Chapter XXXII., III. [100] Gautier, o.c. p. 46 (Migne 196, col. 1437). [101] The Hebrews in bondage to the Egyptians are the symbol of all men in the bonds of sin. [102] As Christ expires the cherubim at the gate of Eden lower the flaming sword, so that the men bathed with His blood may pass in. [103] Isaac was always a type of Christ; his name was interpreted laughter (risus) from Gen. xxi. 6: “And Sarah said, God hath made me to laugh, so that all that hear will laugh with me.” [104] Joseph another type of Christ. [105] This serpent, i.e. Christ the rod of Aaron, safe from the devil’s spite, consumes the false idols. [106] The Brazen Serpent, a type of Christ. Cf. John iii. 14. [107] Cf. Job xli. 1. The hook (hamus) is Christ’s divinity, whereby He pierces the devil’s jaw. [108] Cf. Isa. xi. 8. The guiltless child is Christ, and the cockatrice is the devil. [109] The children who mocked Elisha represent the Jews mocking Christ as He ascended Calvary; the bear is Vespasian and Titus who destroy Jerusalem. [110] These again are types of Christ: David feigning madness among the Philistines, 1 Sam. xxi. 12-15; the goat cast forth for the people’s sins, Lev. xvi. 21, 22; and the sparrow in the rite of cleansing from leprosy, Lev. xiv. 2-7. [111] Samson a type of Christ, will not wed a woman of his tribe (Judges xiv. 1-3) as Christ chooses the Gentiles; Samson bursts open Gaza’s gates as Christ the gates of death and hell. [112] The allusion here is to the statement of mediaeval Bestiaries that the lion cub, when born, lies lifeless for three days, till awakened by his father’s roar. The supernal mother is the Church triumphant. [113] The body of Christ, i.e. the Church. [114] A topic everywhere represented in church windows and cathedral sculpture. [115] Printed at the end of his Paedagogus; see Taylor, Classical Heritage of the Middle Ages, pp. 253-255, where it is translated. [116] Although the dogmas of Christianity were formulated by reason, they were cradled in love and hate. Nowadays, in a time when dogmas are apt to be thought useless clogs to the spirit, it is well for the historically-minded to remember the power of emotional devotion which they have inspired in other times. [117] Gautier, Œuvres d’Adam (1st ed., vol. i. p. 11); Gautier (3rd ed., p. 269) doubts whether this hymn is Adam’s. But for the purpose of illustrating the symbolism of the twelfth-century hymn, the question of authorship is not important. [118] Ante, Chapter XXVII. [119] In these closing lines the “salubre sacramentum” is in apposition to “Ille de Samaria”—i.e. the “sacramentum” is the Saviour, who is also typified by the Good Samaritan. In another hymn for Christmas, Adam speaks of the concurrence in one persona of Word, flesh, and spirit, and then uses the phrase “Tantae rei sacramentum” (Gautier, o.c. p. 5). Here the sacramentum designates the visible human person of Christ, which was the life-giving signum or symbol of so great a marvel (tantae rei) as the Incarnation. Adam has Hugo’s teaching in mind, and the full significance of his phrase will appear by taking it in connection with Hugo’s definition of the Sacrament, ante, Chapter XXVIII. [120] Gautier, o.c. p. 10. [121] The reference is to Aaron’s rod in Numbers xvii. [122] The reference is to Gideon’s fleece, Judges vi. 37, which is a type of the Virgin Mary. [123] Gautier, o.c. 1st ed., i. 155 (Migne 196, col. 1464). In his third edition, Gautier is doubtful of Adam’s authorship of this hymn because of its irregular rhyme. [124] Cf. Gautier’s notes to this hymn, Gautier, o.c. 1st ed., i. 159-167. [125] Gautier, o.c. i. 168. [126] Gautier, o.c. ii. 127. [127] Gautier, 3rd ed., p. 186. This is in Migne 196, col. 1502. [128] A charlatan in Salimbene’s Chronicle, ante, Chapter XXI., uses a like phrase. [129] For the data as to Alanus see the Prolegomena to Migne, Pat. Lat. 210, which volume contains his works. See also HaurÉau, MÉm. de l’acad. des inscriptions et des belles lettres, tome 32 (1886), p. 1, etc.; also Hist. lit. de France, tome 16, p. 396, etc. On Alanus and his place in scholastic philosophy, see post, Chapter XXXVI., III. [130] Migne 210, col. 686-1012. [131] Migne 210, col. 431-481. See post, Chapter XXXII., I. [132] The significance of the title is not quite clear. The poem is written in hexametre, and is not far from 4700 lines in length. It is printed in Migne 210, col. 486-576; also edited by Thos. Wright, Master of the Rolls Series, vol. 59, ii. (1872). [133] The poem is highly imaginative in the delineation of its allegorical figures. [134] These curious lines are as follows: “O nova picturae miracula, transit ad esse [135] The allusion here is to the fate of Hippolytus, whose chariot-horses, maddened by the wiles of Venus, dashed the chariot to pieces and caused their lord’s death. [136] i. cap. vi. Her garb and attributes are elaborately told. In the latter part of the poem she is usually called Phronesis. [137] A favourite commonplace; HeloÏse uses it. [138] The functions of these virgins, the Seven Liberal Arts, are poetically told. The Anticlaudianus is no text-book. But the poet apparently is following the De nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii of Martianus Capella, ante, Chapter IV. [139] Compare the succession of Heavens in Dante’s Paradiso. [140] One may recall Raphael’s painting of Theology on the ceiling of the Stanza del Segnatura in the Vatican. It is impossible not to compare the rÔles of Alan’s Reason and Theology with those of Virgil and Beatrice in the Commedia. [141] Here we are back in the Celestial Hierarchy of Dionysius the Areopagite. [142] As in Dante’s Paradiso. [143] Most of these epithets of the Virgin come from allegorical interpretations of the text of the Vulgate. [144] Compare the final vision of Dante in Paradiso, xxxiii. [145] The reader will notice the Platonism and Neo-Platonism of all this. [146] Notice that the Arts are here equipping and perfecting the man for his fight against sin;—which corresponds with the common mediaeval view of the function of education. [147] The poem gives a full description of Fortune and her house, and unstable splendid gifts. [148] But the different names of Alanus’s Virtues and Vices, and their novel antagonisms, indicate an original view of morality with him. On the Psychomachia see Taylor, Classical Heritage, pp. 278 sqq. and 379. Allegorical combats and dÉbats (both in Latin and in the vernacular tongues) are frequent in mediaeval literature. Cf. e.g. post, Chapter XXX. Again, in certain parabolae ascribed to St. Bernard (Migne 183, col. 757 sqq.) the various virtues, Prudentia, Fortitude, Discretio, Temperantia, Spes, Timor, Sapientia, are so naturally made to act and speak, that one feels they had become personalities proper for poetry and art. Compare Hildegard’s characterizations of the Vices, ante, Chapter XIX. [149] The English reader will derive much pleasure from F. S. Ellis’s admirable verse translation: The Romance of the Rose (Dent and Co., London, 1900). Each of the three little volumes of this translation has a convenient synopsis of the contents. Those who would know what is known of the tale and its authors should read Langlois’s chapter on it, in Histoire de la langue et de la littÉrature franÇaise, edited by Petit de Julleville. It may be said here, for those whose memories need refreshing, that William de Lorris wrote the first part, some forty-two hundred lines, about the year 1237, and died leaving it unfinished; John de Meun took up the poem some thirty years afterwards, and added his sequel of more than eighteen thousand lines. [150] The names are Englished after Ellis’s translation. [151] See ante, Chapter XXIII.; De Meun took much from the De planctu naturae of Alanus. [152] Post, Chapter XXXIII. [153] Ante, Vol. I. p. 213. [154] Migne, Pat. Lat. 172, col. 1056. [155] Ante, Chapter XII., I. [156] Ante, Chapter XIII., I. [157] Ante, Chapter XXVIII. [158] Didascalicon, iii. 4 (Migne 176, col. 768-769). [159] De vanitate mundi, i. (Migne 176, col. 709, 710). [160] Ep. 169 (Migne, Pat. Lat. 100, col. 441). [161] Opusc. xiii.; De perfectione monachi, cap. xi. (Migne 144, col. 306). See ante, Chapter XVI. [162] Speculum ecclesiae (Migne 172, col. 1085). [163] Sonnet 56. [164] Ep. i. (Migne 119, col. 433). [165] John approved of reading the auctores, for educational purposes, and not confining the pupil to the artes. See Metalogicus, i. 23, 24 (Migne, Pat. Lat. 199, col. 453). On John, cf. post, Chapter XXXI. and XXXVI., III. [166] Polycraticus, Prologus (Migne, Pat. Lat. 199, col. 385). [167] Post, Chapter XXXVI., III. [168] I draw upon the extracts given in the thesis of M. Demimuid, De Bernardo Carnotensi grammatico professore et interprete Virgilii (Paris, 1873), who, as appears by his title, confuses the two Bernards. [169] The author of a bastard epitome on the Trojan War, see post, Chapter XXXII., IV. [170] The above, in substance, is taken from Macrobius. [171] Post, Chapter XXXVII. [172] Ante, Chapter XXIX., II., and post, Chapter XXXVI., III. [173] Post, Chapter XXXVI., I. [174] For a successor or friendly rival to Chartres, in the interest taken in grammar and classical literature, one should properly look to Orleans, where apparently those studies continued to flourish. Cf. L. Delisle, “Les Écoles d’OrlÉans au douziÈme siÈcle,” Annuaire-Bulletin de la SocietÉ de l’Histoire de France, t. vii. (1869), p. 139 sqq. In a Bataille des septs arts, by Henri d’Andeli, of the first half of the thirteenth century, Logic, from its stronghold of Paris, vanquishes Grammar, whose stronghold is Orleans. In the conflict, with much symbolic truth, Aristotle overthrows Priscian, Histoire littÉraire de la France, t. xxiii. p. 225. [175] Post, Chapter XXXVII. [176] See post, Chapter XLI. and XLII. for the work of Grosseteste. [177] Cf. post, Chapter XXXIII. and XXXVII. [178] Cf. Specht, Geschichte des Unterrichtswesens in Deutschland, etc. (Stuttgard, 1885), p. 75 and passim. Yet how soon and with what childish prattle youths might begin to speak and write Latin is touchingly shown by a boy’s letter, written from a monastic school, to his parents. It just asks for various little things, and its superscription is: “Parentibus suis A. agnus ablactatus pium balatum”: which seems to mean: “To his parents, A, a weaned lamb, sends a loving bah.” This and other curious little letters are ascribed to one Robertus Metensis (cir. A.D. 900) (Migne 132, col. 533). [179] See Thurot, Histoire des doctrines grammaticales au moyen Âge; Notices et extraits des MSS. vol. 22, part 2, p. 85. For what is said in the preceding and following pages the writer’s obligations are deep to this well-known work of Thurot, and to Reichling’s edition of the Doctrinale of Alexander de Villa-Dei (Mon. Germ. paedagogica, XII., Berlin, 1893). Paetow’s Arts Course at Medieval Universities (University of Illinois, 1910) treats learnedly of these matters. [180] See Thurot, o.c. p. 204 sqq. [181] Regere, a mediaeval term not used in this sense by Priscian. [182] See the Einleitung to Reichling’s edition of the Doctrinale already referred to; also Thurot, De Alexandri de Villa-Dei doctrinali (Paris, 1850). The chief mediaeval rival of the Doctrinale was the Graecismus of Eberhard of Bethune, written a little later. See Paetow, o.c. p. 38. [183] Doctrinale, line 1561 sqq. [184] Doctrinale, 1603 sqq. [185] Doctrinale, 2330-2331. [186] See passage in Reichling’s Einleitung, p. xxvii. [187] See e.g. Une Grammaire latine inÉdite du XIIIe siÈcle, par Ch. Fierville (Paris, 1886). [188] See Reichling, o.c. Einleitung, p. xix; Thurot, Not. et extr. xxii. 2, p. 112 sqq. [189] See e.g. Thurot, o.c. p. 176 sqq.; p. 216 sqq. [190] Thurot, o.c. pp. 126-127. [191] Thurot, o.c. p. 127. [192] The Greek Grammar of Roger Bacon, ed. by Nolan and Hirsch (Cambridge, 1902). [193] Bacon defines idioma “as the determined peculiarity (proprietas) of language, which one gens uses after its custom; and another gens uses another idioma of the same language” (Greek Grammar, p. 26). Dialect is the modern term. [194] Greek Grammar, p. 27. Bacon appears to have followed Priscian chiefly. As to whether he used Byzantine models, or other sources, see the Introduction to Nolan and Hirsch’s edition of the Greek Grammar. These thoughts inspiring Bacon’s Grammar became a veritable metaphysics in the Grammatica speculativa ascribed to Duns Scotus, see post, Chapter XLII. [195] Cf. L. Rockinger, “Die Ars Dictandi in Italien,” Sitzungsber. bayerisch. Akad., 1861, pp. 98-151. For examples of these dictamina, see L. Delisle, “Dictamina Magistri Berardi de Neapoli” (a papal notary equally versed in law and rhetoric), Notices et extraits des MSS., etc., vol. 27, part 2, p. 87 sqq.; Ch. V. Langlois, “Formulaires de lettres,” etc., Not. et ext. vol. 32 (2), p. 1 sqq.; ibid. vol. 34 (1), p. 1 sqq. and p. 305 sqq. and vol. 35 (2), p. 409 sqq. [196] For the history of this school in the eleventh century, see ante, Chapter XII. III. [197] The Eptateuchon exists in manuscript. I have taken the above from Clerval, Les Écoles de Chartres au moyen Âge (Chartres, 1895), p. 221 sqq. Thierry appears to have written a commentary on Cicero’s Rhetoric. See MÉlanges Graux, pp. 41-46. [198] Metalogicus, i. cap. xxiv. (Migne, Pat. Lat. 199, col. 853-856). [199] Polycraticus, vii. 13 (Migne 199, col. 666). [200] Metalogicus, i. 24 (Migne 199, col. 856). [201] Cf. Clerval, o.c. p. 211 sqq. and p. 227 sqq. [202] Metalogicus, iii. 4 (Migne 199, col. 900). [203] Petrus Blesensis, Epist. 101 (Migne 207, col. 312). [204] Epist. 92 (Migne 207, col. 289). These letters are cited by Clerval. [205] See post, Chapter XXXVI. I. [206] Migne, Pat. Lat. 171, col. 1007-1056. [207] Metalogicus, i. 5. [208] See post, Chapter XXXV. I. [209] The works of Giraldus Cambrensis are published in Master of Rolls Series, 21, in eight volumes. The last contains the De instructione principum. Giraldus lived from about 1147 to 1220. [210] Ante, Chapter VIII. [211] Alcuin, Ep. 80 (Migne 100, col. 260). [212] Alcuin, Ep. 113, ad Paulinum patriarcham (Migne 100, col. 341). [213] Traube, PoËtae Lat. Aevi Carolini (Mon. Germ.), 1, p. 243. Cf. “Versus in laude Larii laci,” by Paulus Diaconus, ibid. p. 42. [214] Ante, Chapter XII. [215] Post, Chapter XXXVI. III. [216] Ep. ii. 33 (Migne 171, col. 256). For the Latin text of this letter see post, Chapter XXXI. [217] For the entire poem, which is of interest throughout, see post, Chapter XXXII. I. [218] For the poem see HaurÉau, MÉlanges poÉtiques d’Hildebert de Lavardin, p. 64 (Paris, 1882). [219] HaurÉau, o.c. p. 56. [220] Ibid. p. 82. [221] Ibid. p. 144. [222] Migne, Pat. Lat. 171, col. 1428. This volume of Migne also contains the poems criticized and (some of them) edited by HaurÉau in the book already referred to. [223] Hildebert, Epis. i. 1 (Migne 171, col. 141). [224] Hildebert, Ep. i. 22 (Migne 171, col. 197). [225] A technical illustration from Roman law. [226] Hildeberti, Ep. ii. 12 (Migne 171, col. 172-177). Compare Ep. i. 17, consoling a friend on loss of place and dignities. Hildebert’s works are in vol. 171 of Migne’s Pat. Lat. A number of his poems are more carefully edited by HaurÉau in Notices et extraits des MSS., etc., vol. 28, ii. p. 289 sqq.; and some of them in vol. 29, ii. p. 231 sqq. of the same series. The matter is more conveniently given by HaurÉau in his MÉlanges poÉtiques d’Hildebert de Lavardin. On the man and his writings see De servillers, Hildebert et son temps (Paris, 1876); Hebert Duperron, De Venerabilis Hildeberti vita et scriptis (Bajocis, 1855); also vol. xi. of Hist. lit. de la France; and (best of all) DieudonnÉ, Hildebert de Lavardin, sa vie, ses lettres, etc. (Paris, 1898). [227] It is well known that the great Latin prose, in spite of variances of stylistic intent and faculty among the individual writers, was an artistic, not to say artificial creation, formed under the influence of Greek models. Cicero is the supreme example of this, and he is also the greatest of all Latin prose writers. After his time some great writers (e.g. Tacitus, Quintilian) preserved a like tradition; others (e.g. Seneca) paid less attention to it. And likewise on through the patristic period, and the Middle Ages too, some men endeavoured to preserve a classic style, while others wrote more naturally. [228] Even as it is necessary, in order to appreciate some of the methods of the Latin classical poetry, to realize that their immediate antecedents lay in Greek Alexandrian literature rather than in the older Greek Classics. [229] See Taylor, Classical Heritage, chapter viii. [230] A palpable difficulty in judging mediaeval Latin literature is its bulk. The extant Latin classics could be tucked away in a small corner of it. Every well-equipped student of the Classics has probably read them all. One mortal life would hardly suffice to read a moderate part of mediaeval Latin. And, finally, while there are histories of the classic literature in every modern tongue, there exists no general work upon mediaeval Latin writings regarded as literature. Ebert’s indispensable Allgemeine Geschichte der Literatur des Mittelalters ends with the tenth century. The author died. Within the scope of its purpose Dr. Sandys’ History of Classical Scholarship is compact and good. [231] Ante, Chapter X. [232] Post, Chapter XXXII., I. [233] See Sandys, History of Classical Scholarship, i. 463-464. [234] There was no attempt at classicism in the narrative in which he recounted the Translation of the relics of the martyrs Marcellinus and Peter from Rome to his own new monastery at Seligenstadt (Migne 104, col. 537-594). It was an entertaining story of a pious theft, and one may be sure that he wrote it more easily, and in a style more natural to himself than that shown in his consciously imitative masterpiece. [235] Ep. vi. (Migne 100, col. 146). [236] Ep. xxxii. (Migne 100, col. 187). [237] Ep. xxxiii. (Migne 100, col. 187). [238] Capitula ad Presbyteros (Migne 105, col. 202). [239] See ante, Chapter XII. [240] Chronicon, cap. 35 (Migne 139, col. 46). The sense is easy to follow, but the impossible constructions render an exact translation quite impossible. It is doubtful whether this Benedictus was an Italian. The Italian writing of this period, like that of Liutprand, is easier than among more painful students north of the Alps. But otherwise its qualities are rarely more pronounced. Ease is shown, however, in the Chronicon Venetum of John the Deacon (d. cir. 1008). See ante, Chapter XIII., III. [241] Migne 133. This work fills four hundred columns in Migne. On Odo see ante, Chapter XII., II. [242] Odo of Cluny, Collationes, lib. i. cap. i. (Migne 133, col. 519 and 520). “Therefore God, Creator and Judge of mankind, although He have justly driven our race from that felicity of Paradise, yet mindful of His goodness, lest man all guilt should incur what he deserves, softens the sorrows of this pilgrimage with many benefits.... Indeed the purpose of that same Scripture is to press us from the depravities of this life. For to that end with its dreadful utterances, as with so many goads, it pricks our heart, that man struck by fear may shudder, and may recall to memory the divine judgments which he is wont so easily to forget, cut off by lust of the flesh and the solicitudes of earth.” [243] Ruotgerus, Vita Brunonis, cap. 4 and 6; Pertz, Mon. Germ. Script. iv. p. 254, and Migne 134, col. 944 and 946. A translation of this passage is given ante, Vol. I., p. 310. See ibid., p. 314, for the scholarship and writings of Hermannus Contractus, an eleventh-century German. Ruotger’s clumsy Latin is outdone by the linguistic involutions of the Life of Wenceslaus, the martyr duke of Bohemia, written toward the close of the tenth century by Gumpoldus, Bishop of Mantua, who seems to have cultivated classical rhetoric most disastrously (Pertz, Mon. Germ. Script. iv. p. 211, and in Migne 135, col. 923 sqq.). [244] From Thurot, Notices et extraits, etc., 22 (2), p. 87, and p. 341 sqq., one may see that the principles of construction stated by mediaeval grammarians followed the usage of mediaeval writers in adopting a simpler or more natural order than that of classical prose. An extract, for example, from an eleventh-century MSS. indicates the simple order which this grammarian author approved: e.g. “Johannes hodie venit de civitate; Petrus, quem Arnulfus genuit et nutrivit, intellexit multa” (Thurot, p. 87). [245] Ante, Chapter XXX., II. [246] So likewise in regard to verse, the perfected two-syllable rhyme came first in Italy, and more slowly in the North, although the North was to produce better Latin poetry. [247] Ante, Chapters XI., IV., and XVI. [248] Opusc. xiv., De ordine erimitarum (Migne 145, col. 329). “We may see upon a tree a leaf ready to succumb beneath the wintry frosts, and, with the sap of autumnal clemency consumed, even now about to fall, so that it barely cleaves to the twig it hangs from, but displays most evident signs of (its) light ruin. The blasts are quivering, wild winds strike it from all sides, the mid-winter horror of heavy air congeals with cold; and that you may marvel the more, the ground is strewn with the rest of the leaves everywhere flowing down, and, with its locks laid low, the tree is stripped of its grace; yet that alone, none other remaining, endures, and, as the survivor of co-heirs, succeeds to the rights of the brotherhood’s possession. What then is left to be understood from consideration of this thing, save that a leaf of a tree cannot fall unless it receive beforehand the divine command?” This description is rhetorically elaborated; but Damiani commonly wrote more directly, as in this sentence from a letter to a nobleman, in which Damiani urges him not to fail in his duty to his mother through affection for his wife: “Sed forte dices: mater mea me frequenter exasperat, duris verbis meum et uxoris meae corda perturbat; non possumus tot injuriarum probra perferre, non valemus austeritatis ejus et severae correptionis molestias tolerare” (Ep. vii. 3; Migne 144, col. 466). This needs no translation. [249] Ante, Chapter XI., IV. [250] Proslogion, cap. 24 (Migne 158, col. 239). “Awaken now, my soul, and rouse all thy mind, and consider, as thou art able, of what nature and how great is that Good (God). For if single goods are objects of delight, consider intently how delightful is that good which contains the joy of all goods; and not such as in things created we have tried, but differing as greatly as differs the Creator from the creature. For if life created is good, how good is the life creatrix! If joyful is the salvation wrought, how joyful is the salvation which wrought all salvation! If lovely is wisdom in the knowledge of things created, how lovely is the wisdom which created all from nothing. In fine, if there are many and great delectations in things delightful, of what quality and greatness is delectation (i.e. the delectation that we take) in Him who made the delights themselves!” The reader may observe that the word-order of Anselm’s Latin is preserved almost unchanged in the translation. [251] “Meditatio II.” (Migne 158, col. 722). “My soul is offended with my life. I blush to live; I fear to die. What then remains for thee, O sinner, save that all thy life thou weepest over all thy life, that it all may lament its whole self. But in this also is my soul miserably wonderful and wonderfully miserable, since it does not grieve as much as it knows itself (i.e. to the full extent of its self-knowledge) but secure, is listless as if it knew not what it may be suffering. O barren soul, what art thou doing? why art thou drowsing, sinner soul? The Day of Judgment is coming, near is the great day of the Lord, near and too swift the day of wrath, (that day!) day of tribulation and distress, day of calamity and misery, day of shades and darkness, day of cloud and whirlwind, day of the trump and the roar! O voice of the day of the Lord—harsh! Why sleepest thou, soul lukewarm and fit to be spewed out?” [252] Perhaps it may seem questionable to treat Anselm as an Italian, since he left Lombardy when a young man. Undoubtedly his theological interests were affected by his northern environment. But his temperament and language, his diction, his style, seem to me more closely connected with native temperament. [253] Annals for the year 1077 (Migne 146, col. 1234 sqq.); also in Mon. Germ. Script. iii. [254] Sermo xvi. (Migne 183, col. 851). The power of this passage keeps it from being hysterical. But the monkish hysteria, without the power, may be found in the writings of St. Bernard’s jackal, William of St. Thierry, printed in Migne, Pat. Lat. 180. Notice his Meditationes, for example; also his De contemplando Deo, printed among St. Bernard’s works (Migne 184, col. 365 sqq.). [255] Sermo xv. (Migne 183, col. 847). Translated ante, Vol. I., p. 411. [256] Ep. xii., ad Guigonem (Migne 182, col. 116). [257] Bernard, Ep. 112, ad Gaufridum (Migne 182, col. 255). For translation see ante, Vol. I., p. 398. [258] E.g. Ep. i. and 144 (Migne 182, col. 70 and 300). [259] Ep. 196, ad Guidonem (Migne 182, col. 363). Translated ante, Vol. I., p. 401. See also the preceding letter, 195. [260] As to Jerome’s two styles see Goelzer, La LatinitÉ de St. Jerome, Introduction. [261] Ep. ii. 33 (Migne 171, col. 256). Translation ante, Chapter XXX., III. [262] See ante, Chapter XXX., I. [263] “Against that signal gift of parent nature and grace, a shameless wrangler has stirred up an old calumny, condemned by the judgment of our ancestors; and, seeking everywhere comfort for his ignorance, he hopes to advance himself toward glory, if he shall see many like himself, see them ignorant, that is to say. For he has this special tumour of arrogance, that he would be making himself the equal of others, exalting his own good qualities (if they exist), and depreciating those of others. And he deems his neighbour’s defect to be his own advancement. “Now it is indubitable to all truly wise, that Nature, kindest parent of all, and best-ordering directress, among the other living beings which she brought forth, distinguished man with the prerogative of reason and ennobled him with the exercise of eloquence (or ‘with the use of speech’): executing this with unremitting zeal and best-ordering decree, in order that man who was pressed and dragged to the lowest by the heaviness of a clodlike nature and the slowness of corporeal bulk, borne aloft as it were by these wings might ascend to the heights, and by obtaining the crown of true blessedness excel all others in happy reward. While Grace thus fecundates Nature, Reason watches over the matters to be inspected and considered; Nature’s bosom gives forth, metes out the fruits and faculty of individuals; and the inborn love of good, stimulating itself by its natural appetite, follows this (i.e. the good) either solely or before all else, since it seems best adapted to the bliss descried” (Metal. i. 1; Migne 199, col. 825). These translations are kept close to the original, in order to show the construction of the sentences. [264] “There is another class of philosophers called the Ionic, and it took its origin from the more remote Greeks. The chief of these was Thales the Milesian, one of those seven who were called ‘wise.’ He, when he had searched out the nature of things, shone among his fellows, and especially stood forth as admirable because, comprehending the laws of astrology, he predicted eclipses of the sun and moon. To him succeeded his hearer, Anaximander, who (in turn) left Anaximenes as disciple and successor. Diogenes, likewise his hearer, arose and Anaxagoras who taught that the divine mind was the author of all things that we see. To him succeeded his pupil Archelaus, whose disciple is said to have been Socrates, the master of Plato, who, according to Apuleius, was first called Aristotle, but then Plato from his breadth of chest, and was borne aloft to such height of philosophy, by vigour of genius, by assiduity of study, by graciousness in all his ways, and by sweetness and force of eloquence, that, as if seated on the throne of wisdom, he has seemed to command by a certain ordained authority the philosophers before and after him. And indeed Socrates is said to have been the first to have turned universal philosophy to the improvement and ordering of manners; since before him all had devoted themselves chiefly to physics, that is to examining the things of nature” (Polycraticus, vii. 5; Migne 199, col. 643). [265] “The most excellent man concluded his oration, and by the power of the blessed Peter absolved all who had taken the vow to go, and by the same apostolic authority confirmed it; and he instituted a suitable sign of this so honourable vow; and as a badge of soldiering (or knighthood), or rather, of being about to soldier, for God, he took the mark of the Lord’s Passion, the figure of a cross, made from material of any kind of cloth, and ordered it to be sewed upon the tunics and cloaks of those about to go. But if any one, after receiving this sign, or after making open promise, should draw back from that good intent, by base repenting or through affection for his kin, he ordained that he should be held an outlaw utterly and perpetually, unless he turn and set himself again to the neglected performance of his pledge. “Furthermore, with terrible anathema he damned all who within the term of three years should dare to do ill to the wives, children, or property of those setting forth on this journey of God. And finally he committed to a certain and praiseworthy man (a bishop of some city on the Po, whose name I am sorry never to have found or heard) the care and regulation of the expedition, and conferred his own authority upon him over the tribute (?) of Christian people wherever they should come. Whereupon giving his benediction, in the apostolic manner, he placed his hands upon him. How sagaciously that one executed the behest, is shown by the marvellous outcome of so great an undertaking” (Guibert of Nogent, Gesta Dei per Francos, ii. 2; Migne 156, col. 702). [266] Hist. ecclesiastica, pars iii. lib. xii. cap. 14 (Migne 188, col. 889-892). “Thomas, son of Stephen, approached the king, and offering him a mark of gold, said: ‘Stephen, son of Airard, was my sire, and all his life he served thy father (William the Conqueror) on the sea. For him, borne on his ship, he conveyed to England, when he proceeded to England in order to make war on Harold. In this manner of service serving him until death he gave him satisfaction, and honoured with many rewards from him, he flourished grandly among his people. This privilege, lord king, I claim of thee, and the vessel which is called White Ship I have ready, fitted out in the best manner for royal needs.’ To whom the king said: ‘I grant your petition. For myself indeed I have selected a proper ship, which I shall not change; but my sons, William and Richard, whom I cherish as myself, with much nobility of my realm, I commend now to thee.’ “Hearing these words the sailors were merry, and bowing down before the king’s son, asked of him wine to drink. He ordered three measures of wine to be given them. Receiving these they drank and pledged their comrades’ health abundantly, and with deep potations became drunk. At the king’s order many barons with their sons went aboard the ship, and there were about three hundred, as I opine, in that fatal bark. Then two monks of Tiron, and Count Stephen with two knights, also William of Rolmar, and Rabellus the chamberlain, and Edward of Salisbury, and a number of others, went out from it, because they saw such a crowd of wanton showy youth aboard. And fifty tried rowers were there and insolent marines, who having seized seats in the ship were brazening it, forgetting themselves through drunkenness, and showed respect for scarcely any one. Alas! how many of them had minds void of pious devotion toward God!—‘Who tempers the exceeding rages of the sea and air.’ And so the priests, who had gone up there to bless them, and the other ministrants who bore the holy water, they drove away with derision and loud guffaws; but soon after they paid the penalty of their mocking. “Only men, with the king’s treasure and the vessels holding the wine, filled the keel of Thomas; and they pressed him eagerly to follow the royal fleet which was already cutting the waves. And he himself, because he was silly from drink, trusted in his skill and that of his satellites, and rashly promised to outstrip all who were now ahead of him. Then he gave the word to put to sea. At once the sailors snatched their oars, and glad for another reason because they did not know what hung before their eyes, they adjusted their tackle, and made the ship start over the sea with a great bound. Now while the drunken rowers were putting forth all their strength, and the wretched pilot was paying slack attention to steering his course over the gulf, upon a great rock which daily is uncovered by the ebbing wave and again is covered when the sea is at flood, the left side of White Ship struck violently, and with two timbers smashed, all unexpectedly the ship, alas! was capsized. All cried out together in such a catastrophe; but the water quickly filling their mouths, they perished alike. Two only cast their hands upon the boom from which hung the sail, and clinging to it a great part of the night, waited for some aid. One was a butcher of Rouen named Berold, and the other a well-born lad named Geoffrey, son of Gislebert of Aquila. “The moon was then at its nineteenth in the sign of the Bull, and lighted the earth for nearly nine hours with its beams, making the sea bright for navigators. Captain Thomas after his first submersion regained his strength, and bethinking himself, pushed his head above the waves, and seeing the heads of those clinging to some piece of wood, asked, ‘What has become of the king’s son?’ When the shipwrecked answered that he had perished with all his companions, ‘Miserable,’ said he, ‘is my life henceforth.’ Saying this, and evilly despairing, he chose to sink there, rather than meet the fury of the king enraged for the destruction of his child, or undergo long punishment in chains.” [267] Post, Chapter XLI. [268] Opus majus, pars i. cap. 6. [269] Op. maj. ii. cap. 14. [270] Op. maj. iii. 1. [271] Op. maj. ii. 14. [272] For translation see post, Chapter XXXIV. [273] Post, Chapter XXXVIII. [274] Itinerarium mentis in Deum, Prologus, 2. [275] Ibid. cap. vii. 6. For translations see post, Chapter XXXVIII. [276] Vita prima, cap. xi. Translated ante, Vol. I., p. 427, note 1. [277] Spec. perfectionis, ed. Sabatier, cap. 53. Translated ante, Vol. I., p. 427. [278] Ibid. cap. 93. Translated ante, Vol. I., p. 432. [279] Cap. li., ed. Graesse. “Annunciation Sunday (Advent) is so called, because on that day by an angel the advent of the Son of God in the flesh was announced, for it was fitting that the angelical annunciation should precede the incarnation, for a threefold reason. For the first reason, of betokening the order, that to wit the order of reparation should answer to the order of transgression. Accordingly as the devil tempted the woman, that he should draw her to doubt and through doubt to consent and through consent to fall, so the angel announced to the Virgin, that by announcing he should arouse her to faith and through faith to consent and through consent to conceiving God’s son. For the second reason, of the angelic ministry, because since the angel is God’s minister and servant, and the blessed Virgin was chosen in order that she might be God’s mother, and it is fitting that the minister should serve the mistress, so it was proper that the annunciation to the blessed Virgin should take place through an angel. For the third reason, of repairing the angelical fall. Because since the incarnation was made not only for the reparation of the human fall, but also for the reparation of the angelical catastrophe, therefore the angels ought not to be excluded. Accordingly as the sex of the woman does not exclude her from knowledge of the mystery of the incarnation and resurrection, so also neither the angelical messenger. Behold, God twice announces to a woman by a mediating angel, to wit the incarnation to the Virgin Mary and the resurrection to the Magdalene.” The order of the Latin words is scarcely changed in the translation. [280] In order that no reader may be surprised by the absence of discussion of the antique antecedents of the more particular genres of mediaeval poetry (Latin and Vernacular), I would emphasize the impossibility of entering upon such exhaustless topics. Probably the very general assumption will be correct in most cases, that genres of mediaeval poetry (e.g. the Conflicts or DÉbats in Latin and Old French) revert to antecedents sufficiently marked for identification, in the antique Latin (or Greek) poetry, or in the (extant or lost) productions of the “low” Latin period from the third century downward. An idea of the difficulty and range of such matters may be gained from Jeanroy, Les Origines de la poÉsie lyrique en France au moyen Âge (Paris, 1889), and the admirable review of this work by Gaston Paris in the Journal des savants for 1891 and 1892 (four articles). Cf. also Batiouchkof in Romania, xx. (1891), pages 1 sqq. and 513 sqq. [281] Cf. Taylor, Classical Heritage of the Middle Ages, chap. ix. [282] There is much verse from noted men, Alcuin, Paulus Diaconus, Walafrid Strabo, Rabanus Maurus, Theodulphus. It is all to be found in the collection of DÜmmler and Traube, Poetae Latini aevi Carolini (Mon. Germ. 1880-1896). [283] It is amusing to find a poem by Walafrid Strabo turning up as a favourite among sixteenth-century humanists. The poem referred to, “De cultura hortorum” (Poet. Lat. aev. Car. ii. 335-350), is a poetic treatment of gardening, reminiscent of the Georgics, but not imitating their structure. It has many allusions to pagan mythology. [284] Post, p. 193 sqq. [285] Ante, Vol. I., p. 147. [286] Ante, Chapter XI., III. [287] The following leonine hexameters are attributed to Donizo: “Chrysopolis dudum Graecorum dicitur usu, [288] William was a few years older than Donizo, and died about the year 1100. His hero is Robert Guiscard, and his poem closes with this bid for the favour of his son, Roger: “Nostra, Rogere, tibi cognoscis carmina scribi, [289] Muratori, Script. v. 407-457. [290] Muratori, Script. vi. 110-161; also in Migne. [291] Written at the close of the twelfth century. On these people see Ronca, Cultura medioevale e poesia Latina d’ Italia (Rome, 1892). [292] Muratori, vii. pp. 349-482; Waitz, Mon. Germ. xxii. 1-338. Godfrey lived from about 1120 to the close of the century. The Pantheon was completed in 1185. Cf. L. Delisle, Instructions du comitÉ des travaux historiques, etc.; LittÉrature latine, p. 41 (Paris, 1890). [293] Matthaei Vindocinensis ars versificatoria, L. Bourgain (Paris, 1879). [294] Ante, Chapter XXX., III. [295] Text from HaurÉau, Les MÉlanges poetiques d’Hildebert de Lavardin, p. 60: also in Notices des manuscrits de la bib. nat. t. 28, 2nd part (1878), p. 331. [296] HaurÉau gives a critical text of the Carmen ad Astralabium filium, in Notices et extraits, etc., 34, part ii., p. 153 sqq. Other not unpleasing instances of elegiac verse are afforded by the poems of Baudri, Abbot of Bourgueil (d. 1130). They are occasional and fugitive pieces—nugae, if we will. See L. Delisle, Romania, i. 22-50. [297] The substance of this poem has been given ante, Chapter XXIX. On Alanus see also post, Chapter XXXVI., III. [298] It is printed in Migne 209. Cf. post, p. 230, note 1. [299] The Ligurinus is printed in tome 212 of Migne’s Patrol. Lat. On its author see Pannenborg, Forschungen zur deutschen Geschichte, Band ii. pp. 161-301, and Band xiii. pp. 225-331 (GÖttingen, 1871 and 1873). [300] Alanus de Insulis, De planctu naturae (Migne 210, col. 447). A translation of the work has been made by D. M. Moffat (New York, 1908). For other examples of Sapphic and Alcaic verses see HaurÉau in Notices et extraits, etc., 31 (2), p. 165 sqq. [301] Wilhelm Meyer, a leading authority upon mediaeval Latin verse-structure, derives the principle of a like number of syllables in every line from eastern Semitic influence upon the early Christians. See Fragmenta Burana (Berlin, 1901), pp. 151, 166. That may have had its effect; but I do not see the need of any cause from afar to account for the syllabic regularity of Latin accentual verse. [302] Again Wilhelm Meyer’s view: see l.c. and the same author’s “AnfÄnge der latein. und griech. rhythmischen Dichtung,” Abhand. der Bairish. Akad. Philos., philol. Klasse, 1886. [303] Poet. Lat. aev. Car. i. 116. Cf. Ebert, Gesch. etc. ii. 86. For similar verses see those on the battle at Fontanetum (A.D. 841), Poet. Lat. aev. Car. ii. 138, and the carmen against the town of Aquilegia, ibid. p. 150. [304] Cf. ante, Vol. I., pp. 227, 228. [305] Traube, Poetae Lat. aevi Car. iii. p. 731. Cf. Ebert, Gesch. etc. ii. 169 and 325. [306] Poet. Lat. aev. Car. iii. 733. [307] Du Meril, PoÉsies populaires latines, i. 400. Perhaps the most successful attempt to write hexameters containing rhymes or assonances is the twelfth-century poem of Bernard Morlanensis, a monk of Cluny, beginning with the famous lines: “Hora novissima, tempora pessima sunt, vigilemus. Bernardi Morlanensis, De contemptu mundi, ed. by Thos. Wright, Master of the Rolls Series, vol. 59 (ii.), 1872. Bernard says in his Preface, as to his measures: “Id genus metri, tum dactylum continuum exceptis finalibus, tum etiam sonoritatem leonicam servans....” [308] “Carmina Mutinensia,” Poet. Lat. aev. Car. iii. 703. The poem has forty-two lines, of which the above are the first four. The usual date assigned is 924, but Traube in Poet. aev. Car. has put it back to 892. [309] See further text and discussion in Traube, “O Roma nobilis,” Abhand. Bairish. Akad. Philos., philol. Klasse, 1891. [310] The verbal Sequence or prosa was thus a species of trope. Tropes were interpolations or additions to the older text of the Liturgy. The Sequences were the tropes appended to the last Alleluia of the Gradual, the psalm chanted in the celebration of the Mass, between the reading of the Epistle and the Gospel. Cf. Leon Gautier, PoÉsie liturgique au moyen Âge, chap. iii. (Paris, 1886); ibid. Œuvres poÉtiques d’Adam de Saint-Victor, p. 281 sqq. (3rd ed., Paris, 1894). [311] On the Sequence see Leon Gautier, PoÉsie liturgique au moyen Âge (Paris, 1886), passim, and especially the comprehensive summary in the notes from p. 154 to p. 159. Also see Schubiger, Die SÄngerschule St. Gallus (1858), in which many of Notker’s Sequences are given with the music; also v. Winterfeld, “Die Dichterschule St. Gallus und Reichenau,” Neue JahrbÜcher f. d. klassisch. Altertum, Bd. v. (1900), p. 341 sqq. The present writer has found Wilhelm Meyer’s Fragmenta Burana (Berlin, 1901) most suggestive; and in all matters pertaining to mediaeval Latin verse-forms, use has been made of the same writer’s exhaustive study: “Ludus de Antichristo und Über lat. Rythmen,” Sitzungsber. Bairisch. Akad. Philos., philol. Klasse, 1882. See also Ch. Thurot, “Notices, etc., de divers MSS. latins pour servir À l’histoire des doctrines grammaticales au moyen Âge,” in vol. xxii. (2) of Notices et extraits des MSS. pp. 417-457. [312] “May our trumpet be guided mightily by God’s right hand, and may He hear our prayers with gentle and tranquil ear: for our praise will be accepted if what we sing with the voice a pure conscience sings likewise. And that we may be able, let us all beseech divine aid to be always present with us.... O good King, kind, just, and pitying, who art the way and the door, unlock the gates of the kingdom for us, we beg, and pardon our offences, that we may praise thy name now and through all the ages.” [313] G. M. Dreves, “Die Prosen der Abtei St. Martial zu Limoges,” p. 59 (vol. vii. of Dreves’s Analecta hymnica medii aevi; Leipzig, 1889). “Let every band sing with fount renewed and the Spirit’s grace with joyful praise and clear mind. Now is made good the tenth part (i.e. the fallen angels), undone by fault; and thus that celestial casting out is made good in divine praise. Lo! the bright day of the Lord gleams through the broad spaces of the world: in which all the redeemed people exult because everlasting death is destroyed.” [314] Published by Boucherie, “MÉlanges Latins, etc.,” Revue des langues romanes, t. vii. (1875), p. 35. “Alleluia! O flock, proclaim joy; with melodious praise utter deeds divine now fixed by revealed doctrine. Through the great sacrifice of Christ thou art liberated from death; the gates of hell destroyed, opened are heaven’s doors. Now He rules all things celestial and terrestrial by eternal power; wherein by the Father’s authority He gives judgment always just.” [315] See Gautier, PoÉsie liturgique, p. 147 sqq. It came somewhat earlier in Italy. See Ronca, Cultura medioevale, etc., p. 348 sqq. (Rome, 1892). [316] While Sequences may be called hymns, all hymns are not Sequences. For the hymn is the general term designating a verbal composition sung in praise of God or His saints. A Sequence then would be a hymn having a peculiar history and a certain place in the Liturgy. [317] Contained in Migne 178, col. 1771 sqq. They have not been properly edited or even fully published. [318] Reference should also be made to the six laments (planctus) composed by Abaelard (Migne 178, col. 1817-1823). They are powerful elegies, and exhibit a richness and variety of poetic measures. It may be mentioned that the pure two-syllable rhyme is found in hymns ascribed to Saint Bernard. [319] Leon Gautier, the editor of the Œuvres poÉtiques d’Adam de Saint-Victor, in his third edition of 1894, has thrown out from among Adam’s poems our first and third examples. On Adam see ante, Chapter XXIX., II. [320] Gautier, Œuvres poÉtiques d’Adam de Saint-Victor, i. 174. [321] Gautier, o.c. 3rd edition, p. 87. [322] Gautier, o.c. 1st edition, i. 201. [323] Did the Sequence exert an influence upon Hrotsvitha, the tiresome but unquestionably immortal nun of Gandersheim, who flourished in the middle and latter part of the tenth century? She wrote narrative poems, like the Gesta Ottonis (Otto I.) in leonine hexameters. Her pentameter lines also commonly have a word in the middle rhyming with the last syllable of the line. But it is in those famous pious plays of hers, formed after the models of Terence, that we may look for a kind of writing corresponding to that which was to progress to clearer form in the Sequence. Without discussing to what extent the Latin of these plays may be called rhythmical, one or two things are clear. It is filled with assonances and rude rhymes, usually of one syllable. It has no clear verse-structure, and the utterances of the dramatis personae apparently observe no regularity in the number of syllables, such as lines of verse require. [324] For these and other songs, written after the manner of Sequences, see Du Meril, PoÉsies pop. lat. i. p. 273 sqq. They are also printed by Piper in NachtrÄge zur Älteren deutschen Lit. (Deutsche Nat. Lit.) p. 206 sqq. and p. 234 sqq. See also W. Meyer, Fragmenta Burana, p. 174 sqq. and Ebert, Allgemeine Gesch. etc. ii. 343 sqq. [325] Du Meril, ibid. i. p. 285. [326] Wil. Meyer, Fragmenta Burana, p. 180. [327] The best text of the “Phillidis et Florae altercatio” is HaurÉau’s in Notices et extraits, 32 (1), p. 259 sqq. The same article has some other disputes or causae, e.g. causa pauperis scholaris cum presbytero, p. 289. [328] Du Meril, PoÉsies pop. lat. ii. p. 108 sqq. The piece is a cento, and its tone changes and becomes brutal further on. The poems, from which are taken the preceding citations, are to be found in Wright’s Latin Poems commonly attributed to Walter Mapes (London, 1841, Camden Society); Carmina Burana, ed. J. A. Schmeller; “Gedichte auf K. Friedrich I. (archipoeta),” in vol. iii. of Grimm’s Kleinere Schriften. Cf. also Hubatsch, Die lateinischen Vagantenlieder (Gorlitz, 1870). The best texts of many of these and other “Carmina Burana,” and such like poems, are to be found in the contributions of HaurÉau to the Notices et extraits, etc.; especially in tome 29 (2), pp. 231-368; tome 31 (1), p. 51 sqq. [329] Ante, Vol. I., p. 145. [330] Ante, Chapter IX., II. and III. [331] For generous samples of it, see Geistliche Lit. des Mittelalters, ed. P. Piper (Deutsche National Literatur). [332] For this novel, a Greek original is usually assumed; but the Middle Ages had it only in a sixth-century Latin version. It was copied in Jourdain de Blaie, a chanson de geste. See Hagen, Der Roman von KÖnig Apollonius in seinen verschiedenen Bearbeitungen (Berlin, 1878). The other Greek novels doubtless would have been as popular had the Middle Ages known them. In fact, the Ethiopica of Heliodorus, and others of these novels, did become popular enough through translations in the sixteenth century. [333] Hugo of St. Victor says in the twelfth century: “Apud gentiles primus Darhes Phrygius Trojanam historiam edidit, quam in foliis palmarum ab eo scriptam esse ferunt” (Erud. didas. iii. cap. 3; Migne 176, col. 767). On the Trojan origin of the Franks, Britons, and other peoples, see Joly in his “Benoit de St. More et le Roman de Troie,” pp. 606-635 (Mem. de la Soc. des Antiquaires de Normandie, vol. vii. 3me ser., 1869); also Graf, Roma nella memoria, etc., del medio aevo. The Trojan origin of the Franks was a commonplace in the early Middle Ages, see e.g. Aimoinus of Fleury in beginning of his Historia Francorum, Migne 139, col. 637. On Dares the Phrygian and Dictys the Cretan see “Dares and Dictys,” N. E. Griffin (Johns Hopkins Studies, Baltimore, 1907); Taylor, Classical Heritage, pp. 40 and 360 (authorities); also, generally, L. Constans, “L’ÉpopÉe antique,” in Petit de Julleville’s Histoire de la langue et de la littÉrature franÇaise, vol. i. (Paris, 1896). [334] Joseph of Exeter or de Iscano, as he is called, at the close of the twelfth century composed a Latin poem in six books of hexameters entitled De bello Trojano. It is one of the best mediaeval productions in that metre. The author followed Dares, but his diction shows a study of Virgil, Ovid, Statius, and Claudian. See J. J. Jusserand, De Josepho Exoniensi vel Iscano (Paris, 1877); A. Sarradin, De Josepho Iscano, Belli Trojani, etc. (Versailles, 1878). [335] Eneas, ed. by Salverda de Grave (Halle, 1891), lines 7857-9262. [336] Roman de Troie, 5257-5270, ed. Joly; “Benoit de St. More et le Roman de Troie, etc.,” Mem. de la Soc. des Antiquaires de Normandie, vol. vii. 3me ser., 1869. On its sources see also L. Constans, in Petit de Julleville’s Hist. de la langue et de la litt. franÇaise, vol. i. pp. 188-220. [337] Roman de Troie, 13235 sqq. [338] The Roman de Thebes, the third of these large poems, is temperate in the adaptation and extension of its theme. Its ten thousand or more lines of eight-syllable rhyming verse are no longer than the Thebaid of Statius, and as a narrative make quite as interesting reading. Statius, who lived under Domitian, was a poet of considerable skill, but with no genius for the construction of an epic. His work reads well in patches, but does not move. Several books are taken up with getting the Argive army in motion, and when the reader and Jove himself are wearied, it moves on—to the next halt. And so forth through the whole twelve books. See Nisard, Études sur les poÈtes latins de la dÉcadence, vol. i. p. 261 sqq. (2nd ed., Paris, 1849); Pichon, Hist. de la litt. lat. p. 606 (2nd ed., Paris, 1898). The Roman de Thebes was not drawn directly from the work of Statius, but through the channels, apparently, of intervening prose compendia. It also evidently drew from other works, as it contains matters not found in Statius’s Thebaid. It is easy, if not inspiring reading. The style is clear, and the narrative moves. Of course it presents a general mediaevalizing of the manners of Statius’s somewhat fustian antique heroes; it introduces courtly love (e.g. the love between Parthonopeus and Antigone, lines 3793 sqq.), mediaeval commonplaces, and feudal customs. It drops the antique conception of accursed fate as a fundamental motive of the plot, substituting in its place the varied play of romantic and chivalric sentiment. Leopold Constans has made the Roman de Thebes his own. Having followed the story of Oedipus through the Middle Ages in his LÉgende d’Œdipe, etc. (Paris, 1881) he has corrected some of his views in his critical edition of the poem, “Le Roman de ThÈbes,” 2 vols., 1890 (Soc. des anciens textes franÇais), and has treated the same matters more popularly in Petit de Julleville’s Hist. de la langue et de la litt. franÇaise, vol. i. pp. 170-188. These works fully discuss the sources, date, and language of the poem, and the later redactions in prose and verse through Europe. [339] On Pseudo-Callisthenes see Paul Meyer, Alexandre le Grand dans la littÉrature franÇaise du moyen Âge (Paris, 1886); Taylor, Classical Heritage, etc., pp. 38 and 360. In the last quarter of the twelfth century Walter of Lille, called also Walter of Chatillon, wrote his Alexandreis in ten books of easy-flowing hexameters. It is printed in Migne, Pat. Lat. 209, col. 463-572. Cf. ante, page 192. His work shows that a mediaeval scholar-poet could reproduce a historical theme quite soberly. His poem was read by other bookmen; but the Alexander of the Middle Ages remained the Alexander of the fabulous vernacular versions. [340] See Gaston Paris, “ChrÉtien LÉgouais et autres imitateurs d’Ovide,” Hist. litt. de la France, t. xxix., pp. 455-525. [341] The words “nexum mancipiumque” are more formal and special than the English given above. [342] The early law had as yet devised no execution against the debtor’s property. [343] The jurisconsults whose opinions were authoritative flourished in the second and third centuries. The great five were Gaius, Julian, Papinian, Ulpian, Paulus. Inasmuch as these jurisconsults of the Empire were members of the Imperial (or, later, Praetorian) Auditory, they were judges in a court of last resort, and their “responsa” were decisions of actual cases. They subsequently “digested” them in their books. See Munroe Smith, “Problems of Roman Legal History,” Columbia Law Review, 1904, p. 538. [344] Dig. i. 1 (“De Just. et jure”) 1. See Savigny, System des heutigen rÖmischen Rechts, i. p. 109 sqq. Apparently some of the jurists (e.g. Gaius, Ins. i. 1) draw no substantial distinctions between the jus naturale and the jus gentium. Others seem to distinguish. With the latter, jus naturale might represent natural or instinctive principles of justice common to all men, and jus gentium, the laws and customs which experience had led men to adopt. For instance, libertas is jure naturali, while dominatio or servitus is introduced ex gentium jure (Dig. i. 5, 4; Dig. xii. 6, 64). Jus gentium represented common expediency, but its institutions (e.g. servitus) might or might not accord with natural justice. For manumissio as well as servitus was ex jure gentium (Dig. i. 1, 4), and so were common modes and principles of contract. Ulpian’s notion of the jus naturale as pertaining to all animals, and jus gentium as belonging to men alone, was but a catching classification, and did not represent any commonly followed distinction. [345] Constitutio is the more general term, embracing whatever the emperor announces in writing as a law. The term rescript properly applies to the emperor’s written answers to questions addressed to him by magistrates, and to the decisions of his Auditory rendered in his name. [346] For this whole matter, see vol. i. of Savigny’s System des heutigen rÖmischen Rechts; Gaius, Institutes, the opening paragraphs; and the first two chapters of the first Book of Justinian’s Digest. [347] Dig. i. 3, 32. [348] Dig. i. 3, 10, and 12. [349] Dig. i. 3, 14. [350] Ibid. 39. [351] Dig. l. 17, 30. [352] Dig. l. 17, 31. [353] Ibid. 54. [354] Ibid. 202. [355] Dig. l. 16, 24; Ibid. 17, 62. [356] Cod. Theod. (ed. by Mommsen and Meyer) i. 1, 5. [357] With the Theodosian Code the word lex, leges, begins to be used for the constitutiones or other decrees of a sovereign. [358] From the constitution directing the compilation of the Digest, usually cited as Deo auctore. [359] The original plan of Theodosius embraced the project of a Codex of the jurisprudential law. See his constitution of the year 429 in Theod. C. i. 1, 5. Had this been carried out, as it was not, Justinian’s Digest would have had a forerunner. [360] Juliani epitome Latina Novellarum Justiniani, ed. by G. Haenel (Leipzig, 1873). [361] Conrat, Ges. der Quellen und Lit. des rÖm. Rechts, pp. 48-59, and 161 sqq.; Mommsen, Zeitschrift fÜr Rechtsges. 21 (1900), Roman. Abteilung, pp. 150-155. [362] Ed. by Bluhme, Mon. Germ. leges, iii. 579-630. Cf. Tardif, Sources du droit franÇais, 124-128. A code of Burgundian law had already been made. [363] Edited by Haenel, with the epitomes of it in parallel columns, under the name of Lex Romana Visigothorum (Leipzig, 1849). See Tardif, o.c. 129-143. [364] Cod. Theod. i. 4, 3; Brev. i. 4, 1. [365] On these epitomes and glosses see Conrat, Ges. der Quellen, etc., pp. 222-252. Mention should be made of the Edict of Theodoric the Ostrogoth, a piece of legislation contemporary with the Breviarium and the Papianus. In pursuance of Theodoric’s policy of amalgamating Goths and Romans, the Edict was made for both (Barbari Romanique). Its sources were substantially the same as those of the Breviarium, except that Gaius was not used. The sources are not given verbatim, but their contents are restated, often quite bunglingly. Naturally a Teutonic influence runs through this short and incomplete code, which contains more criminal than private law. No further reference need be made to it because its influence practically ceased with the reconquest of Italy by Justinian. It is edited by Bluhme, in Mon. Ger. leges, v. 145-169. See as to it, Savigny, Geschichte des rÖm. Rechts, ii. 172-181; Salvioli, Storia del diritto italiano, 3rd ed., pp. 45-47. [366] Cf. Brunner, Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte, i. p. 109 sqq. [367] For the characteristics and elements of early Teutonic law see Brunner, Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte, Bd. i. [368] See Brunner, Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte, i. p. 254 sqq., and 338-340. [369] “Adversus Gundobadi legem,” c. 4 (Mon. Germ. leges, iii. 504). As to Agobard see ante, Vol. I. p. 232. [370] The matter is suggested here only in its general aspects. The details present every kind of complication (for some purposes to-day a court will apply the law of the litigant’s domicile). The professio (professus sum or professa sum), by which a man or woman formally declares by what law he or she lives, remained common in Italy for five centuries after Pippin’s conquest, and indicates the legal situation there, especially of the Teutonic newcomers. [371] One sees an analogy in the fortunes of the BoËthian translations of the more advanced treatises of Aristotle’s Organon. They fell into disuse (or never came into use) and so were “lost” until they came to light, i.e. into use, in the last part of the twelfth century. [372] See Conrat, Ges. der Quellen, pp. 182-187. [373] See Conrat, Ges. der Quellen, etc., pp. 162-166, 168-182, 192-202, 240-252. [374] See Salvioli, Storia di diritto italiano, 3rd ed., 1899, pp. 84-90; ibid. L’ Istruzione pubblica in Italia nei secoli VIII. IX. X.; Tardif, Hist. des sources du droit franÇais, p. 281 sqq.; Savigny, Geschichte, etc., iv. pp. 1-9; Fitting, “Zur Geschichte der Rechtswissenschaft im Mittelalter,” Zeitschrift fÜr Rges. Sav. Stift., Roman. Abteil., Bd. vi., 1885, pp. 94-186; ibid. Juristische Schriften des frÜheren Mittelalters, 108 sqq. (Halle, 1876). [375] A contemporary notice speaks of the enormous number of judges, lawyers, and notaries in Milan about the year 1000. Salvioli, L’ Istruzione pubblica, etc., p. 78. It is hard to imagine that no legal instruction could be had there. [376] The evidence is gathered in different parts of Savigny’s Geschichte. [377] De parentelae gradibus, see Savigny, Geschichte, Bd. iv. p. 1 sqq. [378] See Savigny, Geschichte, Bd. ii. pp. 134-163 (the text is published in an Appendix to that volume, pp. 321-428); Conrat, Ges. der Quellen, etc., pp. 420-549; Tardif, Hist. des sources du droit franÇais, pp. 213-246. [379] This follows the so-called TÜbingen MSS., the largest immediate source of the Petrus. As well-nigh the entire substance of the Petrus is drawn from the immediately prior compilations (which are still unpublished) its characteristics are really theirs. [380] Apparently the chief magistrate of Valence: “Valentinae civitatis magistro magnifico.” [381] Petri exceptiones, iii. 69. [382] Petrus, i. 66. [383] See Conrat, Ges. der Quellen, etc., 550-582; Tardif, Hist. des sources, etc., pp. 207-213; Fitting, Zeitschrift fÜr Rges. Bd. vi. p. 141. It is edited by Bocking (Berlin, 1829) under the title of Corpus legum sive Brachylogus juris civilis. [384] For instance, Brach. ii. 12, “De juris et facti ignorantia,” is short and clear. It follows mainly Digest xxii. 6. [385] Summa Codicis des Irnerius, ed. by Fitting (Berlin, 1894). See Introduction, and also Fitting in Zeitschrift fÜr Rechtsgeschichte, Bd. xvii. (1896), Romanische Abteilung, pp. 1-96. [386] Cf. Summa Codicis Irnerii, vii. 23, and vii. 31. 1. [387] Summa Codicis Irnerii, i. 14. The corresponding passages in Justinian’s Codification are Dig. i. 3, lex 12 and 38, and Codex vii. 45, lex 13. [388] Summa Codicis Irnerii, vii. 22 and 23. The chief Justinianean sources are Dig. xli. 2, and Cod. xii. 32. [389] See Salvioli, Manuale, etc., pp. 65-68; ibid. L’ Istruzione pubblica in Italia, pp. 72-75; Brunner, Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte, i. p. 387 sqq. [390] Post, Chapter XXXV., I. [391] The Bologna school is commonly called the school of the glossators. Their work was to expound the law of Justinian; and their glosses, or explanatory notes, were the part of their writings which had the most permanent influence. The glosses were originally written between the lines or on the margins of the codices of the Digest, Codex, Novels, and Institutes. [392] Savigny gives examples of Irnerius’s glosses in an appendix to the fourth volume of his Geschichte. Pescatore (Die Glossen des Irnerius, Greifswald, 1888) maintains that Savigny overstates the difference between the interlinear and the marginal glosses of Irnerius. [393] On Placentinus see Savigny, Geschichte, iv. pp. 244-285. [394] Proemium to De var. actionum, given by Savigny, iv. p. 540. [395] This is from the proemium attached to one old edition, and is given in Sav. Ges. iv. p. 245. In an appendix, p. 542, Savigny gives an even more florid proemium to the Summa Codicis from a manuscript. [396] On Azo, see Savigny, Ges. v. pp. 1-44. [397] Quoted by Savigny. On Accursius see Sav. Ges. v. pp. 262-305. [398] On Bartolus see Savigny, Ges. etc. vi. pp. 137-184. [399] Cf. Savigny, Ges. v. pp. 222-261. [400] “Ecclesia vivit lege Romana,” Lex Ribuaria, 58. This was universally recognized, although the individual clericus might remain amenable to the law of his birth. [401] For these matters see primarily the sixteenth book of the Theodosian Code, and book i. chap. 27. Also the suspected Constitutiones Sirmondianae attached to that Code. Justinian’s Codex and Novellae add much. Zorn, in his Kirchenrecht, p. 29 sqq., gives a convenient synopsis of the matter. [402] One observes that the opening chapter of Justinian’s Digest speaks of jurisprudentia as knowledge of divine as well as human matters. [403] Decretum, i. dist. viii. c. i. [404] Decretum, i. dist. ix. c. xi.; see ibid. dist. xiii., opening. [405] Tardif, Sources du droit canonique, p. 175 sqq., has been chiefly followed here. [406] On the above matters see (with the authorities and bibliographies therein given) Maasen, Geschichte der Quellen, etc., der canonischen Rechts (Bd. i., to the middle of the ninth century); Tardif, Sources du droit canonique (Paris, 1887); Zorn, Lehrbuch des Kirchenrechts (Stuttgart, 1888); Gerlach, Lehrbuch des catholischen Kirchenrechts (5th edition, Paderborn, 1890); Hinschius, Decretales pseudo-Isidorianae (Leipzig, 1863); Corpus juris canonici, ed. by Friedberg (Leipzig, 1879-1881). [407] Jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical courts embraced marriage and divorce, wills and inheritance, and, by virtue of their surveillance of usury and vows and oaths, practically the whole relationship between debtor and creditor. [408] Volume ii. of R. W. and A. J. Carlyle’s History of Mediaeval Political Theory in the West (1909) maintains that the statements of papal pretensions which were incorporated in the recognized collections of Decretals were less extreme than those emanating from the papacy under stress of controversy. [409] See Gierke, Political Theories of the Middle Ages, trans. by Maitland (Cambridge, 1900), p. 22 sqq. and notes. I would express my indebtedness to this book for these pages on mediaeval political theories. Dunning’s History of Political Theories is a convenient outline; Carlyle’s History of Mediaeval Political Theory gives the sources carefully. [410] Occasionally studium (knowledge, study, or science) is introduced as a third part or element of the human community or of human life. Thus in the famous statement of Jordanes of OsnabrÜck—the Romans received the Sacerdotium, the Germans the Imperium, the French the Studium. See Gierke, Political Theories, p. 104, note 8. [411] Cf. Gierke, o.c. p. 109, note 16. But compare Carlyle, o.c. vol. ii. part ii. chaps. vii.-xi. [412] Even toward the close of the Middle Ages Marsilius of Padua was almost alone in positing the absolute supremacy of the State, says Gierke. [413] See Gierke, o.c. p. 144, note 131, and compare notes 132, 133, and 183 for attacks upon the plenary power of the pope. [414] Gierke, o.c. pp. 31-32, and p. 139, notes 107 and 108. [415] Dig. i. 4, 1; Gierke, o.c. p. 39 and pp. 146, 147. [416] Gierke, o.c. p. 64. [417] Gierke, o.c. p. 172, note 256. Cf. ante, p. 268. [418] See Gierke, o.c. pp. 73-86, and corresponding notes. [419] Little will be said in these pages of palpable crass heretics like the Cathari, for example. The philosophic ideas of such seem gathered from the flotsam and jetsam of the later antique world; their stock was not of the best, and bore little interesting fruit for later times. Such mediaeval heresies present no continuous evolution like that of the proper scholasticism. Progress in philosophy and theology came through academic personages, who at all events laid claim to orthodoxy. All lines of advance leading on to later phases of philosophic, scientific, and religious thought, lay within the labours of such, some of whom, however, were suspected or even condemned by the Church, like Eriugena, Abaelard, or Roger Bacon. But these men did not stand apart from orthodox academic circles, and were never cast out by the Church. Thought and learning in the Middle Ages were domiciled in monastic, episcopal, or university circles; and these were at least conventionally orthodox. It has been said, to be sure, that the heresy of one generation becomes the orthodoxy of another; but this is true only of tendencies like those of Abaelard, which represent the gradual expansion and clearing up of scholastic processes. For the time they may be condemned, perhaps because of the vain and contentious character of the suspected thinker; but in the end they are recognized as admissible. The Averroists constitute an apparent exception. Yet they were a philosophic and academic sect, whose heresy consisted in an implicit following of Aristotle as interpreted by Averroes. Moreover, they sought to save their orthodoxy by their doctrine of the two kinds of truth, philosophic and theological or dogmatic. It is not clear that much fruitful thought came from their school. The positions of Siger de Brabant, a prominent Averroist and contemporary of Aquinas, are referred to post, Chapter XXXVII. The best account of Averroism is Mandonnet’s Siger de Brabant et l’averroisme latin au XIIIe siÈcle (a second edition, Louvain, is in preparation). See also De Wulf, Hist. of Medieval Philosophy (3rd. ed., Longmans, 1909) p. 379 sqq. with authorities cited. [420] Called also his Summa philosophica, to distinguish it from his Summa theologiae. [421] Summa theologiae, i. i., quaestio i. art. 1-8. [422] Post, Chapter XXXVI., I. [423] Even the Averroists were more mediaeval than Greek, inasmuch as they professed to follow Aristotle implicitly. Cf. post, Chapter XXXVII., at the end. [424] A touch of “salvation,” or salvation’s need, is on Plato when his “philosophy” becomes a consideration of death (e??t? ?a??t??) and a process of growing as like to God (????s?? ?e?) as man can. Phaedo, 80 E, and Theaetetus, 176 A. [425] Historia calamitatum, cap. 9 and 10. Cf. post, p. 303. [426] Post, Chapter XLI. [427] Ante, p. 298. I cannot avoid referring to Abaelard several times before considering the man and his work more specifically, and in the proper place; post, Chapter XXXVI. I. [428] Introductio ad theologiam, lib. ii. (Migne 178, col. 1039). [429] See Denifle, “Die Sentenzen Abaelard’s und die Bearbeitungen seiner Theologia,” Archiv fÜr Literatur und Kirchengeschichte, i. p. 402 sqq. and p. 584 sqq. Also Picavet, “AbÉlard et Alexander de Hales, crÉateurs de la mÉthode scholastique,” Bib. de l’École des hautes Études, sciences religieuses, t. vii. p. 221 sqq. [430] Two extracts, one from the Sentences and one from the Summa, touching the same matter, will illustrate the stage in the scholastic process reached by Peter Lombard, about the year 1150, and that attained by Thomas Aquinas a hundred years later. The Lombard’s Four Books of Sentences are divided into Distinctiones, with sub-titles to the latter. Distinctio xlvi. of the first Book bears the general title: “The opinion (sententia) declaring that the will of God which is himself, cannot be frustrated, seems to be opposed by some opinions.” The first subdivision of the text begins: “Here the question rises. For it is said by the authorities above adduced [the preceding Distinctio had discussed “The will of God which is His essence, one and eternal”] that the will of God, which is himself, and is called His good pleasure (beneplacitum) cannot be frustrated, because by that will fecit quaecumque voluit in caelo et in terra, which—witness the Apostle—nihil resistit. [I leave the Scriptural quotations in Latin, so as to mark them.] It is queried, therefore, how one should understand what the Apostle says concerning the Lord, 1 Tim. 2: Qui vult omnes homines salvos fieri. For since all are not saved, but many are damned, that which God wills to take place, seems not to take place (become, fieri), the human will obstructing the will of God. The Lord also in the Gospel reproaching the wicked city, Matt, xxiii., says: Quoties volui congregare filios tuos, sicut gallina congregat pullos suos sub alis, et noluisti. Thus it might seem from these, that the will of God may be overcome by the will of men, and, resisted by the unwillingness of the weakest, the Most Strong may prove unable to do what He willed. Where then is that omnipotence by which in coelo et terra, according to the Prophet, omnia quaecumque voluit fecit? And how does nothing withstand His will, if He wished to gather the children of Jerusalem, and did not? For these sayings seem indeed to oppose what has been stated.” The second paragraph proceeds: “But let us see the solution, and first hear how what the Lord said should be understood. For it was not intended to mean (as Augustine says, Enchiridion, c. 97, solving this question) that the Lord wished to gather the children of Jerusalem, and did not do what He willed because she would not; but rather she did not wish her children to be gathered by Him, yet in spite of her unwillingness (qua tamen nolente) He gathered all He willed of her children.... And the sense is: As many as I have gathered by my will, always effective, I have gathered, thou being unwilling. Hence it is evident that these words of the Lord are not opposed to the authorities referred to.” (Paragraph 3) “Now it remains to see how the aforesaid words do not contradict what the Apostle said of the Lord: Vult omnes homines salvos fieri. Because of these words many have wandered from the truth, saying that God willed many things which did not come to pass. But the saying is not thus to be understood, as if God willed any to be saved, and they were not. For who can be so impiously foolish as to say that God cannot change the evil wills of men to good when and where He will? Surely what is said in Psalm 113, Quaecumque voluit fecit, is not true, if He willed anything and did not accomplish it. Or,—(and this is still more shameful) for that reason He did not do it, because what the Omnipotent willed to come to pass, the will of man obstructed. Hence when we read in Holy Scripture velit omnes homines salvos fieri, we should not detract from the will of omnipotent God, but understand the text to mean that no man is saved except whom He wills to be saved: not that there is no man whom He does not will to be saved, but that no man may be saved except whom He wills should be saved.... Thus also is to be understood the text from John i.: Illuminat omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum; not as if there is no man who is not lighted, but that none is lighted save from Him....” The next and fourth paragraph takes up the problem whether evil, that is sin, takes place by the will of God, or He unwilling (eo nolente). “As to this, divers men thinking diversely have been found in contradiction. For some say that God wills evils to be or become (esse vel fieri) yet does not will evils. But others say that He neither wills evils to be nor to become. Yet these and those agree in declaring that God does not will evils. Yet each with arguments as well as authorities strives to make good his assertion.” We will not follow the Lombard through this thorny problem. He cuts his way with passages from his chief patristic authority, Augustine, and in the end concludes: “Leaving this and other like foolish opinions, and favouring the sounder view, which is more fully sanctioned by the testimonies of the Saints, we may say that God neither wills evils to become, nor wills that they should not become, nor yet is He unwilling (nolle) that they should become. All that He wills to become, becomes, and all that He wills not to become does not become. Yet many things become which He does not will to become, as every evil.” Thus the Lombard. Now let us see how Thomas, in his Summa theologiae, Pars Prima, Quaestio xix. Articulus ix. expounds the point: utrum voluntas Dei sit malorum. “As to the ninth articulus thus one proceeds. (1) It seems [Videtur, formula for stating the initial argument which will not be approved] that the will of God is [the cause] of evils. For God wills every good that becomes (i.e. comes into existence). But it is good that evils should come; for Augustine says in the Enchiridion: ‘Although those things which are evils, in so far as they are evils, are not goods; yet it is good (bonum) that there should be not only goods (bona) but evils.’ Therefore God wills evils.” “(2) Moreover [Praeterea, Thomas’s regular formula for introducing the succeeding arguments, which he will not approve] Dionysius says, iv. cap. de divinis nominibus: ‘There will be evil making for the perfection of the whole.’ And Augustine says in the Enchiridion: ‘Out of all (things) the admirable beauty of the universe arises; wherein even that which is called evil, well ordered and set in its place, commends the good more highly; since the good pleases more, and is the more praiseworthy, when compared with evil.’ But God wills everything that pertains to the perfection and grace of the universe; since this is what God chiefly wills in His creation. Therefore God wills evils.” “(3) Moreover, the occurrence and non-occurrence of evils (mala fieri, et non fieri) are contradictory opposites. But God does not will evils not to occur; because since some evils do occur, the will of God would not be fulfilled. Therefore God wills evils to occur.” “Sed contra est [Thomas’s formula for stating the opinion which he will approve] what Augustine says in his book of Eighty-three Questions: ‘No wise man is the author of man’s deterioration; yet God is more excellent than any wise man; much less then, is God the author of any one’s deterioration. But He is said to be the author when He is spoken of as willing anything. Therefore man becomes worse, God not willing it. But with every evil, something becomes worse. Therefore God does not will evils.’” “Respondeo dicendum quod [Thomas’s formula for commencing his elucidation] since the reason (or ground or cause, ratio) of the good is likewise the reason of the desirable (as discussed previously), evil is opposed to good: it is impossible that any evil, as evil, should be desired, either by the natural appetite or the animal, or the intellectual, which is will. But some evil may be desired per accidens, in so far as it conduces to some good. And this is apparent in any appetite. For the natural impulse (agens naturale) does not aim at privation or destruction (corruptio); but at form, to which the privation of another form may be joined (i.e. needed, conjungitur); and at the generation of one, which is the destruction of another. Thus a lion, killing a stag, aims at food, to which is joined the killing of an animal. Likewise the fornicator aims at enjoyment, to which is joined the deformity of guilt. “Thus evil which is joined to some good, is privation of another good. Never, therefore, is evil desired, not even per accidens, unless the good to which the evil is joined appears greater than the good which is annulled through the evil. But God wills no good more than His goodness; yet He wills some one good more than some other good. Hence the evil of guilt, which destroys relationship to divine good (quod privat ordinem ad bonum divinum), God in no way wills. But the evil of natural defect, or the evil of penalty, He wills in willing some good to which such evil is joined; as, in willing righteousness He wills penalty; and in willing that the order of nature be preserved, He wills certain natural corruptions. “Ad primum ergo dicendum [Thomas’s formula for commencing his reply to the first false argument] that certain ones have said that although God does not will evils, He wills evils to be or become: because, although evils are not goods, yet it is good that evils should be or become. They said this for the reason that those things which are evil in themselves, are ordained for some good; and they deemed this ordainment involved in saying mala esse vel fieri. But that is not said rightly. Because evil is not ordained for good per se but per accidens. For it is beyond the sinner’s intent, that good should come of it; just as it was beyond the intent of the tyrants that from their persecutions the patience of the martyrs should shine forth. And therefore it cannot be said that such ordainment for good is involved in saying that it is good for evil to be or become: because nothing is adjudged according to what pertains to it per accidens but according to what pertains to it per se.” “Ad secundum dicendum that evil is not wrought for the perfection or beauty of the whole except per accidens, as has been shown. Hence this which Dionysius says that evil makes for the perfection of the whole may lead to an illogical conclusion.” “Ad tertium dicendum that although the occurrence and non-occurrence of evils are opposed as contradictories; yet to will the occurrence and to will the non-occurrence of evils, are not opposed as contradictories, since both one and the other may be affirmative. God therefore neither wills the occurrence nor the non-occurrence of evils; but wills to permit their occurrence. And this is good.” [431] Ante, Chapter XII. [432] Ante, pp. 289 sqq. [433] The Speculum majus of Vincent of Beauvais will afford the principal example of the resulting hybrid arrangement. [434] Ludwig Baur, Dominicus Gundissalinus, De divisione philosophiae (Baeumker’s BeitrÄge, MÜnster, 1903), p. 193 sqq., to which I am indebted for what I have to say in the next few pages. [435] Migne, Pat. Lat. 64, col. 10 sqq. [436] These works were written near the middle of the twelfth century. Gundissalinus was Archdeacon of Segovia and drew upon Arab writings. [437] See L. Baur, Gundissalinus, etc., p. 376 sqq. [438] The treatise is not printed. Its captions are given by L. Baur in his Gundissalinus, pp. 368-375, from which I have borrowed what I give of them. [439] Liber de praedicabilibus (tome 1 of Albertus’s works), which in scholastic logic means the five “universals,” genus, species, difference, property, accident, (also called the quinque voces) discussed in Porphyry’s Introduction to the Categories. The Categories themselves are called praedicamenta. [440] The above gives the arguments of chapters i. and ii. of the work. One notices that Albertus in this exposition of the subject of Porphyry’s treatise, is using the method which Thomas brings to syllogistic perfection in his Summa. [441] It was printed, more than once, in the late fifteenth century; the most readable edition is that printed at Douai in 1624, in four huge folios. [442] Boundless as the work appears, neither in mental powers, nor learning, nor in massiveness of achievement, is its author to be compared with Albertus Magnus. The De universo of Rabanus Maurus, Migne 111, col. 9-612, is in its arrangement and method a forerunner of Vincent’s Speculum. Later predecessors were the English Franciscan Bartolomaeus, whose encyclopaedic De proprietatibus rerum was written a little before the middle of the twelfth century (see Felder, Studien in Franciscanerorder, etc., pp. 251-253); and Lambertus Audomarensis (St. Omer) with his Liber floridus, a general digest of knowledge, historical, ecclesiastical, and natural, taken from many writers, an account of which is given in Migne 163, col. 1004 sqq. [443] Here, of course, we have the hands of Esau, but the voice of Augustine and Orosius! [444] The above is from cap. 9 of liber i. of the Speculum doctrinale. [445] Migne, Pat. Lat. 34, col. 246-485. [446] Ante, p. 290. [447] The three theological virtues are fides, spes, and caritas. They are called thus because Deum habent pro objecto; and because they are poured (infunduntur) into us by God alone. They are distinguished from the moral and intellectual virtues because their object surpasses our reason, while the object of the moral and intellectual virtues can be comprehended by human reason (Summa, Pars prima secundae, Quaestio lxii., Art. 1-4). [448] ???? et? ????? ??????? p???t???, Arist. Nich. Ethics, vi. 4. [449] One notes that these two, like many other of the vices enumerated, are vices in that they are extremes, in the Aristotelian sense. [450] We are at Quaestio clxxi. of Secunda secundae. [451] The order which Thomas would have followed in the unfinished conclusion of his Summa theologiae, may be inferred from the order of the last half of Book IV. of his Contra Gentiles, or indeed from the last part of the fourth Book of the Lombard’s Sentences. [452] Ante, Chapter XII. [453] There were, of course, attempts at translation, notably those of Notker the German (see ante, Vol. I., p. 308) and Alfred’s translation of BoËthius’s De consolatione. But such were made only of the popular parts of Scripture (e.g. the Psalms) or of very elementary profane treatises. To what extent Notker’s translations were used, is hard to say. But at all events any one really seeking learning, studied and worked and thought in the medium of Latin; for the bulk of the patristic writings never were translated; and when the works of Aristotle had at last reached the Middle Ages in the Latin tongue, they were studied in that tongue. Because of the crudeness of the vernacular tongues, the Latin classics were even more untranslatable in the tenth or eleventh century than now. One may add, that it was fortunate for the progress of mediaeval learning that Latin was the one language used by all scholars in all countries. This facilitated the diffusion of knowledge. How slow and painful would have been that diffusion if the different vernacular tongues had been used in their respective countries, for serious writing. [454] Ante, Chapter XII., I. [455] Eruditio didascalica, i. cap. 12 (Migne, Pat. Lat. 176, col. 750). [456] Cf. Abelson, The Seven Liberal Arts (New York, 1906). [457] I am speaking generally, that is to say, omitting for the present the aberrant or special or intrusive tendencies found in a man like Roger Bacon, for example. They were of importance for what was to come thereafter; but are not broadly representative of the Middle Ages. [458] St. Anselm, Epist. lib. iii. 41, ad Fulconem (Migne, Pat. Lat. 158, col. 1192). So Roscellin showed in his own case how problems primarily logical could pass over to metaphysics or theology. Likewise, although on the other side of the controversy, one, Odo of Tournai, a good contemporary realist, found realism an efficient aid in explaining the transmission of original sin; since for him all men formed but one substance, which was infected once for all by the sin of the first parents. Cf. HaurÉau, Hist. de la philosophie scholastique, i. pp. 297-308; De Wulf, Hist. of Medieval Philosophy, p. 156, 3rd ed. [459] Abaelard, Hist. calamitatum, chap. 2. [460] Ante, Chapter XXV. [461] Ante, Chapter XII., I. [462] Abaelard’s Dialectica was published by Cousin, Ouvrages inÉdits d’AbÉlard (Paris, 1836). For a thorough exposition of Abaelard’s logic see Prantl, Ges. der Logik, ii. p. 160 sqq. [463] I.e. as positive, comparative, and superlative. [464] Cousin, Ouvr. inÉdits, p. 175. Cf. Aristotle’s Categories, ii. v. 20. The opening of Pars tertia of Abaelard’s Dialectica (in Cousin’s edition, p. 324 sqq.) affords an interesting example of this logical analysis and reconstruction of statement, which seems to originate in sheer grammar, and then advance beyond it. [465] Cousin, o.c. pp. 190, 192. [466] Cousin, o.c. p. 331. [467] Prantl’s Geschichte der Logik, vol. ii., contains an exhaustive discussion of the various phases of this controversy: its language is little less difficult than that of the twelfth-century word-twisters. [468] Cousin, o.c. pp. 434, 435. [469] Theologia Christiana, iv. (Migne 178, col. 1284). [470] Migne, Pat. Lat. 178, col. 1641. [471] Ante, p. 292. [472] Scito te ipsum, cap. 13 (Migne 178, col. 653). [473] Scito te ipsum, cap. 19 (Migne 178, col. 664). [474] Migne 178, col. 1615. [475] Ante, pp. 304 sqq. [476] This has been published by StÖlzle: Abaelards 1121 zu Soissons verurteilter Tractatus de Unitate et Trinitate divina (1891). [477] Migne 178, col. 1123-1330; Cousin and Jourdain, P. Abaelardi opera, ii. pp. 357-566 (1859). [478] Migne 178, col. 979-1114; Cousin and Jourdain, o.c. pp. 1-149. [479] Ante, Chapter XXXV., I. [480] Bernard, Ep. 338 (Migne 182, col. 542). [481] Whose sacramental theory of the Creation has already been given at length, ante, Chapter XXVIII. For the incidents of Hugo’s life see the same chapter. Bibliography, note to page 61. See also Ostler, “Die Psychologie des Hugo von St. Viktor” (Baeumker’s BeitrÄge, MÜnster, 1906). [482] De script. cap. 2 (Migne 175, col. 11). [483] De script. cap. 2 (Migne 175, col. 10). [484] Summa sententiarum (Migne 176, col. 42-174); also under title of Tractatus theologicus, wrongly ascribed to Hildebert of Lavardin, in Migne 171, col. 1067-1150. [485] Migne 176, col. 740-838. [486] I think of no previous work so closely resembling the Erud. didas. as the Institutiones divinarum et saecularum lectionum of Cassiodorus. [487] Erud. did. i. 2. [488] Here one sees the source of much that we quoted from Vincent de Beauvais, ante, Chapter XXXV., 1. [489] Lib. iii. cap. 13 sqq. [490] Erud. did. iii. cap. 20. Cf. ante, p. 63. [491] Ante, Chapter XXVIII. [492] Migne, Pat. Lat. 175, col. 115 sqq. [493] Migne, Pat. Lat. 175, col. 923 sqq. [494] The following consideration of the mysticism of Christian theologians is not intended to include other forms of “mysticism” (Pantheistic, poetical, pathological, neurotic, intellectual, and sensuous) within or without the Christian pale. [495] Ante, p. 42 sqq. [496] Ante, Chapter XXVIII. [497] Migne, Pat. Lat. 176, col. 617-680. [498] De arca Noe morali, i. cap. 2 (Migne 176, col. 621). [499] Migne 176, col. 681-703. With Hugo’s pupil, Richard of St. Victor, this constant allegory, especially the constant allegorical use of Scripture names, becomes pedantic, precieux, impossible. See e.g. his Benjamin major in Migne 196, col. 64-202. [500] De arrha animae, Migne 176, col. 951-970. [501] Migne 182, col. 727-808. A translation is announced by George Lewis in the Oxford Library of Translations. [502] De consid. lib. ii. cap. 2. [503] Migne 183, col. 789 sqq. Chapter XVII., ante, is devoted to Bernard, and his letters and sermons. [504] Ed. by Willner (Baeumker’s BeitrÄge, MÜnster, 1903). [505] See ante, Chapter XXX., 1. [506] Bernardus Silvestris, De mundi universitate, i. 2 (ed. by Barach and Wrobel; InnsbrÜck, 1876). As to Bernard Silvestris, see Clerval, Écoles de Chartres au moyen Âge, p. 259 sqq. and passim; also HaurÉau (who confuses him with Bernard of Chartres), Hist. de la phil. scholastique, ii. 407 sqq. [507] See HaurÉau, Hist. etc. ii. 447-472; R. L. Poole, Illustrations of Mediaeval Thought, chap. vi. His Liber de sex principiis is printed in Migne 188, col. 1257-1270. [508] Werner, “Die Kosmologie und Naturlehre des scholastischen Mittelalters, mit specialler Beziehung auf Wilhelm von Conches,” Sitzungsb. K. Akad., philos. Klasse, 1873, Bd. lxxv.; HaurÉau, Hist. etc. i. 431-446; ibid. SingularitÉs littÉraires, etc. [509] Ante, Vol. I., p. 251. [510] Ante, Chapter XXX., I. [511] Under another title, Moralis philosophia de honesto et utile, it has been ascribed to Hildebert of Lavardin, Migne 171, col. 1007-1056. [512] For examples of John’s Latin, see ante, p. 173. [513] See e.g. his treatment of logic in Lib. III. and IV. of the Metalogicus (Migne 199). [514] Polycraticus, ii. 19-21 sqq. There is now a critical edition of this work by C. C. J. Webb (Joannis Saresberiensis Policratici libri VIII.; Clarendon Press, 1910). [515] Polycraticus, lib. vii., is devoted to a history of antique philosophy. [516] Polycraticus, vii. cap. 10. [517] Polycrat. vii. cap. 11. [518] Migne 199, col. 955. [519] Ante, Chapter XXIX., 11. and XXXII., 1. [520] The works of Alanus are collected in Migne, Pat. Lat. 210. What follows in the text is much indebted to M. Baumgartner, “Die Philosophie des Alanus de Insulis” (Baeumker’s BeitrÄge, MÜnster, 1896). [521] All this is thoroughly done by Baumgartner, o.c. [522] See Baumgartner, p. 76 sqq. and citations. [523] What I have felt obliged to say upon the organization of mediaeval Universities, I have largely drawn from Rashdall’s Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1895). The subject is too large and complex for independent investigation, except of the most lengthy and thorough character. Extracts from illustrative mediaeval documents, with considerable information touching mediaeval Universities, are brought together by Arthur O. Norton in his Mediaeval Universities (Readings in the History of Education, Harvard University, 1909). For the Paris University, the most important source is the Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis, ed. by Denifle and Chatelain (1889-1891). See also Ch. Thurot, L’Organisation de l’enseignement dans l’UniversitÉ de Paris (Paris, 1850), and Denifle, Die UniversitÄten des Mittelalters (Berlin, 1885). [524] What has been said applies to the Bologna Law University. That had been preceded by a school of Arts, and later there grew up a flourishing school of Medicine, where surgery was also taught. These schools became affiliated Universities, but never equalled the Law University in importance. [525] The Masters who taught were called Regentes. [526] Both civil and canon law were studied till 1219, when a Bull of Honorius III. forbade the study of the former at Paris. [527] See post, p. 399. [528] Mr. Rashdall’s. [529] Rashdall, o.c. ii. p. 341. [530] Oxford lay in the diocese of Lincoln. [531] For the course of medicine and the list of books studied or lectured on, especially at Montpellier, from which we have the most complete list, see Rashdall, ii. p. 118 sqq. and ibid. p. 780. In Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, vol. xx., 1909, C. H. Haskins publishes An unpublished List of Text-books, belonging to the close of the twelfth century, when classical studies had not as yet been overshadowed by Dialectic. See also, generally, Paetow, The Arts Course at Medieval Universities (Univ. of Illinois, 1910). [532] See generally, Carra de Vaux, Avicenne (Paris, 1900); also Gazali, by the same author. [533] Whoever will read the two monographs of the Baron Carra de Vaux, Avicenne and Gazali, will be struck by the closely analogous courses of Moslem and Christian thought; each showing the parallel phases of scholastic rationalism (reliant upon reason and rational authority) and scholastic theological piety, or mysticism (reliant upon the authority of Revelation and sceptical as to the validity of human reason). [534] See for this matter Mandonnet, O.P., Aristote et la mouvement intellectuel du moyen Âge, contained in his Siger de Brabant, and printed separately; De Wulf, History of Medieval Philosophy, 3rd ed., pp. 243-253 and authorities; C. Marchesi, L’ Etica Nicomachea nella tradizione medievale (Messina, 1904). [535] Ante, Chapter V. [536] Constitutiones des Prediger-Ordens vom Jahre 1228, Prologus; H. Denifle, Archiv fÜr Litt. und Kirchenges. des Mittelalters, Bd i. (1885), p. 194. [537] See Felder, Wissenschaftlichen Studien im Franciskanerorden, p. 24 (Freiburg im Breisgau, 1904); a valuable work. [538] See Felder, o.c. p. 29. [539] Constitutiones, etc., cap. 28-31. [540] Cf. Felder, o.c. p. 107 sqq. [541] Cf. Felder, o.c. p. 177 sqq. [542] From Denifle, UniversitÄten des Mittelalters, i. 99, note 192. [543] See generally, Mandonnet, Siger de Brabant et l’averroisme latin au moyen Âge (Fribourg, Switzerland, 1899); Baeumker (BeitrÄge, 1898), Die Impossibilia des Siger von Brabant; De Wulf, Hist. of Medieval Philosophy, 3rd ed., p. 379 sqq. (Longmans, 1909). [544] Albert was born probably in 1193, and died in 1280; Bacon was born some twenty years later, and died about 1292. Bonaventura was born in 1221, and Thomas in 1225 or 1227; they both died in 1274. [545] So Raphael represents them in his “School of Athens.” [546] Bonaventura, Sermo IV., Quaracchi edition, tome v. p. 572 (cited by De Wulf, Hist. etc. p. 304, note). With all their Augustinian-Platonism, the Franciscans made a good second to the Dominicans in the study of Aristotle, as is proved by the great number of commentaries upon his works by members of the former Order. See Felder, o.c. p. 479. [547] Epist. de tribus quaestionibus, § 12. [548] Tome v. (Quaracchi ed.) pp. 319-325. [549] This is from § 26, the last in the work. Bonaventura has already said (§ 7): “Omnes istae cognitiones ad cognitionem Sacrae Scripturae ordinantur, in ea clauduntur et in illa perficiuntur, et mediante illa ad aeternam illuminationem ordinantur.” (“All kinds of knowledge are ordained for the knowledge of Holy Scripture, are in it enclosed and thereby are perfected; and through its mediation are ordered for eternal illumination.”) [550] It is contained in tomes i.-iv. of the Quaracchi edition. [551] T. v. pp. 201-291. [552] Breviloquium, Prologus. [553] One feels the reality of Bonaventura’s distinctions here between theology and philosophy. They are enunciations of his religious sense, and possess a stronger validity than any elaborate attempt to distinguish by argument between the two. Thomas distinguishes them with excellent reasoning. It lacks convincingness perhaps from the fact that Thomas’s theology is so largely philosophy, as Roger Bacon said. [554] As this chapter opens a pars, it begins with a recapitulation of what has preceded and a summary of what is to come. The specific topic of the chapter commences here. [555] I.e. the desiderative, rational, and irascible elements in man. [556] Bonaventura closely follows Hugo of St. Victor’s De sacramentis, see ante, Chap. XXVIII., especially p. 72. [557] Opera, t. v. pp. 295-313. [558] Vir desideriorum, Dan. ix. 23 (Vulgate). [559] The Breviloquium and Itinerarium are conveniently edited by Hefele in a little volume (TÜbingen, 1861). [560] Albertus, Metaphysicorum libri XIII., lib. i. tract. 1, cap. 4. [561] Physic. lib. viii. tract. 1, cap. 14. [562] Poster. Analyt. lib. i. tract. 1, cap. 1. This and the previous citation are from Mandonnet’s Siger de Brabant. [563] Ethic. lib. vi. tract. 2, cap. 25. [564] Carus, Ges. der Zoologie, p. 231. [565] Ernst Meyer, Ges. der Botanik, Bd. iv. p. 77. [566] The works of Albertus were edited by the Dominican Jammy in twenty-one volumes (Lyons, 1651); they are reprinted by Borgnet (Paris, 1890 et seq.). My references to volumes follow Jammy’s edition. [567] See ante, pp. 314 sqq. [568] Prantl, Ges. der Logik, iii. 89 sqq., calls him an “unklarer Kopf,” incapable of consistent thinking. [569] This is the view of A. Schneider, Die Psychologie Alberts des Grossen (Baeumker’s BeitrÄge, MÜnster, 1903). The author presents analytically the disparate elements—Aristotelian, Neo-Platonic, and theological-Augustinian, which are found in Albert’s writings. [570] See Endriss, Albertus Magnus als Interpret der Aristotelischen Metaphysik (Munich, 1886). [571] The above is mainly drawn from E. Meyer’s Ges. der Botanik, Bd. iv. pp. 38-78. [572] Ante, Volume I. p. 76. [573] See Carus, Geschichte der Zoologie, pp. 211-239. [574] Sum. theol. pars prima, tract. I, quaest. ii. [575] Ante, Chapter XXXV., I. [576] Tome xx. p. 41a. [577] The Vita of Thomas by Guilielmus de Thoco, Acta sanctorum, Martius, tome i. folio 657 sqq. (March 7), is wretchedly confused. [578] Vita, cap. iii. § 15. [579] One may see the truth of this by comparing the treatment of a matter in Albert’s Summa theologiae with the corresponding sections in Thomas. For example, compare Albert’s Summa theol. prima, Tract. vii. Quaest. xxx.-xxxiii., on generatio, processio, missio of the divine persons, with Thomas, Sum. theol. prima, Quaest. xxvii. and xliii. [580] John of Damascus, an important Greek theologian of the eighth century, often cited by Thomas. [581] Quaestiones are the larger divisions of the argument. [582] Pars prima, Qu. xvi. Art. 3. [583] Pars prima, Qu. lxxxii. Art. 3. [584] Prima sec. Qu. iv. Art. 2. [585] Prima sec. Qu. iv. Art. 3. [586] Sum. Phil. contra Gentiles, iii. 37. [587] One cannot avoid applying the masculine pronouns to God, and to the angels also. But, of course, this is a mere convenience of speech. Thomas ascribes no sex either to God or the angels. [588] It will, of course, be borne in mind, that Thomas’s use of videre and visio to express man’s perception of God’s essential nature, does not mean a physical but an intellectual seeing. [589] Given ante, pp. 290 sqq. [590] Secundum quod est in actu, i.e. in realized actuality as distinguished from potentiality (Aristotelian conceptions). [591] The foregoing is taken from the thirteen articuli into which Quaestio xii. is divided. [592] Pars prima, Quaestio xxxii. Art. 1. [593] Quaestiones disputatae: De Veritate, x. 6. Citing Rom. i. 20. [594] Prooemium to Qu. xiv. Pars prima. [595] Qu. xiv. Art. 2—a point which Thomas reasons out in interesting scholastic Aristotelian fashion, but in language too technical to translate. [596] Pars prima, Qu. xiv. Art. 11. [597] Pars prima, Qu. xv. Art. 1-3. [598] Pars prima, Qu. xxvi. Art. 2. [599] Pars prima, Qu. xliv. Art. 3. [600] Pars prima, Qu. xlv. Art. 1. [601] Summa theol. pars prima, Qu. l. As heretofore, I follow the exposition of the Summa theologiae. But Thomas began a large and almost historical treatment of angels in his unfinished Tract. de substantiis separatis, seu de Angelorum natura (unfinished, in Opuscula theol.). He has another and important tractatus, De cognitione Angelorum, Quaestiones disput. de veritate, viii. [602] Pars prima, Qu. l. Art. 1. Thomas goes on to contradict Aristotle, in holding quod nullum ens esset nisi corpus. [603] All that has been given concerning the knowledge of angels relates to what they know through their own natures as created. Further enlightenment (as with men) comes through grace as soon as they become beati through turning to good. Pars prima, Qu. lxii. Art. 1 sqq. [604] Ante, Chapter XXXV., 1. [605] A burning controversy between the Averroists and the orthodox schoolmen. [606] This is the substance of Qu. lxxxix. Art. 1. [607] Pars prima, Qu. xix. Art. 1. [608] Pars prima, Qu. lxxxii. and lxxxiii. [609] Pars prima, Qu. xx. 1. [610] Summa theol., Pars secunda secundae, Qu. xvii. Art 8. [611] Pars secunda secundae, Qu. xxiv. Art. 8. [612] Pars secunda secundae, Qu. xxvi. Art. 4 and 5. [613] Pars prima secundae, Qu. cix. sqq. [614] Another reading is delectatio, i.e. enjoyment. [615] Bacon’s Opus majus was edited in incomplete form by Jebb in 1733, and reprinted in 1750 at Venice. This edition is superseded by that of Bridges, in two volumes, published with the Moralis philosophia and Multiplicatio specierum by the Clarendon Press in 1897. The text of this edition had many errors, which have been corrected by a third volume published in 1900 by Williams and Norgate, who are now the publishers of the three volumes. In 1859 Brewer edited the Opus tertium, the Opus minus, and Compendium philosophiae for the Master of the Rolls Series. “An unpublished Fragment of a work by Roger Bacon” was discovered by F. A. Gasquet in the Vatican Library, and published in the English Historical Review for July 1897. It appears to be a letter to Clement IV., written in 1267. In 1861 appeared the excellent monograph by Émile Charles, entitled Roger Bacon, sa vie, ses ouvrages, ses doctrines. To this one still must turn for extracts from the Compendium theologiae, and the Communia naturalium. The last-named work, with the Compendium philosophiae and the Multiplicatio specierum (which appears not to be an intrinsic part of the Opus majus), may have been composed as parts of what was to be the writer’s Opus principale. Bacon’s Greek Grammar has been edited by Nolan and Hirsch (Cambridge, 1902). [616] Opus tertium, chap. xxv. p. 91 (Brewer’s text). [617] Opus tertium, chap. xvii. (pp. 58-59, Brewer’s ed.). [618] Brewer, R. Bacon, Opera inedita, p. 1. [619] Opus tertium, pp. 7 and 8. [620] In Opus tertium, chap. iii. (Brewer, p. 15), Bacon plainly tells the pope the difficulties in which he had been placed by this injunction of secrecy: “The first cause of delay came through those who are over me. Since you have written nothing to them in my excuse, and I could not reveal to them your secret, they insisted with unspeakable violence that I should obey their will; but I refused, because of the bond of your mandate, which bound me to your work, notwithstanding any order from my prelates. And, of a surety, as I was not excused by you, I met with obstacles too great and many to enumerate.... And another obstacle, enough to defeat the whole business, was the lack of funds.” [621] These are, of course, the Opus majus, the Opus minus, and the Opus tertium; also the Vatican Fragment, the position of which is not quite clear; but it is part of the writings of this year, and constitutes apparently the introductory letter to Clement. [622] The authority for this is the Chronica XXIV., Generalium Ordinis Minorum; see Bridges, vol. iii. p. 158. [623] See Op. tertium, p. 26 sqq. (Brewer). [624] Opus majus, pars ii. end of chap. v. and beginning of chap. vi. (Bridges, iii. p. 49); see Op. tertium (Brewer), p. 81. [625] Op. maj. pars ii. chap. xv. (Bridges, iii. p. 71). [626] Op. tertium, p. 39. [627] Op. maj. pars ii. (Bridges, iii. pp. 69-70). Cf. ante, p. 180. [628] The reference seems to be to the Ethics and Politics. [629] Compendium studii, p. 424 (Brewer). [630] Op. tertium, p. 14. [631] Op. tertium, p. 30. [632] Compendium studii phil., p. 429 (Brewer). [633] Ibid. p. 398—written in 1271. [634] I follow the paging of Bridges, vol. iii. These four causes of error are also given in Opus tertium, p. 69, Compendium studii, p. 414 (Brewer), and the Gasquet Fragment, p. 504. [635] Op. maj. pp. 2 and 3. [636] P. 322 sqq. (Brewer). [637] Opus tertium, p. 102. [638] Ante, p. 128. [639] As, e.g. where he says that it would have been better for the Latins “that the wisdom of Aristotle should not have been translated, than to have been translated with such perverseness and obscurity.” Compend. studii, p. 469, (Brewer). [640] See Opus majus, pars iii. [641] Opus majus, Bridges, vol. i. p. 106. [642] Commonly called “mathematica.” [643] Opus majus (Bridges, i. p. 253). Bacon goes into this matter elaborately. [644] Cf. S. Vogl, Die Physik Roger Bacos (Erlangen, 1906). Gives Bacon’s sources. [645] Opus minus, pp. 367-371. [646] Opus majus, pars v. dist. iii. (Bridges, ii. p. 159 sqq.). [647] A contemporary of Bacon named Witelo composed a Perspectiva about 1270, following an Arab source; and a few years later a Dominican, Theodoric of Freiburg, was devoted to optics, and wrote on light, colour, and the rainbow. Baeumker, “Witelo, ein Philosoph und Naturforscher des XIII. Jahrh.” (BeitrÄge, etc., MÜnster, 1908); Krebs, “Meister Dietrich, sein Leben, etc.” (Baeumker’s BeitrÄge, 1906). [648] With Bacon, experientia does not always mean observation; and may mean either experience or experiment. [649] See Charles, Roger Bacon, pp. 17-18. [650] Ante, pp. 313-315. Duns Scotus puts clearly the double aspect of logic, which Albertus Magnus approached: “It should be understood that logic is to be considered in two ways. First, in so far as it is docens (instructs, holds its own school): and from its own necessary and proper principles proceeds to necessary conclusions, and is therefore a science. Secondly, in so far as we use it, by applying it to those matters in which it is used: and then it is not a science” (Super universalia Porphyrii, Quaestrio i., Duns Scotus, Opera, t. i. p. 51). [651] The two aspects of the experimental science appear in the following statement from the Gasquet Fragment: “The antepenultima science is called experimental; and is the mistress of those which precede it; for it excels the others in three chief prerogatives. One is that all the sciences except this either use arguments alone to prove their conclusions, like the purely speculative sciences, or possess general and imperfect experiences. But only the perfect experience (experientia perfecta, i.e. the scientific experiment or observation), sets the mind at rest in the light of truth; which is certain and is proved in that part [of my work]. Wherefore it was necessary that there should be one science which should certify for us, all the magnificent truths of the other sciences, through the truth of experience, and this is that whereof I say that it is called scientia experimentalis of its own right from the truth of experience (per autonomasiam ab experienciae veritate); and I show by the illustration of the rainbow and other things, how this prerogative is reserved to that science. “The second prerogative is the dignity which relates to those chief truths which, although they are to be formulated (nominandae) in the terms (vocabulis) of the other sciences, yet the other sciences cannot furnish (procurare) them; and of this character are the prolongation of life through remedies to counteract the lack of a hygienic regimen from infancy, or constitutional debility inherited from parents who have not followed such a regimen. I shall show how it is possible thus to prolong life to the term set by God. But men, through neglecting the rules of health, pass quickly to old age, and die before reaching that term. The art of medicine is not able to furnish (dare) these remedies, nor does it; but it says they are possible (sed fatetur ea possibilia), and so experimental science has devised remedies known to the wisest men alone, by which the ills of old age are delayed, or are mitigated when they arrive. “The third prerogative of this science belongs to it secundum se et absolute; for here it leaves the two ways already touched on, and addresses itself to all things which do not concern the other sciences, save that often it requires the service of the others. As a mistress it commands the others as servants ... and orders them to do its work, and furnish the wise instruments which it uses; as navigation directs the art of carpentry, to make a ship for it; and the military art directs the forger’s art to make it a breastplate and other arms. In like manner, this science [the experimental], as a mistress, directs geometry to make it a burning-glass, which shall set on fire things near or far, one of the most sublime wonders that can come to pass through geometry. So it commands the other sciences in all the wonderful and hidden things of nature and art” (pp. 510-511). [652] Opus tertium, chap. xxviii. [653] Opus majus, pars vi. 1 (Bridges, ii. p. 169). [654] Ibid. p. 171. Doubtless the meaning of the above is connected with Bacon’s view of the Aristotelian intellectus agens, which he takes to signify the direct illumination of the mind of man by God. “All the wisdom of philosophy is revealed by God and given to the philosophers, and it is Himself that illuminates the minds of men in all wisdom. That which illuminates our minds is now called by the theologians intellectus agens. But my position is that this intellectus agens is God principaliter, and secondarily, the angels, who illuminate us” (Opus tertium, p. 74; cf. Op. majus, pars i. chap. v.). [655] Compendium studii (Brewer), p. 397. [656] De secretis operibus artis et naturae, et de nullitate magiae, p. 533 (Brewer). Cf. Charles, Roger Bacon, p. 296 sqq. [657] The most convenient edition of the works of Joannes Duns Scotus is that published by Vives, at Paris (1891 sqq.) in twenty-six volumes. It is little more than a reprint of Wadding’s Edition. [658] See Seeberg, Die Theologie des Johannes Duns Scotus (Leipzig, 1900), p. 8 sqq., a work to which the following pages owe much. [659] Grosseteste’s philosophical or theological works are still unpublished or very difficult of access; and there is no sufficient exposition of his doctrines. [660] Seeberg, o.c. p. 16 sqq. [661] See De Wulf, History of Medieval Philosophy, p. 363 sqq. [662] See Seeberg, o.c. p. 34 sqq. [663] The kernel of Duns’s proof is contained in the following passage, which is rather simple in its Scotian Latin: “Dicendum, quod Universale est ens, quia sub ratione non entis, nihil intelligitur: quia intelligibile movet intellectum. Cum enim intellectus sit virtus passiva (per Aristotelem 3, de Anima, cont. 5 et inde saepe), non operatur, nisi moveatur ab objecto; non ens non potest movere aliquid ut objectum; quia movere est entis in actu; ergo nihil intelligitur sub ratione non entis. Quidquid autem intelligitur, intelligitur sub ratione Universalis: ergo illa ratio non est omnino non ens” (Super universalia Porphyrii, Quaestio iv.). [664] Cf. the far from clear exposition in Seeberg, o.c. p. 86 sqq. and 660 sqq. [665] Miscell. quaest. 6, 18, cited by Seeberg, o.c. p. 114. [666] The last two or three pages have been drawn mainly from Seeberg, o.c. p. 113 sqq. In discussing Duns Scotus, I have given less from his writings than has been my wont with other philosophers. And for two reasons. The first, as I frankly avow, is that I have read less of him than I have of his predecessors. With the exception of such a curious treatise as the (doubtful) Grammatica speculativa (tome i. of the Paris edition); and the elementary, and comparatively lucid, De rerum principio (tome iv. of the Paris edition)—with these exceptions Duns is to me unreadable. My second reason for omitting excerpts from his writings, is that I wished neither to misrepresent their quality, nor to cause my reader to lay down my book, which is heavy enough anyhow! If I selected lucid and simple extracts, they would give no idea of the intricacy and prolixity of Duns. His commentary on the Sentences fills thirteen tomes of the Paris edition! No short and simple extract will illustrate that! On the other hand, I could not bring myself by lengthy or impossible quotations to vilify Duns. It is unjust to expose a man’s worst features, nakedly and alone, to those who do not know his better side and the conditions which partly explain the rest of him. [667] Quodlibetalia, i. Qu. 14, cited by De Wulf, o.c. p. 422. [668] Expos. aurea, cited by De Wulf, o.c. p. 423, whose exposition of Occam’s theory I have followed here. [669] On Occam, see Seeberg’s article in Hauck’s Encyclopaedia; Siebeck, “Occams Erkenntnislehre, etc.,” in Archiv fÜr Ges. der Philosophie, Bd. x., Neue Folge (1897). [670] Quoted by Seeberg. [671] De Wulf, o.c. p. 425. [672] In view of the enormous literature upon Dante, popular as well as learned, it would be absurd to give any bibliographical, biographical or historical information as to his works, himself, or his Italian circumstances. [673] De mon. ii. 3. [674] De mon. ii. chaps. 4, 10, 12. [675] De mon. iii. 4 sqq. [676] All this seems supported by Conv. i. 1, and ii. 13, the main explanatory chapters of the work. [677] Conv. iii. 12. [678] e.g. “benigna volontade,” Par. xv. 1. [679] Cf. A. d’Ancona, I Precursori di Dante (Florence, 1874); M. Dods, Forerunners of Dante (Edinburgh, 1903); A. J. Butler, Forerunners of Dante (Oxford, 1910); Hettinger, GÖttliche KomÖdie, p. 79 (2nd ed., Freiburg im Breisgau, 1889). Mussafia, “Monumenti antichi di dialetti italiani,” Sitzungsber. philos. hist. Classe (Vienna Academy), vol. 45, 1864, p. 136 sqq., gives two old Italian descriptions, one of the heavenly Jerusalem, the other of the infernal Babylon. [680] 2 Cor. xii. 2; Paradiso, i. 73-75. [681] Ante, Chapter XIX. [682] Ante, pp. 98-100. [683] The coarseness of Inf. xxi. 137-139 is of a piece with the way of mediaeval art in making demons horrible through a grotesquely indecent rendering of their persons. [684] e.g. Inf. xviii. 100 sqq.; and Inf. xxviii. and xxix. [685] Inf. viii. 37 sqq.; xxxii. 97 sqq.; xxxiii. 116 and 149. [686] Cf. Moore, Dante Studies, vol. ii. pp. 266-267. [687] Any one who looks through the first volume of Tiraboschi’s great Storia della letteratura italiana, written in the early part of the nineteenth century, will find a generous acceptance of myth as fact; just as he would find the same in the Histoire ancienne of the good Rollin, written a century or more before. [688] Dante has frequently been spoken of as the “first scholar” of his time. I do not myself know enough regarding the scholarship of every scholar in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries to confirm or deny this. Personally, I do not regard him as a Titanic scholar, like Albertus Magnus for example. He studied all the classic Latin authors available. Doubtless he had a memory corresponding to his other extraordinary powers. His also was the intellectual point of view, and the intellectual interest in knowledge and its deductions. His view of life was as intellectual as that of Aquinas. But as Dante’s powers of plastic visualization were unequalled, so also, it seems to me, were his faculties of using as a poet what he had acquired as a scholar. Regarding the extent of Dante’s use and reading of the Classics, nothing could be added to Dr. Moore’s Studies in Dante, First Series; though I think what Dr. Moore has to say of “Dante and Aristotle” would have cast a more direct light upon the matter, had he cited as far as possible from the Latin translation probably used by Dante, instead of from the original Greek. [689] Inf. iv. 88. Cf. Moore, Studies in Dante, i. p. 6. The application of the term satirist to Horace is peculiarly mediaeval. [690] Inf. iv. 131. [691] Inf. ii. 20. [692] Par. xx. 68. [693] Purg. xxv. 22. [694] Inf. xviii. 83 sqq. [695] Inf. xxvi. 88 sqq. [696] Purg. xii. [697] Purg. xv. [698] According to Dr. Moore, Dante quotes or refers to the “Vulgate more than 500 times, to Aristotle more than 300, Virgil about 200, Ovid about 100, Cicero and Lucan about 50 each, Statius and BoËthius between 30 and 40 each, Horace, Livy, and Orosius between 10 and 20 each,”—and other scattering references. [699] Inf. xxxiii. 4; Aen. ii. 3. [700] Par. ii. 16. [701] Aen. vi. 309; Inf. iii. 112. [702] Aen. vi. 700; Purg. ii. 80. [703] Purg. i. 135; cf. Aen. vi. 143 “Primo avulso non deficit alter, etc.” [704] See Inf. xxxi.; Purg. xii. 25 sqq. [705] Purg. vi. 118: “O highest Jove that wast on earth crucified for us.” [706] Par. i. 13 sqq.; Par. ii. 8. [707] The provenance, etc., of Dante’s classification of sins in the Inferno, like everything else in Dante, has been interminably discussed. The reference to the De officiis of Cicero is due to Dr. Moore. See “Classification of Sins in the Inferno and Purgatorio,” Studies in Dante, 2nd Series. Also cf. Hettinger, Die gÖttliche KÖmÖdie, pp. 159-162, and notes 6 and 23 on p. 204 and 207 (2nd ed., Freiburg in Breisgau, 1889). Dante’s main statement is in Inf. xi. [708] In whom does not the awful anguish of the suicides (Inf. xiii.) arouse grief and horror? [709] Inf. xvi. 59. They are more respectable than the blessed denizens of the Heaven of Venus, Par. ix. [710] Inf. xix. [711] Inf. vi. 103 sqq. [712] The intellectual temperament finds voice in many great expressions, which are very Dante and also very Thomas, as Par. xxviii. 106-114; xxix. 17; xxx. 40-42. [713] Inf. iii. 18. [714] Hettinger, o.c. p. 254. [715] Aeneid vi. 327 sqq.; Hettinger, o.c. p. 226. [716] See Taylor, Classical Heritage, p. 162. [717] These are pointed out in the Commentaries (e.g. Scartazzini’s) and in many monographs. Hettinger’s GÖttliche KÖmÖdie is serviceable: also Moore’s Studies in Dante and Toynbee’s Dante Studies. [718] Purg. i. 71; John viii. 36. [719] Purg. i. 89. [720] Purg. iii. 34 sqq. [721] Purg. iv. 4 sqq. [722] Purg. v. 105 sqq. [723] Purg. vii. 54; iv. 133-135. [724] Cf. e.g. Purg. xii. 109. [725] Purg. xv. 40 sqq. [726] Purg. xvi. 64 sqq. [727] Purg. xvii. 85 sqq., and xviii.; Hettinger, o.c. p. 235 sqq., and pp. 261-264. [728] Purg. xxiii. 72; xxvi. 14. [729] Purg. xxv. The notes in Hettinger, o.c., are quite full in citations of passages from Thomas and other scholastics. [730] Thomas, Summa, iii. Qu. 89, Art. 5. [731] As it is rather in Par. xxvii. 76 sqq. [732] Par. iii. 52, 64, 89. [733] Par. iv. [734] Par. xi. 1 sqq. [735] Par. xiv. [736] Par. xv. 10. [737] Par. xix. 40 sqq. [738] Par. xx. [739] Par. xxiv.-xxvi. [740] Typified in St. Bernard, Par. xxxi. and following. Suitable reasons for this choice may be suggested by the extracts from Bernard’s De deligendo Deo and Sermons on Canticles, ante, Chapter XVII. [741] Conv. ii. 13. The symbolism inherent in all human mental processes seems indicated by the argument of Aquinas (ante, p. 466) that the mind knows “the particular through sense and imagination; ... it must turn itself to images in order to behold the universal nature existing in the particular.” This is a necessity of our half material nature. [742] Convito ii. 1. Letter to Can Grande, par. 7. [743] In the Can Grande letter, having stated this fourfold significance, Dante does not proceed to exemplify it in the interpretation which follows of the opening lines of the Paradiso. Possibly those lines did not admit of the fourfold interpretation; yet, in general, Dante does not try to carry it out in practice, any more than other mediaeval writers commonly. [744] Convito ii. ch. 14 and 15. [745] Doubtless the commentator habit is fixed in the nature of man; but it was pre-eminently mediaeval. We have seen enough elsewhere of the multiplication of Commentaries on the Sentences of the Lombard and other scholastic works. Dante’s friend, Guido Cavalcanti, wrote a little poem beginning Donna mi priego, upon which we have eight Commentaries, the first from Egidio Colonna in 1316. [746] Yet, however obvious the meaning, tying the pole of the Chariot to the Tree of Life was a great stroke (Purg. xxxii. 49). [747] There is a piece of allegory in the Paradiso which almost gets on one’s nerves, i.e. the ceaseless whirling of the blessed spirits, usually in wheel formations: e.g. Par. xii. 3; xxi. 81; xxiv. 10 sqq.: cf. x. 145; xiii. 20. [748] One notes that all the symbolizing personages of the poem—Virgil, Statius, Matilda, Lia, Beatrice—have literal reality, however subtle or far-reaching may be the allegorical intendment with which the poet has invested them. [749] See e.g. Par. xxxi. 67. [750] Cf. De Sanctis, Storia della letteratura italiana, i. p. 46 sqq. [751] Compare Purg. xxvii. 34 sqq.; xxx.; xxxi.; Par. xviii. 13 sqq.; xxiii.; xxx.; xxxi.; xxxii. 8. |
|
