/';-=09

)(8*=-0/']

11:58:55 AM

viveri

um

A JOURNAL FOR MEDIAEVAL PHILOSOPHY AND

THE INTELLECTUAL LIFE OF THE MIDDLE AGES
REVUE CONSACRE LA PHILOSOPHIE MDIVALE ET
LA VIE INTELLECTUELLE DU MOYEN GE
ZEITSCHRIFT FR PHILOSOPHIE UND GEISTES LEBEN
IM MITTELALTER

VOLUME

7,

1969

ory>

VAN GORCUM - ASSEN - NETHERLANDS

Reprinted with permission of

Van Gorcum, Assen by
SWETS

& ZEITLINGER
LISSE - 1985

B.V.

11:58:55 AM

VlVARIUm
A JOURNAL FOR MEDIAEVAL PHILOSOPHY AND
THE INTELLECTUAL LIFE OF THE MIDDLE AGES

subscription

- J.Engels,
- L. M. de Rijk,(Nijmegen)
C. J.de Vogel,(Utrecht)
(Utrecht).
Board:Prof.L. M.deRijk,Sophiaweg
oftheEditorial
73,
Secretary
TheNetherlands.
Nijmegen,
Ltd.,(Dr. H. J.Prakke& H. M. G. Prakke)
RoyalVanGorcum
TheNetherlands.
Assen,
Perannum:
Hfl.20,- ($. ,7/.
2.)

SINGLECOPIES

1.6$)
Hfl.I 2.0($. 3,7f/

published

eachnumber
ca 80 pages.
Twiceyearly,
MayandNovember;

editors

publishers

shouldbe written
tovivarium
submitted
Contributions
preferably
shouldbe typeThe manuscripts
Frenchor German.
in English,
andfootanddoublespaced,exceptforlongquotations
written
notes.Adequate
(i inch)shouldbe leftat eachedge
margins
shouldbe numbered
ofthesheet.Footnotes
continuously
throughat thefootofthepage
outeacharticle.Theymaybe placedeither
orattheendofthetext.

11:58:55 AM

CONTENTS

ROGER E.
REYNOLDS
Ottawa

OF VOLUME

VII

FurtherEvidencefor the Irish Origin of Honorius

Augustodunensis

L. M. de rij K On The GenuineTextof Peterof Spain's Summqle

Nijmegen
logicales III

j. ENGELS
Utrecht

La Lettre-ddicace
de Bersuire
PierredesPrs ...

J. ENGELS
Utrech
t

Note Complmentaire
sur les ManuscritsBerchoriens
Wor
ehester
73

62

STANLEY B.
AlbertusMagnus and The Problemof Moral Virtue 81
CUNNINGHAM
Windsor
, Ontario
L. M. DE'RijK
Nijmegen

On The GenuineTextof Peterof Spain s Summule

i2o
logicales IV

REVIEWS

79

BOOKS RECEIVED

79, 163

11:58:55 AM

Further

Evidence for the Irish Origin

Honorius Augustodunensis

of

ROGER E. REYNOLDS

best known but most enigmatictwelfth-century

pupil of Anselm
was
Honorius
of
Augustodunensis.Despite theimmensity
The Canterbury
of his literarycorpus and its almost immediate popularity, this
disciple of Anselm chose to shroud the geographicalconnectionsin his
life with the mysterious'Augustodunensis.'. Since thereis no direct
reference in his writings to Autun, students of early scholasticism
have for the most part placed the 'Autun' in quotation marks and
have sought geographic localities far removed from Autun in which
to situate Honorius. Among the localities most often mentioned are
Anselm's school at Canterburyand the Schottenkloster
at Regensburg.1
In one of the more recent books in which the career of Honorius
is treated,ProfessorR W. Southernarguesthatthereis no real evidence
to connect Honorius with eitherCanterburyor Regensburg.2Although
not denying^that Honorius may have been at either or both of these
places, Professor Southern proffersthe tantalizing suggestion that
Honorius may have been the last of the ancient and honorable line of
wanderingscholarmonksof Ireland. In support of his view Professor
Southern adduces informationgiven him by ProfessorAubrey Gwynn
showing that several of the doctrines found in the works of Honorius
bear strikingresemblanceto doctrinesfoundin Irishsources of his time.
ProfessorSouthernalso suggeststhat furtherexaminationmay turn up
other Irishisms.The purpose of this note is to bring to light another
Irishismin Honorius' work.
In one of his shorter tracts, the Sacramentarium
seu de causis et
1 J.A. Endres,
zurGeschichte
Honorius
desGeistigen
Lebens
imXIIJahrhundert
Augustodunensis:
Beitrag
andMunich:
Honorius
andScholasticus
, Presbyter
(Kempten
, Speculum,
1906),6-1; E. M.Sanibrd,
von
Honorius
R. Bauerreiss,
23(1948),397-42$;
Canterbury
(Augustodunensis
/,derRaiten) undKuno
von
undMitteilungen
zurGeschichte
Studien
desBenedictiner
bucher,
(n 26-36),
Regensburg
Bischof
SeealsoAppendix
Ordens,
67(1956),306-313.
, below,
7.
p.
2 R.W.Southern,
Saint
Anselm
andhisBiographer
: 1963),21$.SeealsoAppendix
(Cambridge
, below,
P-7.
I

11:59:02 AM

mjsticortuumdiviniin ecclesiaofficiiliber, Honorius presentsa

signifcatu
brief description of the various sacraments.1When he arrives at het
sacrament of orders, he, like many of his contemporarysentence
collectors, describesthe ecclesiasticalofficesby usingexcerptsfromthe
early medieval Ordinals of Christ,2 the writingsof Isidore of Seville,
and the Liberojpcialis of Amalariusof Metz.3 The Ordinals of Christ,
which had no establishedformin the Middle Ages, were brieflistsof the
ecclesiastical grades ordered according to a prearrangedsequence with
events in Christ's life attached as sanctions. During the early Middle
Ages the Ordinals, whose originscan be traced to patristictimes,*were
s
perpetuatedand popularized throughIrish sources.
To the time of Ivo of Chartres(f ca 1117) the two most popular
formsof the Ordinalsof Christwere the "AncientHibernianChronological Version," as found in the famousBobbioMissal, and the "HibernoHispanic Hierarchical Version," found in the Irish canonical Collectio
Hibernensis:
Hibernian
[Ancient
Chronological
Version]

Hierarchical
[HibernoVersion]
Hispanic

adfuit.
Quandovel comodoinplebetdominus De gradibusin quibusChristus
in
eclesiam.
septem
gradibus
ostiainferni.
Primusgradusleturfuitquandoaperuit Ostiarius
fuit,
quandoaperuit
lebrumisage proveteet dixit spiritus
domini
supervenit.
Secundusgradusexurcesta
quandoeiecitseptemdemonia
quandoeiecet Exorcista
maria
de
ex
maria
dimoniam
magdalena.
magdalene.
septem
1 PL172: 737-806.
derkathoinhisHandbuch
V. Thalhofer
toEndres,
op.cit.,40,only
According
wastheauthor
oftheSacramentari
that
Honorius
um.
lischen
72,hasdenied
1883),
(Freiburg:
Liturgik
2 PL172:79D-760A.
3 Thepassage
cumordinatur
"... sedpro
"Ostiarius
. . andtheexplicit,
theincipit,
with
extracts
PL
contains
from:
mansiones"
diversae
172:
xxiv;
760A-D)
(Cap.
qualitate
operum
Liber
dedivinis
thePs.-Alcuinian
Isidore's
perhaps
(L. VII,c. 12; PL82: 290-293);
Etymologies
Liber
orthe'Bede'Collectanea
(PL94: 4);Amalarius*
; PL101:1234-1236)
ojficiis
(Cap.xxxvi
Omnia
, II, Liber
, Opera
ed.,Amalarii
Liturgica
Episcopi
(L. II, cc. 7-14;J.M. Hanssens,
ojfcialis
Animae
andHonorius'
ownGemma
e Testi
(L. I,
1948],21^-236);
, 139:Vatican:
[Studi
ocialis
c. 183; PI 172: 600).
4 A. Wilmart,
dessciences
duChrist
Lesordres
, 3 (1923),320-327;J.Crehan,
, Revue
religieuses
TheSeven
Orders
19(19^8),81-93.
Studies,
, Theological
ofChrist
inR.E.
s Thesources
havebeentreated
ofChrist
oftheOrdinals
anddevelopment
extensively
Ecclesiastical
inthe
Lower
andHigher
Middle
inthe
Sacred
Orders
ofthe
Ages:
Shifts
Early
Theology
Reynolds,
and
intheOrdinals
Middle
asReflected
theEarly
Orders
Late
Patristic
ofChrist
Ages
Through
Antiquity
from
Mass.:1968),61-19$.
Harvard
Related
Literature
Cambridge,
University,
(Ph.D. Thesis:
2

11:59:02 AM

librum
fecet Lector
Esaiae.
Tercius
subdiiaconatus
quandoaperuit
quando
gradus
ingalilea.
diaquamvinum
de aqua
Quartusgradusdiiacunatus
quandofecitvinum
quandolavit Subdiaconus,
in
cana
galileae.
pedesdixipolurum.
lavitpedesdiscipulorum.
Quintusgraduspresbeteratum
quando
quando Diaconus,
semehac
et
benedixit
fregit
acepitpanem
ieteretcalecem
benedixit.
ostiarios
Sextusgradus
quandoaccepitpanemac fregit
quandodixittulete Sacerdos,
vestriet elevamini
purte et benedixit.
portasprincipis
rexgloriae.
etintroibit
purteeternales
'inanus
episcopus
quandoelevavit Episcopusfuit,quandoelevavit
Septemus
gradus
et suas ad coelumet benedixit
suorum
manus
apostclis.2
supercaputdixipolurum
benedixit
eus.1
The Ancient Hibernian Chronological Version was characterized
by the orderingof the ecclesiastical grades according to the historical
or scripturallydocumented sequence in which Christdischargedthem.
The grades in the Hiberno-Hispanic Hierarchical Version - for our
purposesthe more important were arrangedaccordingto the sequence
in which, at the time of the Ordinal's composition, clerics ideally or
actuallypassedfromgrade to grade.3The mostpatentdifferencebetween
the two sequences is the positionassignedto the hostiarius
. In the Ancient
Hibernian Chronological Version, he is listed immediatelybefore the
bishop, and n the Hiberno-HispanicHierarchical Version, he has been
demoted' to his proper hierarchicalstatus. Further,it is importantto
note the relative positions of the exorcist and lector. In the Ancient
Hibernian Chronological Version the lector precedes the exorcist,
probablybecause Christ'historically'fulfilledthegradesin thatsequence.
But in the Hiberno-HispanicHierarchicalVersion,the lector followsthe
exorcist. Unlike the Gallican and Roman sequence of lower orders,
4
typifiedin the Statutaecclesiaeantiqua and the intersticestexts of the
1 Paris
fol.293r-v.
BNMSLat.13246,
E. A. Lowe,ed.,TheBobbio
Missal:
AGallican
Mass-Book
Hibernian
Latin
of
Version"
(MSParis
13246)(London:
1920),178.The"Ancient
Chronological
'A' recension.
thisnotecorresponds
toWilmart's
Cf.Wilmart,
art.cit.,311-312.
2 Collectio
L. VIII,c.l. Dieirische
2nded.,
Hibernensisy
, ed.,H. Wasserschieben,
Kanonensammlung
Hierarchical
Version"
to Wilmart's
(Leipzig:i88$),26. The"Hiberno-Hispanic
corresponds
'D' recension.
art.cit.,313.
Cf.Wilmart,
3 On thedistinction
andidealecclesiastical
between
theactual
cursus
honorum
, cf.M. Andrieu,
ritromain
Lesordres
dessciences
dans
l'ancien
mineurs
and
, Reveu
religieuses,
g (1925),232-274;
despapes
dessciences
Lacarrire
21(1947),90-120.
M. Andrieu,
, Revue
ecclsiastique
religieuses,
4 Statuta
ecclesiae
ecclesiae
dition-tudes
ed.,LesStatuta
, cc. 93-98;Ch.Munier,
antiqua
antiqua:
critiques
(Paris:i960),96-99.
3

11:59:02 AM

the apocryphalCounciloj 275 Bishops

Constitutum
,2 and the Liber
Silvestri,1
of
the
Hierarchical
the
exorcist
Version
,3
Hiberno-Hispanic
Ponticalis
has been placed lower than the lector, the same sequence as is foundin
the works of Isidore.4 Given the heavy use of Isidore in the Collectio
s
Hibernensis
, this hierarchicalstructureis not surprising,
From the seventh to the mid-eleventhcentury changes of two
kinds were occurringin the Ordinals of Christ. First, a few dominical
sanctionsand episodes attached to each grade were added. Second, and
of more importance,thereappeared a sequential innovationin the ninth
centuryin the Hiberno-HispanicHierarchical Version. The position of
the exorcistand lector was reversedto make themconformto the Gallican or Roman sequence.6 This new "Hiberno-Gallican Chronological
Version" together with the older Ancient Hibernian Chronological
Version and the Hiberno-Hispanic Hierarchical Version were, to the
time of Ivo, the most popular formsof the Ordinals of Christ.
With Ivo of Chartres a new battery of dominical sanctions and
episodeswas introducedinto the Ordinalsof Christ. In Ivo' s De excellentia
in synodohabitus7these new
sacrorumordinumet de vita ordinandorum
sanctionswere attachedto the old Romano-Gallican sequence of grades,
includingthe acolyte, which Ivo had enumeratedand described in his
the text
systematicdiscussion of orders. Isolated fromthe De excellentia
of the Ivonian Ordinal of Christreads:

1 PL8 : 838.
2 PL8 : 826.
3 L. Duchesne,
190.
, I (Paris:1886),161,171-172,
ed.,Liber
Ponticalis
*IntheDeecclesiasticis
liststhelower
Isidore
; PL83 : 790-794),
grades
(L. II,cc. 10-1
ojficiis
In
hostiarius.
: subdeacon,
tothedescending
exocist,
lector,
acolyte,
psalmist,
according
sequence
oflower
Isidore
usestwosequences
theEtymologies
grades.
(L. VII,c.xii,3-32; PL82 : 290-293),
is: hostiarius
inL. VII,c.xii,3,thesequence
Inthesimple
listofgrades
exorcist,
, psalmist,
lector,
ofthelowerorders
treatment
Inthemoreextended
subdeacon.
(L. VII,
etymological
acolyte,
with
theexorcist
oftheDeecclesiasticis
Isidore
returns
tothesequence
only
ojficiisy
c.xii,23-32),
ofthe
treatment
andtheetymological
ThusinboththeDeecclesiasticis
andacolyte
reversed.
ojficiis
is
isusedinwhich
theexorcist
the'Hispanic'
inEtymologies
, L. VII,c.xii,23-32,
sequence
grades
in
oftheacolyte
Ontheunusual
thelector.
lower
than
ina position
listed
position
hierarchically
fr
undihre
hierarchische
Weihen
Isidore's
cf.W. Croce,Dieniederen
, Zeitschrift
works,
Wertung
katholische
70(1948),282f.
Theologie,
s Cf.H. Wasserschieben,
, 3-27.
op.cit.
6 Cf.Leiden
MSLat.Voss.
, below,
Q119in40,fol.13ir.SeealsoAppendix
p. 7.
7 PL 162: 513-519.
Chartres
Ivovon
ofthissermon,
cf.L. Fischer,
OntheIvonian
, der
authorship
: 1917),77; E. Amann
inFestgabe
inFrankreich
A.Knpfler
Erneuerer
der
vita
canonica
(Freiburg-i-Br.
col.3633; andR.Sprandel,
dethologie
andL. Guizard,
Dictionnaire
, XV,2 (Paris:1950),
catholique
inderKirchengeschichte
und
seine
Ivovon
Chartres
(Stuttgart:
1962),181.
Stellung
4

11:59:02 AM

[IvonianVersion]
suntdistincta,
Haecofficia
quia
septem
gradibus
estmuere
sanctaecclesiaseptiformis
decorata.
gratiae
noster
inpropria
Dominus
Haecofficia
ostendit
persona
utforma
et ecclesiaesuaeexhibenda
quae
reliquit,
incorpore.
incapiterepraesentaretur
praecesserat
nobisinitiavit
Hoc officium
Dominus
noster
(Ostiarius)
et ementes
de funiculis
factovendentes
quandoflagello
evertit
nummulariorum
eiecitet cathedras
de templo
lindeet ipseostiarius
dixit:Egosumostium;
praetaxatus
et egredietur.
permesi quisintroierit,
ingredietur
inpropria
Hoc
officium
Dominus
noster
Lector
(
)
persona
Isaiaeprophetae
librum
ostendit,
quandoinmedioseniorm
domini
ad intelligendum
distincte
aperiens
legit: Spiritus
et
caetera
in
eodem
capitulo.
sequuntur
superme,
quae
Hocofficio
ususestDominus
(Exorcista)
quandosaliva
suatetigit
auressurdiet mutiet dixit: Epheta,
quod
estadaperire.
in
se haberetestatur,
Hocofficium
Dominus
(Acolytus)
menon
dicens
: Egosumluxmundi
; quisequitur
evangelio
lumenvitae.
intenebris,
ambulabit
sedhabebit
Hoc officio
ususestDominus
(Subdiaconus)
quandofacta
et mittens
cenacumdiscipulis
linteose praecinxit
aquam
lavitet linteoextersit.
inpelvim
pedesdiscipulorum
ususestDominus
(Diaconus)Hoc officio
quandopostcenam
confecta
ore
et
manibus
sacramenta
dispenpropriis
proprio
incitavit
ad orationem
savi et quandoapostolos
dormientes
et orate,ne intretis
in tentationem.
dicens
: Vigilate
noster
Iesus
Hoc
officio
usus
est
Dominus
(Presbyter)
incorpuset
Christus
quandopostcenampanemetvinum
suaepassionis
suumcommutavit
et utinmemoriam
sanguinem
etiam
manisuis
Hoc
idemfacerent
ordinavit.
discipulis
idem
festius
et excellentius
officium
implevit
quando
ipse
sacerdos
et hostiaseipsum
inaracrucispropter
peccata
sancta
humani
obtulit
et perproprium
generis
sanguinem
aeterna
introiens
caelestia
et terrestria
pacificavit.
and its inclusion in
Thanks to the wide dispersion of the De excellentia
the De sacramentis
of Hugh of Saint Victor1 and Peter Lombard's Sententiae,2 the Ivonian Ordinal of Christ with its dominical sanctions and
1 P. III,cc.6-12;PL176: 423-430.
2 L. IV,dist.xxiv,cc. -11;Petrus
Libri
IVSententiarum
, I andII (AdClaras
Lombardus,
Aquas:
1916),894-901.
S

11:59:02 AM

sequence of orders became dominant in high scholastic treatiseson

sacred orders.
During the period between the composition of Ivo's Ordinal of
of Hugh of Saint Victor,1
Christ and its inclusion in the De sacramentis
several Ordinals appeared in which pre-Ivonianand Ivoniancomponents
were mixed. One of these composite Ordinals is foundin the Sacramentariumof Honorius:
[Honorius Augustodunensis]
Christo
Qui ordinantur
incorporantur.
sicutdicit:Egosumostium;
Ipsefuitostiarius,
huicostiarius
aperit.
permesi quisintroierit,
daemonia
Exorcista
ulit.
, extitit
exp
quando
Lector
eratquandoEsaiamlegerat.
et
reddebat
fuerat
caecis
quandolumen
Acolythus
dixit:Egosumluxmundi.
invinum.
Subdiaconus
quandoaquasconvertit
Diaconus
quandolavitpedesdiscipulorum.
Presbyter
quandodeditcorpussuum.
eis.2
Episcopus
quandobenedixit
Given the popularityof Ivo' s De excellentiaand its Ordinal of Christ
in early twelfth-century
sentence collections,3 it is not surprisingthat
two Ivoniancomponentswere added by Honorius, the Ego sumostiumof
thehostiarius
and theEgosumluxmundiforthe acolyte. Moreover, thereis
reflectedin the 'demonia' of the exorcist a traditionfound in the
Ordinal of Christused by the Norman Anonymous*and in the Lumen
caecis reddebatof the acolyte a tradition found in both the Norman
Anonymousand in the School of Laon.5
The most strikingfeature of Honorius' Ordinal of Christ is its
1 D. vandenEynde,
deHugues
deSaint-Victor
etla datedescrits
Essai
surla succession
(Spicilegium
oftheDesacramentis
thecomposition
Athenaei
Antoniani,
13: Rome:i960),100-103,
places
Pontificii
ofHonorius'
Sacramentarium
thecomposition
1131and1137.Wilmart,
between
art.cit.,319,dates
totheyears
112^-i130.
2 PL172:79D-76OA.
3 E.g.,early
intheSententiae
Ivo'sname,
theDeexcellentia
inthetwelfth
, without
appeared
century
A.Cf.Vat.Lat.4361, fol.114.V-120V.
Magisti
* Cambridge
MSLat.415,p. 119.
Christi
College
Corpus
s Ibid:Oxford
et
216, fol.134.ra,
citedinO. Lottin,
MSLaud.Misc.
Bodleian
Psychologie
Library
V (Gembloux:
morale
auxXlleetXHIe
sicles,
1959),271.
6

11:59:02 AM

dependenceon the archaicHiberno-HispanicHierarchicalVersion,going

With a few minorvariantsthe dominical
back to the CollectioHibernensis.
sanctionsfor the lector, subdeacon, and deacon are almost identical in
iumand the HibernianHierarchicalversions.Further,the
the Sacramentar
sanction
in Honorius' Sacramentar
iummaywell be an abbreviation
bishop's
of that found in the Hibernian versions. Finally, and most important,
Honorius uses the sequence of the lower orders foundin the HibernoHispanic Hierarchical Version with the lector listed hierarchically
superior to the exorcist. This archaism in the sequence of the grades
is extremelyunusual in a period in which almost all tracts on orders
had been structuredaround the Romano-Gallican sequence of lower
orders: hostiarius
, lector, exorcist, and acolyte.
it
Certainly cannot be claimed that the older Hiberno-Hispanic
HierarchicalVersionhad expired by the late eleventhcentury.Copies of
with its ancient Ordinal of Christ continued to
the CollectioHibernensis
be made in scriptoria
throughoutEurope.1 Further,the ancientHibernoHierarchical
Ordinal of Christ was reproduced as a separate
Hispanic
in
piece
many florilegia.2Nonetheless, the appearance of the ancient
formsof the IrishOrdinals of Christin the works of one of the twelfthcenturymoderniis an anomaly worthyof notice. This Irishismin the
Sacramentarium
is then, perhaps, another piece of evidence to bolster
Professor Southern's surmise concerning the Irish connections of
Anselm's most famousdisciple.
CarletonUniversity
Ottawa, Canada.
1 Cf.Wasserschieben,
MSLat.702,fol.2v.
op.cit.,ix-lxxvi. 2 E.g.Berne
Brgerbibliothek
APPENDIX
ad p. i , n. 1: Ina thesis
attheEcoledesChartes,
defended
theargument
has
recently
beenmadethatHonorius
didindeedspendsometimeat Saint-Martin
ofAutun
andthat
thissojournaccounts
forsomeofthepeculiarFrench
notions
in Honorius'
presented
works.Cf.Marie-Odile
Honorius
etla Summa
Gloria
, reported
Augustodunensis
Garrigues,
in Positions
desthses
desChartes
, coleNationale
(Paris:1967),39-46.
ad p. i, n. 2: Garrigues,
thatHonorius
op.cit.,40, surmises
maywellhavebeenborn
in Ireland,
in Canterbury,
andthenbecome'un europen
educated
du Xllesicle'in
hiswanderings
on theContinent.
ad p. 4, n. 6: Ina forthcoming
article
intheHarvard
Review
, "AFlorilegium
Theological
on the Ecclesiastical
Gradesin Clm19414: Testimony
to Ninth-Century
Clerical
I shallbe describing
a groupofninth-century
Ordinals
of Christin the
Instruction,"
Hierarchical
Version.
Hiberno-Hispanic
7

11:59:02 AM

On

The Genuine

Text of Peter of Spain's

Summule

logicales

L. M. DE RIJK
III Two Redactions of a Commentaryupon the Summuleby Robertus
Anglicus*
his academic conference about a number of manuscriptswhich
works of Peter of Spain1Msgr Grabmannpointed to a master
contain
In
named Robertus
Anglicusas a commentatorof the Summulelogicales.
Grabmannidentified2thismasterwith Robert Kilwardby,who is named
Robertus
, indeed, in the Chronicle of the Dominican Conventof
Anglicus
in
and
some manuscriptsas well4. However, thisidentification
Bologna3
seems to be far from certain. Both manuscripts(Vatican Library Vat.
Lat. 3049 and Todi, BibliotecaComunale
, MS 54; see below) call the
one mightthinkof the
without
Therefore
author Robertus
frater.
Anglicus
composition of these commentariesas havingtaken place at some date
before Robert Kilwardby's entrance into the Dominican Order. A
s life and works, the late father
modern investigatorinto Kilwardby*
* Thefirst
6 (1968),pp.1-34and69-101
inthisJournal,
ofthisstudy
.
andsecond
appeared
parts
1 Martin
zudenPhilosophischen
undFunde
desPetrus
Grabmann,
Forschungen
Schriften
Handschriftliche
derBayerischen
Akademie
der
XXI(f 1277)in: Sitzungsberichte
, desspteren
Papstes
Johannes
Hispanus
Hist.Abt.Jahrgang
Philos.
9, Mnchen
1936,pp.65-67.
1936,Heft
Wissenschaften,
2 Seeibid.
* Thischronicle
III6, (1898),notes
fortheyear
Praedicatorum
Ordinis
Fratrum
inAnalecta
edited
adordinem
sunt
Parisiis
1220:Hocannorecepti
(= RegiReginaldum
pereumdem
(forParisius)
Robertus
Parisiis
Frater
naldofAngers),
, quilegebat
moreretur,
Anglicus
metaphypauloantequam
fuit
Forthisnoteand
Hicpostea
Cardinalis.
intheologica
facltate.
erateisimilis
etnullus
sicam,
seeEllen
intotheDominican
entrance
M.F.SommerastoRobert
itsreliability
Order,
Kilwardby's
historicae
inTheLife
Studies
O.P.,Dissertationes
(edited
Seckendorff,
Kilwardby
bythe
ofRobert
Fase.VIII,Rome1937,p. 4.
Romae
ad. S. Sabinae),
Historicum
IT. Praedicatorum
Institutum
4 e.g.inFlorence,
onthePrior
cod.PlutLXXI,29where
Laurenziana,
Kilwardby's
Commentary
VI164(3085),
Biblioteca
Kiliurlu
toRobertus
isascribed
Marciana,
(!). InVenice,
Anglicus
Analytics
ordinis
Robertm
derelativis
secundum
tractatus
wefind
Anglicum
predicatorum.
fratrem
(f.79vb):Explicit
InOxford,
Merton
ofthistract.
onKilwardby's
doubts
Deo. I haveserious
Gratias
,
authority
College
intheother
while
itisanonymous
ofSiccavilla
toJohn
MS292itisattributed
(f.94vtt),
manuscripts
MS158,f.52r:
noteinAssisi,
Bibi.Antoniana
isaninteresting
there
extant.
Moreover,
marginal
andF. Pelster,
ista.SeeA. G. Little
derelatione
/.deSiccavilla
intractatu
Oxford
plusdemateria
I found
inSevilla
(Biblioteca
, Oxford
1934,p. 108,n. 3. - Recently
Theolog
y andTheologians
withthe
a manuscript
containing
Sophismata
gramaticalia
Kilwardby's
y Colombina)
Capitular
cum
Roberti
Suma
(cod.
gramaticalis
argumentis
Anglici
explicit
(io4vb):Explicit
contemporaneous
--9,Xm-XIVS.)
8

11:59:12 AM

R.-M. Martin, suggested1that Robert took the Black Friars habit between 1240 and 1245. So Grabmann'sview thatour commentarieswere
writtenbetween 1248 and 1261 in the period when Robert Kilwardby
was activeas a professorin Parisand Oxford2is certainlyuntenable,since
in both manuscriptsour author is named magister
, not frater. Robert
as
a
artium
must
be
dated
in the 122o's and
Kilwardby'sactivity
magister
i2 3o,s. It is an unmistakablefact that, at that time, Peter of Spain's
work was not yet used in the Parisianand Oxford circles3.
So farthere seems to be no reason to identifyour magister
Robertus
with
Robert
O.P.
Anglicus
Kilwardby
Grabmannonly dealt with the Vatican manuscriptVat. Lat. ^3049,
which contains a commentaryon Peter of Spain's Summulelogicales
,
called there compilatio
supertractatus(f. 8irb). In a note (op. cit. p. 67,
n. 1) he referred to the Todi manuscript (Eibl, comunale
, cod. 54)
which, according to the catalogue of L. Leonij (Todi, 1878, p. 24),
contains glosulecomposite
a magistroRobertoAnglicoupon the Summule
logicales. Grabmann,who did not see the manuscript,knew only its
auxiliumsittestePlatone
), and concluded4fromit that
incipit(Cumdivinum
the Vaticanand Todi manuscriptscontaintwo different
works. However,
an analysisof both manuscriptswill show that our manuscriptscontain
two different
redactionsof the same commentaryby one masterRobertus
Anglicuson Peter of Spain's Summule
logicales.
i - The Commentaryas contained in Vat.Lat. 3049
This parchmentmanuscriptof the Vatican Librarymeasures 200 x 140
mm. and has 82 folios. It seems to date fromthe end of the thirteenth
or the beginningof the fourteenthcentury.Since our codex is partof the
old stock of the VaticaniLatini (containing the CodicesVaticaniLatini
i - 6000), it must have been in the Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana as
early as the sixteenthcentury. More informationabout its origin and
entranceinto the VaticanLibrarycannotbe givenso far.s The onlywork
containedin thismanuscriptis the commentaryon the Summule
logicales.
1 R.-M.Martin,
Matres
dominicains
deParis
etd*Oxford
etlasoi-disant
cole
dominicaine
premiers
Quelques
in:Revue
dessciences
etthologiques
(i 229-1279)
augustinienne
9 (1920),p. $66.
philosophiques
2 Grab
mann,
op.cit.,p. 66.
3 Arguments
insupport
ofthisviewwillbeadduced
ina later
inthisseries.
study
4 op.cit.
yp. 67,n. i .
s MissProf.
Anneliese
Scrittore
intheVatican
waskindenough
togivemethis
Maier,
Library,
information.
9

11:59:12 AM

The work was writtenin two columns and opens, without giving the
author's name, with an extensiveprologue (i-1*15):1
Fonset origoomnium
a plenitudine
scientiarum
totiussapientie
duxitoriginem.
Qui
estfonsluminis
vitebonum,
bonitas
summe
scientiarum,
eternitas,
sapientie,
plenitudo,
Deusanteomniaprimus,
luxincreata2
lux
(um)creator
(increatura
MS)omni
eternus,
cuinonestadditio3 veldiminution
Lux
tui
non
est
transmutados
aut
obumpossibilis.
bratiovicissitudinis,
et finislucistotiusveritatis
et bonitatis
in omnibus
principium
creaturis.
inrationales
Luxautem6
istasuamspeciem
irradiat
rectum
videlicet
creaturas,
perradium
etoblicum.
autemistius
luciseterne
rectum
nullacreatura
nisi
perradium
Receptionem
t obtinere.
Necesseestergonobisrationalibus
divine
creatuperinfusionem
poteri
gratie
risut tamnobilisscientiedeveniamus
ad notitiam
istius
aliqualem(et) receptionem
nobistransmissam
luminis
Qui quidemradius
comprehendere.
perradiumobliquum
essentiam
rei directenon?potestostendere,
sed per multamedia,quasipernubem
humnus
mole carnis8obpressus
claritatem
istamnuli(aintuendo
solem,intellectus
anima
rationalis
tarnen
converti
tur
ten)usnisipersimilitudinem
poterit
speculari.Ipsa
sitilludverissimum
etquamamenum
bonum
ab omnisuprase memor
quamiocundum
busdesideratum,
a quo tantafuitexcellentia
in eius?
decorata(et) naturali
appetitu
desiderat
pervenire.
cognitionem
vetheris
Cuiconsonai10
dicensquodomneshomines
Philosophus
principio
Metaphysice
auctoritate
natura
sciredesiderant.
Adquamscientiam
habendam
ipsaanimafuitcreata,
et
anime
anima
differentia
rationalis
in
libro
de
dicentis
ad
spiritus
quod
Augustini
rerumin se geritsimili
Dei factaomnium
totiussapientie
similitudinem
tudines,
quasi
cumipsa
estad sciendum.
animenaturaliter
ordinata
Quia quidemscientia
aptitudo
cumcorporeactualiter
dolet admodumse
animaob sui coniunctionem
spoliatur,
Boetius11
in
Libro
Secundum
dicit
deconsolacene
multiformiter
denudari.
quod
predictis
de animaipsadicens
:
philosophie
irb
condita
nube
nuncmembrorum
tenet
estoblitasuisumma
.
nonin totum
quam
perdens
singula
carnis
divinesapientie
nubilo
anima
rationalis
Ex predictis
opprimente
patetquod
igitur
rectum
siveperradium
inhacvitapervisionem
seuplenitudinem
apprehencognitionem
a partenondivinesapientie
sed
dendominime
poteritobtinere.Cuiusrei defectus
1 I wish
forchecking
thequotations
thanks
to MrC. H. J.M.Kneepkens
toexpress
mysincere
incorrecting
someclumsy
andforhisvaluable
readings.
suggestions
manuscript
2 increatura
V.
3 adidicio
(!) V.
4 dominicio
V.
5 transmutatacio
V.
6 + [dicitur].
7 directe
nuncV
non]cognito
8 carnis]
crianis
(?) V.
9 ineius]meusV.
1o consonai
Vesont
V.
11Boethius,
MDCCCLXXI
V,III,22-24.
DeConsolatione
ed.Peiper,
p. 130r.22-24:Nunc
Lipsiae
tenet
estoblita
sui.Summamque
condita
nube.Nonintotum
Membrorum
singula
perdens.
IO

11:59:12 AM

nostrepotiushumane
existit.Secundum
conditionis
quod dicit Algazeldecimosue
est ob hoc ut possi
t esseperfctius.
factum
metaphysice
quodquidquidest factum,
ab
invidia
etiamPlatonis
suo
Auctoritate
:
estista
inquit
lybro Thymey1 optimo
relegata
utconvenienter
cunctasibisimiliaeffici
voluitproutnatura
beatitudinis
cuiusque
potuit
essecapax.
innostras
luminis
animas
habeamus
Utigitur
irradiantem
creaturapredicti
receptionem
rumutiquecognitionem
haberedebemus,ut per cognitionem
ipsarum
per radium
intantam
incognitionem
allacriter
oblicum
deveniamus
creatoris
pereffectum
tamquam
in hacvita, secundum
quoddicitAugustinus2
acceptabile
quoddebetessesummum
ei sufficere
esthumana
bonum
conditio
potest
quod tantedignitatis
quodnullum
preter
Hoc etiamauctoritate
Tullii^libro suo de senectutehabetur:ob hoc,
Summum.
ex altissimo
nobisanimus
datusestutcelestium
motuset ordins
deidomicilio
inquit,
et contemplando
etiamsequeremur.
Item.Etiamlibrosuode sompno
contemplaremur
acie superna
dicit*:illosliquetessesapientes
qui totamentis
circumspecte
rquirunt
et quesitasagaciadiligentia
Necessaria
est ergoscientiarationali
comprehendunt.
creature.
Next, the authoradds a shortdivisioscientiarum
(irb-va) :
in summaiocunditate
Creatus
fuitautemhomoin triplici
perfectione:
quoadcorpus
in
summa
bonitate
cedit; in summasapientia
animam,
quoad
quoad (quod ad MS)
cediditiamposteri
tas.Inopposita
Sedperpeccatum
primihominis
utrumque.
predictocontraprimm,
rumvaletin tristitia[m]
tia contrasecundum,
in malitia
<in>ignoran
autemcontra
tertium.
natura
Verumtamen
utab istishumana
concessesuntsibi
relevari,
possetincommodis
f. iva artes,scientie,
virtutes
et quibushomonaturaliter
et crescatin
appetendo
perficiatur
creatoris.
deniqueperveniat
cognitionem
autemscientia
Scientia
autemestautcreatoris,
autcreature.
Creatoris
nonhabetur
in
vitaistanisipercreatur<ar>um
Creaturaradioacquisitam.
obliquoquidem
cognitionem
rumautemscientie
scilicetet secundus.
Primus
duplexestexitus[est]in esse,primus
ut
habetur
Veteris
viam
est
admirationis
;
admirando,
principio
quidem,
Metaphisices,per
inEgipto
veroexitusinesse
Secundus
presbiteri
inceperunt
ubiquephilosophari.
inquit,
Autperviaminventionis
esttriplex.
instudium;
etadhuneconfert
maxime
sensus
visus
etsichabuerunt
visus
differentias
rerum
Aut
nobis
ostendit.
doctri; qui
philosophi
per
nam; etadhuncmaxime
confert
Autperinspirationem
moderni.
auditus,etsicscolares
;
maxime
et ad huncconfert
honesta
munditia
deumutiqueproceteris
<que>intelligit
et hocmodosanctiviri.
reverendo,
humane
Scientiaautemrerumcreatarum
defectum
supplet
duplexest.Que duplicem
Unaesta partecorporis,
aliaveroa parteanime.Primavocatur
conditionis.
mechanica,
1 Plato,
invidia
Timaeus
: aboptimo
22.19-20
29E ed.Waszink
relegata
(Plato
longe
Latinus)
porro
cuncta
suisimilia,
natura
essepoterai,
beatitudinis
est.Itaqueconsequenter
cuiusque
capax
prout
effici
voluit.
2 ubi?
3 Cicero:
Maior
animus
caelestis
Cato
Paris1961"estenim
, cap.21(77)ed.Wuilleumier
(Bud),
etquasidemersus
interram
exaltissumo
domicilio
etc...
depressus
* Macrobius,
inSomnium
Commentarti
/,8, 3. ed.Willis
1963.
Leipzig
s Arist.
A,980a 22-23.
Metaph.
II

11:59:12 AM

et huius<modi>.
in operatione
idestadulterina,
ut Carpentaria
manuum,
que consistit
adulterina
Etdicitur
filiiadulterini
nona natura
(?) sedexalienopatre1,
quiaad modum
inmateriam
forma
sicutab artifice
tur.
introduci
Aliaverovocaturscientialiberlis.Et suntseptem.Quarumtressuntde sermone,
trivium
suntde rebus.Primeautemtresconstituunt
(inicium
MS),
reliqueveroquatuor
scilicet
arismatica
scilicetgramatica,
Alie
vero
rethorica.
(!),
quadrivium,
dyaletica,
Et dicuntur
liberales
addiscere
astronomia.
musica,
quiasolumeassolebant
geometria,
velquiaa terrenis
filiiliberorum,
etmundanis.
curishominem
librant
There follow some remarkson the position of logic in the framework
of the artes. It turnsout to be both dominaand ancilla (iva-vb):

ancillainhoc
Interautemseptem
etancilla.Estenimtanquam
loycapotestessedomina
omnesaliasregendo
aliiset ministrat.
Sedesttanquam
domina
inquantum
quoddeservit
etgubernat
sineconductu.
Omnesaliescientie
claudicando
procedunt
tamquam
rgult
aliarum
Et
ista
venerabilis
domina
destitute.
ideo
per
tanquam
regularum
loyca
remigio
est
se quidemet priuset nonsimulcumaliisipsam| diligenter
utiqueample<c)tendo
malum
simul
ferventi
animoappetendo.
SextoMetaphisice:
UndeAristotiles
est,inquit,
tiam.Resautemsine
et aliamseien
scientiam
querereet modumsciendi,idestloycam
ne
sineloycaestquerenda
modo,ut ibidemscribi
tur,parimi
valet,quianullascientia
( !) nonaudeatsephilosoabsquevaloreprocedat.UndeSeneca: quidyaleticam
ygnorat
destituta
descen: sicutnavissinenautaatqueremigio
IdemTulliusetiam
profiteri.
phum
sic scientietempestate
variasfluctibus
in adversis,
dit in perditiones
disputationis
Averrois:
multiformiter
titubantes.
IdemetiamCommentator
dyaletica,
periclitantur
Valetenimadalias
manus
est
scientiarum
sicut
est
scientia,
inquit,
organorum.
organum
causas.Primaestquiadocetcognoscere
scientias
iterdyaletica
propter
quatuor
principal
si
aliarum
scientiarum
et quidfalsum.
Secunda
autemquiaprobat
principia
quidverum
scientiis
ab aliquodenegentur.
Tertiaest quia dat modumsciendiet argumentandi
utantur.
scientie
cumomnesquodammodo
modoarguendi
Quartaestquiadat
universis,
alteriexprimendo.
suntinmente
exerci
tiumloquendi
etea declarandi
queaputhomines
The next lines discuss the well-known items of the causa efficiens
, causa
and
i
:
causa
of
materialis,
nalis
logic (f. vb~2ra)

estquidsitcausaefficiens
suntscienda.Primum
loyce.
Cyrcaquamtriaprincipaliter
estquisfinis
estde quo tractatur
inloyca.Tercium
Secundum
propinquus.
estcausaefficiens
<Circa>primum
loyce.Anteenimtempus
patetquoniam
Arystotiles
sedipsesolusphilosophorum
autnichilfuerat
de istaartetractatum,
suumautparvum
sufficienter
etmoralem
subtilissimus
etnaturalem
scientiam
totam
perDeigratiam
loycam
utnatura
credo
sic
:
De quocommentator
Averrois
tertiode Anima
adinvenit.
loquens
relevari.
subtiliter
secreta
formavit
istumhominem
utperipsumipsiusnature
possent
scilicet
De secundo
sic.Triasuntde quibusinscientia
subiectum,
determinatur,
partes
autemin loycaestsillogismus
subiecti
et proprietates
subiecti.Subiectum
(exsymilis
sunt
2ra MS),partesveroipsiussuntpropositiones
et oratio.Proprietates
autem
partium
et negatio
affirmatio
et oppositio.
1 Todihas:nonexproprio
sedexalieno.
See below,
p. 24.
patre
I2

11:59:12 AM

estcognitio
verietfalsiperaccidens
De terciosic.Finisenimdyaletice
(?) loycus
princiet verumet falsum.
considrt
paliter
in sequentibus
De ipsisautemtribus
divinanobisgratiainspirante.
predictis
patebit
Then, our authorspeaks about the reason why Peter of Spain wrote his
Peter appears to have been one of quite a group of magisti
Summule.
who
made a compendiumof the scientiaAristotilis
(2ra):
estdyaletica
Verum
ideoratione
tradita
difficiliter,
quiainlibrisAristotilis
intelligentie
auctores
diversi
studuerunt
librosseutractatus
retromissifs]
temporis
amplioris
quosdam
inartehuiusmodi
scientia
Aristotilis
introductores
compilare,
quibuscognitis
limpidius
De quorum
numero
fuitmagister
Petrus
clarescat.
Cuiustractatum
admaiorem
Yspanus.
scolarium
in artedyaletica
ad presens
introductionem
compylantem
per Dei gfatiam
ad
(ex
MS).
sum(p)simuslegendum diligendum
huiuslibri,quodmagister
Patetergoquesitcausaefficiens
Petrus
QuiquorunYspanus.
condescendens
ad maiorem
damnobilium
precibus
intelligentiam
loyceedidithunc
Etestcausaefficiens
testeBoetioquodmovetet operatur
tractatum.
ad hocutressit.
From the author's remarks it appears that Peter of Spain wrote his
Summule
, not summule
, (called tractatus
), at the request of a number of
nobiliumprecibuscondescendens
noblemen ( quorundam
). I hope to return
to this phrase in a later part of this study. Our author's commentary
turnsout to be the writtenrecord of his lectures (cuiustractatum
....
Dei
ad
as
, mayappear also from
gratiamsumpsimus legendum)
per
adpresens
its divisioninto lectiones
. (See below, p. 26 ff.).
Afterthe discussionof the causa materialisof this book (viz. Peter
of Spain's Summule
), our author goes on to deal with fiveother
logicales
well-known items: causa materialis
, causaJormalis9causanalis , titulus
,
and cui partiphilosophie
(2ra_rb):
supponatur
estsillogismus
inse etinsuispartibus
Causaveromaterialis
consideratus
etproprietatibusearundem.
dictum
est.Et (est)causamaterialis
teste
Que autemistasunt,superius
eodemBoecioex quacumaliquofitaliquid.
estduplex
: forma
tractatus
etforma
Causaveroformalis
tractandi
(
)i
Formaverotractandi
idemestquodmodusagendi.Modusautemesttriplex,
scilicet
et istedaturperPosteriora;
diffinitivus
; et istedaturperPriora;
divisivus;
collectivus,
et inprobatur.
Si autemsitexemplorum
hocnonest
probatur
quandoscilicet
positivus,
: exempla
nonutitasintsedutsentiat
deesse,seddebeneesse,lindeAristotiles
ponimus
Etestcausaformalis
hiisquia<d)discit.
reminesse.
quedatessereiet conservt
esttriplex,
Causaverofinalis
scilicet(si MS)propinqua,
remota
etultima.
est
Propinqua
in
hoc
libro
eorum
Remota
traduntur.
est
facilior
librorum
que
cognitio
cognitio
Ultimaest perfectio
animerationalis.
Animaenimcreataest inperfecta,
Aristotilis.
autemvirtutibus
et scientiis.
perfectibilis
1 Hereseveral
linesmust
havebeenomitted
byourscribe.
H

11:59:12 AM

titulus
autemtalisest: Incipiunt
f.2rb Quintum
estquidsittitulus
introductiones
(!). | Tytulus
Petri
Y
magisti spani.
estcuipartiphilosophie
sermocinali
Sextum
supponatur
quoniam
sycut( !) dyaletica.
and the titlesof the thirteen
The authorgives a divisionof the Summule
:
chapters
in primadivisione
in XII capitula.In primodeterminatur
Isteveroliberdividitur
de
Insecundo
Intertiode predicamentis.
Inquartode
introductionibus.
de predicabilibus.
In septimo
In quintode locis.In sextode supposi
In
tionibus.
de fallaciis.
sillogismis.
Indecimodeappellationibus.
Innonodeampliationibus.
octavoderelativis.
Inundcimo
In duodecimo
et ultimode distributionibus.
de restrictionibus.
Accordinglythe commentarycontainsthe followingparts:
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
XI
XII

De introductionibus
De predicabilibus
De predicamentis
De sillogismis
De locis
De suppositionibus
Defallaciis
De relativis
De ampliationibus
De appellationibus
De restrictionibus
De distributionibus

( 2rb-i9ra)
(i9ra-24va)
(24va-3 3vb)
(33vb-37va)
(37va"44va)
(^va-^ra )
(48ra~72vb)
(72vb-74vb)
(74vb-7ra)
(7STa-76ra)
(j6T&-jjT))
(77rb"81rb).

The commentaryends on f. 8irb_va. The explicitis rather confusing.

I give the finallines of our text as it is foundin our manuscript(compare
the text which is given by the Todi manuscript,below, p. 31):
unomododicitprivationem
infinite
Item.Notandum
(!) extencionis
quodinfinitum
finite
aliomododicitprivationem
multiplicacionis
fore.Primomodoestpassioquant
tatiscontinue,
mododistraete
secundo
( !).
estnomensimplex,scilicetquod est signum
Item.Notandum
inponiquodinfinitum
tur(!) ad significandum
est.
unam,utdictum
in
conati
roberto
Finitaestistacompilacio
(!) a magistro
supratractans
anglico
O qua
M
ducentsimo
materiam
dacio
anno
domini
explanandi
potest
petriyspani
magisti
invire(8 1va)octavograduthauri. . .
mmaijterciadecimadiesoleexistente
septimo
FinitolibrositlausetgloriaChristo.
The large number of clumsy mistakesmade by our scribe (see all the
quoted texts) seems to prove conclusivelythathe did certainlynot excel
14

11:59:12 AM

in knowledge of logical matters and was not a skilfulcopyist either.

Fortunatelythe parallellous work in the Todi manuscriptis of some
help in enablingus to correct some of the scribe's errors1.
The remainingpartof the manuscript(8 1va-82v) is filledwithnotes
on severalmatters,writtenin different
hands,partof whichare definitely
later than the hand that wrote our tract.
The two firstnotes discuss logical matters(8 1 va) :
fieri
modis.Unoenimmodovereet proprie,
potest
(1) Notaquodpredicatio
quatuor
estvera,quiagenuspredicatur
de specie.Aliomodo
estanimai1
ut 'homo
; istapredicatio
ut *homo
esthomo*
fitvereet nonproprie,
; istaestvera,sed nonpropria,
quiaidem
curri
de seipso.Terciomodofitproprieet nonvere,ut 4homo
; istaest
predicatur
de subiecto,
adiectivum
sednonvera,quiadubiunest
predicatur
proprie,
quiaverbum
9
velnon.Quartomodofitnecproprie
necvere,ut4homo
estasinus
utrum
homocurrat
;
nec vera,quia unaspeciespredicatur
de alia specie,utasinusde
istanec estpropria
homine.
habettantum
(2) Queritur
quatuor
specieset nonplures
quarepropositio
kathegorica
etc.
nequepauciores
The next note concernsmathematics(the circulatio
; 8 1va) :
scilicetunitas,
triaconsiderante,
et simplicitas.
In circulacione
Unitas,quia
integritas
estunasolalinea.Integritas,
consideran
eius
quiapropter
nequepotest
integritatem
lineis,sicutomnesalie
quia nonfitex diversis
principium
nequefinis.Simplicitas,
etsicde aliis
, sedfitex unasolaet
quadrangulacio,
figure, sicuttriangulado,
linea.
simplici
hand continueswith a note on questio(8iva-82rb).
A somewhatdifferent
dictumproponimus
tertractavimus
(3) Quoniamde artequestionum
(?) brevi
(?)
ostendere
etc.
quidsitquestioet undedicatur
Folio 82v opens with a fragmentof a letterabout some liturgicalprivileges of the Order of the Grey Friarsconcerningthe feastsof the Virgin
Mary, St. Francis, St. Anthony, St. Clara, as they were given and
guaranteedby Pope InnocentIV (1 243-^4) and his successorsAlexander
IV (12 4-61), Urban IV (1261-64), Clement IV (126^-68) and Gregory
X (1271-76).
1 Foranattempt
ofourexplicity
seebelow,
ata correction
pp.31-32.

11:59:12 AM

2 - The manuscriptTodi, BibliotecaComunale54

This manuscript was described by L. Leonij in his catalogue of the
nowadaysbelongingto theBibliotecaComunale1. His descripmanuscripts
is
but
useful.The manuscriptcertainlydates fromthe thirteenth
tion all
as Leonij says. It is on parchmentand
century,not from the fifteenth
bound up in vellum and measures 280 x 210 mm. It contains 109 folios
written in two columns. Leonij did distinguishthe differentworks
which are contained in this manuscriptbut failed to give the correct
, which is the firstwork found
explicitof the commentaryon the Summule
in our manuscript.
Actuallyour manuscriptconsistsof threeparts: a copy of Robertus
in a redactiondifferent
fromthat
Anglicus' commentaryon the Summule
found in Vat. Lat. 3049; some fragmentsand straynotes, and, finally,
an anonymouscommentaryon Aristotle's Topics.
the firstfoursquires of our manuscriptwere wrongly
Unfortunately
bound. The correct order would be :
IT-I2V
37r"48v
2^.36V
i3r-24v ; next follow 49r etc. in the correct order.
The works mentionedabove occur in this way:
A. ff. i ra-$"6vb(middle of the column) the commentaryon the Summule
is found. It will be discussed below, pp. 22 ff.
B. ff. 6vb-6ovbcontain several fragmentsand notes:
i. The first fragmenthas apparently been taken from some
commentaryon a tract on fallacies. It is found from $6vb-7rband
opens as follows:
tribusmodis.Unomodo
dicitur
etc. Primonotaquodcompositio
etdivisio
Compostilo
tionum
dicitur
alio
modo
dicitur
actio,
componibilium
proposi
componentis
compositio
Et
sic
sumi
turhic. Similiter
unio.
vocum
dividendarum
modo
dicitur
tertio
passio,
dividends
tribus
modis.Unomododicitur
divisiosumitur
actio,aliomodopropositioEtsic
vocum
tertio
modo
dicitur
numdivisibilium
( !) separatio.
supponendarum
passio,
tribusmodissecundum
sumitur
hic. Sed notandum
quod oratiopotestdiversifican
speciem.
The other lemmataare :
etc
Hiishabitis
.
etc.
autem
Quidam
distinguunt
sitetc.($7a)
Unde
licetdictum
1 Lorenzo
diTodi
dellaComunale
deicodici
Inventario
, Todi1878,p. 24.
Leonij,
l6

11:59:12 AM

etc
modus
.
Secundus
motivm
Principium etc.
divisionis
modus
etc.
Secundus
dictionem
etc.
Fallaciaextra
communi
accidentis
Visaratione
etc.
paralogismorum
modus
accidentis
Secundus
:
etc.
(forfallacie)
(7rb)
figure
defallaciasecundum
etc.
quidetsimpliciter
Sequitur
This fragmentends as follows (7rb):
Tertionotandum
nonpossunt
quodduplexestratioquaresecundum
quidetsimpliciter
Unaratioquodsecundum
falladas.
facere
sehabent
diversas
sicutpars
quidetsimpliciter
et quiaparset totumnonfaciunt
et totum
secundum
et
diversa,
quid simpliciter
ergo
nonfaciunt
falladas.
diversas
The next fivelines of this column are blank.
These texts were not taken from Robertus Anglicus' commentary
on the seventhtractof the Summule(De Jallaciis). Apparentlytheywere
to be consideredas straynotes.
2. On 7va-vb two sets of ten medical questionsare found.They
run as follows:
undeet qualiter
nascunturcapilli
(a) Primoqueritur
Itemquaresuntrotundi
Itemquarepilisemper
crescunt
Itemex quocrescunt
ad modum
quarerectenoncrescunt
segetis
Item(quare)nascuntur
diversis
coloribus
Itemquarecalvescit
quidamet hoca parteante
Item<quare>
canescunt
insenectute
et aliinon
quidam
Itemquarequidaminadolescentia
canescunt
Itemquidsignificant
quantitas
pilorum
supercilii
Itemquidsimiliter
qualitas
pilorum
superciliorum.
(b) Primode mulieribus
queritur
quarenonsuntbarbate
Itemqueritur
coitum
quaremagisappetunt
postpartum
quamante
Itemquaremenstruam
cumhomines
nonpatiantur
patiuntur
Itemqueritur
de quomulieres
nutriunt
infantes
inuterosuo
Itemquidegerit
velquid<. ? .) gitin utromatris
Itemqueritur
quotsintet que que inpediunt
conceptionem
Itemqueritur
efficitur
nonautem
mulier
quarepostcoitumleprosisubsequens
leprosus,
Itemquareinfans
natus
inoctavomensevivere
nonpotest,
cumpossitinseptimo
etnono
vivere
Item<
>i.
Itemperquodforamen
exitmenstruum.
1 Theninth
wasomitted
asmay
from
itsanswer
question
presumably
(f.j vb).
byourscribe,
appear
17

11:59:12 AM

The text of the firstquestion may be compared with a passus found in

:
Simon of Faversham'scommentaryon the Summule
logicales1

dicendum
femina.NamutdicitYpocras(!),
f.7va:Adprimum
quodvirestcalidior
Et
est
tumex complexione
viro.
hoc
tumex calore
femina
calidior
frigidior frigidissimo
habetporos.Feminaverofrigida
Undecircamaxillas
est et
testi
culorum.
apertiores
habetilloset ex humiditate
inviscatos.
Sedunde(unumMS)est
Ideostrictos
hmida.
Dicendum
mulieres
barbatas.
inmatrice
locato
quodexspennate
quasdam
quodvidemus
ex
in
Si
vicinitate
dextra
est
eiusdem
clauso.
calidior
consistt,
pacte
quia
epatis
oreque
et masculus
Si autemin sinistra
efficitur.
fetusmeliori
atquecalidonutritur
sanguine
Si
vero
in
etsi
femina
efficitur.
dextra
est
versus
parte, aliquantulum
parte,que frigidior,
Sed(!) insinistra
versus
efficitur.
mulier
virmuliebris
dextram,
sinistram,
aliquantulum
minustarnen
estceterismulieribus,
validaviris.UndebarIstacalidior
efficitur.
virilis
viro.
bamhabet,sedminus
The answer to the last question remindsus of Aristotle,whose name is
not mentioned,however:
foramina
dicendum
exit,scilicet
ipsiusmulieris
f.7vb:Addecimum
quodpernovem
in speculum
inficit
menspeculum
sanguine
peroculos.Undetalismulierrespiciens
remanet
Undepalmatergens
struoso.
speculum
sanguinolentia2.
(3) Next follows a set of eleven astronomical and meteorological
questions (7vb-$8ra):
stellarum
Primoqueritur
de creatione
quaresuntcreate
de pluvia
Secundo
queritur
Itemqueritur
de nive
Itemquarepociusningit
quaminestate
pocius(!) inhyeme
Itemqueritur
de grandine
Itemqueritur
de tonitruo
Itemde choruscatione
Itemde fulmine
de yriquidest
Itemqueritur
et subtotcoloribus
in taliforma
Itemquareapparet
tione.
insuaappari
Itemquidsignificai
(4) The next set of ten questions concerns the soul (g 8ra_rl)):
de animaquidsit
Primoqueritur
Itemquotsuntanimespeciediffrentes
causatur
a quibusprincipiis
Itemqueritur
humano
in
anima
est
iter
Itemqueritur
corpore
qual
cumdicatAristo<ti)les
veltristetur,
animagaudeat
utrum
Itemqueritur
quodnon
1 ForSimon's
I-VofThe
seemySimon
(d. 1306)AsACommentator
text,
ofTheTracts
ofFaversham
6 (1968),[pp.69-101I,
in: VIVARIUM
Summule,
p. 91.
2 Cp.Aristotle,
Deinsomniis
etDedivi
Aristotelis
Deinsomniis
Lulofs,
, 4^9b 27.Cp.H. J.Drossaart
natione
1947),pp.XXX-XXXIII.
(Leyden
persomnum
18

11:59:12 AM

utrum
Itemqueritur
animamoveat
se de locoad locumnecaliter
Itemqueritur
utrum
habeatanimam
mundus
necne
Itemqueritur
datoquodsicquidpossitesseanimamundi
Itemqueritur
utrum
animainprincipio
sitperfecta
ad substantiam
et virtutes
quantum
et scientias
Itemqueritur
cumprimacausa,angelus
etanimacognoscant,
istetresdiffrant
qualiter
cognitiones.
($) The fourthset of questions is mainlydevoted to medical matters
(^grb-vb):
Primoqueritur
queet quotsintcausesompnii
Item,cumsemper
alimentm,
recipiamus
quodestcausaaugmentandi,
quarenonsemper
^
augmentamur
mulier
cum
naturaliter
sit
est
unde
ferventior
viro
est
in
libidine
Item,
quod
frigida,
Itemqueritur
estmagiscongrua
coitui
quecomplexio
Itemquodtempus
estmagiscongruum
coitui
Itemquidestilludquodvidetur
cadereadmodum
stellede nocte
Itemquareilludnonfitde die
Itemqueritur
se debenthaberemeliushomines,
inquopeius
quo tempore
Itemquidestilludquodsoletreprimere
de nocte
Itemqueritur
utrum
aliquomodopossetcapivelsaltemimpediri.
Afterthe answerstwo more questions are found (^8va~vb):
Itemqueritur
undeestquodquedamanimalia
vident
de nocte,de dieautemnon
Itemundeest quodexiensin obscuropotestvidereexeuntem
in splendido,
et non
econverso.
(6) The next set of questions concerns physical and medical matters,
again (^8vb-69ra) :
Primoqueritur
dominum
quarecumaliquisfremitat
precatur
Itemqueritur
abhominemus
quaremortuos
quosinvitadileximus
Itemqueritur
testiculis
quarenon(cumMS)aliquisinebriatur
positisin aquafrigida
Itemqueritur
inparteanteriori
ciciusquamina parteposteriori.
quarecanities
contingit
Itemqueritur
coitum
brutaverofugiant
quaremulieres
pregnantes
appetant,
Itemqueritur
et sic<cus>,
tamcitucurrat
quarecumlepussitfrigidus
Itemqueritur
noncalefit
quarevasargenteum
supraprunas
plenum
aquavelvinobulliens
Itemquarevaserepleto
absente
aquacalidavascalefit
igne
Itemqueritur
bibitus
ad mamillam
veniat
quarepilusa muliere
Afterthe answersof these questions some more are added (8vb-9ra):
Itemqueritur
ruminant
quarequedamanimalia
Secundoquarehabent
exta
inquorecipitur
folliculum,
, velrumen,
quendam
qui dicitur
cibuspriusquam
intret
cuiusmeatus
estangustus.
stomachum,
19

11:59:12 AM

si totusexponitur
Itemqueritur
radiislunenonmoritur.
Si
quareequusredoxatus
autemradiuslunetangat
siveperaliquodforamen,
ulterius
(ulteraeius
perfenestram
MS)moritur.
animalia
oreconcipiunt
et orepariunt,
Itemquarequedam
conciquedamperinferiora
pariunt.
piuntetperinferiora
Itemqueritur
priuslevetpedesposteriores
quamanteriores
quarebos quandosurgit
terre
nares
Itemqueritur
cubant
deponant
quando
quarepecoraprimo
clamans
lacrimatur
Itemqueritur
loquitur
quarequisinsompno
infantes
a nutricibus
coituutentibus.
Itemqueritur
quarequare( !) malenutriantur
actuum
Itemquarepueripostenativitatem
et
nonhabeant
complementum utambulandi
cumbrutahochabeant.
loquendi,
(7) Next there follows a set of questions on Aristotle's Physics(supra
librumPhisicorum
; 9ra-6ova). This part opens as follows:
Utrum
est
de naturalibus
Scientia
Phisicorum.
Questiosupralibrum
possitessescientia.
nonsuntsemper
necnecessarie,
suntetnecessaria.
eorumquesemper
Sedresnaturales
tiaad opposi
substantiam
ta,utmateria
prima.
quiahabent
queestinpoten
etc.
>.
<
Ergo
sitcorpus.Etarguitur
libriPhisicorum
utrum
Tuncqueritur
desubiecto
quodnon,quia
intota
tociusetpartis.
Sedcorpusmobileestsubiectum
idemnonpotestessesubiectum
liber
scientie
naturalis
ut
non
esse
scientia
unius
naturali.
subiectum,
partis
Ergo potest
Phisicorum.
....).
<
etc. I give
On f. 9va the lemma is found: Innataestnobisvia cognoscendi
the opening lines (9va) :

utrum
univerInnata
estnobis
viacognoscendi
A, 184a16]etc.Etqueritur
[Aristotle,
Physics
Particulare
sit
universale
Etvidetur
salesitpriussingulari.
simplicius.
prius,
quia'est
quod
est
Namadditcondi
tionesindividuantes.
Item.Primum
enimse habetperadditionem.
etcognoscendi
essendi
turconsequentia.
Item.Quodestprincipium
ida quononconverti
esthuiusmodi.
. . . etc.
particularia,
priusesteis. Universale
The other lemmataare :
9va:Id quidem
[184b 2g]
igitur
autpassionem
autem
6ora:Substantiam
[185a 34-3$]
(for:innitam
) autqualitatem
infinitum
estetc.[187b 7-8].
secundum
6ort):Innitum
quodinfinitum
incognitum
Aftersome eightblank lines anothercontemporaryhand continueswith
three more questions (6ova-vb):

Etarguitur
velab intellectu.
universale
sitensnature
(a) Questioestutrum
quodsic
et in quidde rebus
substantialiter
et hocsitilludquodpredicatur
quodsitensnature
extra
etc.
Et arguitur
velincorporaba.
utrum
universalia
sintcorporalia
(b) Queritur
quodsint
est
universale
estincorporeum;
(!) sic: omnequodhabetesseincorporeum,
corporales
huiusmodi
; ergoetc
20

11:59:12 AM

sintin ipsissingularibus
(exuniversalibus
(c) Questioestutrum
MS)
ipsauniversalia
etab eisseparata.
Etargui
turprimo
quodsint.Hocseparatum
positavelextrasingularia
Universalia
sunthuiusmodi.
esta sensibilibus
quodhabetessein intellectu.
Ergoetc.
C. A somewhat finerhand than the one responsible for the folios
i ra-0rbwrote the remainderof our manuscript.It certainlydates from
the thirteenthcentury,probablyfrom the firsthalf of the centuryand
containsa complete commentaryon Aristotle's Topics.This work opens
as follows:
divisione
sciendum
autde
philosophie
quodomnisloicaautestde sillogismo
Supposita
Si de sillogismo,
sic estscientialibriPriorm
, in quo determinai
partibus
sillogismi.
de sillogismo
Aristotiles
exempli.
autde partibus
Si autemsitde partibus,
autde partibus
Ethoc
subiectivis.
integralibus
sicutmanusetpedesetaliamembra,
sive
patet.Homoenimethabetpartes
integrales,
et corpus;habetiterum
sicutsuntSoret Plato.Similiter
animam
partessubiectivas,
Si sitergode partibus
dicode sillogismo.
auteritde partibus
integralibus
sillogismi,
autde partibus
remo
tisetincomplexis,
et complexis.
Si de partibus
remo
tis
propinquis
sicestliberPredicamentorum
Aristotiles
sive
de terminis
, inquodeterminai
incomplexis,
de decernpredi
Si autemsitde partibus
camentis,
que suntpartesremotesillogismi.
et
sic
est
liber
in
Aristoti,
Peryermenias
propinquis
quodeterminai
sillogismicomplexis,
lesdeenuntiatione.
tioveroestparspropinquiQueestparspropinqua
proposi
sillogismi,
- , in quo determinai
sic estliberPosteriorum
or. Si autemsitde partibus
subiectivis,
- , et liberThopicorum
- in quo
de sillogismo
et falsigrapho
Aristotiles
demonstrativo
- , et liberElenchor
de sillogismo
um
determinai
de sillo, in quo determinat
dyaletico
et hocintelligendum
estde sillogismo
in forma.
Istienim
gismosophistico;
peccante
subiecti
vesivespecies
suntpartes
incommuni
sivesimplici
ter<. . .) .
sillogismi
sillogismi
liberThopicorum
DicitautemThopicorum
Titulusest: incipit
Aristotilis.
ad differentiam
sicutad differentiam
aliorum
Priorm
et Posteriorum
etaliorum
librorum,
quoscomposuit
Et dicitAristotilis
Aristotiles.
ad differentiam
aliorum
comphilosophorum
qui Thopica
sicut
Themistius
Grecus
et
Marcus
Tullius
sicut
testatur
Boecius,
Latinus,
posuerunt,
suorum.
Boeciusin principio
Thopicorum
Folio f. 68vb is blank with the exception of the three firstlines. The
next folio (69r) opens with a new lemma: Sunt autemproblematum
et
cetera.This is the opening line of Aristotle's TopicsB (= 108 b 34).
Bok III begins on f. 73va ; Book IV on f. jjTi) ; Book V on f. 8 2rb;
Book VI on f. 86rb; Book VII on f. 93rb; Book VIII on f. 9ra. The last
lemma is Ampliusunamorationem
et cetera(f. io9ra); it is taken from
b
The
TopicsVIII, 163 34.
commentaryseems to be complete and ends as
follows (1 09va) :
ibusdocebatactorexercitationes
Adultimum
dicendum
circaconclusiones
quodinPrior
fuitibi,estintelligendum
despecialibus
conclusionibus,
specialeset ideoquoddictum
scilicetquodoportet
scireorationes
ad conclusines
>
specialesque <
2I

11:59:12 AM

in disputationibus.
Hic autemdicitidemde generalibus
conclusionibus
incidimi
et
factasideo quia ad eas
Namad universales
universalibus.
oportethabereorationes
continue
estdifficile1.
habundare
This commentaryon the Topicsis not one of the thirteenthcentury
commentarieshithertoknown (Boethius of Dacia, some master Elyas,
Henryof Brussels,Adenulfof Anagni,Angelusde Camerino, Radulphus
cuiusdam
Brito,Simon of Faversham)2. It is not identicalwiththe Expositio
Robertiin Topicaeither, seven books of which are found in a thirteenth
century manuscript of the Bibliotheca Nacional in Lisbon (Fundo
Alcobaa, cod. 175, olim 378).

3 - The Todi redaction of Robertus Anglicus' commentaryon the

Summule
Preceding the above-mentionedtexts Robert's commentaryon Peter
of Spain's Summule
logicalesis found in our Todi manuscripton ft'.ira6vb3. The work opens with an exuberant prologue which has the
followingincipit: ( 1ra) :
inprincipio
cuiuslibet
in Thymeo*
sittestePlatone
auxilium
Cumdivinum
operisinploeisquide maximis
velde
estquasimosetquedam
randum,
religio
quisicdicit: omnibus
Boetius
De
inauxilium.
Ethuicconsonat
minimis
sunt,deitatem
deprecantur
quiddicturi
5
nulla
rerum
omnium
invocandus
:
consolations
est,
pater,preter
quem
inquit,
philosophie
suntbeneficia
de
Et ut dicitSenecaquodilliusambigenda
exordium.
ratione
fundatur
Et ideoin maioriexordioinvocarenomen
cunctaduxerunt
cuiusmuere
originem.
et
bonitate
meoassitprincipio
et ineffabili
Altimissimi
duxiutipsesuasumma
dignum
et
instruat
in
consortio
studentes
me
una
inesse
me
et
in
exornet
presenti
processum
iubeatconsummanostrum
etipsequinullofineclauditur,
informet
laudabitur,
inceptum
ri.
In the next lines (ira-rb) our author goes out of his way to give quite
a number of quotations from Aristotle, Plato's Timaeus
, Boethius'
Tuscul.
de
Alanus
De consolatione
.,
Cicero,
Insulis,
,
Disputt
philosophie
he
Isaac
St.
of
Isidorus
Then,
Israeli,
Sevilla,
Calcicius,
Augustine.
1 Notetheerroneous
continue
estdifficile.
: . . . ideo
oftheexplicit
quiaeashabuere
reading
byLeonij
etdifficile;
seeop.cit.,
continue
: Des.Habere
wrote
ofAuguste
toa letter
Pelzer,
Grabmann,
referring
p. 67,n. i.
2 Forthese
zurAristotelischen
Kommentare
Lateinische
seeM. Grabmann,
commentaries,
Ungedruckte
III(Mnchen
Geistesleben
13.Jahrhundert
in: Mittelalterliches
ausdem
1956),pp.142-157.
Topik
3 Seeabove,
p. 16.
* Piatonis
IVed.J.Waszink.
Volumen
Timaeus
, p. 20,6 in: PlatoLatinus:
5 A. M.S. Boetii
Consolationis
Liber
Philos.
III,VIII,97,ed.R. Peiper.
22

11:59:12 AM

retums to his original point and goes on to give a divisioscientiarum

(jrb-va)
Hiisvisisad propositum
estquodhomoestex corporeet
redeamus.
dictum
Quoniam
ut perunamcorporis
animaconsti
estduplexscientia,
necessitas,
tutus,ingeniata
per
iliaqueestanime,
animesublevetur.
Illaqueestcorporis,
medianica
alteram
appellatur,
manuum
liberlis
Diciturmedianica
confacta,quiade operibus
appellatur.
quasimanu
veladulter
veludmechus
medianica
scientia
dicitur
siderata.Vel dicitur
quasimecha
sicintellectus
se
quandoad resistasvilessensibiles
quiad aliumthorum
appropinquat,
inarchitectoriam
etusualem.
Istaenimmedianica
recurrat.
dividitur
<
>.
Usualis
suntsex: lanifcium,
rus,medicina.
>.
venatio,
armatura,
<
navigatio,
inpracticam
ettheoricam.
Etdifferunt
Liberlis
dividitur
Tuncadliberalem
accedamus.
vel
modo
istescientie
modoprocedendi,
(?)
(?)
stip
quiapractica
grosso
estbonum
in fine,quiafinis
et theorica
practice
percausas.Adhucdifferunt
procedit
f.iva <
Veritas
vitevelspeculatio.
theorice
).
<
) et finis
Monastica
estqueordinat
etpoliticam.
inmonasticam,
Practica
dividitur
yoconomicam
etycos,quodestcustodia;
a monos
sui; etdicitur
adcognitionem
hominem
, quodestunum,
in Ethycis.
Yconomica
et hecdaturab Aristotile
et heremitis
et hecdebeturmonachis
idem
est quod
lindeyconomus
familiam
ordinare,
diciturque docetpropriam
grece
et hec a
inventore
huius
ab
Vel
latine.
dicitur
scientie;
Yconomo,
primo
dispensator
Politicanominatur
Tulliolibrosuo De Ojpciis
enodatur.
que docetregerepopuloset
in legibus
et hec traditur
a polis
Undedicitur
civitates.
, quodestcivitas
, velpluralitas;
et decretis.
in proemio
De qua dicitAverroys
scientiam
revertamur.
Nuncautemad speculativam
habente
ediditPhisicorum1,
equivocede homine
quodhomodicitur
quodsupralibrum
veroetpieto.Sed,prohdolor,verbum
sicutdehomine
scientiam
etnonhabente
Augusetveillisinquibuslegesilliterate
estdicentis
: adhucvenierunt
tini2verificatum
tempora
obscurabunt.
litteratas
scientias
de rebus.Scientia
de
in scientiam
scientia
dividitur
de signiset scientiam
Speculativa
3
sexto
Aristotiles
rebusdividitur
inillastresmodossciendi
Metaphisice
quando
quostangit
et methaphisicus,
mathematicus
dicit:tressuntmodisciendi,scilicetnaturalis,
quia
- , autde rebus
- et tuncestnaturalis
scientia
de rebusautestde rebusin materia
- , autde rebusquesuntin
- et tuncestmathematica
a materia
abstractis
simpliciter
et estmethaphisica.
tamenpretermotum
et materiam;
consideratis
motuet materia,
latinedicitur.
Undemathesis
grecequasiabstractio
sui subiecti.In naturali
divisionem
secundum
Scientia
naturalis
dividitur
philosophia
motuset
ab Aristotile
dicitur
estcorpusmobile.Undenatura
subiectum
principium
etsic
ad aliquam
mobilinoncontracto
materiam;
quietis.Autagit(ergoMS)de corpore
Si fitde corpore
Naturalis
liberPhisicorum
MS),quiCanon
nuncupatur.
Averroys
(priorm
inquo
CelietMundi
autcontrahitur
ad suumcausatum
mobilicontracto,
; etsicestLiber
sunt.
de motibus
determinatur
que incorruptibilia
corporum
supracelestium,
1 Cfr.Aristotelis,
commenvariis
ineosdem
Cordubensis
DePhysico
Auditu
Libri
octo
cumAverrois
eiusestparsutilitatis
"Utilitas
ed. Venetiis
1^62:H: (Antiqua
tariis,
Transi.):
apudJunctas
*.
etc*
voluntariis
inoperationibus
Etdeclaratum
estinscientia
scientie
consyderante
speculativae.
2 ubi?
3 Cfr.Arist.
E, 1025b 18- 1026a 32.
Metaph.
23

11:59:12 AM

Then he seems to make a freshstart ( i va) :

inhomine1,
Duo suntdefectus
sciliceta partecorporis
et a parteanime,lindead supa partecorporis
suntinvente
defectum
artesmechanice,
idestadulteriplendum
quedam
dicituradulterinus
ne,quiasicutfilius
qui nonestex proprio
patresedex alieno,ita
artesmechanice
dicuntur
adulterine
sedex arte.Etsuntseptem,
quianonsuntex natura
scilicetlanifcium,
armatura,
venatio,
medicina,et theatrica.
agricultura,
navigatio,
contine
t subse omnemmodumfaciendi
Lanifcium
vestes.Armatura
continet
subse
omnemmodumfaciendi
arma.Agricultura
continet
sub se omnemmodumcolendi
subse omnemmodumnavigandi.
continet
Venatiocontinet
subse
agros.Navigatio
omnem
modum
venationis.
Medicina
continet
subse omnem
modum
sanandi.
Theatrica
modum
continet
omnem
ludendi
locusRomedepu; etdicitura theatro
, quodestquidam
ttusad exercendum
hastiludiciludici(!) etaliosludos.
a parteanimefuerunt
Adsupplendum
verodefectus
invente
Et
quedamartesliberales.
tressuntde sermone
etfaciunt
suntseptem.
scilicet
Quarum
trivium,
gramatica,
dyaleAliequatuorsuntde rebuset faciunt
scilicetarismetica,
tica,rethorica.
quadrivium,
et
musica
Dicuntur
autem
astronomia.
liberales
duabus
de
causis; primaquia
geometria,
easaddiscere
tantum
filiiliberorum
solebant
estquialibrant
hominem
a curis
; secunda
secularibus.
He says he will confinehimselfto dialectics, but aftera few lines he
. It is self-evident
goes on to speak, again, about the scientiesermocinales
thatour text is much abbreviatedhere (ibid.)
Hic autemsolumde dyaletica
esttractandum.
Adhuiusergocognitionem
[etJquatuor
scilicetque sitcausaefficiens,
suntinquirenda,
material
et finalis.
is,formalis,
est Aristo
Causaefficiens
tiles.Causamaterialis
estargumentatio
vel modusarguendi.
estmodusagendiet estquintuplex,
Causaformalis
scilicetdiffinitivus,
divisivus,probaet exemplorum
et sic
tivus,inprobativus
Diffinitivus,
suppositivus.
quiadocetdiffinire,
de aliis.Et estutilisad tria,scilicet
ad obviationes,
quiadocetobviare;ad exercitium,
hominem
exercitatum
adregulas
aliaram
artium
illas<
).2
quiareddit
quiaprobat
libricognitionem
sexsuntinquirenda,
Adhuiusautem
scilicet
causaefficiens
etc
. <. . . .>
Tresenimsuntscientie
de sermone,
scilicet
rethorica.
Gramatica
dyaletica,
gramatica,
estdecongruo
etincongruo.
de
et
vero
falso.
Rethorica
de
ornato
et
inornato.
Dyaletica
scientie
liberiste.
supponitur
Ergosermocinali
Next some notes on the definitionof philosophiaare intersered(ibid.) :
multis
Hiisvisisdiffinitiones
modisdiffinitur.
Primomodo
Philosophia
aliquenotentur.
amor
Alio
modo
est
sui
est
abhomine,
sapientie.
philosophia
philosophia
ipsiuscognitio
secognoscit
Aliomodophilosophia
idesthomocognoscendo
estdivinarum
philosophiam.
: tangit
enimsubiectum
ethumanaram
etc.Inhacdiffinitione
duotangit
philosophie
per
rerum
ethumanarum
etiamcausamfinalem,
hocquoddicit:divinarum
; tangit
quiabene
vivereestfinis
philosophie.
1 Forsuchtopics,
ontheTwelfth
Notes
seemypaper
: Some
Human
Century
Topic
ofTheThree
(Four)
Remedies
inVIVARIUM
asTheir
Evils
andofScience
, Virtue
, andTechniques
s (1967),pp.8-1g.
2 Hereseveral
linesmust
havebeenomitted
byourscribe.
24

11:59:12 AM

Et notandum
alio mododiffnitur
sic ab Augustino:
est
quodphilosophia
philosophia
haberevitammundam
verorum
et incontaminatam
non
alibi:
errante,
cognitionem
inpresenti
summa
estcognitio
idestomnium
in
universi,
rerum,
nobilitas,
philosophia
estin anima.Duobusautemmodis
eterne
futuro
veracausafelicitatis
; cuiusdescriptio
autemdiffnitur
ab Ysidoro:primosic: philosophia
estdivinarum
humanarumque
cogestrerum
estprobabilis
nitioinquantum
hominipossibile
scientie;alibi:philosophia
cumratione
benevivendi.
Etperhocquod
coniuncta
humanarum
divinarumque
cognitio
causamfinalem.
dicitcumratione
benevivendi
tangit
Without any transitoryformulaanother freshstart is made and what
follows seems to be a new introductionto the Summi/ie-commentary
( ! va- vb) :
ex duobusconstat,
scilicetex
: omnecompositum
Dicit Aristotiles
in Metaphisica1
a
est
nott
rei naturalis
forma.
materia
et forma,lindecuiuslibet
Quod
perfectio
esta forma.Undetriplexestoperatio
rei perfectio
Aristotiles
dicens:uniuscuiusque
et disiungere.
Cumergohomosit
scilicetordinare,
(ordinario
MS)forme,
compiere
forma
etcompleri,
a
sua
habeat
f.i vb quoddam
| quod
perfici
oportet
compositum
generale,
etanima
habeat
cum
omne
forma
Sed
abanima,
est
scilicet
eius.
perfici
inperfectum
que
secundum
dicentem
:
uthabetur
inlibroDeAnima2
desenatasitinperfecta,
Philosophum
etinperfecta
animanataestveludtabularasainquanichildepingitur
perficiaantequam
Perficitur
autemanimaduobus
modis,scilicet
tur,oportet
quodab aliquoperficiatur.
est
Undevidendum
Patetautemquodscientiis
virtutibus
et scientiis.
magisindigemus.
animiquedistributa
nobilis
Estergoscientia
suscipit
perpartes
possessio
quidsitscientia.
citolabitur.Undesciennisipublicetur
incrementem
et avarum
possessorem
dedignatur
utopestemporales
dumquodquedam
suntquedistributa
; aliasuntquedistriminuuntur,
utignis;aliasuntquedistriineodemstaturemanent,
sedsemper
butanondiminuuntur
turtantomagis
utscientia,
butaaugmentantur,
augmentatur.
que quantomagisdistribui
incrementum.
distributa
dicit:
Et hoc estquodtangit
suscipit
partes
per
quando
que
etdiversitainanimaunitatis
estordinatio
traditur
djffinitio
Aliter
depicta
quodscientia
ab
causatorum
autemetdiversitas
tiscausatorum.
Unitas
primecause,
procedit unita(te)
ab unitate,
omnismultitudo
Boetium
procedat
ergo
queestDeus.Cumenimsecundum
causatorum
a bono; quaread cognitionem
omniabonaprocedunt
perlocuma coniugatis
bonitatis
estcognitio
necessaria
cause,queestDeus.SedcumipseDeussitinfinite
prime
inadfinitum
etinfiniti
nullaestproportio,
humnus
verofinitus
intellectus
etpotentie,
et
in
sua
virtute
Deum
nosternequitapprehendere
tellectus
essentia,
oportet
ipsum
a
creaturarum
creaturas
tamquam
ipsas,ut percognitionem
quodpriuscognoscamus
debet
finis
totius
illud
esse
Et
Creatoris.
veniamus
ad
philosoposterioribus
cognitionem
phievelscientie.
The careless compositionof thisprologue appears the more clearlyfrom
our
the fact that in commentingupon the initial phrase of the Summuie
1 Cfr.Metaph
Z. n, i037a29-30.
2 Arist.
Beatitudine
vol.IX.DeAnimae
Deanima
149K 4; Themistii
III,42^31 ff.Cfr.Averroes
LiberV,p. 221,43.
DeAnima
W.v. Moerbeke)
(transi.

11:59:12 AM

author again startswith the usual items, the four causes, the forma
its titulus
, and the cui partiquestion:
tractatus,
suntinquirenda,
libriquatuor
cuiuslibet
Dialetica est ars artiumetc. In principio
est huius
final
is. Causaefficiens
scilicetquidsit causaefficiens,
formalis,
materialis,
scilicet
Petrus
Causa
materialis
est
et
duplex,
Hyspanus.
sillogismus
operismagister
linde
est
cum
animal
est
substantia
omnis
dico
:
omne
homo
;
partes
sillogismi, sillogismus
sunttrespartesomne
Partessillogismi
estanimal;ergoomnis<homo>estsubstantia.
scirequodpartessillogismi
consideran
: aut
animaletc.Et debemus
tripliciter
possunt
aute
sunt
sunt
aut
sunt
remote
remotissi;
inquantum
inquantum propinque, inquantum
suntremote,
sicsuntpropositiones
suntpropinque,
etinquantum
sic
me.Sedinquantum
suntremotissime,
sicsuntsillabe.Proprietas
suntdieti
ones.Sedinquantum
est
sillogismi
et negatio.
affirmatio
Formatractandi
estmodusvel forma
et forma
tractatus.
Causaformalis
tractandi
est
scilicetdiffinitiva,
divisiva,
exemplorum
probativa,
inprobativa,
positiva.
quintuplex,
et partessillogismi
Perhocquoddicitexemplorum
totumsillogismum
et
, tangit
positiva
Forma
tractatus
est
divisio
libri
eius.
proprietates
percapitula.
et istaestquadruplex.
Estquedamutilitas
estutilitas
Causafnalis
quod(que MS)dat
sciendiet iterinaliasscientias.
Aliaestutilitas
modum
quod(que MS)datexercitium
est quodprobatsuasregulaset nonalias,sicut
>. Tertiautilitas
(
verum
a falso.Etsicpatetquesit
estquoddiscernit
). Quartautilitas
<
materialis
et speciali.
causaefficiens,
Ethocestingenerali
fnalis.
formalis,
adformam
libresexsuntinquirenda,
Accedamus
Undein principio
cuiuslibet
tractatus.
cuipartiphilososcilicet
quematerialis,
quefnalis,
quesitcausaefficiens,
queformalis,
Causaefficiens
PetrusHyspanus.
Causamaterialis
estmagister
triplex,
phiesupponatur.
scilicetsillogismus,
et proprietates
sicutpriusfuit
partium
partessillogismi
sillogismi,
Formatractandi
estduplex:forma
et forma
dictum.Causaformalis
tractandi
tractatus.
estquintuplex,
utdictum
estsuperius.
Formatractatus
estdivisiolibripersuacapitula
velpersuaspartes.Causafnalis
esttriplex
remota
etremotissima.
: propinqua,
<. . . .).
est:
tractatus
Cui
talis
Petri
Incipiunt
supponaMagisti Hyspani. partiphilosophie
Tytulus
tur?Seiendesermocinali.
Next the lectioprimais given. It containsa divisiotextuswith a sententia
lectionisin generali
, then a sententiain speciali, followed by a set of
I give the complete text o the firstlectio
notabiliaand a set of questiones.
vb-2rb);
isteliberin
Undecumdivisiovaleatad tria,dividatur
Hocvisoad litteram
accedamus.
dicitur
isteliber
Et
non
est
XII capitula.Undeprimum
introductionis.
capitulum
sed isteest magis
introductorius
tantum
quoniametiamalii librisuntintroductorii,
divisionosadalioslibros.Etistam
introducimur
introductorius,
magnam
quiaperistum
noscausabrevitatis
etaccipiamus
minorem.
nemobmittamus
In secunda
induaspartes.Inprimadiffinit
liberdividitur
Undeisteprimus
dyaleticam.
Ubi
ibi:
Sonus.
de principiis
Secunda
determinat
presens
pars
incomplete
dyaletice.
in quatuor
Et dividitur
lectiofinietur.
Primaparsestpresentis
lectionis.
partescausa
In tertia
In secunda
In primapartediffinit
brevitatis.
ponitconclusionem.
dyaleticam.
Primaestin principio
In quartaostendita quo sit incepturus.
ponitethymologiam.
26

11:59:12 AM

a dya.Quartaibi:
secunda
dicitur
ibi: Etideoinacquisitione
lectionis.
. Tertiaibi: dyaletica
Sedquiadisputatio.
lectionis
In specialisicprocedit
circapartem
Ethecestsententia
ingenerali.
primam.
de hocquod
etc.Hicponuntur
dueclausule.Primaestde arsartium
, secunda
Dyaletica
Per hoc quoddicitarsartium
dnottexcellentiam
dicit:ad omnium
methodorum.
per
dnott
omnis
reflexus
nominativm
excelunamregulam,
pluralis
super
quia
genitivus
Veldicoarsartium
ut Deusdeorum
lentiam,
, virgo
, arsartium.
virginum
perexcellentiam
aliisscientiis
vel deservit
aliisscientiis,
nonquodsitnobilior
sed quiaprebetmodum
dicitur
sit
aliis
sicutmanus
non
nobilior
f.2ra aliissciIentiis,
membris,
organorumquia
organum
aliismembris.
Veldicitur
arsartium
aliarum
artium
sedquiadeservit
per
quasidomina
aliisscientiis
excellentiam
idestforma
iter.Velsic: arsarcium
eoquodomnibus
prebeat
sicdyaletica
illumint
aliasartes.
et luxaliarum
artium,
visibile,
quiasicutluxillumint
methodorum
Aliaestcumdicitadomnium
ad omnium,
etc.,idesthabetviamcognoscendi
inloycaidemestquodregulaingramatica.
idestad omnesaliasartes,lindeprincipium
Methodus
idemestquodbrevis
viavelbrevis
scientia
velbrevis
ars.
dicens
In
:
Et hecestexplanatio
secunda.
primepartis.Incipit
quaponitconclusionem
estarsartium
cesstobiectio
itaestquoddyaletica
perhocquoddicitcomplete
postquam
que possetfieriab aliquo,quiapossetdicerealiquis: egovideoquodpriusacquirimus
Solvitur
priordebetessein acquisitione.
quamloycam;ergogramaticam
gramaticam
vel
fieri
esse
hocperquandam
distinctionem
potest complete
queposset quiaacquirere
Si loquarde acquisitione
dico quodgramatica
debet(esse)c
incomplete,
incomplete.
sicdicoquoddyaletica
estprior.
prioracquiri.Si complete,
illaparsinquaponitethymologiam.
estinterethymoloPosteasequitur
lindedifferentia
vel
estquandolatinm
exponitur
pergrecum
giamet interpretationem.
Ethymologia
utesthic: lapis
perlatinm.
Interpretado
peraliudlatinm,
quandolatinm
grecum
dicitur
a dya
lindedyaletica
dicitur
,
, quodestduo, et(velMS)lexis
quasiledens
pedem,
est
ratio
in
scilicet
et
,
disputatione.
opponentis
respondentis
quod
Dicistuquoddyaletica
nonpotest
haberinisidisputando.
Egovideoquodaliquishabeat
istamscientiam
sinedisputatione
habeatur
(habeant
MS) cumdisputatione.
quamvis
Dico quodnonpossithaberepleneet perfecte.
Etdicit
Etitaestfinita
a quositincepturus.
tertia
parsetincipit
quarta.Inquaostendit
voce
necsermo
nisimediante
sic: Sedquiadisputatio
nonpossit
sermone
haberi
nisimediante
vox
est
hocest
omnis
ideo
a
sono
a
est
sonusf
inchoandumy
incipiendum.
quia
tamquampriori
Finita
estsententia
lectionis
ingenerali
et inspeciali.
Adevidentiam
lectionis
possumus
aliquanotareet aliquadubitare.
autperspeculatioPrimum
notabile
estquodomniscognitio
reiautfitperoperationem
Ethocdiversimode,
nem.Si peroperationem,
sichabemus
artemvelfacultatem.
quia
Siperspeculanosfaciles.
arsartatnosadsuasregulas.
Aliomodoestfacultas
quiareddit
Autin
hocesttripliciter.
Autin comparatione
ad doctorem
; sicestdoctrina.
tionem,
animam
ad
in
Aut
et
sic
est
ad
;
disciplina.
comparatione
comparationediscipulum
inseautabsolute
rationalem
: autinhabendo
; sicestscientia
; ethoctriplex
respectum
inse; sicestscientia.
Si ad aliud,autadditcircaillamscientiam
saporem;et sic est
autadditamorem;
estamator
sic estphilosophia,
sapientie.
sapientia;
quiaphilosophus
amat
sedrusticus
amatphilosophiam,
estphilosophus;
lindeestobiectio:quicumque
; ergoestphilosophus.
philosophiam
Amareestcognitio(!)reihabite;
Solutio.Differentia
estinteramareet desiderare.
desiderare
estcognitio
reihabende.
a dya
Secundum
notabile
estquoddyaletica
dicitur
, quodest
, quodestduo,et logos
27

11:59:12 AM

istastresscientias,
vellexis
, comprehendit
, quodestratio.Perhocquoddicitlogos
sermo,
suntde sermone.
scilicetgramaticam,
rethoricam,
quia istetresscientie
dyaleticam,
Perhocquoddicita dya, quodestduo,etlexis
modis
: aut
, quodestratio,ethocduobus
abalioopposito
unumoppositum
rediscernit
; etsicsuntistetres: gramatica,
dyaletica,
a falso.Etsicestdyaletica
verum
solummodo.
Autdiscernit
thorica.
et loycapossunt
terconsideran:
estquoddyaletica
autlargo
notabile
Tertium
duplici
stricto
Si largo
modo.Si consideretur
modo,sic estliberTopicorum.
modo,autstricto
omneslibrosloycales.
modo,sic estloyca,que comprehendit
modis
: autinviadoctriconsideran
etloycapossunt
duobus
estquodgramatica
Quartum
sicdicoquodgramatica
Si in viadoctrine,
ne,autin viascientie.
pecedit
dyaleticam.
sicpecedit
Si inviascientie,
dyaletica.
et sic
est quod scientiapotesthabereduobusmodis:aut per infusionem;
Quintum
autperinventionem,
et hocdupliciter;
et sic
habuerunt
sancti;autperinventionem;
nos
sic
doctrinam
aut
habuerunt
habemus)
;
<et
;
sequaces.
per
philosophi
rerum
certacognitio
iuncta
estdivinarum
estquodphilosophia
Sextum
humanarumque
universi
cuius
in
Aliomododicitur
benevivendi.
cumratione
descriptio anima
cognitio
estcausasumme
felicitatis.
infuturo
summa
nobilitas
est <in>cpresenti,
sicdiffinitur
: dyaletica
est scientia
estquodab Augustino
notabile
dyaletica
Septimum
ballutiencium
mutosloquifacit,linguas
reficit,
dirigit,
pascit,sicientes
que esurientes
et disponit.
ordinat
ad aliasscientias
rationalem
animam
ad unumfinem
notabileest quodarsest collectiomultorum
Octavum
preceptorum
rationis
infinitatis
Aliter:arsestfinitum
tendentium.
miraculum,
compendium
insigne
tatem(
invenies
minimam
)!.
quanti
quamsi perse consideres
estbrevisliberet utilisa doctorum
Nonum(octavum
(est)quodtractatus
MS)notabile
estbreviset apertademonstratio.
Item.Introductio
codicibus
compilatus.
Unomodo
Decimum
MS)estquoddyaletica
potestduobusmodisconsideran.
(decimus
secundum
Alio
modo
et
sic
est
scientia.
est
secundum
docens;
quodestutens;
quod
Autsecundum
modisconsideran.
duobus
etsicestars.Item.Adhuc
quoddeservit
potest
secundum
et sic estancillaet vilior.Si consideretur
aliisscientiis;
quoddatmodum
sicestnobilior.
ad aliasscientias,
sciendiet informat
cognitionem
Etvidetur
debeatprecedere
utrum
quodsic.Viapecedit
Queritur
gramaticam.
dyaletica
estviaadaliasscientias
idcuiusestvia. Seddyaletica
>; ergopece(
etincongruum.
etfalsum,
verum
considrt
dit.Adidem.Dyaletica
congruum
gramaticus
etincongruitas
exmodis
exsignificatis,
oritur
etfalsitas
Sedveritas
significandi.
congruitas
2rb Sed
modum
Ergoloycaprece| ditgramaticam.
pecedit
significandi.
significatum
considrt
Sedcontra.Quodgramatica
significata,
probo.Gramatica
generalia
prcdt
pecedit
dyaleticam.
speciale.Ergogramatica
pecedit
specialia.Sedgenerale
dyaletica
et
etorationes
dictiones
etsillabesuntpartes
Item.Littere
loyce.Sedlittera
gramatice,
etc
.
et orationem.
dictionem
sillabaprecedunt
Ergo
: autproutestinviadoctrine
consideran
etloycapossunt
Solutio.Gramatica
;
dupliciter
Si in viascientie,
et sic gramatica
pecedit
gramaticam.
dyaletica
pecedit
dyaleticam.
Etsicsolvitur.
Etquodnonsitscientia
sitscientia.
Aliaquestioestutrum
probo.Si dyaletica
dyaletica
autperdoctrinam.
autessetperinventionem
essetscientia,
Quodnonsitperinventionem
ut aliquisesseta quo haberemus
eam,et de ilio aliam;et sic
patet,quiacontingeret
1 Thisdefinition
isincomplete
inourmanuscript.
Cp.Log.Mod.Ili,p. 17$.
28

11:59:12 AM

Itemaliaratione.Omnisscientia
essetprocedere
in infinitum.
suaprincipia;
supponit
immoprobat.Ergononestscientia.
nonsupponit,
Seddyaletica
Item.Omneilludquod
aliamscientiam,
nonestscientia.Sed dyaletica
transcendit
transcendit.
Ergononest
scientia
dyaleitica.
autfitper
Solutio.Respondeo
Quandotudicisquodomnisscientia
primoad primm.
est
scilicet
autperdoctrinam,
extranea
inventionem
et
Si
sensum.
inventio,
duplex
per
Si persensum,
sic concedoquoddyaletica
sic dicoquodest
nonsitscientia.
extranea,
scientia.
Ad secundum
Quandotu dicisquodomnisscientia
respondeo.
supponit
argumentum
sua principia,
dico quod dyaletica
potestduobusmodisconsideran:aut secundum
suaprincipia.
Autsecundum
quodestdocens,etsicdicoquodsupponit
quodestutens.
Etsicdicoquodnonsubponit
sedprobat.
aliasa se; $ed
Ad tertium
Quandotu dicisquodtranscendit
respondeo.
argumentum
'
ut *celum
itomnia
transcendit;
accommoda,
tang
dyaletica
ergoetc. Etestibidistributio
aliasa se.
aliasa se. Sicdyaletica
transcendit
That the text of our commentaryis the result of lectures may appear
fromsuch clauses as ubifiniturlectiohodierna(2rb).
The order of the tractsis in the Todi manuscript:
Prologus:ira-rb
I De introductionibus
: i rb-10rb
1
II Depredicabilibus : iorb-i2vband37ra~vb
III De sillogismis
: 37vto-40ra
IV De locis
: 4044
V De suppositionbus 44va-47rb
VI Depredicameli
s
and2$ra-29ra
47rb-48vb
VII Defallaciis
: 29^-36^ and13r-24r*>
VIII De relativis
24rb-vb and49ra-orb
vto
IX De ampliationibus
etappellationibus:
orb-o
va
X De restrictionibus: ovb-2
XI De distributionibus
: $2va-6vb.
A few remarksare called for. Althoughthe author speaks of a division
into twelve chapters,the tracts De ampliationibus
and De appellationibus
are takentogetheras the ninthchapter,withthe resultthatinsteadof the
usual twelvechaptersthe finalnumberis eleven. This seemsto confirmthe
abbreviatorycharacterof this redactionof Robert's commentaryand fits
in well withtheratherclumsycompositionof theprologue,which can be
explained most plausiblyas the resultof a somewhathastycompilation2.
The firstcapitulumor liberis called introductions.
The introductory
is conceded by our author,but the first
characterof the whole Summule
1 Notice
ofthefirst
theincorrect
four
Seeabove,
binding
squires.
p. 16.
* Seeabove,
p. 2$.
29

11:59:12 AM

, he says,so thatit is given the title

chapteris introductorypar excellence
De introductionibus
. In thisconnectionit mustbe noticedthatthecomplete
work by Peter of Spain was not entitled Introductiones
nor Summule
but
Tractatus
Petri
In
some
commentaries
,
Hyspani (ivb).
Magisti
logicales
is found, but thistitleis certainlyto be considered
the titleIntroductiones
as thatof the firstchapteronly. So in the wide-spreadthirteenthcentury
, found in at least seven manuanonymouscommentaryOmneshomines1
read
libri
est
iste
we
Titulus
:
Introductiones
:
maistriPetriYspani
scripts2,
. Mus. cod. 27773, f. ioovb), and in the firstredaction
(Nuremberg,Germ
of Robert's commentary:Tytulusautem talis est: Incipiunt
introductiones
Petri
Lat
That
for
.
Robert
the correct
f.
3049, 2rt))3.
Yspani(Vat.
magisti
but tractatusappears fromthe
title of Peter's work is not introductiones
explicitof the same manuscript(Vat. Lat. 3049, f. 8irb): Finita est ista
supertractans(for: tractatus)etc.4.
compilatio
Furthermore,the unusualplace of De predicamentis
(afterthe tractof
tract
can
the
De
be
noticed.
Then,
jallaciis discusses the
supposition)
so-called Fallaciemaiores
, not the shortversionthatis foundin partof the
older manuscripts,such as Vat. Reg. Lat. 120g, which Bocheski used
forhis edition of Peter's Summule*
.
The text of this redaction of Robert's commentaryoften differs
considerablyfromthatof the Rome redaction.The deviationsare indeed
so strikingthat one would be inclined to take them for two different
commentaries. The numerous similarities and parallellous passages
mightbe explained,in thatsupposition,as the resemblancesand parallells
authorsthatare quite usual in thatkindofcommentary.
between different
However, one glance at the explicitof the Todi redaction sufficesto
know that we reallyhave to do with two redactionsof the same work.
As a matterof factthe work has two colophons in the Todi manuscript.
On f. $6V under the second column we read : Expliciunt
glosulecomposite
a totalogyca
a magistro
P. Hyspaniextracte
R. Anglicosupertractatum
magisti
novaet veteri.DEO GRACIAS.
1 SeeGrabmann,
undFunde
, pp.67-69.
Forschungen
Handschriftliche
2 Munich,
Germanisches
B.N.Nouv.
C.L.M.
4603;690$22.294;Paris,
Acq.lat.308;Nuremberg,
V.P.L.2389.
cod.Fol.III,26,andVienna,
cod.ly.yyz;
Museum,
Escorial,
3 Grab
tohis
forthewhole
mann
tookthetitleintroductiones
book.Seetheintroduction
wrongly
AkadederBayerischen
inlogicam
Introductiones
edition
ofWilliam
ofShyreswood's
(Sitzungsberichte
Klasse
miederWissenschaften,
-Hist.
Phil.
10,Mnchen
1937,p. 16). Inmyviewthe
1937,Heft
isnotcorrect
work
titleIntroductiones
forWilliam's
either.
4 Seeabove,
pp.31-32.
p. 14andbelow,
5 Likemost
classmanuscripts,
themanuscript
Vat.Keg.Lat.i2o$hasbeen
first
ofthesupposed
in
inthisseries
someapparent
Seemyfirst
overestimated
sofar.Itcontains
interpolations.
paper
VIVARIUM
7 (1968),pp.1-34.
30

11:59:12 AM

This colophon was writtenby our scribe under the firstpart of the
fragmenton fallacies following immediatelyafter our commentary1.
The commentaryitselfends as follows (^6vb) :
uno mododicitprivationem
finite
Item.Notandum
quod infinitum
(!).
exceptionis
finitemultinls
Alio mododicitprivationem
or multiplicationis
?; cfr.
(multitudinis
Vat.Lat. 3049,f.8irb).Primomodoest passioquantitatis
secundomodo
continue,
infinitum
estnomen
Item.Notandum
discrete.
secundum
quodnomen
simplex
quodest
imam
ut
et
ad
dictum
est.
rem,
inpositum
signum
significandum
a magistro
Finitaestistacompilacio
R. Anglico,
in qua proutconari
supertractatus
circamateriam
P. Hyspani.
explanandi
potuitmagisti
In spite of the numerousstrikingdifferencesbetween the wordingof our
commentaries,we can safelyassume thatthe Rome and Todi manuscripts
present a double redaction of one master's commentaryon Peter of
Spain's Summulelogicales.
A strikingdifferencebetween both redactions,however, is thatin
the Todi redaction the explanatoryparts are much shorterthan in the
Rome redaction,and that the former,in order to elucidate the matter
dealt with, insertsmore questions and sophisms. This featureseems to
point to a later compositionof the Todi version2.
As to the clumsycolophon foundat the end of both redactions,the Todi
manuscriptsuffices,if necessaryat all, to show the incompetenceof the
scribe of the Rome manuscript,which actuallyhas supratractansinstead
of supertractatus
, and conatiinstead of conari. However, the colophon
even in its Todi version still affordsplentyof difficulties.In Rome the
word proutwas apparentlyoverseen before conari. Todi, at the other
hand, readspotuitinsteadofpotest
, which mightbe explainedas a hintfor
the priorityof the redactionof our commentaryas found in the Rome
manuscript3,and it has potuitafterthe phrasemateriam
explanandi.Rome
omits circabeforemateriam.
I would suppose thatthe clumsyword dacio
read in the Rome manuscriptbefore magistiPetriYspaniis the scribe's
misreadingfor an inserted circa, which he took fromthe margin and
put in on the wrong place. That he was a very unreliable copyistwe
have already seen. Both manuscriptshave explanandi
. The gerunddoes
not fit in here; moreovera verbum
is
nitum missing. I thinkwe have
to read somethinglike explanavit.
1 Seeabove,
p. 30.
* beealsobelow,
p. 44.
3 Forthispriority,
seealsobelow,
p.44.
31

11:59:12 AM

With all due reservationI would propose to read the original

colophon as follows:
RobertoAnglico.In qua prout
a magistro
Finitaest istacompilacio
supertractatus
Petri
conaripotestcircamateriam
explanavit
Magisti Yspani.
The Rome manuscriptcontains a valuable addition about the date of
composition. Unfortunatelythe date proper must be considered as
corrupt, since the year 1207 is certainlywrong:
ducentsimo
AnnoDominimillesimo
maijterciadecimadie, sole
septimomen<se>
thauri
2.
octavo
invire1
existente
(81 va)
gradu
The date May 13 th, 1207 is impossible, since Peter of Spain's Summule
3
logicalescannot possiblyhave been writtenat so an earlydate . But how
to correctour text? Grabmann,who considered Robert Kilwardbyto be
the author of our commentary,proposed to supply quadragesimoor
before septimo To my mind this is a quite arbitrary
quinquagesimo
encroachmentupon the manuscriptreading. From the palaeographical
point of view other conjectures would be more appropriate; e.g.
insteadof ducentsimo
trecentesimo
(our scribe may have had or read in his
instead of
text instead of ) ; or one may read septuagsimo
. In these cases we would have,respective, or {septuagsimo)
septimo
septimo
and
1
1
dates
1277 as the possible dates forthe compo307, 270,
ly, the
sition of our text. The firstconjecture can be dismissed for other
reasons: our commentarymust have been writtenbefore thatby Simon
of Favershams,who died in 1306 and wrote probablyhis commentary
at some date about 1280 at the latest6.Thus, 1270 and 1277 are leftas
we have to establish
possible dates. In order to solve this question,
Robertus Anglicus' identityfirst.

1 Fora correction
seebelow,
ofthisword,
p. 33.
2 Seeabove,
p. 14.
would
dateoitheSummule
3 Itshould
diedin1277.Theearliest
that
theauthor
benoticed
possible
i23o's,I think.
beinthe1220'sorearlier
4 Handschriftliche
undFunde
, p. 67,n. i.
Forschungen
Seebelow,
ff.
40
pp.
in VIl-Voj theaummule,
6 SeeL. M. de Rijk,Simon
asa Commentator
oj thetracts
ofFarersham
6 (1968),[pp.69-101],
VARIUM
p. 76.
32

11:59:12 AM

4 - The identityof Robertus Anglicus

. As a matterof
Several Mediaeval scholarswere called Robertus
Anglicus
fact Fabricius mentions a RobertusAnglicusin his Bibliothecamediae
aetatiSypublished in 1746 (VI, pp. 379-380; second edition, p. 13s1).
He was bishop of Olmutz in 1201 and is to be dismissed therefore.
Several other Mediaeval scholars were surnamedRobertus
, e.a.
Anglicus
one Robertus OrfordiusO.P., a theologianwho was born at Erfortand
became masterof theologyat Oxford. He is alleged to have been one of
the stoutestdefendersof Thomas Aquinas. He cannotbe consideredhere
either.
Through the importantstudies of Paul Tannrywe know aout a
Robertus
Anglicuswho wrote on mathematicaland astronomicalsubjects
at Montpellierin the firsthalfof the 1270V. Tanneryrightlyrejects an
identificationof this Robertus with Robert Grosseteste (d. 12^3) and
with Robert Kilwardby.The firstrejection is self-evidentbecause of the
date of Grosseteste's death (12^3). That our scholar cannot have been
Robert Kilwardbyeither, needs more adstruction.
Let we startwiththe colophonofsome ofthemanuscriptscontaining
Robertus Anglicus' Tractatusquadrantisor his Tractatusde sphera2.The
thirteenthcenturymanuscriptParis, B. N. Lat. 7392s gives as the explicit
of the Tractatusde speraJo. de Sacroboscoad glo (sas) RO (BERTI) Anglici
(ff. 2ra-43rb):
de speracelestiad maiorem
Finitaestistacompiladosupermateriam
introductionem
in MontePessulano
scolarium
Ro. Anglicus
et
studentium,
quemcomposuit
Magister
inprimo
inascendente.
finivit
existente
a.d. 1271 soleexistente
gradutaurietscorpione
tractatus
de spera(43rl>)*.
Explicit
1 PaulTannery,
duquadrant
dematre
Robert
Letraite
XIIIe
Texte
latin
e*
Angls
(Montpellier,
siclec.)
in: Notices
desmanuscrits
dela Bibliothque
etextraits
traduction
ancienne
Nationale
etautre
grecque
desinscriptions
etBelles-Lettres
1897,pp.61-639.
ypublis
35,2,Paris
bibliothques
parl'Acadmie
2 Thework
andtranslated
TheSphere
wasedited
andItsCommenThorndike,
byLynn
ofSacrobosco
Press1949),pp.143-246.
ofChicago
tators
(TheUniversity
3 Tannery's
sicle
date(XIVe
sincethe
) doesnotholdgoodforthesecond
partofthemanuscript,
onlogicitcontains
ofthetract
Forthismanuscript,
gives1293asthedateofwriting.
colophon
Text
Summule
seeL. M.deRijk,OnTheGenuine
I: General
Logicales
ofPeter
ofSpain's
problems
inthemanuscripts,
6 (1968),[pp.1-34],
in: VIVARIUM
concerning
interpolations
possible
pp.
24-33.
* Notf.43v,asissaidbyTannery.
Thetextopens
onf. 2ra(not:1vas Tannery
hasit)with
a
in
inprimo
De
Tractatum
, dicentes
capitula
distinguimus
Spera quatuor
quidsitspera
prologue:
onf.2va:Unasciencia
deSacrobosco's
text.Robert's
estnobilior
etc.containing
gloss
begins
John
autquiacertiori
modo
Inter
aliasigitur
altera
scientias
subiecto,
, autquiaestdenobiliori
procedit.
dupliciter
tamquiaestdenobiliori
subiecto
astronomia
estde
intur
, quoniam
(? for:invenitur
) dicinobilissima
estcorpus
etincorruptibili
nobilissimum
celesti
modo
, quod
, tum
,
ingenerabili
quiacertiori
corpore
procedit
demonstrative
. . . etc.
quoniam
procedit
33

11:59:12 AM

A similar colophon is found in Oxford, Bodleian Library, ms. Digby

48, f. 88r, with the exceptionof the date (here : 1272)1. Since one of the
2
quadrantishas as the date of writing
manuscriptscontainingthe Tractatus
antequem.
i 276s, we must take the year 1276 as its terminus
From this evidence the conclusion may be drawn that Robert
Anglicus, the author of a Tractatusquadrantisand a commentaryon the
well-knowntractDe spheraby Johnde Sacrobosco, taughtat Montpellier
about 1271-72. The questionariseswhetherthisauthormaybe identified
with Robert Kilwardby. Tannery seems to be right in rejecting this
identification*
. Tannery's main argument was the apparent lack of
interest in mathematical and astronomical subjects on the part of
Kilwardby,since nothingin the lists of his extantwritingsindicatesany
special interest of that kind. Some fortyyears ago two scholars, M.
Alliaume5 and P. Humbert6, believed to be able to undermine this
,
argumentof Tannery's by pointing to certain treatises "de aritmetica
de geometria
, priorisprovincialis
, de astronomiaRobertiKilwardby
Jratrum
in provinciaAngliefound,according to Laude' s catalogue, in
predicatorum
the public libraryof Bruges (cod. io). Humbert supposed that about
12407, soon after the founding of the University8,Kilwardby was

1 SeeJosiah
Writers
CoxRussell,
, London
1936,
Century
England
p. 129.TheMSSalzburg
ofThirteenth
butinstead
ofMontpessulano:
from
Parisius.
cod27.9,dating
Sankt
129$hasthesame
Peter,
explicit
2 Cambridge,
MS1767.SeeTannery,
isascribed
to
op.cit.,p. 574.Thiscopy
Library,
University
ofthisattribution,
seeTannery,
Fortheincorrectness
Io.deMontepessulano.
op.cit.,pp.S7-S7l
m; Sl*>
3 Itwasedited
op.cit.,pp.s93-639.
byTannery,
* Mrs.EllenM.F. Sommer-Seckendorff
iscertainly
inhebookonRobert
when
wrong
Kilwardby
VIIIoftheInstitutum
Historicum
historicae
inThe
OP.,Dissertationes
Kilwardby.
(Studies
Life
ofRobert
to
ad S. Sabinae, Rome1937,p. 11)shewrites
thatTannery
Romae
FF.Predicatorum
"sought
ourSchoolman
Robertus
between
anda certain
anidentity
establish
Anglicus
(viz.Robert
Kilwardby)
atMontpellier
inthesixties
ofthecentury
hismathematical
..
andpursued
wholived
investigations
ofKilwardby
these
mathematical
thepossibility
both
considered
works,
having
composed
Tannery
such
author
Infact
thematter
nofurther".
but. . . theFrench
rejected
Tannery
clearly
pursued
meparat
devoir
tre
seeop.cit.,p. 79: cette
ecarte.
anidentification;
hypothse
s M.Alliaume,
scientiduquadrant
1Anglais
delaSocit
Etude
deRobert
in:Annales
nomographique
deBruxelles
45 (1926),[pp.139-148],
p. 140,n.4.
fique
6 P. Humbert,
1Anglais
inVieIntellectuelle
Matre
Robert
4 (1932),t. XIV,pp.81-86.
7 Infact,
del'Universit
wasatMontpellier
Cartulaire
a Robertus
in1240.SeeA.Germain,
Anglicus
I ( 1181-1400),
duConseil
souslesauspices
deMontpellier,
desFacults
deMontpellier
, publi
gnral
a Robertus
isamong
ofa document
thesubscribers
dating
1890,p. 190,where
Anglicus
Montpellier
ofMont1240andcontaining
oftheUniversity
statuts
thecomplementary
from
14and21January
Robertus
deValensa,
Guillermus
deConchis
Desiderius
O.F.M.,Johannes
frater
Anglicus,
pellier:
de
Petrus
Rinna
de Ronha,
Felixde Tranbleto,
BonaFlandrensis,
, Stephanus
Johannes
Anglicus
that
noneofthem
benoticed
asmagister.
Itshould
Assura.
signed
8 Thisnotcorrect.
about
iuris
from
Thefacultas
medicinae
asearly
as 1181,thefacultas
dates
from
DieEntthefacultas
artium
asearly
as 1220.SeeH.Denifle,
while
existed
thesame
time,
certainly
desMittelalters
bis1400
Graz19^6),pp.341-347.
derUniversitten
, Berlin
i88$,(reprint
stehung
thefact
stressed
that
wasastudium
consuetudinem
Denifle
, op.cit.,
Montpellier
p.347).
rightly
per
generale
34

11:59:12 AM

teaching at Montpellier and that he returned to England later, but

revisitedMontpellierin 1271, on the occasion of the General Chapter
of the Black Friarsheld there,and thatKilwardbytook thisopportunity
of publishingthe commentaryon De sphera.
Several points of Humbert's view need comment. First, Alliaume
and Humbert were misled by the inaccurate informationgiven in this
old catalogue, and failed to see that the treatisesfound in the Bruges
manuscriptare nothingbut parts of Kilwardby'streatiseDe ortuscienti
arum1.As a matterof fact this work contains some chapterson these
subjects which exhibit the usual level of knowledge any masterof arts
was required and supposed to possess in Kilwardby's days. Moreover, as
is rightlypointed out by Mrs. Sommer-Seckendorff,Kilwardby in
De ortuscientiarum
expresses a pronounced mistrustof astrologywhich,
in so faras it deals withmeteorology,he allowes to be a science, although
as yettoo underdevelopedto be reliable, while thatwhichwas concerned
with the horoscope and divination,was stronglycondemned by him as
superstitionand magic.2 Therefore Tannery's argumentis still to be
considered as tellingagainstKilwardby'sauthorshipof the tractsunder
discussion and, accordingly,againstan identificationof Kilwardbyand
our Robertus Anglicus.
Secondly, we know that fromabout the middle of the 1240's, the
date of his assumingthe Black Friars' habit3, he had devoted himself
entirelyto theology,as is quite plausiblebecause of hisgeneralreputation
as a great theologian among his contemporaries,which he must have
gained before his election as Provincial in 12614. Well, how can it
possiblybe explained, in Humbert's view, thatcomingas a Provincialon
the General Chapter at Montpellier, about ten years after ending his
academic career devoted entirely,it seems, to theologianstudies from
about 1248 to 1261, Kilwardbysuddenlydecided to publish at Montpellier a treatisehe must have alreadycomposed manyyearsbefore, ad
scolariumin Montepessulano
introductionem
studentium
? Why would
maiorem
he have waited so long?*
One conclusion only can be drawn from our evidence: Robert
Kilwardbycannot be the author of the Tractatusquadrantisnor of the
commentaryon Sacrobosco's De sphera.

1 Seethemodern
catalogue
byA. dePoorter.
2 op.cit.
y(seeabove,
p. 8,n. 3),p. 13.
3 SeeSommer-Seckendorff,
op.cit.,p. .
4 Seeibid.p. 6.
s Mrs.Sommer-Seckendorff
inrejecting
is perfectly
Humbert's
onthisground.
right
conjectures
Seeop.cit.p. 12.
IS

11:59:12 AM

But who was Robertus Anglicus named as the author of these

believed1 that the question finds
treatises?Mrs. Sommer-Seckendorff
an unexpected solution throughsome informationgiven by P. Glorieux
in his work on the thirteenthcenturytheologicalmastersof Paris. In his
article on John of St. Giles Glorieux notes among the works of this
masterlisted under gg: Tractatus
, the incipitof which is
quadrantisveteris
identicalwith thatof the tractascribedto our master.RobertusAnglicus
due suntpartes)2.However, in the manuscriptsmentionedby
(Geometrie
Glorieux our tract is either anonymousor ascribed to one Io. de Mon(c.q. Io. Anglicus).As a matteroffactnone ofthe 38 manuscript
tepessulano
work so farknown3ascribesit to Johnof St. Giles (Johanthis
of
copies
nes de S. Egidio). As to the attributionto one Jo. de Montepessulano,
Tanneryhas convincinglyshown thatthe readingIo mustbe the resultof
a misreadingof ro. (for: Robertus)*.Therefore, Mrs. Sommer's thesis
must be rejected as disprovedby all manuscriptevidence.
To my mind, sound philologydemands to assume the existence of
one Robertus
Anglicuswho taughtat Montpellier in the early 1270^ and
wrote a Tractatusquadrantisand a commentaryon Johnde Sacrobosco's
De sphera. An identificationof our Robert with any other author
hitherto known is not justifieds. Unfortunately,no master Robertus
Anglicus is mentioned in the documents concerningthe universityof
, who, however,
Anglicus
Montpellier6.There is mentionedone Robertus
Cartularium
edited
the
in
is not called magister
,
by Germain,
University
for the year 12407. It is impossible so far to decide whetherhe is the
Robertus
Anglicuswho is mentionedin the colophon of the commentary
of Johnof Sacrobosco as teachingat Montpellierin 127 1- 127 28. Tannery
(op. cit., pp. 585-585) suggeststhat Robert's knowledgeofthequadrant
follows that of William Anglicus (who is mainlyknown as a physician
1 op.cit.
fpp.13-14.
2 Palmon
sicle
nr.3,p. 53.
deParis
auXIIIe
enthologie
desMatres
, Paris1933,
Glorieux,
Rpertoire
3 SeeTannery,
CoxRussell,
andJosiah
whomentions
op.cit.,
3$ copies,
op.cit.,pp.S7~S7S
British
Ital.1j (XIVs.)andLondon,
Bodleian
Canon.
Museum,
Library,
p. 129,whoaddsOxford,
beaddedParis,
should
B. N.Lat.ig2i.
MS.Egerton
844.Tothese
4 Seeop.cit.
and^78-^79.
ypp.SJO-S74s Leaving
undecided
ofRobert's
thequestion
(op.cit.y
pp.$8o-$8i)
Tannery
supposed
nationality
forAnglicus
d'ocorthography
thelangue
stands
forAngls
hissurname
that
,
, being
, possibly
Anglicus
inItaly.
andInglese
wasusual
inFrancia,
justasLanglois
6 I recently
inhisBiblioStein
mentioned
allthedocuments
atMontpellier
byHenri
investigated
deFrance
ourelatifs
l'histoire
descartulaires
, Paris1907,s.v.Montpellier.
fianai*
gnrale
graphie
7 Seeabove,
p. 34,n.7.
8 Seeabove,
p. 34.
36

11:59:12 AM

and an astrologerand whose life is evidenced for the period 1219-30^,

so closely thatsome relationshipbetween them may be assumed2.
Russell believes3 that our Robert is apparentlythe author of a
translationof Alkinds De iudiciis.In fact one of the manuscriptcopies
of this translationbears the title: Alkindusde iudiciisex arabico latinus
an. dom. 12J2 However, the transcription
Anglicum
Jactusper Robertm
dates from the sixteenth century and the colophon runs: Finit liber
AlkinditranslatioRobertiAngligenede ch
, which surnameis
, as it is read in some older
apparentlyto be read as de Chebilor de Choelle
Bodleian
of
the
Oxford,
work,
Library, Ashmole 209,
copies
e.g.
f. 266r ( Finit liber AlkinditranslatioRobertiAngligenede Chebil),'or
Ashmole 369, f. ioiv (datingfromas earlyas the thirteenthcentury)*.
In my view there is no reason to ascribe this work to our Robertus
Anglicus. On the contrary,the clear attributionof thiswork to an
author named RobertusAngligenade Chebil or de Choelle
, or Robertof
in
a
of
as
is
named
the
British
Chester
he
,
Museum6,seems to
manuscript
with our Robertus Anglicus.
exclude an identification
The question mustbe answerednow whetherthe Robertus
, who
Anglicus
is the author of Tractatusquadrantis and the commentaryon John de
Sacrobosco's De sphera7may be also the author of the two redactionsof
the commentaryon Peter of Spain's Summule
logicaleswhich we foundin
1 TheMSSevilla,
Biblioteca
Colombina
f - i - lg hasthecolophon:
astrologia
explicit
Capitulary
Werbillini
astronomus
civis
est
medicus,
Massiliensis,
appellatus,
magisti
(!),
professione
quianglicusnatione,
1220(f.33r).
anno
domini
compilata
peripsum
2 There
isa treatise
andCaius
onSacrobosco's
DeSphera
inCambridge,
Gonville
, MS137,
College
Lincolclerici
with
Roberti
venerabilis
ff.i-24
thecolophon:
episcopi
Explicit
spera
confessoris
maistri
thatthis
niensis
suggests
(seethecatalogue
byJames,
(op.cit.,p. 130)rightly
p. io).Russell
wasconfessor
master
ofLincoln
to Robert
Grosseteste,
1235-1
253,whowashimself
bishop
inthose
ourRobertus
interested
tobenoreason
toidentify
matters.
there
seems
However,
Anglicus
inthe
a Robertus
with
thismaster.
Ifwereally
aretoidentify
himwith
, theonementioned
Anglicus
in 1240cannot
wouldbe a
Cartularium
be considered,
whileourRobertus
it seems,
Anglicus
ashighly
I takesuchidentifications
candidate.
considered,
possible
Everything
speculative.
3 op.cit.
yp. 129.
4 Oxford,
ofthe
text
isfound
inthecolophon
Bodleian
MSAshmole
179,part
4. Thesame
Library,
de
16th17thcentury
ofthework
inOxford,
Bodleian
91f.86: Alkindus
Library,
Digby
transcript
deiudiciis
exarabico
latinus
anno
Domini
1272.
perRobertm
Anglicum
/actus
5 Thesixteenth
Alkindi
translatio
Roberti
liber
Ashmole
434,has(f.23v): Finit
Angligene
century
copy
c-h-o - e - 1- 1- e.
6 App.VI,f. io9v;seeLynn.
A Catalogue
andPearlKibre,
Thorndike
ofMediaeval
ofIncipits
inLatin
Mass.1937,p. 102.
, Cambridge
Scientific
Writings
7 Thorndike
identoRobert
Anglicus'
(The
Sphere
ofSacrobosco
etc.).doesnotpayanyattention
tity.
37

11:59:12 AM

the Vatican and Todi manuscripts.Three argumentscan be adduced in

favourof the identityof our author with the teacher of Montpellier.
First,the remarkablesimilarityof the colophon in both the Rome
and Todi redaction of the Summulecommentarywith that of the De
spheracommentaryas found in Paris, B. N. Lat. 7392 and Oxford,
Bodleian Library,Digbj 48 1. This correspondenceis the more noticeable
since this kind of colophon which is well-known, indeed, fromworks
subjects, is veryunusual in tractson grammaror
discussingquadrivium
dialectics. Ifour surmiseabout the identityof our authorand the teacher
of Montpellier is correct, both conjectural correctionsof the Vatican
colophon (discussed above, p. 32) may be right, as both 1270 and
1277 fitin prettywell with the dates mentioned in the colophons of
Robert's commentaryon De sphera(1271 and 1272). On palaeographical
instead of septimo)seems to be the
grounds the year 1270 ( septuagsimo
more preferable.
Secondly, the occurrence of several sets of medical, astronomical
and meteorologicalnotes added in the Todi manuscriptby the same hand
thatwrote our Summule
, is a reliable clue forthe scientific
commentary2
interestof the school where that commentarywas writtenand used in
class*. Well, the firstschool to be considered in this regard is that of
Montpellier, where one Robertus Anglicus is reported to have been a
teacher in the 127o,s.
Thirdly,an importanthintfor the place of originof a commentary
is oftento be foundin the example its authorgives in his
on the Summule
in the tract De locis. Well, Robertus Anglicus
discussion of Exemplum
gives the names of cities and villages situatedin the South of France:
in eodemlibrodocet
Item.Notandum
Vat.
Lat. 3049,f.38va_vb:
quod Aristotiles
et
docet
duos
in
reducere
(38vb)
partem
exempli
ponereprimam
exemplum sillogismos
et ex conclusione
loco maioris
prime(!) docetfacere
primisillogismi
propositionis
minorem
:
et ex secunda
minorsecundi
partedocetsicfacere
sillogismi
uAratriatenses
sed
contra
malum
est
Avinionenses
contra
ajfmos
( !)
ajpmes(l)*
(!) pugnare
estmalum".
pugnare
esttalis:
Aliussillogismus
contra
Avinionenses
sedArelatenses
contra
pugnare
ajfimes
(!) estmalum
"Ajfmos
(!) pugnare
estmalum".

1 Seeabove,
pp.14and31.
2 Seeabove,
pp.17-21.
3 Forthiscommentary
seeabove,
asa school-book,
p. 29.
4 or:affiniesl
38

11:59:12 AM

Even ifwe bear in mindthe inaccuracyof the scribe1, thereis no denying

that he wrote the geographical names correctly in at least one case:
forthoseof Avignon.
forthe inhabitantsof Arlesen Avinionenses
Arelatenses
? If we would consider
But what about his Aratriatenses
(or : Aratiatenses)
would
this as a scribal error for Arelatenses
, his example of exemplum
contain
should
three
become useless, since an exemplum
argumentation
termsat least; in our case : A pugnarecontraB malumest; ergoB pugnare
contraC malumest (c.q. ergoC pugnarecontraD malumest). But what is
to be taken for? Let us see what the Todi
or Aratiatenses
Aratriatenses
Todi has wrongly
redaction of our commentarytells about exemplum.
^
of
twice Aurelianenses
:
(inhabitants Orleans)
de aliaspecie,scilicetde exemplo,
et
Todi,Bibi.
Com.,$4,f.4ovb:Posteadeterminai
similidicit3quodquandounumparticulare
probatur
peraliudparticulare
peraliquam
Verbigratia
inipsis,tuncestexemplum.
ait3:
tudinem
repertam
contra
Aurelianenses
malum
est
*Avi(ni)onenses
pugnare
malum
contra
est*
.
Avi(ni)onenses
ergoAurelianenses
pugnare
tatemet vicini
estaffinitas.
Seddifferentia
estinteraffini
tas
Similitudo
tatem,
quiaaffini
estinterea que suntin eadem
estinterea que nonsunteiusdem
castri,sedvicinitas
'
hic*particulare
sumitur
careria.4
Similiter
largomodo.
ingenerali
et inspeciali.
huiuslectionis
Ethecestsententia
Since three differenttermsare wanted, it is self-evidentthat the word
is the resultof the scribe's misreadingin at least one case.
Aurelianenses
In any case, it is difficultto see how the inhabitantsof Orleans can be
called affinesfo those of Avignon. Therefore the conclusion must be
drawn - the correctnessof Avinionenses
(for the usual Avenionenses
) taken
is our scribe's erroneous writingfor
for granted - that Aurelianenses
cities or villagesnear Avignon.My guess
the inhabitantsof two different
is that we might read Arausicenses (for the inhabitantsof Arausio =
Orange) and Arelatenses,the latter readingfindingsome supportfrom
the Rome manuscript.If my surmise is correct, our example opposes
two villagesnear Avignon,one to the northof thatcity,the other to the
south.

1 Seeabove,
p. 31.
2 viz.Peter
ofSpain,
Summule
, nr.5.0sted.Bochenski.
logicales
3 Asa matter
inourmanuscripts.
offact
other
names
aregiven
many
4 correria
= via,sedillaproprie
adscriptores
transir
Glossarium
(Ducange,
perquamcarrus
potest
etinmae
tohave
been
mediae
latinitatis
theevidence
theword
, s.v.).From
given
byDucange
appears
Thesame
isusedoncemore
usedinSouthern
word
InTodi,f.47rb
France.
mainly
byourauthor.
weread
: dijnitur
siccanis
: estlatrans
incarrea.
39

11:59:12 AM

In conclusion, it maybe said thatit seems to be highlyprobable, indeed,

that the commentaryon Peter of Spain's Summulelogicaleswhich is
extant in two redactions, was writtenby the same Robertus Anglicus
whose Tractatusquadrantisand commentaryon Johnof Sacrobosco's De
spherahave been preservedin some manuscripts.He is mentionedin our
manuscriptsas havingtaughtat Montpellierin the early 127o's. That the
arts of the triviumwere taughtat Montpellier, which was especially
known for its facultyof medicine, may appear from the rules for
(= Montmagistiet scolaresin gramaticaet logica apud Montepessulanum
studentes
vel
,
(= Montpelliret)
Montepessulanetum
pellier)
dating from
March 27th, 12421.
As a matterof factRobert's commentaryon the Summule
mighthave
been written at some date before the 1270*8. A comparison of his
commentarywith thatof GuillelmusArnaldi(writtenbetween 1238-44)
seems to suggestan earlier date for the composition of Robert's commentary. In this connection Robert's relation to William Anglicus
(c. 1219-30) and theoccurrenceofa RobertusAnglicusin theCartularium
forthe year 1240 seem to be of some importance2.

- Some furtherremarkson the contents of Robert's Commentaries

In this section some fragmentsare given which seem to be of some
importanceforthe location of the work. They have been takenfromthe
two redactionsof Robert's commentary.

DE INTR0DUCTI0N1BUS*

Under the lemmaNomen est vox etc. the followingnote on signijicatum

specialeis found (Rome, va):
generaleand signicatum
in nomine,
scilicetgenerale
et speciale.
Item.Notandum
quodduplexestsignificatum
et sic consideratur
a gramatico.
cumqualitate,
substantiam
ut significare
Generale,
a loyco.
remvelillamrem.Et sic consideratur
habeat<istam>
Speciale,ut significare
1 SeeA. Germain,
IV(July
domus
31th,
126$)quedam
op.cit.,p. 191.Ina bullaofPopeClement
studium
scientie
lateralis
deMontepessulano
ofValmagne)
vestra
, ubiviget
(viz.oftheCisterciensians
yp. 198).
(ibid,
2 Seeabove,
p. 36.
3 Forsomeremarks
ofthistitle,see
seeabove,pp.10ff.Forthecorrectness
ontheprologue,
above,
p. 30andbelow,
p. 47f.
40

11:59:12 AM

The later Todi versionhas the followingpassage (2va_vb):

ad literm
Sed antequam
extraliterm,
accedamus,
(2vb)quedamvideamus
quiaego
videoquodgramaticus
diffinit
nomen
unomodo,loycus
aliomodo.Queritur
ergoquesit
causa.
Solutio.Dicoquodgramaticus
considrt
modorum
sed
generalia
significata
significando
nominissignificat
substantiam
specialia.Sed generalesignifcatum
loycusconsidrt
et qualitatem
modorum
nominis
fcandi
sicutaccidentia
specialia.
Specialevero
signi
*
estsignificare
nominis
istamremvelillam,ut ' homo
hominem,
signifcatum
significat
1
hoc non debemusammirari
si gramaticus
diffinit
lapis*significat
lapidem.Propter
unomodo,loycus
aliomodo,quiadiverso
nomen
t
contrarietatem.
respectu
inportan
The distinctionis found as early as in Nicholaus of Paris, Lambert'of
Auxerreand other authorsfromabout uo1.
There are some other importantnotes on the concepts congruitas
,
Veritas
and
modus
:
,
,
perjectio
signicandi(Rome $vb-6ra)
Item.Notadifieren
tiamintercongruitatem
et incongrui
et inpertatem,
perfectionem
veri
tatem
et falsi
tatem.
fectionem,
lindecongruitas
et incongruitas
estex debitavel indebita
ordinatione
dictionum
vel
accidentium
et modorum
ut *Sortes
estalbus*
. Et estincongruitas
accidensignificando
tiumut *viralba*. Undehie potestfiericavillatio
talis: nulladictioest incongrua
subiecto
accidentia
conveniunt
s Sorcurri
<cuius>
; sedcumdico: 'omni
, istaconveniunt
inaccidentibus
Undenotandum
acci; ergoestcongrua.
quodnonsolumconvenientia
4
*
dentium
sufficit
sed opportet
(!) quodibi sitdebitusmodussignificando
quia omnis
estnomendividuum
et ('Sor*)2individuum.
Sed dividuum
et individuum
suntmodi
ti. Ideoetc.
opposi
significandi
Item.Perfectio
ex debita<velindebita)0
ordinatione
dictionum,
etUnperfectio
provenit
cumapposito,
ut ' Sorlegit*
(scilicet)suppositum
Item.Veritas
et falsitas
ex convenientia
a specialium
et disconvenienti
provenit
signifi*et *homo
ut *(homo)
estalbus
estasinus*.
catorum,
(...).
Item.Veritas
etfalsitas
habent
inanima,
inrebus,etinpropositione.
esse,scilicet
triplex
In animautin subiecto;in rebusut (6ra)in causa,quia,<ut>dicitAristotiles:
aabeo
inpropositione
ut(etMS)insigno.
quodresestw3;
The Todi redactionof our glosses has a similar passage on these items
underthe lemma Oratioestvoxsignicativa.The differences,
however,are
remarkable.The passage as given by our scribe is not only somewhat
negligent,but it also seems to be of a later date, since unlike the Rome
1 SeeJanPinborg,
DieEntwicklung
derSprachtheorie
imMittelalter
der
zurGeschichte
, in: Beitrage
undTheologie
desMittelalters,
Texte
undUntersuchungen,
Band
Philosophie
2,Mnster42,Heft
1967,pp.27and3.
Kopenhagen
2 corr.
Rcexsubiecte
R.
3 Categ.
$, 4 b 9-10.
41

11:59:12 AM

redaction, the Todi manuscriptmentionsthe modisignicandiessentielles

(3vb):
intracongrui
Notadifferentiam
tatemet perfectionem
et veritatem,
tasest
quiacongrui
ex debitaconvenientia
accidentium
et modorum
Et dico
essentialium.
significandi
cumsubstantivo
accidentium
ingenereet in numero
dicitur
convenire
, quiaadiectivum
*
et in casu. Et dico modorum
essentialium
Sor' ibiest
signicandi
quia cumdico omnis
et
cum
substantivo
tarnen
adiectivum
convenientia
sed
noneritistemodus
accidentium,
*omnis
estdivisivum
et *Sor' non.Quaremaledicitur
essentialis,
quia'omnis'
significandi
etiamvenitexdebitaconvenientia
Sor'. Perfectio
cumappositi,
hocestnominis
suppositi
cumverboexparteante.Etdicobenenominis
cum
verbo
, quiaadhocquodoratioperfecta
suntnecessaria:
nomencumverboet debitus
casusqui respondeat
verbo
sit,quatuor
finito
et debitus
numerus
et debitapersona.
is not discussedhere in the Todi version,but some
The notion of Veritas
lines before. See below, pp. 46-47.
There is some discussion about the significativefunctionof the
nominaobliqua (Rome, 6ra) :
nomenoblicum
sitnomen.Etostendo
utrum
secundum
Queritur
quodsic,
dyaleticum
inrecto
considrt
dictionis
; sedidemestsignificatum
quoniam
loycus
speciale
significatum
etinoblico;ergosicutrectus1
estnomen,
itaetoblicus1
debetessenomen.Item.Omne
3sicutet
rectum
nomen
tuia forma
adsignificandum
forma2
; sedeadem2
imponi
significai
verbo
in
Item
veritatem
cum
oratione
est
etc.
constituit
ad
idem.
oblicum3;
Quod
ergo
est*huiusmodi,
dicendosic: 4audio
nomenquoaddyaleticum;
sed nomenoblicum*
leccionem1
etc.
; ergonomen
autquoadsignificationem
Solutio.Nomenpotestdupliciter
(!) consideran:
generlem,
ut
est
aut
substantiam
cum
;
specialem,
quoad
que
qualitate
significationem
significare
4homo
*vel
est
accidens
acciden
aut
modm
talem,
partis*,
'/apis', quoad
qui
significandi
utspeciesnominis,
autquoadmodumsignificandi
specialem
qui estin recto,qui est
actus.
substantiam
et inratione
inratione
causematerialis
respectu
suppositi
significare
Primis
etestnomen
sicutrectus.Ultimomodo
tribus
modisnomen
oblicum
estnomen,
solumrectum
estnomen,
ad quod(for: que?) potest
appellainomina
quiasolumloycus
velessematerialis.
reddere
inratione
tamen
hoca parte(predicati)
principii
suppositum,
estrectus.
Cuiusmodi
Adprimum
inrectoetobliquositidemsignificatum
dicendum
quodquamvis
argumentum
utiampatuit.Adsecundum,
tamen
nonestidemmodussignificandi
specialis,
speciale,
utdicton
sehabet,
diversimode
sit
forma
tamen
in
recto
et
eadem
quodquamvis
obliquo,
* ibi estVeritas
meam
est. Ad tertium
estquodsic dicendo:4audioleccionem
dicendum
ratione
recticasuspronominis
in verbo,scilicethuiusquoddico4audio*
intellecti
, non
autemestVeritas
a partepredicati.
1 se.casus.
2 eadem
isanablative
case.
forma
3 sc.nomen.
These
words
arenominative
cases.
4 estoblicum
MS.
s Sc.orationis.
+2

11:59:12 AM

There is another interestingnote on the significativefunctionof thenoun (6rb_va):

'
' aut
sitsignificativum
Item.Videtur
rem
quodnonomnenomen
quoniamchimera
signifcat
autinanima.Nonsignificai
remextraanimam
extraanimam
; hocpatet.Nonsignifcat
inanima,
dicitAristotiles
nisipriusfuerit
in
<rem>
quoniam
quodnichilestinintellectu
nonestinsensuetc.Ergo.Item.Cumdico'Cesar'
sensu.Sedchimera
rem
tautsignificai
autinanima.Nonsignificai
remextraanimam,
extraanimam
quianonest.Itemnonest
reiextra.SedCesarnonest.Ergo.
inanima,
quiailludquodestinanimaestsimilitudo
eiusnoneritinanima.Ergodicoquodomnenomen
Similitudo
<ad)cplacitum.
significai
nonestinanimaetsignificai
dicoquodchimera
inanima.Sedquandotu
Adoppositum
esseinintellectu
dicisquodnonestinabstractione
: aliquidpotest
duobus
<in>intellectu
autsinereceptione.
modis:autperreceptionem
Si primomodo,verum
sst
specierum
nichilestinintellectu
etc
. Sisecundo
dicoquod
modo,sicnontenet.Adsecundum
quod
' non
4Cesar
inanima,
sedextra.Sednonvaletsi significet
extraanimam
<rem>
significai
extra
se.
etc.
quodsignificet
Ergo
The same discussionis foundin the Todi redactionin a more condensed
form. Here it is preceded by a discussionof the indispensability
of the
nominis(Todi, 3ra):
inventio
utrum
inventio
nominis
sitnecessaria.
Et videtur
Queritur
quodnon,quiaPetrus
Elye
estinven
dicitquodnomen
tumutsitsuppositum
sivereddat
naturale
verbi.Sedpronomenetparticipium
reddunt
verbi.Ergoinventio
nominis
nonestnecessaria.
suppositum
Contra.Priscianus
dicitquodnomenestnobilius
verboet ordina<t>
ipsumprius.Sed
verbiestnecessaria
inventio
inarte.Ergoinventio
nominis
pociuseritnecessaria.
Solutio.Dicoadargumenta
nominis
estnecessaria.
Quandotudicisquod
quodinventio
etparticipium
reddunt
hoc
est
naturam
nominis.
verbo,
pronomen
suppositum
per
Diciturautemin literaquodomne
nomen
etc. Sedquodaliquodnichilsignificai
probo.
' estnomen.
' Chimera
' nichil
Sed' chimera
utprobabo.
nichil
signifcat,
Ergoaliquodnomen
Probado
Si
minoris.
'chimera'
aut
extra
animam,
signifcat.
significaret
aliquid, significarei '
'
autinanima.Sednonsignifcat
hocnecillud,utprobabo.Ergoetc.Probatio.
Chymera
remextraanimam,
nonsignifcat
nichil
est
in
rerum
non
natura.Ergo
quiachymera
remextraanimam.
Itemnonsignificai
remque estinanima,quiadicitArissignifcat
totiles:"nosnonintelligimus
nisiverum";in Posterioribus
dicit: "solumverorum
est
intellectus".
Sedchimera
nichilestinrerum
natura
neccumintellectu
nostro
possumus
'
' non
chimrm.
nec
intelligere
Ergo chymera
signifcat
aliquid,et per consequens,
aliquid.Ad idem.Cesarnonest. Et estnomen.Sed 'Cesar'nonsignifcat
aliquid,ut
minoris.
Illudquodnonest,nonsignificai
probabo.Ergoetc.Probatio
aliquid.Sed
'Cesar'
. Ergovidetur
('Cesar')0nonest.Ergononsignificai
aliquid
quodaliquodnomen
'
'
nonsignificet
nonsignificai
aliquid.Adidem. Nichilestnomen.Sed 'nichil'
aliquid.
' Nichil
' non
nonsignificet
aliquidquodsignificet.
Ergoaliquodnomen
aliquid.
significai
'
'
Probatio.Si nichilsignificaret
nomensignificaret
aliquid.Sed nichilet aliquidsunt
alterius,
opposita.Ergounumsignificai
oppositum
quodestcontraAristotilem.
Ergo
aliquodnomennonsignificai
aliquid.Contra
patetinlitera.
Solutio.Dicoquodomnenomen1
aliquid.Adprimum
signifcat
quod'chimera'
significai
1 omne
nomen
dicoquodMS.
43

11:59:12 AM

nisiverum,
etquandotudicisquodnonintelligimus
dicendum
remqueestinanima
quod
talemnon intelligimus
nisiverum;et
Purus,et secundum
duplexest intellectus.
talemintelligimus
et secundum
chimrm
mixtus
cumfantasia,
et multaalia
intellectus
'
rem
Et
sic
fuerunt
in
natura.
in
anima.Ad
chymera1
significat
ymaginatam
numquam
que
lindetudeberes
sicconcludere:
estquod1Cesar*
Cesarem.
aliuddicendum
id
significat
est;ergoCesarnonest;ergo'Cesar'
aliquidesse;sedCesarnon
quodnonestsignificat
'
'
Ad tertium
Cesarem.
nonsignificat
aliquidesse.Quodconcedo;sed Cesarsignificat
- et sic ' nichiV
non
dicoquodquedamsuntnomina
impositionem
que significant
per
- et quedamperprivationem,
et sic 'nichiV
aliquid.
significat
significat
Froma comparisonof the textsas foundin the Rome and Todi versionsit
is clear that the Todi manuscriptcontains a more elaborate form of
. There are in the Rome edition two
Robert's glosses on the Summule
human intellect (anima) in forming
of
the
about
the
rle
questions
propositions(Rome, 6va_vb):

Dicendum
Item.Queritur
propositionis.
quodanima,quiaanima
quidsitcausaefficiens
etaliasresdiversas,
scilicet
hominem
remsimplicem,
scilicet
aliquam
apprehendit
primo
vel disconveniat.
utrumconveniat
et cogittet dlibrt
conanimalet lapidem,
<Si
estanimal
affirmativam
dicendosic: *homo
' Si disconsicfacit
veniunt),
propositionem
nonestlapis
dicendosic: *homo
'
sicfacitpropositionem
veniunt,
negativam
tio. Et videturquodnon,
utrum
si animanonesset,<necesset)proposi
Item.Queritur
Sedanimaestcausaefficiens
tureffectus.
causadestrui
propositionis.
Ergo
quiadestructa
nonest9.
Sedhecestvera:
Positoquodanimanonsit,hecestvera:*anima
etc.Sedcontra.
'anima
eritquamvis
animanonsit.
nones. Ergoaliquapropositio
non
est
verum.
breviter
Dicendum
Quare
quianonessetali-(6vb)-quis
qui proquod
anima
nonest
scilicet
' Ergononvaletobiectio
istam[animam]
nunciaret
propositionem,
falsa.
Under the lemmaVerbum est vox etc, (Rome, 6vb-7vb; Todi, 3ra-va)
are found. I quote a note
some more interestingnotes on significatio
our
of
redaction
in
the
Rome
glosses (7ra) :
occurring
seipsam
modis.Unomodovoxsignificativa
diciturtribus
Item.Voxsignificare
;
significat
se nichilsignificare
ut 4baf' quia
aliquid.Secundomodovoxsignificat
ergosignificat
ethoctribus
modis.
aliquidet nonaliquid.Tercioperimpositionem,
potestsignificare
Si permodum
autpermodum
Autpermodum
rei,sic
rei,autremveram,
privationis.
ut prepositiones
suntpartesindeclinabiles,
MS), adverbia.<Si)csig(propositiones
rem
autremperaut
rem
hoc
nificent
veram,
(!)
dupliciter: significant successivam
Si rempermanentem,
sicestnomen.Si
sicestverbujn.
Si remsuccessivam,
manentem.
4
ut 'nemo
sicsuntnomina
', nullus
privationis,
negativa,
permodum
are constituentsof a kindof functional
Thus the tresmodiperimpositionem
divisionof words:
44

11:59:12 AM

per impositionem:
a. per modum rei ->indeclinableparts
b. significansrem veram, viz. the formanature
a rem successivam -> verbum
rem permanentem-> nomen
c. per modum privationis-> negativenouns.
This division remarkablydiffersfrom that given as early as in the
premodisticperiod, e.g. by Robert Kilwardby1.This seems to be an
additional reason to take our Robertus Anglicusand Robert Kilwardby
as two different
persons.
There is a note on the different
in both version*:
meaningsof tempus
idest
7ra:Item.Tempusdicitur
Rome,
quinqumodis.Primoidemestquodtemperies,
aeris; undedicitur
: modoestclarum
Aliomodotempus
diffinitur
ab
dispositio
tempus.
est
mensura
rerum
Aristotile2:
motus
mutabilium.
Alio
modo
est
idem
tempus
quod
ut 'dies',4mensis
' Aliomodoidemestquodaccidens;et de tali
dictionis,
significatimi
in hac parte.Todi
: Tertionotaquod tempusdiciturquadrupliciter.
, f.3rto
loquitur
Primoidemquoddispositio
aeris.Secundoidemquodhabilitas
Tertiomodo
faciendi.
idemquodmensura
rerum
motus
mutabilium.
modus
Quartomodoidemquodquidam
nostras
actiones
subaliquadifferentia
et sicsumitur
hic.
temporis;
intelligendi
That the Rome version mentions five and the Todi version only four
meaningsof 'tempus'is, of course, not to be takenas an argumentto date
the Todi versionbefore the Rome version.
There is an interestingdiscussionof the notionsof truthand falsity:
Rome
Notaquodistaduo' verum1
et 'falsum'
nonponuntur
indiffinicione
, 8ra_vb:
propositionstamquam
sedtamquam
terminantes
partes
principales,
partes
partes
principales.
Etpropterea
sumiin diffinitione
Adhucquam
visverumet
possunt
perdisiunctionem.
falsum
inse considerata
accidunt
tamen
subdisiunctione
sunt
propositioni,
ipsasu(m)pta
essentialia.
estveravelfalsa,sicutdicitur
indiffinitione
tionis.
Questioestutrum
propositio
proposi
Etostenditur
sitvera.Sicscribitur
inlibroDe animaquodsicut
quodomnispropositio
siccomponimus.
Sedsolusintellectus
estverorum,
uthabetur
inPosterioriintelligimus,
1 InPriscianum
MSCambridge
maior
Peterhouse
em,
191, f.3ova"vb,SeeJan
Pinborg,
op.cit.,p. o.
2 NotinAristotle
IV 11,219b 1).Mr.C. H. J.M.Kneepkens
waskindenough
to
(cfr.Physica
direct
definition
oftimeusual
inthetwelfth
toa similar
myattention
grammarians.
century
E.g.
PeterHelyas:
estautem
diffinitio
hec:tempus
estdimensio
more
etmotus
rerum
generalis
temporis
dicta
convenit.
from
Arsenal
mutabilium;
generalis,
Paris,
711,f.67va).
quiaomni
tempori
(quoted
Thisdijfinitio
isofanearlier
: seeGarlandus
date
generalis
certainly
Dialecticat
Compotista,
p. 2612-13
ed.De Rijk
: ... indiffinitione
estcerta
etrationabilis
dinumeratio
more
temporis
queesthec: tempus
etmotus
mutabilium
alsotheeleventh
rerum.
tract(glossonPriscian)
grammar
Compare
century
found
inCologne,
MS 201,f.31vb:Notasecundum
Cathedral
Library
(Dombibliothek)
quosdam
mutabilibus
rebus
suipartem
existere
adiacentem,
significare
tempus
quantitatem
queperminimam
varietatem
exvariis
actibus
. . . Hancautem
ofa few
perhibetur.
temporis
(lacuna
procedentem
considerans
estcerta
dimensio
rerum
dixit:tempus
secundum
moram
etmotum
rerum
mutabilium.
letters)
4S

11:59:12 AM

estvera.Sedomnispropositio
estcompositio.
bus.Ergoomnispropositio
Ergoomnis
Item
Ens
et
verum
est
vera.
ad
idem.
Sedomnis
convertuntur.
(8rb).
propositio
propositio
suntopposi
ta. 'Nullam
estens.Ergoetc.Itemad idem.Verumet falsum
propositionem
' sunt
' et 4omnem
esseveram
esseveram
dicitur
de
propositionem
opposita.Et si oppositum
Sed
tum
nullam
et
esseveram
estfalsum.
to
de
propositionem
proposito.
opposi proposi
esseveramestverum.Itemad idem.Aliquam
propositionem
propositioErgoomnem
esseveram
estverum.
estfalsum.
Etsi hoc,
nemesseveram
propositionem
Ergonullam
esseveramestnonverum(veraMS). Sed 'nullum
nullampropositionem
non et
ergo
4omne
'
omnem
esse
veram
est
verum
corr
ex
vera
.
(
MS).
propositionem
equipollent.
Ergo
estvera.
Ergoomnispropositio
de veroincomplexo
Solutio.Ad primaduo estdicendum
quodargumenta
procedunt
Intellectus
veroincomplexus
nonde intellectu
et de intellectu
incomplexo,
complexo.
! MS)et enset verum
Et sicpatet.Adtertium
solusestverus(verorum
convertuntur.
de opposito
etc. habetintelligi
tei
dicendum
<de>uniformi
quodistaregulaoppositum
tionesuntcomplexa
hocmodo,quiainunaproposi
Sedhecnonaccipiuntur
etin
sumptis.
*et 4omnis
4
'
non
aliaincomplexa.
dicendum
quod nullus
equipollent
Ergoetc.Adultimum
et negationem.
Sicautem
copulainteripsumsignum
quandononestibialiquaverbalis
nonestinproposito.
Ergoetc.
as
Aftera note on sensus(on account of the definitionof oratioperfecta
in
another
on
animo
auditoris
note
and
sensum
verum
illa queperjectum
)
generai
falsumis given:
' dicitur
multis
modis.Unomodoidemestquodsig8rb~va: Item.Notaquod4sensus
Rome,
4
ista
dictio
habet
sensusJ
. Aliomodoidemestquodvirtus
ut
nificado
dictionis1,
plures
etcommunem
sensum
et
in
foris
dividitur
de
; sensus
particularem
particuapprehensiva ;
est qui iudicatde
scilicetvisus,auditusetc.;sensuscommunis
larisest quintuplex,
Aliomodoidemestquodperfecte
MS)a sensuparticulars
receptis
(receptivis
speciebus
velintelligendum
velapprehendendum
movetanimam
ad aliquidhabendum
(apreplianet sicaccipitur
hie.
dum!MS).Ethocmodosensusidemestquodperfectio
orationis,
senti
ut 4istebene
.
Etaliomodoidemestquodintellectus,
Uno modo
et 'falsum'
consideran.
Item.Notandum
dupliciter
possunt
quod 'verum'
velnonentitas,
utesselapidem
ettuncestreientitas2
suntincomplexa
verum
etfalsum
estinpropositione.
etfalsi
tascomplexa
et nonesse.Veritas
Item.Notaquodduplexest (8va) Veritas:
quedamper
quedampermodumaffectus,
Veritas
tur
Veritasaffectus
modumconceptus.
conceptus
optativa.
reperi in oratione
in causa,si<c>
in signo.Si tamquam
estduplex:auttamquam
incausa,auttamquam
in
ut 'hominem
esseanimaiestverum'
. Si tamquam
est Veritas
in oratione
infinit<iv)a,
Sic
in
oratione
hic.
modo
est
indicativa.
hoc
accipitur
signo,
In the Todi redaction the note on sensuspredeces those on verumand
falsum:
' dicitur
4
multis
modis.Primodicitur
Todi
, 3va-vb: Quintonotaquod sensus
[mul](3vto)
:
utdicitPriscianus
de foris.Aliomodoidemestquodintellectus,
virtus
apprehensiva
1 i. e. meaning.
2 i.e. therealorconceptual
ofa thing.
existence
46

11:59:12 AM

idestintelligibile.
Aliomodoidemestquodsignificado.
.
sensibile,
quodenimparatur
tio
habet
ista
die
idest
lindedicitgramaticus
Alio
sensus,
plures
plurasignificata.
quod
et sic sumitur
modosensusidemest quodsententia,
sensum
hie, cumdicitperfection
utrum
sententiam.
sitveravelfalsa.Quodnon
Queritur
, idestperfectam
propositio
generai
nonestidcuiusestsignum.
Sedpropositio
estsignum
sitveraprobo.Signum
veritatis
et
est
Dicit1
non
vera.
Ad
beatus
idem.
falsitatis.
Anshelmus:
Veritas
est
Ergopropositio
estin solamente.Ergononestin proSedVeritas
recti
tudosolamenteperceptibilis.
Itemadidem.Quandosubiectum
et predicatum
position. Ergononestverapropositio.
vera.Sedhic( !) subiectum
nonsuntineodem,tuncnonestpropositio
tionis
estin
proposi
est
et
hoc
in
Quare
predicatum
predicamento
qualitatis.
quantitatis
patet
genere
quodnon
estvera.Itemad idem.Scribitur
ab Aristotile
suntineodemnecpropositio
inlibroDe
itaintelligimus".
Itemab ipsoscribitur
in libroPosteriorum
anima"sicutcomponimus
Est
solum
verorum
omnis
intellectus
vera.Sed ompis
<est>c.
compositio
ergo
quod
estcomposita.
<est)cvera.
propositio
Ergoomnispropositio
Ad istamquestionem
Quedampropositio
<est)cvera,quedamfalsa.Ad
respondeo.
tu
dicis
nonestveranisi
etc.,
Quando
quodsignum respondeo
quodpropositio
primum.
Et estibi propositio
in hoc quodestsignum
veritatis.
sive significativum
significativa
Adsecundum.
estreetitudo,respondeo
Quandotu dicisquodVeritas
significati.
quod
inproposi
utinsuosubiecto,
tioneutinsuosigno.Adtertium.
Veritas
estinmente
Quando
etpredicatum
tudicisquodsubiectum
etc., respondeo
sicestintelligenda
quodauctoritas
nonsuntin eodemvel essepossunt.Undequamvis
et predicatum
quodsubiectum
etpredicatum
nonsintineodemgenere,
subiectum
esseineodem,quia
tam<en>
possunt
inanimaperintellectum.
sitvera,respondeo
Adargumenta
adprimum.
Quanqueprobant
quodpropositio
primo
dicoquodduplexestverum,
do tudicis: esseetverum
scilicet
et
convertuntur,
complexum
ut esseuniusrei,idestuniusorationis;
et de taliintellexit
Aristotiles
incomplexum,
Essecomplexum
convertuntur.
eritpropositionis
etid non
quandodicitesseetesseverum
convertitur.
Quarepropositio
potestesse veravel falsa.Ad idemrespondeo
quod
: intellectus
et anglicus
Aris; de taliintellexit
duplexestintellects
purusestdivinus
velfantasticus,
totiles
mixtus
habet
se
indifferenter
ad
scilicet
; intellectus
qui
utrumque,
et ad falsum
ad verum
; et hocmodocompositio
potestesseveravelfalsa2.

II

DE PREDICABILI!}US

From the opening lines of this chapter it appears that the correct title
3 and that
of the firstchapteris De introductionibus
, not De propositionibus
the whole work should not be given the title: Introductiones*
. The text
runsas follows in both redactionsof Robert's glosses:
determinavi
de introductionibus.
In
i9rb: Predicabileetc. Superius
Rome,
magister
1 Devertitate
ed.Schmitt.
, cap.11,p. 191,11-21
2 Thisdiscussion
isimmediately
followed
between
bythenoteon thedifference
, percongruitas
Seeabove,
andVeritas.
fection
p. 4$.
3 Thistitlewasgiven
inhisedition.
byBocheski
Seeabove,
pp.30and40.
47

11:59:12 AM

! MS).Ethecinduas1.Naminprima
depredicabilibus
(positionibus
parteistadeterminat
in speciali.
in secunda
ingenerali,
de predicabilibus
determinat
auctordeterminavit
in
Todi
f iora: Predicabile sumiturdupliciteretc. Superius
Inhocsecundo
determinat
deintroductionibus.
depredicabilibus.
capitulo
capitulo
primo
Inprima
turinduaspartes.
dividi
lindeistudsecundum
parteauctor
capitulum
premittit
In secunda
de ipsis.
quinqupredicabilium.
prosequitur
quedamutiliaad cognitionem
In the Todi versionthereis a note on the phraseEccehomo
, immediately
afterthe divisiolectionisand before the notabilia:
velincongrua,
istalatinitas
sitcongrua
utrum
etperfecta
Todi
. Queritur
, iorb:Eccehomo
et congrua
secundum
Adhocdicoquodestperfecta
intellectum
et invelinperfecta.
4audi*vel
hie
hoc
verbum
ad
et
quiaintelligitur
quantum sensum,
congrua inperfecta
velvide
: homo
esthie. Quodsolutio
non
'videyquiacumdico: 4eccehomo'audiintelligitur
adverbum,
nominis
itasehabetadiectivum
verbi
vaieatprobo.Sicutsehabetadiectivum
cumverbosinesuosubstantivo.
nonhabetconstrui
nominis
ad nomen.Sedadiectivum
sinesuosubstantivo.
cum
nomini
construi
verbi
nec
adiectivum
poterit
Ergo
tamenintelligitur,
nonponatur,
verbum
ut dictumest.
Solutio.Dico quodquamvis
It is self-evidentthat this discussion is out of place here. It seems to
belong to the firstchapter.Its occurrencegives some additionalevidence
for the negligentway our scribe compiled the text of Robert's second
version.
:
Robert distinguishesthreemeaningsof 'universale1
multis
dicitur
notandum
modis.Uno
Rome
, i9rb:Circaistamlectionem
quoduniversale
et
sic
et
in
omni
scientia
multas
reshabeas
mododicitur
proprietates
partium;
partes plures
reiqueestinanima
Aliomodosolasimilitudo
de universali.
; etsicuniversale
determinatur
communis
demultis
estintendo
forma
predicabilis
singulaquedam.Terciomododicitur
et sicde aliis; et hocmodo
de Sorteet de Platone,
tas,et predicatur
ribus,uthumni
sic: universale
estquedam
forma
a
animeabstracta
hic' universale
'. Etdiffinitur
accipitur
via
Ita
enim
est
intellectus
primo
agentis.
cognoscendi:
per
operationem
singularibus
ab intellectu
ettuncestsingulare
a sensu,
medianresapprehenditur
; posteacognoscitur
communem
formam
tuncintelligit
etintellectus
tibusaliisvirtutibus,
aliquam
repertam
inmultis
vocatur
Ethocestquoddicit
universale.
sicreperta
inistoetinilio; illaforma
versusfinem2:"singulare
est dum
Boetiusin libroDe consolatione
prime
philosophie
illa
forma
universale
non
est
Et
universale
dum
sentitur,
quod
intelligitur". intellige
illa
forma
communis
a
est
abstracmultis
solum
sed
multis
communis
quando
singularibus
Undeuniversale
et tuncuniversale.
taab intellectu;
duplexhabetesse:insingularibus,
aliudinanima;et illudestformale.
et istudestessemateriale;
< . . . (i9v) . . . .)
estuniversale.
Estenimquoddam
Tertium
notandum
quodaptumnatum
quodtriplex
ut
. Estquoddam
scilicetactu,uthomo
secundum
estpredicari
de pluribus,
potentiam,
ut
sol
formam
non
sunt
soly
intellectu,
Quoddam
, quia
quia significai
quandam
plures.
fenix
1 Sc.dividitur.
2 V,pr.s.
48

11:59:12 AM

et quamvis
si pluresessent,
nonsintpluresin
de pluribus,
que estaptanatapredicari
convenit
tamen
actunecinpotentia,
plures.
intelligere
The latternote is also foundin the Todi version (iorb). Both redactions
have a note on the twofold meaning of principium:principiumintra or
Both types are subdivided.
extraor extrinsecus.
and principium
intrinsecus
an
Todi
has
Todi
,
i9va;
iova).
(Rome,
interestingnote on the difference
and
between predicabile
,
, predicatum
predicamentum:
et
est interpredicabile,predicatum,
Todi
, iova: Quintonota quod differentia
est quod est aptumpredicaride pluribusproutnon
Predicabile
predicamentum.
et^ic
estquodactupredicatur
de pluribus
ut homo.
Predicatum
poniturin oratione,
est coordinatio
multorum
ut 'Soresthomo'.Predicamentum
in oratione,
predicantur
essecoordinatio
multorum
lindesicutexercitus
utsubstantia,
predicabilium,
regisdicitur
multorum
esse
coordinatio
sic
dicitur
militum, predicamentum
predicabilium.

Ill

DE PREDICAMENTIS 1

Robert distinguishesfour ways of predication in the Rome version

(24vb):
modis
huiuslectionis
:
Ad evidentiam
notandum
predicari
quodaliquidpotest
quatuor
et sicpureunivocata.
et eandem
Autnon
autsecundum
naturam
eandem
intentionem,
et intentionem,
et sicpureequivoca.
et nonnaturam
eandemintentionem
secundum
ut quanti
tassecundum
Autsecundum
et nonnaturam,
eandemintentionem
eandem
de linea,de numero
intentionem
de tempore,
;
predicatur
quodestgenus
quiasecundum
secundum
naturam
etiamsecundum
de
diversam
instantis,
naturam,
quia de tempore
Et id quodsic dicitur
denumero
unitatis.
lineapernaturam
pernaturam
permanentis,
sedmagis
estequivocum,
univocum.
demultis,
univocum,
Quartodicitur
partim
partim
et nonsecundum
ut
de multis
eandem
eandemnaturam
secundum
intentionem,
aliquid
' dicitur
4sanum
de ostensivo
de
de animali,
de urina,et de cibo tamquam
(losivo)
urinatamquam
de signo.Et id quod sic diciturde multis,partimest equivocum,
univocum.
partim
The Todi version has a short note on the differencebetween equivocum
equivocansand equivocum
equivocatum.
'
'
scilicetequivocans
et
Todi
dicitur,
, f.47va:Secundonotaquod equivocum
'dupliciter
4
ut
nomen
canis
suntistaque
[velanimal]Equivocata
equivocatum.
Equivocans, hoc
vel sydus,vel piseis(sic!)
sub istisduobus,ut animailatrabile,
comprehenduntur
marinus.
1 IntheTodiversion
isthesixhone.Seeabove,
thischapter
p. 29.
49

11:59:12 AM

This maybe compared with the thesisdefendedin the ArsMelidunathat

nouns are equivocantiaratherthan equivoca1.
A marginalnote added by a later hand at the foot of f. 26r gives the
well-known formula including all categories together: Hie suntomnia
: Virgiliusmagnuspoetafilius Maronisgramaticussedens
decernpredicamenta
hodiein temploanfulatusdisputansfatigatus.
Under the lemma Hiis habitis (Bocheski, nr. 3.08 adnem) the
Rome versionhas two interestingnotes on substantia:
'
1 dicitur
Rome
notandum
modis.
, 26va: Circaistamlectionem
quod substantia
quatuor
tertiomodocompositum,
aliomodoforma,
Unomodomateria,
quartomodoidemest
hic secundum
accidens.Quinto2modoaccipitur
quodestunumde
quodsubstantial
camentis.
predi
consideran
: autsecundum
Item.Notaquodsubstantia
subsistenciam,
potesttripliciter
autsecundum
autsecundum
esse.Primomodoestprimasubstantia
essenciam,
magis
estmagissubstantia
substantia
quam
quamsecunda.Secundomodosecundasubstantia
substantia
quamalia.Etprimomodo
prima.Tertiomodononestunamagissubstantia
inlitera.
hicMagister
loquitur
Under the lemma Hiis visis dicendum (Bocheski, nr. 3.1 1) another
note on substantiais found in the Rome redaction of Robert's glosses:
consideRome
notandum
, 27ra: Circaistamlectionem
potestdupliciter
quodsubstantia
Siprimomodo,sicsubstantia
autsecundum
ran: autsecundum
methaphisicum
loycum.
ingenere".Si secundum
"latent
equivocationes
equivoce.UndeAristotiles:
predicatur
Si primo
usum
aut
ad
aut
ad
nature,
quantum
proprietatem.
quantum
loycum, ergo
modo,sic substantia
equivoce.Si secundomodo,non. Et sic accipitur
predicatur
veroetpicto,tarnen
secundum
animai
dicatur
deanimali
hic,quamvis
quodest
equivoce
solum
animali
vero.
pro
genusaccipitur
From the division of the passage opening with the words Diciturautem
alterumalteriopponiquadrupliciter
(Bocheski, nr. 3.32) it appears that
Robert already had the interpolationCaliditasautemin his text of the
Summule*
. In the Rome redaction the divisio textusruns as follows:
. Dicitur (ex dicaturMS) alterumalteri. Superius
Rome
divisusfuitiste
, 31ra-rb
.
et Postpredicamenta
in trespartes,scilicetin Antepredicamenta
tractatus*
, Predicamento,
estdetertiaparte.
Etdividiturhecparsinquinqu.
Etdictode duabus
dicendum
partibus
in tertiade
de oppositione,
in secundade prioritte,
Namin primapartedeterminat
Ubipartes
sivedehabitu.
inquartade motu,inquintade habere
simultaneitate,
incipiant
tionem
topposi
Etdividi
turinduas.Naminprima
estpiesentis
dividi
lectionis.
patet.Prima
1 SeeL. M.deRijk,Logica
Modernorum
II,p. 297.
2 Thefifth
added
later
mode
wasapparently
on.
3 Forthisinterpolation,
6 (1968),pp.3-4.
VIVARIUM
seepartoneofthisseries,
4 viz.thechapter
Depredicamentis
.

11:59:12 AM

Secunda
ibi: Contraria
de illisspeciebus.
sunt.Et
determinai
in suasspecies.Insecunda
de quartaspecie.In secundaremovet
illa secundain tres.Namin primadeterminai
de illaspecie.Primaincipitibi: Contraria
sunt.Secunda
In tertiadeterminai
dubium.
nonest
. Tertiaibi: Privative
(31rb)ibi: Caliditas
opposita.
In the Todi version, too, the Caliditaspassage is found (Todi, 27vb).
From this it appears, that this interpolationdates fromas early as the
i 27o,s.

IV

DE SILLOGISMI
V

DE LOCIS*

Thejcos-interpolation3is not foundin Robert's commentaries.I give the

divisiotextusas it is foundin the Rome version:
f. 38ra: Argumentation
is quatuor sunt species.*Superius
Rome,
posuit
magister
In parteistaponiteiusdivisionem.
autemhec.
Dividitur
diffinitionem
argumentations.
t argumentationem
in suasspecies.In secunda
parsin quinqu.Namin primadividi
deunaspecie.Intertia
determinai
dealia. In quartareducitentimema
ad sillogismum.
de alia specie,scilicetde exemplo.Secundaincipit
ibi: Inductio
In quintadeterminai
entimema
est
. Quintaibi: Exemplum.
. Tertiaibi: Entimema.
Quartaibi: Sciendum
quodomne
Etsicpatetdivisiolectionis.
The same divisionof the text is foundin the Todiversion,f. 40 va.
have already
The interestingexamplesgivenby Robert forexemplum
been discussedabove, pp. 38-39.

VI

DE SUPPOSITIONIBUSs

I give the complete text of Robert's commentaryas it is found in the

Rome redactionof his glosses.
LECTIOPRIMA
Eorumque dicuntur.Superius
determinai
terminis
Rome
, ff.44va-48ra:
Magisterde
1 IntheTodiversion
isthethird
thischapter
one.Seeabove,
p. 29.
2 IntheTodiversion
isthefourth
thischapter
one.Seeabove,
p. 29.
3 Forthis
seeL. M.deRijk,
OnThe
Summule
Genuine
Text
I,
logicales
interpolation,
ofPeter
ofSpain's
6 1968,[pp.1-34],
inVIVARIUM
6, 1968,[pp.69-101],
pp.2-3,andII VIVARIUM
p. 100.
4 nrs.g.03- .oyed.Bocheski.
s IntheTodiversion
isthefifth
thischapter
one.Seeabove,
p. 29.

11:59:12 AM

In parteistadeterminai
de proprietate
scilicetde
et de propositionibus.
terminorum,
Etdividitur
hecparsinduas.Inprimapremittit
tionibus.
ad
quedamnecessaria
supposi
In
secunda
ibi:
determinai
de
tionibus,
subposi
Suppositio
suppositionum.
cognitionem
ibi: Suppositio
unamdivisionem.
Insecunda
diffinit
est
. Primaintres.Inprimapremittit
alia. Istaveroque incipitibi:
est.In tertiadividitsignificati
onem,ibi: Significations
In secundadividit,<ibi):
in
In
tionem.
duas.
diffinit
dividitur
prima
supposi
Suppositio^
In secunda
Prima
in
communis
In
alia
.
tres.
diffinit
prima
suppositionem.
Suppositionum
ibi: Differunt
autem
etsignificationem,
inter(intercia
.
datdifferentiam
MS)suppositionem
ibi: Copulationum
In terciadiffinit
(!).
copulationem,
Et sicpatetdivisiolectionis.
ab intellectu
termini
et substantivi
adiectivi
estacceptio,
idestreceptabilitas,
Suppositio
estacceptio,
Similiter
et precipue
maxime
copulatio
proaliquo,idestprosignificato.
substantivi
termini
ad differentiam
ab intellectu
termini
adiectivi
idestacceptabilitas,
idest
prosignificato.
proaliquo,'
Sic accipit
diciturtribusmodis.Vel pro modosignificando
Notaquod significano*
et
res
sive
sive
sit
Alio
modo
modus; sicsigna
quodcumque
prosignificato
gramaticus.
secundum
re
et
substantiali
Tercio
modo
quodresoppopredicabili,
pro
significant.
rei
estrepresentatio
lindeexponesic: significado
etad dispositionem.
niturad modum
siveilla ressit
abanimaapprensa,
etpredicabili
f.44rbSubicibili<s>
<s>mediante
| similitudine
siveincompletum.
enscompletum
)
<Notabilia
'
diciturmultismodis.Uno modo
notandum
Circaistamlectionem
quod significatio'
Aliomodoidemestquod
a gramatico.
Etsicaccipitur
idemestquodmodus
significandi.
:
reipervocem; ethecdupliciter
Terciomodoidemestquodrepresentatio
ressignificata.
hic
secundo
modo
modo
reivere,autmodirerum
autestrepresentatio
;
; primo
accipitur
non.
'
f multismodisdicitur.Unomodoidemest
Secundo[modo]notandum
quod suppositio
Aliomodo
in aliquascientia.
est
Sic
propositio
aliqua(aliaMS)famosa
quoddignitas.
Alio
sub
subiectum
sicut
idemquodsubaliopositio
MS)>
ponitur predicato.
(propositio
turhic.
modoidemestquodproaliopositio
(positoMS).Ethocmodosumi
estquodterminus
Tercionotandum
potest
poniproaliosexmodis.'Autquandostatpro
' homo
estdig{n)issima
: homo
utcumdicitur
auditur'
Aut
.
ut
voce,
quandoprosignificato,
'
estnatura
ut 'Aomo
creaturarum1
. Autquandostatprovoceet significatione,
creatura
statproproprieestdissillabum1
statproproprietate
vocis,ut(homo
Aliquando
Aliquando
statprosupposito
ut 'homoestspecies'
. Aliquando
siveprointentione,
tatesignificandi
'homo
curri
ut
.
significandi,
)
(Questio
sitaliquid.Etvidetur
utrum
Queritur
quodnon.Namsi essetaliquid,posset
significado
tari.Ergononestaliquid.
vocem
Sed
non
vocem
represen
potestper
representan.
per
Sednominonpotestrepresentan
Unumopposi
torum
Probatio
minoris.
perreliquum.
suntopposietinfinitum
Finitum
uthabetur
inElends
nasunt[injfinita,
, resveroinfinite.
etc.
ta. Ergounumnonpoterit
representan,
perreliquum
cumeo (cumeo bisMS)
unitur
non
Itemadidem.Quodestextraanimam
MS)t
(ameniam
S1

11:59:12 AM

etspeciesreiestinanima.Ergovoxunit'xr
quodestinanima.Sedvoxestextraanimam
nonsit.
speciei.Ergovideturquodsignificado
numquam
et significatum
debenthabereremeiusdem
nature
in hocquod
Itemad idem.Signum
et significatum.
estpermanens
et non
| Sedvoxest (estestMS)restransitoria
/. 4rasignum
vox
non
al
i
d
(aliud
MS)
poterit qui
Ergo
significare.
permanens.
cumdicit
dicendum:
est.Adprimum
Solutio.Dicendum
quodsignificado
argumentum
"nomina
suntfinita,
resveroinfinite",
nondicitquodnominasuntfinita
Aristotiles:
et ressuntinfinite
hocestressunt
sedrespectu
rerum,
nominum,
respectu
simpliciter,
hoc dicitquodoportet
nomina
esse
multopluresquamvocesvelnomina.Et propter
utperunum
nomen
resrepresententur.
Etsidicasquodnonverum
plures
quod
equivoca
suntfinita,
resveroinfinite
nominum
nomina
quiaeademresrepresentatur
respectu
per
eadem
res
nonrepresenta[n]tur
nomina
dicendum
sinonima,
per
quod
plura
plura
eiusdem
seddiverse
rei. Ut patetquod 4lapis* significai
nomina,
proprieproprietates
'
et
tatem
ledentis
pedem petraproutpedeteritur.
similiter
dicendum
Ad secundum
quod,licetvoxextraaninamnon possitunirirei
uniriintentionaliter,
ita quod sit
velspeciei,quiaestinanimarealiter,
potesttarnen
et nonrealis.
uniointentionalis
naturam
sittransitoria,
tamen
Adtercium
dicendum
quod,licetvoxeademsecundum
Ethocestquoddicit.
intransitoria.
eademinspecieremanet
LECTIOSECUNDA
diffinitionem
actorposuit
(divisionem
Suppositionumalia communisetc. Superius
sex
Et
hec
turinsexsecundum
ibi
eius.
divisionem
di
vidi
MS)suppositionis,ponit
pars
et sic de aliis.
divisiones
quasponit.In primaponitprima,in secundasecundam,
Terciaibi: Suppositionum
accidentalium.
ibi: Suppositionum
communium.
Secunda
Quartaibi:
Sexta
ibi:
ibi:
Item.
Quinta Suppositionum
personalium.
Suppositiosimplicium.
Suppositionum
suntde presenti
Primequatuor
lectione.Et sic patetdivisiolectionis.
num
confusarum.
)
<Notabilia
habetnaturale
et
extraorationem
Notandum
primoquodterminus
positus
' suppositum
etquierunt,
ut ' homo
tuncsupponit
persesumptus.
proomnibus
quisuntetquifuerunt
f.4rb
talemsuppositionem
veroinoratione
habetacciden
Terminus
| et tuncsupponit
positus
eri, autpropreteritis,
ut
ut 'homo
curri
ut 'Ao/no
, autprofuturis,
propresentibus,
'homo
.
fuit*
' dicitur
Unomodoidemestquodpotestadessevelabesse,
Item.' Accidentale
tripliciter.
ut risibilehomini,
et accidentale
ut albedohomini.Aliomodoestproprium,
Sorti,
hic'supAliomodoquodestperaliud.Ethocmodosumitur
quiaprimoinesthomini.
accidentalis'
positio
termino
communi
estforma
Item.Inquolibet
sibi,uthumaduplex.Unaque convenit
tio
Et hoc facitsuppositionem
Undesupposi
nitasconvenit
simplicem.
singularibus.
re
ut
aut
terminus
fit
modis:
supponit
pro significata pro
quando
simplex quinqu
auditur1
estdignssima)
creaturarum
creatura*
ut'homo
;
; autprovoce,ut 'homo
(significato,
ut
aut(pro)proprietate
estdissillabum1
; aut(pro)proprietate
vocis,ut 'homo
significati,
'homo
estspecies1
.
ad
de aliquosubiecto
nonin comparatione
Notandum
quodquandoaliquidpredicatur
53

11:59:12 AM

Ut'omnis
tuncsubiectum
habetsuppositionem
homo
tionem,
simplicem.
aliquamsupposi
*tantum
ut
homo
estanimai1
curri
dictionem
.
Aut
. Etquandoponitur
(exclusivam),
post
ut *lapisestaliudab homine1
.
'aliud1,
postistamdictionem
autestadiectivus,
in
ut
Item.Notaquodterminus
MS)positus
(predicamento
'homo
1 etsichabet predicato
aut
substanti
Et
:
vus.
hoc
estalbus
:
;
personalem
suppositionem
duplex
sichabetpersonalem
autestprimeimposi
autsecunde.Si prime,
tionis,
suppositionem,
ut species,genus,ut 'homo
ut 'homo
estanimai.Si secunde,sic habetsimplicem,
est
est
'animal
.
,
species1
genus1
)
( Questio
veltransnullasit,quianullum
accidentale
mutat
Videtur
accidentalis
quodsubpositio
est extraorationem,
muttessentiale.
terminus
Sed naturalis
quia statpro omnibus
orationis
suamnaturalem
nonvariabit
tisetfuturis.
presentibus,
preteri
Ergoingressus
vel
naturalis
non
sit
tio
accidentalis.
supposi
suppositionem.
Ergo
extraorationem
est substantialis
non
Item.Omnissuppositio
positio.Sed terminus
nonest.
proaliquo.Ergonaturalis
suppositio
supponit
scilicet
nature
etrationis.
dicoquodduplexestaccidentale,
4vaSolutio.
Adprimm
| Dico
ut
non
albedo
hominis
variat
homivariat
accidentale
non
essentiale,
<nature>
ergoquod
inorationem
communis
et tale
utingressus
termini
rationis,
nem,sedaliudaccidentale
insuppositionem
naturalem.
essentiale
rationis
[non]variat
alicuidupliciter.
Autalicui
communis
Adaliuddicoquodterminus
potestsupponere
Autpotestsupponere
suo.
naturalis.
et sicnonestsuppositio
prosignificato
predicato;
'homo1
Ethecsuppositio
naturalis
estaliquid,quiailleterminus
supponit
prosuosignifiEtsicpatetsolutio.
catoad quodimponitur
ad significandum.
frater
dato (for: Baco??)per
vult
secundum
Ad aliudargumentum
quod
Rogerius
naturalem
nonesse,idemest
demonstrationem
perquamipsedicebatsuppositionem
Etsic
subaliquopositio
nonesttantum
, ymmo
proaliopositio.
deceptus,
quiasuppositio
sumi
turhic.Etc.
LECTIOTERTIA
Item.Personaliumsuppositionum.Superius
posuitactordivisiones
suppositionis.
insecunda
secunturinduas.Inprimaponitprimam,
Hicponitalias.Ethecparsdividi
intres.InprimaponitunamdivisioPrimadividitur
dam,ibi: Confusarum
suppositionum.
In secundaprobatprimm,
deindesecundum
nemet explanat
membrum.
primum
autem
Secunda
ibi:
membrum.
In
tertia
secundum
Quod
(suumMS).
utraque
explanat
diviillaparsinquaponitsecundam
tertia
. Tuncsequitur
ibi: Confusa
istarum;
suppositio
In secundareflectit
se supra
in duas.In primaponitdivisionem.
sionem.Et dividitur
ibi: Sedegocredo.
Primacum
Secunda
eiuspartem.
illamutdestruat
earnquoadalteram
estpresents
lectionis.
precedentibus
Insecunda
earn
determinai
Etdividitur
inquatuor.
Inprimaprobatsuamdi<vi)sionem.
tertia
In
MS).
quoadopinionem
aliquorum.
(oppositionem
quoadpropriam
opinionem
Secundaibi: Utcum
tacitequestioni.
In quartaremo
veldicas:respondet
vetdubium,
'omnis
ibi: Sednevideatur
homo.
f.4svidicitur:
Tertiaibi: Cum
homo
estanimai*.
Quarta
unus'quisque
oppositum.
Hecdivisiolectionis.
S4

11:59:12 AM

( Notabilia
)
universale
affirmativum
confundit
terminm
Notandum
quodsignum
primm
(tercium
adiunctum
mobiliter
et
inmediate
distributive.
sibi
de utroque
ut 'omnis
MS)
Exemplum
' confusam
SoretPlato'
. Sedsi habeat'animal
estanimal;
homo
inmobiergo
suppositionem
'
homo
estanimal1
estanimal'
.
, nonsequitur:'ergohomo
liter,ut omnis
universale
confundit
terminm
inmediate
sibiadiunctum
Item.Signum
vel
negativum
et distributive,
ut inullus
homo
mobiliter
estasinus;
Sortes
non
est
asinus
nec
mediate,
ergo
subpredicato;
homo
nonestBrunellus'
Plato'
.
; etsimiliter
'ergoomnis
estintersuppositionem
etreddere
locutionem
Item.Notandum
quoddifferentia
veram,
dicitur
ad
locutiopercomparationempredicatum
quodpotestreddere
quiasuppositio
nem<veram>
proaliquo.
terminm
confuse
Item.Notandum
et
quod hec negatio'non'distribut
sequentem
'
mobiliter.
omni
homine
tam
crrente
Item.Videturquod 'homo'nonsupponit
non
pro
quam
crrente,
quodtalia(sunt)subiecta
quiadicitBoetius
qualiasuntpremissa
predicata.
'
currisolumfacitstaresubiectum
Sedhocpredicatum
procurrentibus.
Ergosolum
statprocurrentibus.
idemessetdictum'homo
curriet 'omnis
homo
Item.Si supponunt
proomnihomine,
et aliaindefinita
. Sedhocestfalsum,
sive
curri
[aliaindefinita]
quiaunaestuniversalis
hominibus.
quodnonsupponat
proomnibus
Ergovidetur
particularis.
contradictiones
forme.
Sedsubiectum
estlocomaterie,
Item.Materia
sequitur
semper
loco forme.
contradictiones
Sedpredisequitur
Ergosubiectum
predicati.
predicatum
et nonprocurrentibus.
Sed stareproomnibus
est
catumsolumstatprocurrentibus
lindedicoquodquandodico'homo
curri
duobusmodis:autactuautpotentia.
, et hic
nontarnen
Sedcumdicitur'omnis
homo'
actusedpotentia.
f.46rastat'homo'
proomnibus,
tunc
stat
omnibus
in
actu
secundum
omnibus
cur(rentibus),
pro
quoddicitur
quod
pro
utea que suntin potentia
reducantur
ad actum.Et sicpatet
ad hocsuntsignainventa
solutio.
dico duodquandodico quod taliasuntsubiectaqualiapremissa
sunt
Ad secundum
adveritatem
dico
orationis,
quiaad hoc quodhec
predicata, quodid [quod]intelligitur
inactu.
secundo
sit,oportet
quodhomoprimositinpotentia,
contradictiones
Adaliuddicoquodsubiectum
sequitur
predicati
predicatur
inquantum
nonlicetconfundere
dubitatoria
etnoninaliisf talisestrelativa
f
quiavocabula
aliquid
utsi dicerem:4tudubitas
sibiadditum
hoc',
terminm
mobiliter,
aliquid;ergotudubitas
dictionis.
nonvaletquiaibiessetfallacia
figure
est interin<de)finite
ut 'homo'sumitur
Tertionotandum
sumptum,
quoddifferentia
in
inter
terminm
universali
hoc est
et
affirmativa,
indefinite,
positum propositione
estintersuppositionem
et confusam.
Namisteterdeterminatam
dictum:differentia
'homo'
tis
indefinite
hominibus
minus
su<m)ptus
supponit
proomnibus
presentibus,
preteri
in propositione
universali
Cumautemponitur
ut
cum
dicitur:
et futuris.
affirmativa,
'omnis
homo
curri
tantum.
, modosupponit
proistisquisuntmodoinactupropresentibus
consideran
: aut
in<de)finite
Quartonotandum
potest
quodterminus
su<m)ptus
dupliciter
- etsicdicoquodsupponit
incomparado
<ne>adsuasupposita
proomnibus
quisuntvel
- ; autpotestcomparari
velerunt
ratione
ad suumpredicatum
; et sicdico
quifuerunt
'homo'
Ut si dicam:'homo
curri,
proeisproquibusexigitpredicatum.
quodsupponit
lindenotaquodsignum
sic ut que
tantum,
additurtermino
propresentibus
supponit
suntinpotentia
reducantur
ad actum.Sednotandum
quodduplexestactus.Estenim
55

11:59:12 AM

Actusessendi
estquandoaliquidestactu.Actus
essendi
| etquidam
46rbquidam
supponendi.
actu
et
tarnen
est
ea quesunt
signanonreducunturj
supponendi quandoaliquidsupponit
etfutura.
inpotentia
essendi,
Quod
MS)adactum
quiasicreducuntur
preterita
(inponitur
estfalsa:'omnis
homo
curri
Et sic propositio
. Sed signareducunt
ad
est inpossibile.
actumsupponendi.
*
'
Notandum
quod naturalediciturduobusmodis.Uno mododiciturnaturaquedam
ut talisdiciturvirtus
visinsitarebusex similibus
(eximilibet
MS) similiaprocreare,
motuset quietisin seipso.Et hocdupliciter.
Aliomodoprincipium
Primo
generativa.
Alio
modo
H'citur
se
materiam
et
formam
et
et
non
mododicitur
per
per
compositum.
turhic.
peraliud.Ethocmodosumi
utin ' curri
suntduo: significatum,
Notandum
, cursus
, et (con)signifiquodintermino
verbum
facitstareter'curri
non
ut
Sciendum
in
catum,
presens
tempus.
ergoquod
Et
in subiecto
eiusdem
sed
minm
pernaturam
significati consignificati.hocestcausa
et subiectum
loco materie.
et predi
catumponiturloco forme
predicatur
quiaverbum
forme.
Sedmateria
sequiturcontradictiones
omniest duobusmodis.Autin potentia;et sic
Notandum
quodstarepro termino
curri
terminus
utcumdicitur:*homo
indefinite
; etsicdicitinlittera.
sumptus,
ponitur
materiam
istarum
inproposi
tioneuniversali
Autactu; etsicstatterminus
; etsecundum
affirmativum
illa
fuerunt
ad
universale
actum
reducit
ad
inposita significandum
que
signum
subtermino
communi.
)
( Questio
mobiliter
terminus
inpredicato
utrum
; utcumdico:
Queritur
possitconfundi
'
' positus
'omnis
Et videtur
homo
mobiliter.
estanimai1
, utrumanimaipossitconfundi
quodsic.
materie
tur
dicitquodnon.Etfaciotaleargumentum.
46vaEtauctor
| Admultiplicationem
sequi
' homo
' estin
estloco materie
et animai
locoforme,
forme.
Sedhomo
quia
multiplicatio
'
'
et confunditur;
veroinpredicato
et [et]' homo
subiecto,animar
multiplicatur
ergoet
et
et singularis
et natura
Adidem.Natura
'animai'.
(nonMS)generis
(notaMS)individui
veroet
deunosolo,species
velsingulare
quiaindividuum
predicatur
specieisuntopposite,
etpredicari
suntopposita
Sedpredicari
de unosoloetdepluribus
genus[et]depluribus.
nil aliudest (adestMS) quamstarepropluribus
de pluribus
<etstarepropluribus)
homo
estanimai
nilaliudest(adestMS)quamconfundi.
', isteterErgocumdico: 'omnis
'
aut
mobiliter.
Adidem.Omneid quodpredicatur,
minus' animal
(velMS)confunditur
'omnis
homo
est
animai
ut
aut
ut
aut
ut
Sed
cum
dico:
minus.
,
maius,
predicatur equale,
' non
*animal
ut
utequalenecutminussed (utMS)predicatur
isteterminus
predicatur
' homo'
. Sednil(aliud)eststarepropluribus
maius.Ergostatpropluribus
quam
quam
' animaV
'
4
debetconfundi,
homoconfundit.
Etisteterminus
confundi.
Ergomultofortius
.
cumstetpropluribus
quam'homo'
'animal
' vel terminus
in predicato
Solutio.Dico quod isteterminus
posituspotest
estetsimplex,
invariabilis
forma
loco
forme
et
consideran.
Aut
est
inquantum
dupliciter
et (estMS)
Etquianullum
ab Aristotile
SexPrincipiorum.
secundum
simplex
quodhabetur
nonconfun'animal'
est(etiamMS)divisibile,
et sicdicoquodisteterminus
invariabile
in
terminus
Autpotest(patetMS) consideran
ditur.Et sic nonvaletargumentum.
insuamateria
in quofd]estsicutforma
incomparatione
adsubiectum
;
positus
predicato
sicutaddivisionem
forme
materie
divisio
etsicaddivisionem
queestinmateria,
sequitur
velalterius
colorisquiestinligno.Sicdico
et nigredinis
divisioalbedinis
lignisiquitur
6

11:59:12 AM

'
'
Boetiidicentis:"taliaerunt
confundi
iuxtaverbum
predicata
qualia
quod animalpotest
suntsubiecta".
Ethocestquoddicitactor.
LECTIO
QUARTA
desuppositioniactorquasdam
dubitationes
Etne videaturoppositum.Superius
posuit
Etdividitur
hecparsinduas.Inprima
bus.Hicautemmovetunamdubitationem.
posuit
Insecunda
con<tro)vers<i)am
ponitsuamopinioqueestinteripsumetaliosmaistros.
esse
ibi: Sedegocredo
. Hecinduas.
nem(oppositionem
Secunda
MS)propriam.
impossibile
In secundacausamopinionis
In primaponitunamopinionem.
illorum;secundaibi:
Causam
autem
quammoventur.
propter
Primain quatuor.In primaponitunamrationem
; in tertia
; in secunda
secunda(m)
ibi
Totum
accidentaTertia
:
Hoc
videtur.
ibi
:
idem
in
Secunda
Item.
tertiam
; quarta
quartam.
illa.
le. Quartaibi: Inest
comparatio
ingenerali.
lectionis
Ethecestsententia
lia)
(Notabi
nonestgenus,quiadicit
Primonotandum
estquarequiaesttamgeneralis
multiplicatio,
tantosimpli<ci)us.
est
Aristotiles
in libroDe causis
quodquantoaliquid communius,
estdivisibile
nullum
est
Sed
commune.
Sedgenusestquoddam
simplex
Ergo simplex.
habereconfusam
Etsicnonpotest
sivemultiplicabile.
Ergogenusnonestmultiplicabile.
suppositionem.
Secundonotandum
; et <hec)
Quedamestuniversalitas
quodduplexestmultiplicatio.
veldistributio
in
confusio
ingenere.Aliaestmultiplicatio,
benereperitur
multiplicitas
divisivum
secundum
multa
; ethecnonestingenere,
quiasingulare
quoddicitPorphirius
inunamnaturam.
estcollectiomultorum
estuniusin multa,
5eduniversale
et quedam
se
et
Tertionotandum
peraccidens
quedam
per
predicatio
quodquedarrv-est
estpredicari
natum
idquodaptum
sedicitur
secundum
se. Secundum
predicatur
quando
et
subicitur
estpredicari
id quodaptumnatum
albe, <per>accidens
ut 'cignus
quando
ad |
velsuperius
universale
ut *album
estlignum'
. Perse quandopredicatur
econverso,
F.47rainferiora,
econverso
accidens
ut4homo
estanimai.Secundum
predicatur
quandoinferius
et secundum
ut 1animaiesthomo',
de superiori,
quandopredicatur
quodaliquidicunt,
Etsi dicas:numquid?;dicitBoetius
idemde se,ut'/io/no
(esthomo).
quodnullaest illa
tu
contra
de
in
se.
idem
dicis,
prout
propositio
quia
quod
predicatur Ergo
predicatio qua
"nullaest
esseinpropria,
estverissima,
tamen
quiadixitAugustinus:
potest
pre<di>catio
dese".Similiter
illaquandoidempredicatur
predicatio
patetquodomnis
inpropria
magis
Dicitsuperhocquodquando
inTertioMetaphisice.
fitratione
uthabetur
communitatis,
dicit
Verbigratia
tuncestpredicatio
commune,
inpropria.
predicatur
quodnonestmagis
de se.
verequandoid<em)predicatur
dicitincomplete
tamen
Item.Notandum
genequianatura
predicatio,
quodlicetdicatur
in libroDe causis
Sedutdicitur
risestquoddam
quodquantoaliquid
aliquidcommune.
et talenonpotestmultiestsimplex
communius
tantosimplicius,
generis
ergonatura
utdicitactor
hominis
forma.
Sed
est
Alia
natura
causa
est
forma,
plican.
quod
generis
Item.Nullum
etindivisibilis.
SexPrincipiorum
, estsimplex
multiplican.
Ergononpoterit
Sed dicitBoetiusquodgenus
et indivisibile.
estsimplex
termini,
quodestin ratione
SI

11:59:12 AM

diversarum
sicutpunctus
termini
in medio
specierum,
respectu
potestessein ratione
linearum.
diversarum
circuiirespectu
et talis
Item.Notandum
; quedamquefitpersingulrem;
quodduplexestmultiplicatio
et talispotestconnumerum;
numquam
potestessein genere;quedamperplurlem
id quodest veregenuset talenonest
siderandupliciter,
quia autgenusappellatur
se
Et talispotestesse
habet
fieri
id
aut
;
<est>
permodum
quod
generis.
<genus> genus
genus.
tatequiaesttotumquoddam
de totoin quanti
in quanti
Circaidemestnotandum
tate
communis
mobilitervel
tur
terminus
confundi
quandoest mobilis
quando
completum,
'homo'
confunditur
et potestfieri
. 47rbconfusio
ut cum[homocur]isteterminus
mo|biliter
homo
' Aliudesttotumin quantisubeo. Sic: 'omnis
descensus
currit;
ergoSoretPlato
confunditur
communis
inmobiliter.
Undeestibi
tateincompletum,
quandoterminus
tateincompletum.
totum
in quanti
et multiplicationem
est intercommunitatem
sive
Quintonotandum
quoddifferentia
ex
et
servatur
uni
oritur
versalitas
tas
nam
communi
secundum
confusionem,
singularibus
ab universal
itateprocedit.
, quia omnissingularitas
quod dicitactorSexPrincipiorum
in singulari,
et servatur
ab universali
est
veroprocedit
quiamultiplicatio
Multiplicitas
divisio.
uniusin multaveldicituniusomnisinmultasingularia
)
( Questio
sitgenus.Etvidetur
:
utrum
natura
Queritur
multiplicati
quodsic. Cumdicitur
generis
hoc
non
est
accidens
alia
alium
differentie.
homines
'ile
f,
( !)
nequeequaleneque
f
Ergo
hacibi: Estgenus
multiplicatum.
Ergonatura
genus.Etestratioquamfacitactorinlittera
estgenus.
multiplicati
generis
utrum
in libroTopicorum
Item.DicitAristotiles
quodad sustinendum
aliquidgenus
insitaliquaspeciesei. Ponitexemplum:
si
estutrum
alicuiconsiderandum
insitsubiecto
videndum
estutrum
moveatur
secunaliquis(aliquidMS)dicatquod(anima)movetur,
dumspeciemaliquammotus[animamovetur].
per
Ergovultquodgenuspredicatur
Et
hocmodogenusmultiplicatur.
et
similiter.
ad
Ergo
comparationeminferiora,species
estgenus.
natura
multiplicati
generis
et particulare.
estcircasingulare
rationalis
Item.Illadifferentia
inquid,inplusse habet.
Item.Omnequodpredicatur
nonpotestmultiplican
secundum
Solutio.Dicendum
multiplicati
quodnatura
generis
et
Undenumerus
benepotestmultiplican.
sermonem
rem,sed secundum
singularis
modum
remnisisecundum
secundum
nondifferunt
quiaeademsuntsecundum
pluralis
. 47vare(m),quiacumdicitur:
alius| estistehomoet aliusest1,et ille et sic de
'istihomines'
singulis.
sed[genus]
id quod
Adaliuddicoquodgenusinquantum
genusnonpotestmultiplicari
Aristotiles
inTopicorum.
Etsicintelligitur
estgenusbenepotestmultiplicari.
Ethocestquoddicit.
LECTIOQUINTA
aliorum(aliquorum
determinavit
actoropinionem
Causa autem.Superius
MS). Hie
turin quinqu.In primarepetit
Et hec dividi
autemdeterminai
propriam.
opinionem
* estanimai
etMS.
s

11:59:12 AM

In secunda
causamillorum.
In quarta*
illam.In tertiaprobatquoddam
dictum.
destruit
suam
In
solutionem
destruit
di
visionem.
ad
a(p)plicat
propositum. quinta
quamdam
ibi: Dicimus
enim
Tertiaibi: Uthomo
constituitur
Secunda
.
quodAristotiles.
loyce
loqueado
hocdestruimus
divisionem
. Quintaibi: Etpropter
.
Quartaibi: Etsimiliter
quamdam
Ethecestdivisiolectionis
ingenerali.
et sententia
)
<Notabilia
notabile
estquodtriplex
estcompositum.
estcompositum
Primum
naturale,
Quoddam
et veraforma,
ut homoconstatex corporeet anima.
quodconstatex veramateria
Aliudestcompositum
ex veramateria
artis.Quodconstat
etficta
utymago,
forma,
quia
habetverammateriam,
utlignum,
et habetformam
ab arte.Aliudestcompositum
ex
et
Et
esse
rationis
veram
differentia.
dicitur
non
habet
materi;
compositum
quod
genere
amequeveram
Etde istocomposito
formam.
inlittera
loquimur
quandodicitur
quod
4
1
4
homoconstituitur
ex animaliet rational^
loyceloquendo.
notandum
Secundo
rationalis
habetessea forma
naturali,
quodforma
quiaanimadicitur
esseformanaturalis
et humanitas
lindehumanitas
est formarationis.
est eademin
sedanimanonesteademinomnibus
omnibus
Etcausahuiusest
hominibus.
hominibus,
unumprincipium,
utpatetquiahomoconquiasupradiversa
principia
potestfundari
ex quatuor
stituitur
elementis
elementa
ettamen
etquatuor
suntdiversa
homo
principia
est verumsolumprincipium.
Ita est similiter
quod animesuntdiversein diversis
in ipsissecundum
rationalis
sed tamenhumanitas
hominibus,
[ethec]
quodestforma
unius
homines
suntunius
f.47vbeademest.Quoddicit| Boetius
quodparticipationes plures
homo.
io)
(Quest
utrum
subiecto.
Queritur
Quodsic,probo.Dicit
predicatum
multiplicetur
multiplicato
actorSexPrincipiorum
et quodei accidit
unumsuntet vocataccidens
ipsum
quodaccidens
et quodaccidit
et predicatum
predicatum
ipsumsubiectum.
Ergovultquodsubiectum
et
suntidem.Item.Predicatum
Sedexforma
estlocoforme
etsubiectum
locomaterie.
materia
fitidem.Ergoex subiectoet predicato
fitidem.Item.Dicit Commentator
estenset predicatum
superIX Metaphisice
quodenset essesuntidem.Sed subiectum
estesse.Ergosubiectum
et predicatum
suntidem.
Exististribus
:
habeoquodsubiectum
etpredicatum
suntidem.Exhocarguo
argumentis
unius
et multiplicationem
quandocumque
aliquaduo sunteadem,ad confusionem
alterius
et predicatum
suntidem; ergoad multi; sedsubiectum
sequitur
multiplicatio
subiecti
videtur
plicationem
sequitur
multiplicatio
predicati.
quodmultiplicetur
Ergo
predicatum.
autem
Solutio.Dicoquodduplexestpredicatum
: accidentale
etsubstantiate
. Predicatum
'
accidentale
autem
estidemcumsubiecto
estalbus1.
Predicatum
secundum
esse,ut homo
substantiate
dicituresse idemcumsubiectoper essentiam.
Sed duplexest essentia,
scilicetcompleta
vel
et incompleta.
de dififinito,
predicatur
Completa
quandodiffinitio
et quiadiffinitio
et diffmitum
sictuncpredicatum
suntidemperessentiam,
econverso,
estidemcumsubiecto,
ut'/jo/do
estanimai
rationale
mortale'
. Autestessentia
incompleta,
ut quandoaliquaparsdiffinitionis
ut animaide
de dififinito,
MS)
predicatur
(ponitur
homine
velrationale,
estanimaV
ut' homo
vel(homo
estrationale1
. EtsicpatetquodaliquanS9

11:59:12 AM

et predicatimi
suntidemsecundum
essentiam
do subiectum
secundum
esse,aliquando
secundum
essentiam
aliquando
incompletam.
completam,
Aut
consideran.
Et <ad>argumenta
patetsolutioquia 'predicatimi*
potestdupliciter
subiecto
id quodest,et hocmodomultiplicatur
secundum
quia
multiplicato
intelligitur
estinratione
Autpotest
consideran
insubiecto.
idestinquantum
inquantum
predicatum,
Sicutpatet:albedo
et hocmodononconfunditur
potest
equemultiplicatur.
predicati,
et sicest|
aut
hocest
consideran
:
secundum
secundum
formam,
se,
quamdam
dupliciter
secundum
etinsimplici
consistens
essentia
consideran
; autpotest
48raindivisibilis
quodestin
Et sic
materie
vel subiectisequiturdivisioalbedinis.
subiecto,et sic ad divisionem
utdictum
eodemmodode predicato,
est.
The Todi version of this chapter is more elaborate on several points,
especiallyin the introductorypart.
VII

DE FALLACIIS1

maiorum
This chaptergives glosses on the so-called Tractatus
fallaciarum,
not on the shortertract which was edited by Bocheski as the seventh
logicales2.It is beyond all doubt that Robert had
chapterof the Summule
in
text
of the Summule.The same holds good forall
tract
his
the longer
. Hence the
the other thirteenthcenturycommentariesof the Summule
conclusion must be drawn that those manuscriptswhich contain the
logicalesare
longer tracton fallaciesas the seventhpart of the Summule
the better manuscripts.For that matterI have serious doubts whether
the shortertractas it is foundin Bochensks text (nrs 7.01-7.69) could
be considered as a work of Peter's hand. I shall returnto thisquestion
to my edition of the Summule.
in the Introduction
VIII DE RELATIVIS
IX DE AMPLIATIONIBUS3
X DE APPELLATIONIBUS*
XI DE RESTRICTIONIBUSs
XII DE DISTRIBUTIONIBUS.6
1 IntheTodiversion,
istheseventh
one.Seeabove,
too,thischapter
p. 29.
2 SeealsoL. M.deRijk,
6
I inVIVARIUM
sSummule
Text
OnThe
Genuine
logicales
ofPeter
ofSpain
(1968),[pp.1-34],
p. 3.
3 IntheTodiversion
Thisseems
tobeanadditional
onappeilatio.
that
with
iscombined
this
chapter
Seeabove,
oftheTodiglosses.
redaction
hint
tothelater
pp.31and44.
4 Seethepreceding
note.
s IntheTodiversion
isthetenth
one.Seeabove
thischapter
p. 29.
6 IntheTodiversion
istheeleventh
one.Seeabove,
thischapter
p. 29.
60

11:59:12 AM

In one of the next issues of this Journalthe wide-spreadcommentaryof.

master Guillelmus Arnaldi, who taughtat Toulouse from 1238-1244,
will be discussed1.
To be continued
Nijmegen
Sophiaweg73

1 Unfortunately
I havehitherto
insomeofourmanuscripts
indications
misled
supposed
bycertain
Arnald
ofVillanova.
SeeL. M.deRijk,
ofthefamous
wasofthehand
this
that
physician
commentary
s Summule
Text
OnTheGenuine
I, p. 34.
logicales
ofSpain*
ofPeur
6l

11:59:12 AM

La

Lettre-ddicace

de Bersuire

Pierre

des Prs

J. ENGELS

moraleet dans l'dition des

plusieursmanuscritsdu Reductorium
en
i
Chevallon
I-XIV
Claude
livres
21, le Prologue est prcd
par
Dans
d'une Lettre-ddicaceadressepar PierreBersuire son protecteur,
le cardinal Pierre des Prs1, laquelle a t assez nglige. Pannier2ne
l'a pas mentionnedu tout. Fassbinder3en a cit troisphrases.Samaran
maisla considrecomme faisantpartiedu Prologues.
en cite un fragment,
sont
En fait, cette Lettre-ddicace et le Prologue du Reductorium
de
la
dernire
clairement
de
deux textesdistincts.Cela ressort
phrase la
Lettre-ddicace, o Bersuire dit: Quem igiturordinemhuius Reductorii
collacionem
uideredelectat,sequentem
perlegat. . .6, combine avec cette
autre phrase, crite en 135"97: . . quando collacionemseu prologm
meifeci, "Celui qui veut connatrela dispositiondes matires
Reductorii
dans le Reductorium
, doit lire le Prologue ( collado) qui suit cette Lettreddicace". Du reste, ces deux textes ont peut-tre mme t crits
: le Prologue,lorsque Bersuirevenaitde terminer
des momentsdiffrents
la
le Reductorium
;
Lettre-ddicace,lorsqu'il avait ensuite achev aussi le
, du moins dans sa premireversion.
Repertorium
1 Pourle cardinal
Pierre
Bersuire
voirCh.Samaran,
de Palestrina,
desPrs,vque
Pierre
, Prieur
littraire
dela
dansHistoire
deJ.Monfrin,
deParis
deSaint-loi
(120?-1
362),aveclacollaboration
France
, t. 39 = 1962,pp.265-6etpassim.
2 L. Pannier,
de1Ecole
des
Pierre
Bersuire
surlebndictin
. . ., dansBibliothque
Notice
biographique
= 1872,pp.325-64.
Chartes
, XXXIII
3 F. Fassbinder,
desBenediktiners
Pierre
und
dieWerke
DasLeben
, I, Bonn,
1917,p. 16,n. 3;
Beruire
p. 17,n. i ; p. 21,n. 2.
* Op.cit.
yp. 303.
s L'incipit
Petro
dePratis
inXristo
acdomino
Reverendissimo
delaLettre-ddicace
,
, domino
(infra
patri
donne
duReductorium
sicomplte
desincipit
lalistepourtant
dans
parF.Stegmlp. 70),manque
Ilfaut
l'insrer
IV = 1954,pp.236-41.
medii
aevi(sigle:RBMA
biblicum
), Madrid,
ler,Repertorium
mihi
laboravi
non
solum
...
lap. 236,justedevant
6425Videtef
quoniam
ACatalogue
andP. Kibre,
dans
aussi
L. Thorndike
Cetincipit
Scientific
pits
ofMediaeval
ofInci
manque
celuidu
donnent
London
in
;2
1963,
1937
Latin,1
pourtant
Cambridge
(Mass.),
qui
Writings
(col.772;col.1694)etceluideRed.I (col.192; col.411).
Prologue
6 Voirplusloin,p. 72,lignes
17-8.
7 VoirVivarium
III = 1965,p. 158,lignes
12-3.
62

11:59:20 AM

Etantdonn Vimportancede la Lettre-ddicace pour le canon et la.

chronologiedes oeuvres latinesde Bersuired'une part,et d'autre part le
faitque Vimprimde Chevallon est pratiquementinaccessible, il a paru
utile d'en procurerici une dition critique.
La Lettre-ddicaceest actuellementatteste dans neuf manuscrits.
Des douze manuscritssignals par J. Monfrin1comme contenant le
iumet qui de ce faitpourraiententreren ligne
premierlivre2du Reductor
de compte, il fauten liminer trois.
Le ms. Bale D. 11.23,comme le Dr. Max Burckhardt,conservateur
la Bibliothque universitaire,a bien voulu nous l'crire, ne contient
ni la Lettre-ddicaceni le Prologue. Il commence immdiatementpar
est). Le ms.
l'incipit du premier livre ( Deus quia propriespeculationis
Paris, B. N. lat. 8864 (olim Suppl. latin io)* commence par explicate
ideoipm moralerepertori
baptizos ; c'est que le premierfeuillet manque,
la
contenir
a
d
premirepartie du Prologue de mme que, sans
lequel
doute, la Lettre-ddicace. Quant au ms. Worcester, Cathedral Chapter
LibraryQ.936, son cas est plus complexe.
1 Monfrin,
nousrenvoyons
VAppendice.
Manuscrits
et
pp.435-6,sousB. - Parle sigleMonfrin
deCh.Samaran,
larfrence
dont
despp.434sqq.delamonographie
setrouve
ditions
lanote1de
la page62.
2 Antrieurement,
RBMA
F. Stegmller,
sixmanuscrits
, IV = 1954,p. 238,avaitnumr
qui
duReductorium.
livre
lepremier
onnepeutenretenir
contenir
taient
censs
Pourtant,
queleseul
nousallons
traiter.
ms.BleD.H.2,dont
andCaiusCollege56 ne contient
Gonville
Le ms.Cambridge,
pasRed.I-XV,maisXVI
(Monfrin,
p. 440).
Pembroke
Lems.Cambridge,
mais
XVI(manque
chez
197necontient
College
I-XV,
pasRed.
intheLibrary
Monfrin,
Catalogue
oftheManuscripts
p. 440,maisvoirADescriptive
ofPembroke
. . ., Cambridge,
, byM. R. James
1905,pp.183-4).
Cambridge
College,
Merton
Lems.Oxford,
XVI(Monfrin,
246necontient
I-XV,mais
College
pasRed.
p.440).
Lems.Paris,
B. N. lat.14412necontient
pasRed.I-II,maisXII-XIII
(Monfrin,
p. 436).
Le ms.Paris,
B. N. lat.16787necontient
pasRed.I-XV,maisXV-XVI
(Monfrin,
p. 43s).
3Monfrin,
RBMA
IV = i954>P238:"(script.
1430perCuonradum
p. 435;Stegmller,
Lapic;
laes. Antonii,
Burckardi
fratribus
Basileae;
legavit
capellani
capel
Johannis
OP)f. 1-157:/-/K".
ACatalogue
andP. Kibre,
. . .2,London,
L. Thorndike
1963,col.411.
ofIncipits
4 comportant
duXlVesicle,
mutil
dudbut,
contenant
Red.
317 ff.enparchemin,
I-X,provenant
deBourges,
dupalais
Ytier
deMartreuil,
delaSainte-Chapelle
arriv
la Bibliothque
possesseur
dondeschanoines
deBourges
LouisXV.Monfrin,
duroien1752,comme
p. 434,p. 436;L.
Petri
Berchorii
duo, item
BEC1856,p. 146(Commentarium
ducatalogue
deBourges
, volumina
Delisle,
de 1552),
III,1881,
p. 158; Id.,BEC1862,p. 286;Id.,BEC1871,p. 20,p. 28; Id.,Cab.desMss.
P. 420.
5 Dansl'dition
1731,p. 1,col.2,deuxdernires
Cologne,
lignes.
6 Pourlesmanuscrits
de Worcester
et l'histoire
de la bibliothque,
voirN.R. Ker,Medieval
AList
Libraries
. . .,
Books2,
Britain,
London,
1964,p. 205,Monasticon
ofSurviving
ofGreat
anglicanum
etL.H.Cottineau,
ed.W. Dugdale,
London,
1817,I, pp.569-622,
Rpertoire
topo-bibliographique
desabbayes
etprieurs,
vol.II,Mcon,
1939,col.3456-6.
<>3

11:59:20 AM

Ce manuscrit, examin sur place et, ds 1898, signal par le

professeurH. Schenklde Graz1, a t dcriten 1906 dans le cataloguede
Floyeret Hamilton2.Entre 1941 et 1944, il a t examin par I. Atkins,
alors bibliothcaire du Chapitre, et le professeurKer^. En 1966, le
bibliothcaire actuel, G. C. B. Davies, et le doyen de Worcester,
R. L. P. Milburn, sur notre demande, ont bien voulu vrifiercertains
points. Il en ressort*que le ms. Q. 93, en 3^8 feuillets,partie en papier
et partie en vlin, du XVe sicle ( ineunte
d'aprs Atkinset Ker) contient
- sauf
des disjectamembradu Reductorium.
peut-tre aux ff. 31 1-2
Malheureusement,il a beaucoup souffertde l'humidit, de sorte qu'un
quart environ du texte est devenu illisible. La couverture a disparu,
mais Ker* estime que la reliure est caractristiquepour Worcester.
Au point de vue palographique,M. Milburna crit ce qui suit: "f. 3133^8 is writtenin the same hand as f. 1-45 and f. 81-83. Halfwaythrough
f. 4 verso, the work is continuedin a contemporary(fifteenth
century)
but much clearer hand". Les ff. 1-80 contiennentRed. XVI6, tronqu du
dbut. Puis suivent,jusqu'au f. 265, les livresXI-XIV ("fairlycomplete")
naturalishistorie
d'un Compendium
, c'est--dire encore du Reductorium.
1
et
L'incipit (f. 94v) l'explicit (f. 26$v) de Red.XIV, De naturemirabilibus
sont indiqus par des rubriques. Les ff.266-310 contiennentun ComIl s'agit de Red. XV ( Ovidiusmoralizatus
in OuidiiMetamorphoses.
mentarius
)
dans la dernire version P(aris), mais la plus grande partie du chapitre
liminaireDe Jormis
gurisquedeorummanque, puisqu'il commence seulement par Hic fitmentici
. Les ff. 31 1-2 contiennent?Quedamdistinctiones.
Les ff. 313-58 enfin correspondent globalement aux livres I-IV du
Pournaturalishistorieprcit, c'est--dire du Reductorium.
Compendium
1 souslen4373delaBibliotheca
Kathederenglischen
latinorum
Britannica
X,DieBibliotheken
patrm
der
Classe
derK.Akademie
dans
derPhil.
: Sitzungsberichte
-Hist.
Worcester
dralen
(Fortsetzung
), XVIII.
ch.s.XV.1. Compendium
Wien,1898,p. 72(cf.pp.44-5):uFerner:
Wissenschaften,
139.Band,
usinOvidi
i Metamorphoseon
libros".
historiae
2. Commentari
naturalis.
2 J.K.Floyer
inthe
andS. G. Hamilton,
Library
ofWorcester
Chapter
preserved
Catalogue
ofManuscripts
Cathedral
, Oxford,
1906,pp.i-6.
3 Catalogus
in 1622-1623
bibliothecae
librorum
,
Young
, made
byPatrick
Wigorniensis
manuscriptorum
andNeilR. Ker,Cambridge,
anIntroduction
with
Librarian
toKing
/,edited
byIvorAtkins
James
1944,p. 28,n.4; p. 39;p. 76.
4 cequipermet
lanotice
deMonfrin,
decorriger
p. 436.
s N. R. Ker,Medieval
Libraries
. . .2,p. 215-.
6 Schenkl
danssanotice
dumanuscrit
cetrait
n'apassignal
(voirplushaut,
p. 64,note1);
liteundsonst
classischen
c'estsansdoute
irgendwie
queles"patristischen,
qu'ilneretenait
parce
Stcke"
rarische
(art.cit.,p. 4$).
wichtigen
7 VoirPetrus
XV:Ovidius
moralizatus
Reductorium
morale
, cap.i,DeJormis
gurisque
Berchorius,
, liber
doorhet
Werkmateriaal
critice
deorum
e codice
Brx.
Bibi.Reg.863-9
editus,
, textus
(3)uitgegeven
derRijksuniversiteit
Instituut
voorLaatLatijn
Utrecht,
1966,p. $1,ligne10d'enbas.
64

11:59:20 AM

auersus
, qu'on
tant,1' incipitdu f. 313 Angelusmalusesta Deo( !) uoluntate
de
De
au
dbut
montre
reconnatre
I, iii,
diabolo1,
que le Prologue
peut
et, partant, la Lettre-ddicace manquent ici. Thoriquement, il est
possible que la Lettre-ddicacese trouve quand mme ailleurs dans le
manuscrit,par suite d'un dplacementde feuilletpar exemple. Toujours
est-ilque l'tat du manuscritn'a pas permis M. Milburnde la retrouver.
M. Davies a estim avec raison qu'en tout tat de cause son utilitpour
rtablissementdu texte seraitngligeable. Nous avons donc cart aussi
ce ms. Worcester Q.932.
Les neuf manuscritscontenant la Lettre-ddicace sont numps
ci-dessous dans l'ordre alphabtique des noms de lieux de dpt, avec
toutes les informationsutiles. Celles-ci ont t puises aux notices^
succinctes de la bibliographie des manuscritsque Jacques Monfrina
tablie avec beaucoup de soin et pour laquelle il a sollicit des renseignements pistolaires indits. Nous les corrigeons le cas chant et les
compltons, soit d'aprs nos propres observationsfaitessur les reproductions*des manuscrits,soit d'aprs les sources que nous indiquons.
i. CF: Le ms. Clermont-Ferrand,Bibi. mun. et univ. 101, olim 95,
233
papier, XVe sicle, contenant Lettre-ddicace (f. ir-2v),
vPrologue (ff. 2 1ov), Table des quatre premierslivres de la main de
F. de Sauzayo (ff. iov-nv), Red. I-IV (ff. 13r-233v). Provenance:
Bibliothque ds Dominicains de Clermont-Ferrand(1677). Manque
chez Montfaucon,H, pp. 135*3-6.
Monfrin,p. 435. - Cat. gn. desmss.desbibl. publiquesde France,
, t. XIV, Clermont-Ferrand
, par C. Couderc, Paris,
Dpartements
1890, p. 31.- Thorndikeand Kibre, A CatalogueofIncipits....
citentle ms. Clermont-Ferrand
pour l'incipit du premierlivre
2
col.
col.
196
192;
3,
(*1937,
411), non pour la Lettreddicace et le Prologue.
Pour le couvent des Dominicains de Clermont-Ferrand,voir
Couderc, pp. XXIV-XXV, et Dictionnaired'histoireet de
t. XII, Paris, 1953, col. 145 1.
gographieecclsiastiques,
1 Dansl'dition
1731,p. 6,col.2.
Cologne,
2 Pource manuscrit
voiraussinotre
surlesmanuscrits
berchoriens
deWorcester
Note
,
complmentaire
plusloin,pp.73-8.
3 Monfrin,
pp.43-6,sousB.
QueM.M.lesConservateurs
mettre
ladisposition
demanuscrits
del'Instiquiontbienvoulu
tuutvoorLaatLatijn
icil'expression
de
desmicrofilms
oudesphotocopies,
veuillent
bientrouver
notre
sincre
reconnaissance.

11:59:20 AM

Ch. Samaran et R. Marichal, Cat. des mss. en criture

latine portantdes indicationsde date, de lieu ou de copiste
, t.
VI..., 1968, p. 16, insrentce ms. parmi les" Manuscrits
liminsou douteux", avec la remarque: 44Le copiste qui a
crit le premier cahier du ms. (ff. 1-12) et le dernier f. a
'
sign au f. iiv: Explicit tabula... F. N. de SauzayoV'
2. C: Le ms. Coblence, Staatsarchiv,GymnasialBibi., Abt. 701, nr.
20, ff. i9r"40r,papier, XVe sicle (aprs 1439), contenantLettreddicace (f. i9ra-b), Prologue (ff. i 9rb-i61 va), puis (ff. i6iva40r) Red. I-IX, iii. Provenance: Dominicains de Coblence.
Monfrin,p. 43 (corrigerVIII en IX, iii). - RBMAIV, p. 243
. Le directeur
place le manuscrit tortparmiceux du Repertorium
du Staatsarchiv,Graf Looz-Gorswarem, a bien voulu nous
crire notammentce qui suit:
4Index librorum manu
"In dem handschriftlichen
scriptorum,
tur
in
bibliotheca
adservan
"qui
gymnasii regii confluentii,
curis
secundis elaboratus a.
a.
1822,
"primm compositus
ist
ab
Ernesto
Dronke'
die Handschriftnicht
et
1832
"1831
"beschrieben. Es heisst lediglich zu der heute als Nr. 2o
"gefhrtenHandschrift: 'i. Liber de SanctissimaTrinitate.
"2. Berchoriimorale reductorium' ....
"Die HandschriftAbt. 701 Nr. 20 g ist ein Papierkodex des
"i. Jhs(nach 1439) und stammtaus dem Koblenzer Dominikanerkloster. ber den 1. Teil (fol. ir-i4v) berichtet
"MartinGrabmann,Eine ungedrucktetheologischeSummaaus
"dem Jahre 1439, in Scholastik 27, 19^2, S. 68-76. Der 2.
"Teil (fol. i9r-40r) enthlt das Reductorium morale des
"Petrus Berchorius mit Widmung und Prolog (Videte
"quoniam), aber nur die Bcher 1 bis 8 einschliesslich.
"Inwieweit Buch 8 vollstndigabgeschrieben ist, kann hier
"nichtnachgeprft
werden (Explicit : nam sicutdiciturin libro
"de naturaterre. Artikel: Angwillaunter pisces)".
Au desinit du manuscritcorrespond dans l'dition Cologne,
17 3 1, p. 23, col. i, lignes 3-4 du cap. iii: "in lib. de natura
rerum" ; c. le manuscritde Thomas de Cantimpr, Utrecht
710, f. ii4vb, lignes 2 et 3 d'en bas.
3. E: Le ms. Escurial e. III. 20, olim IV. L.. - III.F. 11, ff. ir-8ov,
parchemin, XlVe sicle, contenant Lettre-ddicace (f. ira-iva),
per
Prologue (ff. iva~4ra), Red. I-III, xv (De cibo); desinit (f. 8ov):
66

11:59:20 AM

, & medetur.Provenance: la librairie de Mateo

consequens
magisprocit
Dandolo Venise (cote CXLVIII); acquis en 1^73.
Monfrin,p. 435 (corriger cote et nombre de feuillets). - G.
Antolin, Catlogode los cdiceslatinosde la Real Bibliotecadel
Escorial, Madrid, t. II, 191 1, pp. 81-3; t. I, 1910, pp. XXVIIXXVIII; t. V, 1923, p. 102.
Le desinit se lit dans l'dition Cologne, 1731, p. 72, col. 1,
lignes 34-f.
4. MC: Le ms. Mont-Cassin473, olim 202 et 935, 678 pages (pp. 08
et 678 en blanc), parchemin, XlVe-XVe sicles, contenant Lettreddicace (pp. ia-2a), Prologue (pp. 2a-7a), puis Red. I-IX.
Monfrin,p. 436. - La cote se trouveaussi chez Montfaucon,I,
p. 229, col. i.-RBMAlW = 1954, p. 241 , le place tortparmi les manuscrits de Red. XVI. - M. Inguanez, Codicum
casinensium
, III, Mont-Cassin, 1940-1,
manuscriptorum
catalogus
p. 114.
A. Caravita,/ codicie le artia MonteCassino, t. I, Mont-Cassin,
1869, p. 368, datait le manuscritdu XlVe sicle. Cet auteur,
bien qu'il signale les rapportstroitsentre le Mont-Cassin et
Avignon, aprs que Jean XXII en 132 1 eut rig l'abbaye en
vch (p. 333), ne compte pourtantpas le ms. 473 parmiles
nombreuxmanuscritsen provenanced'Avignon.
C',est sans doute ce manuscritque se rapportel'Itemlib. de
rerummoraliz.primapars dans la liste des livres
proprietatibus
donns l'abbaye par Henricus Thomacellus, abb de 13961413 (M. Inguanez, Catalogi codicumcasinensium
antiqui (saec.
V11I-XV
), Mont-Cassin, 1941, p. 14).
. O: Le ms. Oxford, Bodl. Douce 177 (Madan 217^1), 458 ff.,
parchemin,XVe sicle, contenantLettre-ddicace(f. ira-iva), Prologue
(ff. iva-4va), Red. I-X (ff. 4va>4^8). Provenance inconnue. Donn
Douce par Roger Wilbraham.
Booksand Manuscripts
Monfrin,p. 436. - CatalogueofthePrinted
, Oxford,
bequeathed
byFrancisDouce, Esq. to theBodleianLibrary
1840, p. 30. - F. Madan, A SummaryCatalogueof Western
in theBodleianLibraryat Oxford. . . , IV {CollecManuscripts
tions receivedduringthefirst half of the 19th Century
), Nos.
16670-24330, Oxford, 1897, pp. 4-6.
6. Pj : Le ms. Paris, B. N. lat. 14276, 334 ff.,parchemin,XlVe sicle,
67

11:59:20 AM

contenant Lettre-ddicace (ff. ira-iva), Prologue (ff. iva-4vb), Red.

I-IX (ff. 4vb-334vb). Provenance: Saint-Victor (cote 310; 007 du
catalogue de Grandrue,B. N. lat. 14767, ff. i39v-i4or).
Monfrin,non insrp. 436, mais voir p. 434 et p. 43 lignes
4-. - RBMAIV = 19^4, p. 241, place ce ms. dubitativement,
mais tort,parmiles mss. de Red. XVI. - L. Delisle, Inventaire
la Bibliothque
des mss. latins de St-Victorconservs
impriale
sousles numros14232-15*75 dans C, XXX = 1869, p. 3
("Fin du XlVe s. Peint.").
C'est un des mss. copis ou acquis entre 1417 et 14^8 par les
soins de JohannesLa Masse, religieux,plus tardprieur et abb
de Saint-Victor (L. Delisle, Le cabinetdes manuscrits
. . . , II,
Histoire
cf.
A.
Franklin,
Paris, 1874, p. 217;
gnralede Paris.
de Paris, t. I, Paris, 1867, p. 146).
Les anciennesbibliothques
7. P2: Le ms. Paris, B. N. lat. 16785, 292 ff., parchemin, XVe (?)
sicle, contenant Lettre-ddicace (f. ira-iva), Prologue (ff. iva-4ra),
Red. I-IX (ff. 4ra-292va). Provenance: Grands-Augustins de Paris, 44.
Monfrin,p. 435; p. 436. - RBMAIV = 1954, p. 241, place ce
ms. dubitativement,mais tort, parmi les mss. de Red. XVI.
- L. Delisle, Inventaire
des mss.latinsde Notre-Dame
et autres
les
nationale
sous

numros
la
conservs
16719Bibliothque
fonds
18613 , dans BEC, XXXI = 1870, p. 469 ("XV s. Peint.").
Ce ms. forme,avec les mss. 16686 et 16687, le seul exemplaire
en seize livres. Vu
manuscritcomplet connu du Reductorium
de VInstitutnational de France, Acaque B. Haurau ( Mmoires
et belles-lettres
dmiedes Inscriptions
, t. XXX, Paris, 1883, p. go)
et Ch. Samaran (op. cit., p. 342) datentle ms. 16787 du XlVe
sicle, il y a tout lieu de rexaminerla date de cette srie.
C'est peut-tre cette srie de mss. du Reductoriumque
F augustiJacques Legrand a emprunt les exemplapour ses
sermons(voir E. Beltrn,JacquesLegrand(I1415) prdicateur
,
XXX = 1967, p. 2o2, note 24).
dans AnalectaAugustiniana
8. Pgj: Le ms. Prague, Mus. Nat. 3147 (XII A 8), 172 ff.,parchemin,
miniatures, XIVe sicle, contenant Lettre-ddicace (f. ira-iva),
Prologue (ff. iva-4va), puis (ff.4va-i72) Red. I-IV, xxviii (De medico);
. Provenance: Couventdes Augustins
desinit: vel faciteri omniasupradicta
de Roudnice.
Monfrin,p. 436. - RBMAIV = 1954, p. 241 , le place dubitativement, mais tort, parmi les manuscritsde Red. XVI. 68

11:59:20 AM

Nrodnho
Museav Praze[Catalogus
F. M. Bartos,SoupisRukopisu
Musaei NationalisPratensis],II, Prague,
codicummanuscriptorum
moralisquinqu librorum"
;
1927, p. 213 ("Primaparsreductorii
le manuscrit est donc probablement mutil de la fin du
quatrimelivre et du cinquime).
Le desinitse lit dans l'dition Cologne, 1731, p. 10 1, col. 2,
ligne 46.
9. Pg2: Le ms. Prague, Mus. Nat. 3456 (XIV D 4), ff.2-141, parchemin,
dbut XVe sicle, contenant Lettre-ddicace (f. 2ra-2vb), Prorogue
(ff. 2vb-6va), Red. I-IV (ff. 6yb-i4i). Provenance: Eglise de CeskyKrumlov. Don de MagisterJaksso(f. 2r).
Monfrin, p. 436 (XlVe s.) - RBMAW = 1954, p. 241, le
place dubitativement,mais tort, parmi les manuscritsde
Red. XVI. Voir le catalogue de Bartoscit pour Pgj, pp. 298-9.
10. Ch: A ces neuf manuscrits,il faut ajouter le texte de la LettreI-XIV imprime
ddicace qu'on lit au f. Ira-b de l'dition du Reductorium
1
1

Paris
en
Chevallon
:
Claude
2
par
"ReductoriimoralisfratrisPetri Berchoriilibriquatuordecim,perfectam
officiorumatque morum rationemac pene totam nature complectentes
historiam. . . VenumdaturParrisiis,apud Claudium Chevallon . . . A lafin: Parrisiis,apud Claudium Chevallon . . . anno Domini millesimo
, i$2i. In-fol., car. goth.,
quingentsimo vigesimoprimo. Parrisiis
LV-365 ff., titre avec encadrementgrav sur bois, marques typogr.
de B. Rembolt sur le titreet de C. Chevallon la fin".
Nous citons le titre conformmentau Cataloguegnraldes
livresimprims
de la Bibliothquenationale
, Auteurs
, XI, Paris,
192^, col. ii 20 (Rs. D. 1226).
Monfrin, p. 444. - Thorndike and Kibre, A Catalogue of
Incipits. . . , citent l'dition Chevallon pour l'incipit du
premierlivre (1 1937, col. 192 ;2 1963, col. 41 1), non pour la
Lettre-ddicaceet le Prologue.
Le collationnementde ces dix tmoinsne sauraitaboutir un arbre
gnalogique des manuscrits,tantdonn que, pour ce petitfragmentdu
Reductorium
, les fautescommunessont trop peu nombreuseset insuffisamment caractristiques.Pourtant, la comparaison a permis de conclure
que C et Pg2sont dfectueuxet que, parmi les autres, Pgj est excellent,
suprieurnotamment P2. C'est donc Pgn c'est--dire le ms. Prague,
69

11:59:20 AM

Muse national 3147 (XII A8) que nous ditons ici, avec un apparat
critique rduit, et en corrigeantles fautesvidentes l'aide des autres
tmoins.

[f. i^a]

[EPISTOLA

DEDICATORIA]*1

Reuerendissimoin Xristo patri ac domino, domino [Petro]2 de Pratis,

dignaDei prouidenciaepiscopo Penestrino3ac sacrosancteRomaneecclesie cardinali nec non ad presens uicecancellario domini nostri Pape,
fraterPetrus Berchorii, [pauper &]* peccator, monachus, seruitor &
familiariseiusdem, seipsum ad perpetuumfamulatum.
Quia, paterreuerendissime,iustumuidetur & congruum*,testesentencia Salomonisa, quod is qui ficumseruat & irrigatquandoque loco &
temporepercipiatfructuseius et hoc ne fortesit sicut ille agricola qui
ficum habens in orto suo annis singulis ueniebat ad ipsam querens
fructum& non inueniens,quapropteripsam mandauitsuccidi & de orto
ipsiussubmouerib hinc est, pater & domine, quod cum iam diu est me
ficuminfructuosam&6 aridam, in agro & uiridario domus tue duxeris
transplantandum& diuersisgraciis & beneficiisirrigandum,sciens quod
plerumque arbores transplantacione proficiunt quodque quando7
Paulus plantat & Apollo rigatc,fructusuberioresproueniunt& succrescunt, dignum & congruum iudicaui fructus laborum meorum tibi
pandere ut sic de me arbore tua, quamquam infructuosaet sterili,possis
complacenciam aliquam reportare.
Tibi igitur, creatori & patri8 meo, intendo offerreuitem in qua
erunttres propagines. Quarum uvas in calice tuo comprimenstamquam
bonus Pharaonis^ pincerna1/d spero letificare cor tuume, quod erga
scienciasnon solum ciuiles & cannicas,sed eciam theologicas& morales
scio sollicitum& attentum11.Tres autem iste propaginestres sunt libri
* Letexte
unepartie
deladocua ttabli
S. vanderBiji,quia aussirassembl
parMlleMaria
mentation.
1 CFIncipit
* Pg.om.
moralis
Reductorii
;
prohemium
. ; P2Epistola;
congrue.
C,E,MC,O,P,tit.om
Pg1Prolo- s CF,O,P P2,Pg2
Morale 6 diu- &]C factum
in reductorium
me.
gus.Incipit
prologus
ordinis 7 CF,C,,O,P,,Pg2quandoque.
frater
P. Berchorii
quodcomposuit
& patri]
Cpatri
etdomino.
: Incipit
reductorium8 creatori
sancti
benedicti
cancell.
; Pg2
9 tamquam
bonus
Com.
Ch
morale; Epistola
Pharaonis]
nuncupatoria.
10E,MC,Pg2piscerna;
2 Pg,P.
P2picerna.
3 CF,C,MC,0, P P2,Pgx,
Pg2,Ch;E peie- 110, Pg2attenticum.
strino.
a Prov.
18. b Luc.XIII,6-7. c Cf.i Cor.III,6. d Cf.Gen.
XL,9-11.
XXVII,
XXVU,n.
e Cf.Prov.
70

11:59:20 AM

seu tres laborum meorum particule tibi uel nunc uel alias propinande,
scilicet MORALEREDUCTORIUM,MORALEREPERTO
RIUM, que duo iam
tibi in presenti1expono, et consequentermorale directorium,2 quod
si uita comes fuerit3 offerretue maiestati propono. Amicus enim
evangelicuslicet sompnolentus& dormienslegitursuperuenientiamico
tres panes acomodasse8; mulier eciam euangelica tria farinesata [f. i rb]
b. Simili ergo modo ego inter amicos & seruitores
legitur fermentasse
tuos pauperior, quamquam sompnolentus& negligenspossim dici, in
archiuo* librorumtuorum istos tres panes acomodo & pro turba Xristi
famelicarecreandacista triasata farine5fermento,& pro nutriendislacte
non solido cibod simplicibusqualescumque cibos ignaruspulmeniarius
confido uel compono. Et, ut verumfatear6,pulchrumdepingerehominem pictor fedus mille colorum conor generibus & tamquam fatuus
medicus7curare alios non meipsumecontra regulamracionis contendo.
Istos igitur8 tres panes istaque tria sata farine, id est istas tres
partculasrudis & simplicis doctrine rudimentis9rusticalibusa me rudi
ruditerpro rudibuspre rudit[at]e10,tua benigna(grata)11paternitasgrate
recipiat, & de me spina steriliqualescumque uvas & rosas forsitancolli2
3
gens', istospanes& farinamquos offero,ac1 si poma aurea de Esperidum1
silua colligeret,gratitudinetantasumat. Nec indignetureadem si parum
estquod offerotanto[patri]14, sed attendaipocius affectum
quam manm15
& cogitet quod magis est pensanda offerentisuoluntas quam oblati
utilitas uel mayestas. Paupercula enim uidua16 que solum in erario
templi duo riinutaposuit, magisposuisse asseriturmultisaliis diuitibus
qui multamaiora [apponere17uidebanturS. Cum ergo sciat ueneranda
paternitas18tua quod profundafluuiorumscrutatushnon extiterimnec
Iordanis influxeritin os meum1 quodque Minerue non perforatuscuspidibus nec fontepotatus Pegaseo19, Apollinis20 monte bicipiti non

1 inpresenti]
Cinpresentibus
; ,MCinpresen- 10C,P,; cet.rudite.
11Pg1add.
Chimpresentiarum.
ciaram;
2 CF, ,0, Pj,P2,Pg2ductorium,
Ch; cet.sic.
sedvide
Pro- 12C,MCy
Pgly
*3deEsperidum]
Cdeaspidum
in Reductorium
; Pg2desperidum.
, ed. Colonia
Agrippina,
logam
14 principl.
I73I, p. 2yCol.lyl.3.
3 quod- fuerit]
Com.
C,,MCy
0, P,,P2,Chmagnum;
Pg2mag4 C archana.
nani.
16P,mulier.
s satafarine]
P,,Chinv.
6 Et- fatear]
17?Siproponere.
C uelutverius
dico.
18ueneranda
7 fatuus
Cpamodicus.
p.]CFvenerenda
Pg2status
paternitas;
medicus]
CF,Pg2ergo.
ternitas
reuerenda
; ,MCreueranda
paternitas.
9 C,Pgx
.
lac.; MCpegeleo
CFy
EyP2ypegaso
; Cpecum
; cet.indumentis.
20C appollonis.
a Luc.
DI,33. c Cf.Mt.XV,32-9. d Cf.Febr.
V, 12. e Cf.Luc.IV,23.
XI,-8. b Mt.X
11. i Cf.lobXL,18.
f Cf.Mt.VII,16. g Marc.
XE,41-4. h Cf.lobXXVffl,
71

11:59:20 AM

dormiui, spero quod eadem a me eli[n]gui &1 inscio, Aristotilis2 proposiciones, Tholomei3 consideraciones, S[o]cratis*sapienciam et Tullii
quia nouit quod deficienspondere,
eloquenciam non requiret sed
numero & mensuraainuenior minus habens - si, cum sim paruulus^,
8
loquar ut paruulus6 & sapiam7ut paruulus /b,michi parce[tJo.
Igiturconfido in Domino quod hiis omnibus consideratisserenitas
tua, pie pater, labores meos non detestabitur10,sed pocius solita
benignitatequa mentes intuenciumallicis, solita caritate11qua muitos
amplexaris& reficis,solita humilitatequa nullumuilipendisaut despicis,
solita prudencie [f. iva] luminositate qua preterita, presencia12 8c
futurasollerterconsideraset respicis,solita iusticie equitate qua Grecis
& barbaris,sapientibus& insipientibusdebitoremcte reputans,cum sis
liber ab omnibus,seruumsingulorumte efficisd,munus modicum quod
tibipauper seruitoroffero- quod re ueranonestdignum13presenciatanti
patris non dedignabitur,sed pocius iuxta Cathoniselogium!*/egrata
beniuolencia persequetur1s .
Quem16 igitur17ordinemhuiusreductorii uideredelectat,sequentem collacionem18/'perlegat que libri19ordinem manifestat
ad laudem
facitdisertas21/& a
scilicet & gloriamCreatoris,qui linguasinfancium20
quo omnis sapiencia11& omne donum perfectumdesursumest1,qui est
benedictus in scula seculorum22.

1 elingui
met
om.;C
; O,P,,P2
eligo
&JCF,Pg%t
tam;Pgleligui&.
2 C Aristotolis.
* C,Chptolomei
;
; ETololomei
P,,P2ptholomei.

tis.
Pglsacra
s O,P2add.&.
6 loquar
utparuulus]
Cr,Pg2om.
7 0, P,sapiencia.
CF,O,P.,P2,Pg2paruulo.
9 Pglparces.
10,OyP P2,Pg2detestabit.
qua- caritate]
P,om.
12preterita,
; cet.inv.
Pgx
presencia]

*3CF,P,,Pai. dignum;
Es. dignum;
Oi.indignum;Pg2indignum.
*4CF,Pg2
om.;0eulugium
; P,eulagium.
MCproseF, ,O, P,,P2,Pg2t
persequar;
quitur.
16C qui;MCquam.
*7CFyC ergo.
18C prologm.
*9quelibri]C, P, quilibri;Oquiliber;Pgz
quodliber.
20EyMCy
infantinas.
OyP^j, C/i
21EyMCdisertinas;
O ditas;P, desertas;
Pg2
deseruitinas.
22C add.Amen.

a Cf.Sap.XI,2i. b Cf.i Cor.XIII,n. c Rom.

Catonis,
I, 14. d I Cor.IX,19. e Disticha
memento
munus
laudare
cum
dettibipauper
amicus
I, 20:Exiguum
yplene
(ed.M.Boas&
pito
placide
acci
H. J.Botschuyver,
Amsterdam,
1952,p. sg). f suprat
p. 62. g Sap.X,21. h Cf.EcciI, 1.
i lac.I, 17.
72

11:59:20 AM

Note

Complmentaire
Berchoriens

sur les Manuscrits

de Worcester

J. ENGELS

Le ms. Worcester, Cathedral Chapter LibraryQ.931 pose un problme

particulierconsistantdans sa relationavec un autre manuscritberchorien
de cette bibliothque, savoir le ms. F. 95 port disparu depuis 1821.
Lorsqu'en cette anne-l les manuscritsont t placs de nouveau dans
Tordre du cataloguede Hopkins (1697)2, on a constatl'absence du ms.
cot F[olio].9 chez Hopkins,mais la prsenced'un ms. Q[uarto].93, qui
n'tait pas signal dans ce catalogue, lequel s'arrte aprs Q.80.
A propos de la relationentreles mss. F. 95 et Q.93, le catalogue de
Floyer-Hamilton(1906)3 a mis trois opinions contradictoires:
1) A la p. 47, aprs la citation de l'item de Hopkins*: "F. 9 . Figurae
cummoralitate
a Genesiad Apocalypsin
", il est dit: "Reported as missingin
1821, and no longer in the library".
2) A la p. i, il est dit des ff. 1-80 du ms. Q.93: "This treatise is
probablywdiatremainsof F.9^, q.v.".
3) A la p. 173: "F.9. There seems, however, to be little doubt that
this volume is now Q.93".
Atkinset Ker5 fontseulementtat des opinions 1) et 3) de FloyerHamilton. Ils se rallient 3), tant d'avis que le F. 95 doit tre identifi
avec le Q.936. En outre, ils estiment que ce manuscritest vis par
1' item 8 2 du cataloguedresspar Young en 16 22-3, et libell comme suit:
1VoirVivarium
VII= 1969,p. 63.
2 W.Hopkins,
Librorum
Ecclesiae
Cathedralis
niamCatalogus
continent
codices
apudVigor
Manuscriptorum
1697,II,i,
aeetHiberniae
dans
CCLII
librorum
,imprim
Bernard,
,Oxford,
manuscriptorum
Catalogi
Angli
- Surcecatalogue,
voirCatalogus
Librorum
Bibliothecae
, made
Manuscriptorum
Wigorniensis
pp.16-22.
in1622-1623
anIntroduction
toKing
with
and
, Librarian
/,edited
byPatrie
James
byI. Atkins
Young
NeilR. Ker,Cambridge,
1944,p. 1; pp.24-9.
3 J.K.Floyer
inthe
andS. G.Hamilton,
preserved
Library
Chapter
ofWorcester
Catalogue
ofManuscripts
Cathedral,
Oxford,
1906.
4 Bernard,
op.cit.,p. 18,col.b.
* Ed.cit.
Libraries
Britain
yp. 28,note4; N. R. Ker,Medieval
, AListofSurviving
Books2,
ofGreat
London,
1964,p. 21g.
6 Ed. cit.,p. 7s; p. 76.
73

11:59:31 AM

de Genesiusqueadnem apocalipsisanon.Jol. rec."1.

"Figuraecummoralitate
sans
difficult
J'admets
que l'item 82 de Young et l'item F. 9^ de
Hopkins, presque identiques, se rapportentau mme manuscrit. Par
contre, l'identit in totodu Q.93 et du F. 9 g disparu me parat sujette
caution. Il est difficilede comprendre,du moins en jugerloin, comment
ce manuscrit,class par Young et par Hopkins parmi les in-folio,aurait
pu tre rang plus tard parmi les in-quarto. En outre, les items 82 de
Young et F. 9^ de Hopkins consistentdans un seul titre,tandisque, ds
qu'un manuscritcontientplusieurstraits,leurs catalogues le mentionnent d'ordinaire expressment.
Cette dernireobjection ne s'applique pas l'opinion 2) de FloyerHamilton: ce seraientseulementlesff.1-80 du Q.93 qui reprsenteraient
le F. 9. Ils auraientt relisplus tardavec les ff.8 1-3^8v, et l'ensemble
constitueraitl'actuel Q.93. La reliure ne pourrait alors dater d'avant
1697. Pourtant,la notice de Ker2 donne l'impressionqu'elle doit tre
plus ancienne. (Notons entreparenthsesque celui qui a faitexcuter la
reliurea d tre conscientque l'ensemble a pour auteurPierre Bersuire;
sinon commentaurait-ileu l'ide de relier une moralisationdes figures
bibliques avec un compendium d'histoire naturelle et un commentaire
des Mtamorphoses
?) Cette seconde opinion de Floyer-Hamilton n'est
gure compatible avec la rpartitiondes deux mains distinguespar
M. Milburn*. Finalement,le libell mme des itemsde YoungetHopkins:
Figuraecummoralitate. . . pour un manuscritdont 1'explicit (f. 8ov)
et sic estnisxvilibrireductorii
moralis. . . ,
dclare expressment: ...
D'autant
ne laisse pas de surprendre.
plus que Young ajoute le qualificatif
]. On le voit, l'opinion 2) de Floyer-Hamiltonn'est pas non plus
anon[yme
sans reproche.
Il y a donc lieu d'examiner aussi l'opinion 1) de Floyer-Hamilton:
le ms. F. 9, qui n'aurait rien voir avec le Q.93, aurait simplement
disparu. Cela revient se poser la question suivante: N'y a-t-il pas
eu deux exemplaires de Red. XVI dans la bibliothque de Worcester,
qui tait celle d'un prieur bndictin jusqu' la Dissolution des
monastresen 1^38?
A cet gard, il importede remarquerqu'il y a encore aujourd'hui
Worcester, et depuis longtemps,un second exemplaire de Red. XIV
aussi bien que de Red. XV.
1 Ed.cit.,p. 39.
2 Op.cit.
, p. 21
3 Voirplushaut,
p. 64.
74

11:59:31 AM

de celui
Un exemplairede Red. XIV, De mundimirabilibus
, - diffrent
du Q.931 - est contenudans le ms. mixte F. 19, dont nous n'avons pas pu
solliciter tempsun microfilm.Ce manuscritcomportantplus de 166 ff.,
du dbut du XVe sicle2, conserv Worcester ds environ 1oo3, a t
signalpar Young (item 24 1)4 et par Hopkins5. Plus rcemment,il a t
dcrit par H. Schenkl6 et dans Floyer-Hamilton7
. Ces derniers y ont
de
traits
ont
en
commun
traiterd'une manire
diffrents,
qui
distingug
ou d'une autre des vices et des vertus. Par contre, Hopkins n'a pas
signal le trait 2, tandisque pour Young le manuscritcontientun seul
traitd'thique8 Fasciculusmorm,
qui porte le nom du trait5, mais qui
aurait empruntsa matireaux traits2, 3 et 4. C'est assez drputant,
mais on peut dblayerquelque peu le terrain.
Schenkl et Floyer-Hamiltonont not que le trait 2 (ff. 38-103)
venialiumet mortaliumet a comme
porte comme titre De differentia
Tractatus
valde
utilis
de
vitiis
et virtutibus.
Ce traitanonymea t
:
explicit
signaldepuis par le professeurMorton W. Bloomfield dans A Prelimi, mainlyof the
naryList of Incipitsof Latin Workson the Virtuesand Vices
thirteenth
, fourteenth
, and fifteenthCenturies
9, mais sans information
nouvelle.
Schenklet Floyer-Hamiltonont ensuitenot que le trait4 (ff.13 160) est intitul Liberqui diciturNich[o]l[ai'de Fumo. C'est une Tabula
moralis Alphabetica(Hopkins) avec l'incipit: Abiceredebemusfetorem
immundicie
. Cette Table ne parat pas avoir t signale par Bloomfield.
Sur 1ertraitg (ff. 161 sqq.), nous sommes un peu mieux informs.
de similitudinibus:
sic est de cordehominispermet de
L'incipit: Anselmus
reconnatrece texte dans les numros68 et 1040 de Bloomfield10.Il s'agit
du Fasciculusmorum
attribu Robert Silk (?) ou JohnSpicer (?), et
a retrac une quinzaine de manuscrits.
Bloomfield
pour lequel
1 Voirplushaut,
p. 64.
2 Atkins
andKer,ed.cit.,p. $0.
3 Ker,op.cit.
d'enbas.
yp. 210;p. 2o,3 lignes
* Atkins
andKer,loc.cit.
s Bernard,
op.cit.,p. 16.
6 Bibliotheca
latinorum
X, DieBibliotheken
derenglischen
Britannica
Kathedralen
patrm
(Fortsetzung
),
XVIII
derWissenschaften,
derPhil.
Classe
derK. Akademie
-Hist.
, Worcester
, dansSitzungsberichte
Wien,1898,p. 46,n4291.
139.Band,
7 Op.cit.,p. 10.
8 Pourcettecatgorie
de textes,
voirH.-M.Rochis,
latins
dans
I. Florilges
spirituels.
Florilges
Dictionnaire
deSpiritualit,
etPh.Delhaye,
mdivaux
II. Florilges
V, 1964,coll.43^-60,
,
d'thique
(coll.460-7$).
quisuitimmdiatement
9 Traditio
XI = 19g,p. 287,n225.
10Art.
cit.,p. 271; pp.373-4.
7S

11:59:31 AM

Le trait3 (ff. 104-30) est intituldans le manuscrit:Secundusliber

. Pourtant, l'incipit Quia Deus cotidiefacit
Eligii de mirabilibusmundi
et
cit
Schenkl
Floyer-Hamilton, est celui du Prologue de
par
magnolia,
Red. XIV1, et liberEligii sans doute une fautede transmissionpour liber
priorissanctiEligii "le livredu prieurde Saint-Eloi",i.e. Bersuire.C'est le
titre qu'on lit dans le ms. Oxford, Digby 206 de Red. XIV: Moralizatio
ii libb.2. Quant la divisionen deux
mundiy
priorisS . Eligii de mirabilibus
livres,Bersuireindique dans le Prologue*que Red. XIV consisteen deux
parties. La premire partie (cap. i-lviii)* prsente et moralise les
mirabiliadans Tordre alphabtiquedes rgionso ilsavaientt localiss;
la seconde partie (cap. lix-lxxv)ceux qui n'avaientpu tre localiss dans
une rgion dtermine. Secundusliber, dans le titredu trait 3, est donc
une erreur: il faudraitPrimusliber. Schenkl remarque que ce trait est
incomplet. Je ne sais s'il a observ que, comme le notentFloyer-Hamilton, les ff. 127-30 ont t dplacs, le traits'arrtantau f. 124; les ff.
125-6 tant rest en blanc. Toujours est-il que Schenkl avait raison. La
suite du trait 3 se trouve dans le trait 1 (ff. 3-37) intitulTractatus
de
mundiad moresapplicatisimutil du dbut. L'incipit, cit par
mirabilibus
suntillis se lit en effetRed. XIV, lix*, c'estSchenkl: [ . . . ] bestiemeliores
-diredans le premierchapitrede la seconde partie. Puis, Igniummirabilia
6 constituele dbut du
multasuntin natura
chapitrelxi?. Il n'y a donc plus
traits
et
1
les
aient
form l'origine un seul
doute
de
3
que
gure
manuscritde Red. XIV. L'examen du texte devra dcider s'il s'agit d'un
exemplaire complet ou lacuneux.
Le ms. F. 89, 166 ff.,de la findu XlVe sicle8 ou du dbut du XVe9,
provenant du Couvent des Dominicains de Worcester10, signalpar
1 VoirRepertorium
medii
aeri(RBMA
biblicum
), IV = 1954,p. 237,n642$,xiv.- L'incipit
manque
RBMA
desorte
de
chezBloomfield,
I-III,19^0-1,
puutiliser
quia seulement
quepourlesincipit
lalistepresque
recourir
deRBMA
C'estsans
il faut
IV,pp.236-41.
Bersuire,
toujours
complte
recueilli
isolment
voiequ'ontrouve
de Red.XVI,p. 282,n178
douteparuneautre
l'incipit
IV,p. 238,no6426,I).
(cf.RBMA
2 VoirA. G. Little,
latinorum
Initia
ordinem
xiii.xiv.xv.attribuuntur
secundum
operum
quaesaeculis
a tort,
i disposita
, Manchester,
1904(= repr.NewYork1958),p. 191.Little
ajoute,
Alphabet
dtrerecueilli
aurait
lanotice
duXlVelivre
avecceluiduXVedans
sur
[Ord.
Min.]!. - L'incipit
II = 1964,p. 87.
dansVivarium
Little
3 Edition
1731,p. 64,col.2,ligne12d'enbasetsqq.
Cologne,
4 Inc.:Africa
esttertia
cf.RBMA
orbis;
, n642, xiv.
pars
generaliter
s Inc.:Circa
multa
sunt
mirabilia
naturam
humanam
; cf.ibid.
6 Edition
1731,p. 608,col.i, ligne8 d'enbas.
Cologne,
7 Ibid.,
p. 616,col.i, ligne8 d'enbas.
8 Schenkl,
andKer,ed.cit.,p. 39(84).
art
cit.,p. $3,n4318.Atkins
Ker,op.cit.,p. 21.
10Ker,op.cit.,p. 21$.
76

11:59:31 AM

Young (item 841) et par Hopkins2, dcrit dans Floyer-Hamilton*,

carodo[m]acontientdeux traits. Le premiercommence par Abstinentia
sacram
attribue

d'une
Tabula
tur. Il s'agit
super
Scripturam
Jacques de
Voragine, dont F. Stegmller* et surtout Morton W. Bloomfields
signalentplusieursautres manuscrits,tous anglaisou d'origine anglaise.
Le second trait (ff. 130-166), un commentairemoralisantdes Mtamor, est attribudans le manuscrit JohnRidewall. Cette attribution
phoses
a t reprise par Young6, Hopkins?, Floyer-Hamilton8et Schenkt.
Toutefois,ces deux derniersayantcit l'incipit: A veritate
quidemauditum
19 1,conclu
Mario
en
auertent;adfabulas autemconuertentur
,
Esposito10a,
avec raison qu'il s'agit en faitde Red. XV, Ovidiusmoralizatus.Pour le
moment, il nous suffitde prciser que c'est la version A(vignon).
Cette prsence, Worcester, d'un second exemplairede Red. XIV
et de Red. XV ne sauraittonner, si l'on est attentifau nombre et la
1
ynousavons
rpartitiondes manuscritsde Bersuire1 . Pour le Repertorium12
de
manuscrits

conserv une quinzaine

complets, ct de nombreux
manuscritspartiels^ ; cela montresa grandevogue,qu'il faudraexpliquer
en revanche,nous n'avons conserv qu'un
un jour. Pour le Reductorium
seul exemplaire manuscritcomplet1*,avec peu de manuscritsdes livres
I-XIIPs. C'est que le Reductorium
, en tant qu'encyclopdie, n'a pas pu
rivaliser srieusement avec le De Troprietatibus
rerumde Barthlemy
dans
avait
remani
ses
livres
Bersuire
I-XIII), ni avec le
l'Anglais (que
s rerum
de Thomas de Cantimpr,ni avec le Speculum
de Vincent
De naturi
de Beauvais. Mais le sort des livres XIV-XVI, ajouts aprs coup par
Bersuire,a t diffrent.Ils ont eu, surtoutles livres XV et XVI, une
1 Atkins
andKer,loc.cit.
2 Bernard,
op.cit.,p. 18.
3 Op.Cit.
yp. 4.
4 RBMA,
III = i9i,p. 218,3998,i.
s Art.
citele ms.F. 89).
cit.
tp. 266,n2 (Bloomfield
6 Loc.cit.
7 Loc.cit.
8 Loc.cit.
9 Loc.cit.
10TheEnglish
Review
voirVivarium
Historical
VI = 1968,
, XXX= 191^,p. 469;pourcetarticle,
pp.102-3.
11Voirla bibliographie
dansCh.Samaran,
Monfrin
tablie
Pierre
Prieur
de
Bersuire,
parJacques
dela France
littraire
Saint-loi
deParis
, t. 39 = 1962,pp.434sqq.
(U290-1
362),Histoire
" DansVivarium
unecoquille
HI = 196^,p. 150,ligne11d'enhaut,
a substitu
Reductorium

Repertorium
qu'ilfallait.
13Monfrin,
pp.441sqq.sousF.
*+Voirplushaut,
p. 68.
*5Monfrin,
sousB.
pp.435^-6,
77

11:59:31 AM

Cela est prouv par le nombre de

vogue gale celle du Repertorium.
manuscritsconservs. Monfrin1en signale dix pour le livre XIV, De
mundimirabilibus
, auxquels il fautajouter notammentle ms. Worcester
F. 19 prcit2. Pour le livre XV, Ovidius moralizatus
, nous avons
dont
le
relev
de
soixante
manuscrits,
pourra tre publi
compt plus
sous peu3. Quant au livreXVI, FigureBibliemoralzate
, Monfrin*en a dj
manuscrits.
signal dix-sept
Dans ces circonstances,l'opinion 1) de Floyer-Hamilton- postulant
qu'il fautcompter Worcesteravec deux exemplairesaussi de Red. XVI :
Tun, F. 9 (Young 82), disparu entre 1697 et 1821; l'autre conserv
au dbut du Q.93 actuel - ne parat pas moins plausible que leurs
opinions 2) et 3). Un nouvel examen du ms. Q.93 malheureusementfort
endommag,qui tiendraitcompte aussi des donnes de l'histoirelittraila question.
re, pourraitpeut-tretrancherdfinitivement
Utrecht
Instituut
voorLaat Latijn

1 Monfrin,
sousC.
pp.436-7,
2 etd'autres,
souslenomsoitdeSolin,
soitdeGervaise
maintenant
deTilbury.
Telest
quipassent
andP. Kibre,
A Catalogue
le casdums.Madrid,
Bibi.Nac.R. 79signal
parL. Thorndike
of
inLatin,2
London,
1963,col.1216.
Scientific
Writings
Incipits
ofMediaeval
3 Monfrin,
unecinquantaine.
sousO,ena djsignal
pp.437-40,
4 Monfrin,
sous.
pp.440-1,
78

11:59:31 AM

Reviews

vonH. Dahlmann,
unterMitwirkung
Mittellateinisches
, hrsg.vonK. Langosch
Jahrbuch
IV = 1967
W. vondenSteinen,
H. Walther,
F. W. Lenz,C. Minis,A. nnerfors,
(A. HennVerlag,
Ratingen).
neparat
le Mittellateinisches
A partir
chezson
de ce volume,
Jahrbuch
plusenSelbstverlag
ce qui manichezl'A. HennVerlag,
KarlLangosch
Cologne,mais Ratingen
diteur
Il contient
les articles
de fondsuivants:
festela vitalitet le succsde cetannuaire.
mittellateinischer
Autoren
undSelbstnennung
P. Klopsch,
(pp. 9-2$); K. SchreiAnonymitt
- ZurSymbolik
undzuseinen
virtutes(pp.26-60);
und"Virginitas"
desSmaragds
ner,"Venus"
deraugustinischen
Stillehre
Eine
K. Forstner,
61-71);
Interpretation
frhmittelalterliche
" (pp.
in deruEcbasis
cuiusdam
derTropologia
E. Glich,Die Bedeutung
72-90);
(pp.
Captivi
"
"Carmen
w
Treverensis
L. Gompf,
Querela
(Dassogenannte
Winrici")
(pp. 91-121);
magisti
- Jephtas
Tochter
Abaelards
DiePlanctus
W. v. d. Steinen,
(pp.122-144);W. Heckenbach
Zur
desArchibeim
osb,ZurParodie
(pp. 14$-154); K. Langosch,
Archipoeta
" desuBittpredigtn
Zu"Kaiserhymnus"
und"Beichte
Archipoeta
(pp.161-6);
poeta
(pp.i SS-160); P. Klopsch,
zurUberlieferung
von
VII,11,2) (pp. 167-171);idem,Weiteres
idem,Acyrus
(Archipoeta
n
von
desVinzenz
Pseudo-Ovidius
"De vetula
(pp. 171-2); P. von Moos,Die Trostschrift
derconsolatio
IX( Vorstudie
zurMotivundGattungsgeschichte
Beauvais
) (pp. 173frLudwig
218); A. Sottili,
ZurBiographie
Brivios
undMaffeo
Vegios
(pp.219-242); A. nnerGiuseppe
in Schweden
, EineUbersicht
fors,Die mittellateinische
Philologie
(pp. 243-^9).Suivent:
berForschungsarbeiten
(pp. 260-301),Anzeigen
(pp. 301-3)et Mitteilungen
Besprechungen
(pp.303-4).
J.E.

Books

Received

MEDIAEVALAND RENAISSANCE
STUDIES; Editedby RichardHunt,Raymond
Institute
ofLondon.
Lotte
TheWarburg
Vol.
VI;
1968
University
Klibansky, Labowsky;
on theDe inventione
and
Price: 3.0.0. Contents:
MaryDickey,SomeCommentaries
A. B. Scott,ThePoemsof
andEarlyTwelfth
AdHerennium
oftheEleventh
Centuries;
of
OftheCanon; J.C. Jennings,
TheOrigins
OfLe Mans: A NewExamination
Hildebert
oftheVirgin;f E. Macrae,Geoffrey
ofAspall's
Series"oftheMiracles
The "Elements
Commentaries
onAristotle;
O. F. M. ; f
J.I. Catto,New Lighton Thomas
Docking
de
Geometriam
Euclidis
Nicole
V. Zoubov,Autourdes Quaestiones
Oresme;
super
AnAutograph
AnUnknown
Treatise
L. Labowsky,
Gaza; L. Labowsky,
byTheodorus
ofNiccoloPerotti
IndexofManuscripts.
InTheBiblioteca
Marciana.

79

11:59:40 AM

Albertus Magnus

and The Problem of Moral

Virtue

STANLEY B. CUNNINGHAM

I. THE HISTORICAL SETTING

the intellectual upheaval that attended the appearance of
Greek
philosophical literaturein the Latin West in the early
Within
thirteenth century, a special problem was put for Christian
moralistswhen they were confrontedby the theoryof natural virtue
contained in the NicomacheanEthics of Aristotle. Not surprisingly,
Christian thinkershad been primarilyconcerned with supernaturally
endowed perfectionsthroughwhich man could hope to achieve beatitude. In thispreoccupation,however, theytendedto ignorethe question
and indeed the verypossibilityof virtue naturallyacquired. Albert the
Great (1206-1280) appears to have been one of the firstto respond
to the challenge of Aristotle'sEthics; and the originality
enthusiastically
of his venturecan be gaugedby the extentto which in his own theoryhe
included the purelynaturaland human elementsof morality.Now as it
developed, the problem of naturalvirtuein manyways was allied to the
question of what constitutesthe moral characterof an agent's actions.
Earlier thinkers,to be sure, had come to see, thoughgradually,that a
numberof factorsare involved; but therewas both in theirtheoriesand
in their written presentationsa noticeable absence of cohesion and
unity.Albert's awarenessof theseproblemsand his responseto themare
evidentin one of his earlyworks. His contributionwas nothingless than
a methodicaltreatmentof a numberof moral distinctions,inheritedfrom
his predecessors, culminatingin a causal groundingof those natural
virtueswhich, in the career of moral speculationbeforehim, had been so
conspicuouslyignored.
The De bono
Albert's innovationsshow up most strikinglyin a relativelyearlywork
entitled De bono, written about 1240-1244 during his residence in
81

11:56:07 AM

Paris.1 It is worth remarkingthat at this time he was conversantwith

Ethics: the Ethicavetus
, comprisinga
only fragmentsof the Nicomachean
a Greek-Latintranslationof Books II and III, the Ethicanova containing
a Greek-Latintranslationof Book I, and a few excerptsfromBooks VII
and VIII.2 The De bono, therefore,reveals only a partial knowledge of
Aristotle'sethics. It was also writtenearly in Albert's career, nor is it
his only or latest publicationin this field. Yet by contrastto this other
writingsit enjoys a numberof meritswhich make it a primarysource
for an appreciationof his own moral philosophyin its organic outlines.
Prior to the De bonoAlberthad undertakento write the Tractatus
de
3
natura boni which remains unpublished to this day. The Tractatus
,
abandoned in considerabledisorderfarshortof its projected aims, is an
awkward and prematureattemptto erect a comprehensivesynthesisof
the naturaland supernaturalperfections.His experimentin thisdirection
was resumedwith greatersuccess in the De bono.The moral sections in
Books II-IV of Albert's Scriptasupersententias
(writtenfrom 1245-1249),
while admittedlyprovidinga valuable source for this thought,standas
so many separated components of a comprehensive presentationof
, Albert is not concentratingexclusivelyupon
theology. In the Scripta
morals alone, but rathercomposinga theological summaalong lines laid
down ninety years earlier by Peter the Lombard. Finally, Albert is
commentarieson the Nicomachean
Ethics
.*
the author of two full-fledged
1Alberti
Omnia
C. Feckes,
W. Kbel
Debono
ed.H. Khle,
B. Geyer,
, t. XXVIII),
(Opera
Magni
inAedibus
references
tothetextofthe
Westfalorum
Aschendorff,
1951).Subsequent
(Monasterii
inArabic
inthisorder:
tractate
article
willbegiven
Debono
(inRoman
(both
numerals),
question,
orad 1), page,line(when
oranswer
to argument
(e.g.,#,1
necessary).
argument
numerals),
oftheOpera
in38volumes
arecitedintheBorgnet
edition
Omnia
works
Other
(Paris:
byAlbert
andtechnical
are
nature
onthetextoftheDebono
Comments
ofa critical
Vives,1890-1899).
the
dates
when
waswritten,
theDebono
intheProlegomena
found
, pp.ix-xxv.
Concerning
possible
etmorale
isoffered
auxXlleetXllle
sicles
mostplausible
, t. VI,
byO. Lottin,
Psychologie
argument
ishefeafter
insixtomes
Lottin's
work
(Gembloux
J.Duculot,
273-284.
[Belgique]:
1948-1960)
asPEM.
cited
2SeeA. Pelzer,
au
enusage
desouvrages
demorale
conserves
lenom
sous
d'Aristote
Lesversions
latines
XXXIII
Seealso
de Philosophie,
Xlllesicle
(1921), 316-341,
378-412.
, RevueNo-Scolastique
are
Nicomaquef
leGrand
etVthique
Albert
. Additional
Saint
O. Lottin,
PEM>
VI,31-331
precisions
s Translations
andCommentaries
onPseudo-Dionysius
DateofGrosseteste'
inD. A.Callus,
O. P.,The
found
dthologie
etmdivale,
XIV(1947),186-210.
ancienne
Ethics
andtheNicomachean
, Recherches
3SeeF. Pelster,
Einungedrucktes
Werk
desGrossen
Alberts
denatura
ausderFrhzeit
DerTractatus
boni.
,
de
CI (Tbingen,
thologiques
Quartalschrift,
1920),64-90.Also,O. Lottin,
Ouvrages
Theologische
PEM
leGrandy
Albert
saint
, VI,237-242.
4 SeeL'thique
Traduction
inL'thique
Nicomaque
dans
lemoyen
: Introduction,
Nicomaque
gelatin
andno
etJ.Y. Jolif,
Paris:1958),
t.I (Louvain,
etCommentaire
74-8$.Earlier
parR.A.Gauthier
in: A. Pelzer,
onAristotle's
as commentator
Ethics
arefound
onAlbert
studies
lessimportant
leGrand
surla Morale
Nicomaque
recueilli
etrdig
d'Albert
indit
Lecours
d'Aquin,
parS. Thomas
82

11:56:07 AM

In works of this nature, however, the arrangementof the material is

not Albert's but Aristotle's. To put it in other words, neitherof these
commentariesnecessarilyreflectsthe controllingprinciplesof organizationaccordingto which Albertwould framehis own moral treatise.
By contrast, the De bono is neither a commentarynor part of a
. Though it is incomplete, what we have is the first
theological summa
of
a
projected synthesisof moral doctrine in which Albert devotes
part
of the naturalprinciplesof moralitypriorto an
himselfto an investigation
examination of the supernaturalvirtues. Since he wrote in a form
inspired by the medieval academic disputation, Albert was free to
assemblehis materialaccordingto principlesof his own formulation^nd
choice. Indeed, in the earlyarticlesAlbertcarefullyestablishesa number
of broad metaphysicalprincipleswhich dictate both formaland material
aspects of his theory of virtue. Being an independentand exclusively
moral synthesis,the De bonois our best source for tracinghis theoryof
naturalvirtuein its consecutivedevelopment.
Briefly,the work opens with a metaphysicaldisquisition on the
, bonitas
) and the physical good (bonumnaturae). The
'good' (;bonum
implication,clearlystatedin one of Albert's later commentaries,is that
we cannot move into the area of moral goodness unless we firstunderstandthe notionofgoodness.1Metaphysicsproperis followedbysections
dealing respectivelywith the causes of virtueand the natureof virtuein
general. The major and remainingpartof the De bonois composed of four
tractateseach of which deals with one of the cardinal virtues ( virtutes
cardinales
yvirtutes
) in thefollowingorder: fortitude,temperance,
politicae
and
The
finaltreatiseon justice containsa revolutionary
justice.
prudence
treatmentof naturallaw theory.2
Pre-Albertinian
Theories
The full significanceof Albert's theoryof humanvirtueas elaboratedin
the De bonostandsout againstthe backgroundof his contemporaryand
earlier writers. That history, as Dom Odon Lottin did so much to
demonstratein his monumental Psychologie
et Morale aux Xlle et XUle
sicles
, was a richand highlyvariegatedcomplexus of interlockingthemes
RevueNo-Scolastique
de Philosophie,
XXIV(1922),333-361,
479-^20;P. G. Meersseman,
inOpera
Omnia
Introduction
B.Alberti
0. P.,(Bruges,
1931),3-9,69-73.
Magni
1Paraphrasis
I, 2,cap.1,ed.Borgnet,
VII,17.
2SeeStanley
Albertus
B. Cunningham,
onNatural
oftheHistory
ofIdeas,
Law
, Journal
Magnus
no.4 (1967),479-502.
XXVffl,
83

11:56:07 AM

and tensions.For our purposes, two facetsof thathistoryare especially

relevant.There was firstof all a tendencyamong most writersto restrict
extensivelythe moral worth of human acts to the level of supernatural
virtueand merit. The second facetof this overall historyconcernsitself
with the developmentin theoriesabout the natureand numberof factors
contributingto the moral specificityof human acts.
A) Theproblemofmoralworth
Apropos of the firstproblem, Lottinhas remarkedtime and time again
that prior to St. Thomas Aquinas there was a conspicuous tendency
among medieval writers to confuse the moral goodness of acts with
supernaturalmerit.1 Underlyingthis confusionwas the implicationthat
the only kind of moral perfection is that which derives from a
divine infusion. That is, insteadof merit being visualizedas a property
resultingfromthe morallygood act, itwas confusedlymade thecondition.
Since these Christianmoralistsfavoured an almost exclusivelysupernatural perspective, there resulted theories of moral neutrality,so to
speak, at the natural level of human conduct. Now since the time of
Peter Abelard in the early twelfthcentury,the moral specificationof
human acts was, in varyingdegrees, explained by the agent's intention.
And as it developed, the only kind of good intentionwas one rooted in
charityand directedby faith.One mightnot be surprisedto discoverthis
attitude running through a theological literature which was largely
preoccupied with the principlescontributingto man's salvation.But the
resultcame to be thatlittleif any value was laid upon naturallyacquired
to insure
virtueswhich, by themselves,would admittedlybe insufficient
supernaturalbeatitude. Seen throughthe highermedium of theological
virtues(faith,hope and charity),the naturalcardinalvirtues(fortitude,
temperance,prudence,justice) appeared to be little else thanessentially
incomplete and imperfect qualities. In short, they were not moral
virtues. In St. Albert's own time, this line of thoughtculminatesin a
theoryheld by some Franciscantheologians,notablyJohnof Rupella and
St. Bonaventure, who viewed the human act, taken at the level of
even though it be a deliberated
nature, as being essentiallyindifferent
between
moral goodnessand merit
this
confusion
that
insists
Lottin
act.2
1 "Onmaintint
saint
Thomas
avant
morale
taitla charit;
de la bont
toutefois
quele facteur
morale
etmrite
bont
surnaturel."
couramment
Aquin,onconfondait
PEM,
IV,480,Seealso
onpp.84n.2,8$n.i,86n.2.
below
thereferences
given
a Ibid.
yII,488-489.
84

11:56:07 AM

arose in large measurefromfaultyorganization."The principalcause,of

this in the twelfthcentury",he writes, "was the inclusionoftreatments
on virtueinto a doctrineof grace.
The widespread confusion,diagnosed by Lottin, between natural
and supernaturalmoral perfectionsstems largely from a manual of
theology widely read at that time, the famed Sentencesof Peter the
Lombard.2 Published between the years 11^3-1158, the work is a
compilation of extracts gleaned from scripturaland patristic sources
to which are adjoined Peter's own commentsand explications. As to its
architectonicstructure,Peter follows a plan already adhered to in the
works of some of his immediatepredecessors,namely,the orderpi the
Apostolic Creed. In two differentplaces within this frameworkhe has
insertedmoral treatises: in Book II withinthe contextof sin, and in Book
III followingthe treatiseon Christ.Yet in eithersectionno room is made
fora treatmentof the naturalacquired virtuesas such. True, in Book III
followingthe chapteron charityand precedingthose on the giftsof the
Holy Spirit,Peter cursorilymentionsthe fourcardinalvirtues,but these
3 By the same token,
are clearlyconceived as divinelyinfusedperfections.
he steersclear of anyphilosophicalapproachto moral virtue.Indeed, not
only in referenceto this particularmatter,but throughoutthe entire
work, it has oftenbeen remarkedthat there is a noticeable absence of
the principles and precisions of philosophy*.Symptomaticof this attitudeis "a notionofvirtuewhichis plainlytheocentricand Augustinin".5
From passages in St. Augustine'sDe liberoarbitrio
, the Lombard culls a
definitionofvirtuewhichis reallyPeter's own amalgamofSt. Augustine's
words and the Augustininidea of the gratuitous nature of grace:
et qua nullusmale utitur
bona qualitasmentis
, quam Deus
, qua rectevivitury
solusin homineopeiatur
.6 The exclusivelydivine origin of virtue is even
more apparentwhen one of the Lombard's disciples, Peter of Poitiers,
supplies his own interpolation to the definitionin order to stress
1Lesvertus
dePierre
Ablard
desthologiens
vertus
? Larponse
desvraies
morales
sont-elles
acquises
XX(1953),38.
ancienne
etmdivale,
dethologie
Recherches
saint
Thomas
d'Aquin,
2Petri
isgiven
Libri
IVsententiarum
Lombardi
, 2nded.(Quaracchi,
analysis
1916),2 vols.A helpful
Albert-lesamorale
: savie
Pierre
Lombard
Grand,
, sesoeuvres,
(Confrence
i960),
byPhilippe
Delhaye,
Inst.d'Etudes
Montreal,
Mdivales,
1961.
3 Sent.
morales
Lesvertus
Cf.O. Lottin,
, p. 19,n. 23;and
acquises
Ill,d. 33,cap.1,vol.2,697ff.
Pierre
Lombard
Ph.Delhaye,
, 77-79.
4 See,forexample,
Albert-ledelatheologie
morale
Thomas
O.P.,Aux
Deman,
(Conference
origines
Pierre
Lombard
,
Montreal,
Mdivales,
1951,pp.68-69;Ph.Delhaye,
Grand,
19^1),Inst.d'tudes
pp.99-100.
5 Ph.Delhaye,
Pierre
Lombard
, p. 33.
6Sent.
Delibero
arbitrio
, II (47-^3).
II,d. 27,cap. vol.I,446.Cf.St.Augustine,
85

11:56:07 AM

the moral inefficacyof man: Virtusigitur est qualitas mentisqua

rectevivitur
, qua nemomale utitur
, quam Deus in homineSINE HOMINE
operator.1
Commentingon the Lombard's definition,Lottin once again has
occasion to remindus of the subsequenttendencyin the twelfthcentury
to equate the goodness in human acts with supernaturalmerit.2 The
resultwas eitherto ignoreor to minimizethe value of naturalvirtue,and
to regardthe Christianperfectionof charityas the onlygenuinecause of
goodness.
could be so influentialin thisreThat Peter the Lombard's Sentences
spectbecomes evidentwhenwe stop to considerthata majorproportionof
speculative theological literaturein the next two centuriesconsistedof
works which, in varyingdegrees, were modelled upon the Sentences.
These writings, whether they be Scriptaor the later and more intended to perpetuate
dependentlywroughtsynthesesknown as Summaey
No one can deny, of course, that
the originaldefectin Peter's Sentences.
therewas a progressiveincreasein the attentionand space givento moral
speculation. There were even new materialsinsertedinto the traditional
Lombardian framework.But the bits and pieces of each man's moral
theorygenerallyremained scatteredand disconnected. In the wake of
Peter the Lombard, then, the emergence of moral treatisesshowing a
logical consecutivenessand organizationwas slow to materialize.Moreover, in commentingupon this late appearance of systematizedmoral
treatises,Lottin also indicated the scarcityof any such treatmentsuntil
the thirdand fourthdecades of the thirteenthcentury.3As the earliest
and most noteworthyexperimentsin this directionhe cited the Summa
aurea of William of Auxerre (writtenabout 1220-122$) and Philip the
Chancellor's Summade bono(completed before 1236). Oddly enough he
did not mention St. Albert's De bono, yet the dates and authorscited
bring us almost to the eve of its composition. Up to this time, the
continuityof the Lombardian frameworkas well as the privileged
authorityof the Augustinindefinitionof virtuetendedto discourageany
positive recognitionof the naturaldimensionin morals.
B) Themultiplicity
of moralelements
In diagnosing the prevailing conception of moral worth prior to
1Sententi
latina
added.
arum
libri
, III,c. i, Patrologia
(hereafter
PL)2ii, col.1041a.
Capitals
quinqu
2PEM
, IV,821.
3Ibid.,
IV,817-819.
III,S9S-S9&'*
86

11:56:07 AM

AlbertusMagnus,we have seen the positiongivenbymedievalthinkersto

their moral sections within the wider structure of their theological
synthesesand the effectthis had upon their theories of virtue. There
is still anotherdimensionto the historicalcontext, this time involving
attemptsmade both to identifyand to correlate the elements which
contributeto .the moral specificationof human acts. What factors,elements, or principlesare necessaryto constitutea morallygood action?
How manyare there?Assumingthatseveralare required, what are their
?
inter-relationshipsand interdependencies
With respect to the identificationof these principles, there is a
pertinent passage in St. Albert's De bonowherein he states that in a
morally good act a pluralityof elements is required. He enlists the
authorityof Pseudo-Dionysiuswho says:
theDivineNames
that'thegoodis constituted
IV of Concerning
... in Chapter
bya
totalandsinglecause,butthateviloriginates
omnifariously'.
Bythisit is understood
withthe
all thecircumstances
ofvirtue
therearerequired
thatforthereality
together
to bearuponits proportionate
withtheactas it is brought
endharmonizing
object.
thecorruption
ofanyoneofthesebyitselfis sufficient.1
Forevilandvice,however,
The same doctrine is reiterated in Book III of Albert's Scriptasuper
:
Sententias
butthat
It mustbe saidthatgoodandevilin actsarenotcausedin onlyonemanner,
thegood,as Dionysius
says,is causedbya totalcausethatis one.Thatis, in theconofthegoodactall thecircumstances
stitution
andtheendandtheagent'sintention
inthemanner
iscausedonlywhenallofthesearesimultaneously
mustcoincide.
Jit
present
at once.Evil,
of an integral
wholewhichis madeup ofall itspartstakentogether
ofany
as Dionysius
thatis, fromthecorruption
however,
says,derives
omnifariously,
isdestroyed.
wholeisbroken
part,justasanintegral
upwhenanyoneofitsparts
particular
butitis notmadegood
a goodintention,
Andso itis thatthereis nogoodactwithout
the
intention.2
solelyby
Throughout his lifetime,Albert seems to be quite consistentin this
regard. Supported by a statementof the Neo-Platonic author, PseudoDionysius, Albert insiststhat moral goodness, more specificallyvirtue,
derives only froma total synthesisof all the elementsinvolved, namely
circumstances,the agent's intention,the end, and the act itself. The
corruptionof any one of these constituentsvitiatesthe act. In the Sentences
, Albert admits that intention plays a major rle in the moral
determinationof acts, but it is not the sole feature.
We have brieflyanticipated the Albertinianposition merely to
1I, 5, i, ad22,p. 74.SeealsoI, 3, 1,ad6,p. 38.
2InIISent.
yd. 41,a. 2,sol.,ed.Borgnet,
XXVII,
643a.

87

11:56:07 AM

indicateone standtakenin the historyof thisproblem. Prior to Albert's

arrival in Paris, however, this particular problem had been vexing
moralistsforover a century.Albert's words are certainlya farcry from
those written a centuryearlier by that intrepid figureof the twelfth
,
century,Peter Abelard. In his relativelyshort treatise entitled Ethics
written about 1135-, Abelard distinguishesbetween an
or KnowThyself
external human act (opus) and the intentionwhich precedes it.1 The
term 'intention' connotes a determinationor consent of the will to
performan external action. That is, it is an internal act of the will
distinguishablefrom other natural undeliberated tendencies. Now,
externalacts in themselvesare morallyneutral: theirmoral goodness or
turpitudeaccrues to them solelyfromour interioract of consentwhich
precedes them.2 As long as consent is withheld,a dispositionto evil or
weaknesscannotbe called evil. On the contrary,ifweaknessis conquered
it serves as an occasion for merit. The pleasure accompanyinga sinful
act does not augmentits turpitude. As for the physicalact itself,it is
morally indifferent.Killing a man may be committedaccidentally,that
is without consent, in which case it could scarcely be called evil. In
short, the moralityof external acts is a borrowed one, and identical
with that of the intention. God does not weigh the thingswe do, but
ratherthe spiritin which we performthem.
As ifanticipatingfutureindictmentsof propoundinga radical moral
subjectivism,Abelard attemptsto place the moralityof intentionon a
more objective footing.It is not enough, he says, that one's intention
seemgood; it must reallybe good by conformingto God's will.3 Otherwise, he observes, the acts of non-believerswould be good like ours,
since theytoo believed thattheirworks were pleasingto God.
Even after the condemnation of his theories at the Council of
Sens in 1140, Abelard still clung to his position. External acts are
He is prepared to admit that virtuesand vices are
morallyindifferent.4
in themselves,but the relationshipof these to
and
evil
essentiallygood
from
clear.
the act itselfis far
1 "Cum
etopusillius
duoquidem
hominis
intentionem
dicimus
bonam,
bonum,
distinguimus,
itaque
" - Petri
bonitatem
Abaelardi
tarnen
intentionis.
Ethica
seuliber
ac opus;unam
scilicet
intentionem
ofAbelard's
seeO. Lottin,
scito
dictus
, cap.VII,PL178,6ob.Fora discussion
position,
teipsum
PEM
II,421-422.
, IV,310-314;
2 Ethica
, VII,col.6joa-c;XI,6gic.
3Ibid.
ofintention
of
ofthemoral
andinhisconception
inhistheory
goodness
yXII,653b.Both
withthetraditional
theocentrichimself
school.
Abelard
Augustinin
virtue,
aligns
ultimately
desaint
Duns
Scot
lesthologiens
chez
Lanalitemorale
Cf.J.Rohmer,
Augustin
(Paris:Vrin,
1939),
morales
loc.
vertus
Les
n.
O.
cit.y
,
Lottin,
acquises
p. ig.
40;
37,
p.
Dialogus
PL178,1652b.
etchristianumt
inter
judaeum
philosophumy
88

11:56:07 AM

It is too easy to brand Peter Abelard as a radical moral subjectivist

and to let it standat that. What is oftenoverlooked is thathis position
stemsfroma reactionto legalisticmoral doctrine.1In the penitentialand
canonical literatureof the times, it was common practice to codifyacts
or opposition to law. In oppositionto this
accordingto theirconformity
excessive legalistic objectivism, Abelard had emphasized the rle of
individualintention,but to such a degree that he had seriouslyundermined all objective basis for morality.2
In the next hundredyearsand more, the doctrine of intentionran
a torturouscourse due in large measure to the initial imprecisionof its
vocabulary.3 Sufficeit to say that with few exceptions later moralists
were prepared to recognize the primacy of intention in the moral
determinationof humanacts. The problem was not so much this, however, as to supplement Abelardo simplistic theory of intentionwith
other moral principleswhich would ground the moralityof acts upon a
solid and objective footing.It was this search, originallysparkedby the
Abelardian crisis, which partly accounts for the growth of moral
speculationin the next centuryand a half. Effortswere made to define
moralityin termsof certainrationallydiscerniblefeaturesin the human
act itself; and early overtures to a philosophical approach to virtue
representone facet of this doctrinal evolution.4 In additionto the discoveryand enlistmentof new principles,of course, there still remained
the problemofintegrating
theminto a logicallyconsecutiveand cohesive
account.
A firstsignificant
step in the post-Abelardianmovementis foundin
Peter the Lombard's Sentences
. Peter enlists no less an authoritythan
St. Augustineto confirmhis thesisthat certainacts are intrinsicallybad
and thatno degree of good will or intentioncan erase theirturpitude.s
This stand constitutesa positive reaction to the Abelardianthesis. End,
or intention,is not the sole determinantof morality.Independentlyofit,
some acts are evil in theirveryconstitution( perse mala, persepeccata);
that is, theyare objectivelyevil. Intention,the Lombard admits,deter1SeeO. Lottin,
PEM
, IV,478-479.
2Ibid.
yp. 313.
3SeeO. Lottin,
Vintention
dePierre
morale
Lombard
saint
Thomas
, PEM
, IV, 309-486;
also,Le
dela moralit
saint
d'Ablard
Thomas
, PEM,
II,421-465.
problme
intrinsque
d'Aquin
4SeePh.Delhaye,
La placedel'thique
lesdisciplines
au Xllesicle
, Miscellanea
parmi
scientifiques
moralia
inhonorem
Eximii
Domini
Arthur
E. Nauwelaerts,
Jansen,
(Louvain:
1948),I, 29-44.
La dfinition
idem
morales
Also,O. Lottin,
, PEM,III, 103-115",
, Lesvertus
149-150;
philosophique
loc.cit.,pp.19-24.
acquises,
5Libri
IVSent.,
II,d.40,c. 1,vol.I, 520-522.
89

11:56:07 AM

mines the other kinds of external acts. An act inherentlygood, for

instance,may be vitiatedby a bad intent.
Moreover, in speaking about acts, differentlevels or kinds of
goodness are discernible.1 All actions are ontologicallygood in their
verynature (essentiasui).2 Unlike Abelard, the Lombard feels that some
acts may also be classifiedas objectivelygood. Feeding the hungry,for
instance, in addition to possessing ontological goodness, is what he
calls generebonus9 because it belongs to that class or genus called works
of mercy.3 This generic goodness, thoughsomewhatbroad and indeterminate, is independentof the intention; it is objective. Nevertheless,it
is still inferiorto the perfectlygood act which, in additionto possessing
the goodness of essence and its class, issues froma good intentionand is
directed to a good end.
The end which Peter the Lombard has in mind is supernatural,
namely charity or God. 4 On the other hand, rather than refuse all
goodness to the actions of non-Christianswho lack faithand charity,
he allows for a goodness of intentionat the purely naturallevel.s The
extensionof the notion of the good will allow forthis,he says. Without
contradictingit, he refers, to one theory which says that operations
aimed at the alleviation of natural wants and the welfare of one's
relativesor neighborsare morallygood. The statement,however, reads
in a spiritof concession. To account for moral goodness in acts, Peter
reasonsmainlywithina supernaturalperspective.
By partiallyextending the notion of goodness beyond the rigid
limits imposed on it by Abelard, the Lombard indicated certain lines
along which subsequent theories of the morality of acts evolved.
Henceforth,moral speculationwas characterizedbyanalysesofadditional
elements which, over and above intention, contribute to the moral
1 w.. . auctoritatum
traditionem
etrationibus
eorundem
omnes
testimoniis
munivimus,
quidicunt,
essebonos,
veroinquantum
inordinatae
essentia
actus
fiunt,
sui,idest,inquantum
sunt,
quosdam
sedetiamgenere
nontantum
bonos
utreficere
esse.Addunt
essentia,
esse,
quosdam
quoque,
peccata
acperfecte
misericordiae
vero
actus
absolute
estdegenere
; quosdam
esurientem,
quiactus
operum
illi
sedetiam
causaetfinis
utsunt
velgenus,
bonos
essentia
dicunt,
commendant,
quosnonsolum
- Ibid.,
etaliter
etbonum
finem
bonaproveniunt
metiuntur."
d. 36,p. 04."Item
quiexvolntate
- Ibid
inquantum
actum
interiorem
velexteriorem,
omnem
., d. 35,
est,essebonum."
probant
cap.3,p. 494.
2Thereis considerable
intheLombard
s doctrine
at thispoint.Whenhesaysthat
ambiguity
nare
doeshemean
those
toinclude,
orimplicitly
actus
"omnes
exclude,
goodintheir
being,
very
1
are"per
semala",
sepeccata"
actswhich
"per
3 Cp.below,
p. 97.
4 Ibid.
yd. 38,cap.1,p. 09.
5Ibid.,
d.41,cap.2,pp.^24-^25^.
90

11:56:07 AM

specificationof acts.1 In the writingsof one of the Lombard's disciples,

for instance,a new and importantdimensionwas added. Circumstances
,
said Peter of Poitiers, in some way influencethe characterof our acts
and must be taken into consideration.2The point was only mentioned
in passing; it received no furtherdevelopment. But the formula"bonum
continuedto reappaeroftenin laterwriterseven though
ex circumstantial
its rle was never clearly defined. One must wait until St. Albert's
treatiseon circumstances.
De bonofor the firstfull-fledged
the
decades
of
the
thirteenth
By
centuryit was not uncommon
early
for writers to discern several levels or moments of goodness in the
human act. The followingformulaeappear with increasingfrequency:
bonumnaturaeor bonumnaturalereferringto the physicalrealityof the
, bonumex circumstantia
, bonumvirtutis
act; bonumin genere
politicae, and
bonumgratiae.The formula
finallythe goodness of supernaturalgrace
bonumin genere
, since the time of Peter the Lombard,generallysignified
the objective goodnessof a class of actions. Albert's immediatepredecessor, Philip the Chancellor, through an ingenious application of the
between
hylomorphictheory,interpretedit to mean a naturalfittingness
an act (say, feeding)and its object (a hungryman).3 Yet its statusas a
moral or non-moralfeaturewas leftambiguous.*
This evolvingawarenessof the multiplicityof elementsinvolvedin
the moralityof humanactions may by taken as an index of the development in moral theory at this time. And yet, at the same time, this
complexityin the data of the problem was scarcelyattendedby anykind
of apparentcohesiveness.Amidstthis pluralityof factors,some kind of
intelligiblesynthesiswas wanting.This in turnwould presupposeclearly
definedrelationshipsbetween the various elements involved. In short,
there was need for systematicintegration.Albert's De bonowas written
in responseto this need.
1SeeO. Lottin,
Leproblme
delamoralit
, PEM
, II,421-465.
intrinsque
2 "Utrum
autem
voluntas
maius
nonpotest
sitquamactusveleconverso
simpliciter
peccatum
Inquibusdam
inquibusdam
enim
maius
actus.Attendendae
determinan.
estvoluntas,
peccatum
sunt
omnes
etquolocoet
enim
circumstantiae
ana laicoana sacerdote,
: a quoscilicet
fiat,
aliquid
- Sententiae
ethuiusmodi."
Petri
liber
Pictaviensis
II, cap.14,4; ed. P. S. Moore,
quotempore,
inMediaeval
XI(Notre
M.Dulong,
Publications
Studies
Indiana,
Dame,
J.N.Garvin,
1950),
p. 93.
3 "Etest
Reficere
materia
dicendum
cum
actus.
hieexconiunctione
forme
actus
quodgenus
accipitur
enim
formam
exconiunctione
dicit
trahitur
bonum
esurientem
dicit
ettarnen
materiam,
quamdam,
- quoted
huius
adaliud."
PEM
ofthisnewmeaning
Because
, III,441,11.106-109.
byO. Lottin,
dealofcircumtoit,theformula
ingenere"
a great
"bonum
without
remains
untranslatable
given
locution.
4 Fortexts
where
ingenere
thebonum
morale
tobonum
PEMy
II,
, seeO. Lottin,
Philip
juxtaposes
morales
loc.cit.,31, n.66.
43911 9-17> "Lesvertus
acquises",
91

11:56:07 AM

il. Albert's metaphysics

of the good

It would exceed the scope of thispaper to attempta thoroughanalysisof

Albert's metaphysicsof the good even as containedin the De bono.There
are, however, three salient metaphysicalthemeswhich must be kept in
mind since theydeterminehis theoryof virtue.
and Appetition
A) Goodness
In the opening article of the De bono where in Albert reports three
definitionsof the good, he creditsAvicennawith definingthe good as the
"undividednessof act frompotency" (.indivisio
actusa potentia).1Throughout these early articles, Albert identifiesthe notions of perfectionand
) with thatof the good. This is apparent
completion (actus,complementum
in the definitionimputed to Avicenna which is clearly an attempt to
express the absolute without enlistingsomethingyet more ultimate.
a positive reality,the
Though seeminglynegative,the definitionaffirms
nature of the good in itself, this being a unity between any kind of
potency or avidityand its correspondingperfection(actus). The ac
in question,however, does not standsimplyforthe operationperformed
which is added to thatsame being
by some being, nor for the fulfilment
notion
of
its
substantial
The
form.
perfectionhere is ratherone of
by
fulfilment
and completionwhich accrues to a thingfromthe attainment
of its end.2 The allegedlyAvicenniandefinition,then,trulyexpressesthe
proper nature (propriaratio) of goodness, namely,an identitywith end
(indivisionis) .3
All things,frominanimatebodies to intellectualagents,desire the
good at proportionatelevels of appetite. On the one hand, there is
'perfectappetite*which is alwaysaccompaniedby some formofcognition
or apprehension. There is also 'natural appetite' which is universally
presentin all beings, and
elsethantheaptitude
ofthatwhich
isinpotency
. . . whichis nothing
andinclination
towards
Thisis in all things,
andbythisis meantwhatis said,'thatthe
perfection.
attheendofBookI ofthePhysics
desire*,
justas thePhilosopher
goodis whatall things
matter
form
as
female
the
male
evilthegood.4
that
desires
the
and
says
1Thisdefinition
as suchis notfound
inAvicenna.
It seems
to haveoriginated
withPhilip
the
Chancellor
whointurn
attributed
ittoAristotle.
Cf.Debono
, p. i, n. 13.
2I, i, i, ad 11,p. 6.
n- I, 1,7,ad2, 14,1.87.
31,1,gtsol.,p.10,i. i. "Bonm
autem
estcondicio
finis
utfinis.
p.
addit
ad
a. . . bonum
ens
relationem
finem
.
.
I,
1,
10,
sol.,
super
p. 20,1.47.
4 I, i, i, ad i, p. 4.
92

11:56:07 AM

The desire for the good among some thingsmay be no more than the
inclination of the imperfect towards perfection, but this entitative
willingnessis rooted in all beings. At the heartof each and everynature
is a desire for goodness. Correlatively, it is the very quintessence of
the good to be desired, ifnot cognitivelyand actively,at least according
to this innatepropensity.1Onlygoodness can be desired, or at least that
which is apprehendedas being good (in rationeboniut hune).2
or summum
bonum.All createdgoods, even though
God is theprimum
in
as
certain
perfections themselves,are nonethelessdefective
standing
in comparisonto God who is the source of all goodness.Theirgoodness
owes its presence to an inux of perfectionfrom the supreme good;
and the universaldesire inherentin all thingsis simplya desire for this
influxof perfection.3 Or to put it anotherway - and thistime Albertis
consciously exploiting the Neo-Platonic doctrines of St. Augustine
in the sense
and Pseudo-Dionysius- all thingsare good by participation
that the firstgood or exemplar is reflected(relucet)in created goods.*
Exemplarismtells us the mode of presence. Albertrejectsanyattemptto
visualize this participationas a direct sharingin the nature itselfof the
supreme good. Rather, participationis taken to mean that each thing,
possessingas it does a certainfiniteand particularinstanceof goodness,is
bonumas the cause of
somehow reducible to the efficacyof the primum
this goodness. As a particularinstance ( ratioparticularis
) of goodness, it
What
is
mirrors
the
reallypossessed is created
supreme goodness.
only
and
this
as
boni
creati
ratio
),
particularized in individuals
goodness (
s
throughtheirdifferencesand matter.
and Appetition
B) TheanalogicalNatureof Goodness
In no way, then, can goodness as some sort of common naturebe predicated univocally of an infiniteGod and the universeof finitecreatures.
On the contrary,to explain the unityin goodness between the summum
bonumand creatures, as well as among created goods themselves,the
principle of analogyis introducedby Albert, more preciselythat type
of analogywhich is called a communityof proportionality
:
1Ibid.
tad 14,p. 7.
2Ibid.,
ad p. g.
3I, i, i, ad2,p. 4. Inplaceofcreatam
(1.69),readincreatam.
4I i> 2,pp.7-8.
5Ibid.
Seealso,ad2.
, adi, p. 8, 11.34-36.
93

11:56:07 AM

To thefourth
it mustbe saidthatthatgoodwhichall things
desireis notreobjection
ofproportionality
ducibleto onespeciesor to onegenus,butto a community
in such
wisethata distinction
obtains
between
and
And
wesay
.
.
so
.
proportion proportionality
andcommensuration
ofall possibles
inrelation
thattheproportionality
to a perfecting
inthisproportionality
isone,andsotooistheappetite
endisone,andtheendofallthings
whichinclines
totheend.1
ofproportionality,
as wasestablished
It mustbe saidthatthereis a community
earlier,
to thethird
modeofanalogy.
Foralthough
whichis reduced
thereis notoneendwhich
nevertheless
as itsfulfilment,
thereis oneendbeyond
theorderof
everygoodattains
creation
to whichevery
inclines
to
its
this
is
thehighest
And
end
good
according power.
are
from
it
Other
not
unless
and
back
to
tend
it.2
derive
they
good.
goods
good
All creatures, in desiring their own particular perfections,are really
moving towards a perfectingend which, by a communityof proportionality,is one. This is the same as sayingthateverythinghas some kindof
naturalinclinationtowardsgoodness. More thanonce, Albertpoints to
the writingsof Pseudo-Dionysiuswho has said that,correspondingto the
differentlevels of nature and appetition discernible in the universe,
there results a hierarchyof degrees in which perfectionis shared by
creatures.3 Intellectualand rational beings desire the good knowingly;
sentientcreaturesreveal a desireforthe good in theirsensibleappetites;
other livingthingswithoutsense, desire the good by theirinnateurge to
live; and finally,inanimatecreatures tend to the good in their mere
inclinationto participatein being.4 All this is to say that creatures,by
a movement commensuratelyone, desire an end which is also proportionatelyone : goodness. Now, we have alreadyseen thatthe absolute
instanceof goodnessis God, the summum
bonum.Even thoughall creatures
do not actuallyattainto Him as theircomplementum
, neverthelessHe is the
absolute end, beyondthe order of creation,towardswhichall of creation
is drawn according to diverse specific powers and natures. What
creaturesachieve on this naturallevel, of course, is not a part of God,
but rathera certaininstanceof created goodness.
The principle of analogy and the doctrines of Pseudo-Dionysius
coalesce in Albers explanationof the relationshipbetween creatures
and God. The resultis a universeconceived in Neo-Platonicfashionas a
1I, i, i, ad4,p. .Concerning
Between
useofanalogy,
seeHampus
TheAnalogy
Albert's
Lyttkens,
GodandtheWorld
19^2),1^3-163.
(Uppsala,
2I, 1,4,sol.,p. 10.
31, i, 2, sol.,p. 8. Cf.Dionysius
De divinis
nominibus
, 1, 20, in
(trans.
Joannes
Saracenus),
Paris,
, I (ed.Ph.Chevallier:
1937),247-248.
Dionisiaca
4 Dionysius,
inI, 1,6,
Thistextisquoted
Dedir.nom.
IV,#16,
, I, 168-169.
Dionisiaca
byAlbert
sol.,p. i2.
94

11:56:07 AM

hierarchyof beingswhich derive from,and are tendingback towards,an

infinitegood. Each thingdesires and sharesin goodnessaccordingto the
level of its natureand powers. Our generalconcept of the good is broad
enough to accommodate everyinstanceof the good, both finiteand infinite,since predicationis made analogicallyin each case.
By enlistingthe principleof analogy,Alberthas bestowed upon the
notion of goodness a flexibilityand unitywhich hithertowas missingin
pre-Albertinianthinkers. Application of the principle ensures the
reduction of all the various degrees and kinds of goodness to a more
overall intelligibleunity. Moreover, what has been said of the good in
general will be no less applicable to the elementsof moral goodness
proper: all these in some way will connote a perfectionand an "undividednessof act frompotency". Each of them,in view of thisanalogical
similitude,has a certainintelligiblesettingwithinthe more comprehensive notion of bonum
.
The notion of the innate appetency for perfection in creatures
dovetailswith the Albertiniandoctrineof being. Everycreated being in
some way is a compositionof potencyand act. Hence, it is not entirely
destituteof goodness, but only relativelyso.1 Yet if each thingpossesses
a certain degree of perfection,it still remainssusceptibleto additional
increments. Reiterating the conceptions of the Liberde causis, Albert
accrues to createdthings
saysthatstabilityin being ( xio et permanenti)
When
of
the
an
influx
they have incorporated the
good.2
through
desired perfection,beingsare perfectedin theirverynature.
The terms'influx', 'participation',and 'information'all conveythe
same idea. For Albert, goodness is scarcely a remote ideal or standard
which creaturesmerelyimitate. Rather,it is seen as a perfectiveelement
which has been incorporated and shared in by the creature. As an
interiorizedperfection,inheringintimatelywithinthe thing,it consummates a correspondingpotency or need therebyfulfillingthe created
nature in its very being. This is why the Avicenniandefinitionof the
good, "the undividednessof act frompotency",most trulycharacterizes
the quintessenceof goodness.
C) Casual Explanationof theGoodness
of Creatures
The problem of the relationshipbetween created being and the good
does not end here. In Article Seven of the firstQuestion in the De bono,
1I, i, i, ad8 ( = ad7andad8),pp.-6
; ad3,pp.4-5.
2Ibid.,
ad2,p.4.
95

11:56:07 AM

Albert boldly confrontsthe classic dilemma voiced by Boethiusin his

In this tractate,Boethiushad raised the question how
De hebdomadibus.1
naturesor substances,fromthe veryfactthattheyexist, are good, since
theycan scarcelybe called absolute goods. If, as St. Albert has already
done, we are preparedto admit thateach and everybeing is not entirely
devoid of goodness, but only relativelyso, would this not lead us to
equate the being of creatures (esse) with their goodness ( bonumesse)?
In thisarticle Albertundertakesto clear up thisdilemma.
Boethius had urged that the substantialbeing of creaturesmay be
called good since it derivesfromand participatesin the Prime Good in
whom goodnessand beingare identical.The solutionofferedbyBoethius,
Albert admits, is imperfect and obscure'.2 To clarifyBoethius' answer
one must invoke a theoryof causes.3 In a vocabularyhighlyredolent of
Avicenna, Albert begins by observing that nothing can exist ( esse in
ejfectu)except by a cause since the effectowes its whole being to an
antecedent cause. Now the four Aristoteliancauses - form, matter,
final cause or end, and efficientor agent cause - fall conveniently
into two groupingsor arrangements.Form and matter,which we may
also designateas act and potencyor quo estand quodestrespectively,are
intrinsicprinciplesor constituentcauses of a being. The end and efficient
causes are its extrinsic causes. These combinations coincide in the
productionof being. The end or finalcause exists in the agent cause as
that which is intended ( per intentionem)
; the form exists potentially
in the matter ( per potentiam).The final cause is the highestof all the
causes; it is the 'cause of causes'. Though completely unmoved and
immobile in itself,it neverthelessmoves all the other causes. As that
which is desired, it effectsmotion in the efficientcause, and thisin turn
induces the material principle or 'that which is' to receive the form.
With thishierarchicalarrangementof the causes, Albertfeelspreparedto
interpret the relationshipbetween the being of creatures and their
goodness. The being is giventhemby the efficientcause which moves the
matterto the receptionofform.The goodness,on theotherhand,derives
from the end which moves the efficientcause as an object of desire
and intention. According to their absolute and abstractconsideration,
the being and goodness of creatures, therefore,cannot be equated.
1Quomodo
cum
non
bona
sint
sint
substantialia
bonae
ineoquod
sint
substantiae
, ed.andtrans,
byH. F*
asDehebdomacited
Stewart
andE. K. Rand(LoebClassical
1953),pp.38-53.Generally
Library,
dibus.
2I, i, 7,p. 14,1.2.Cf.Dehebdomadibus
, pp.46-48.
31,i, 7,p. 14,il. 37ff.
Albert's
final
seeI, 1,1,#13,
Foranargument
against
position,
p. 4, 11.
jff.
96

11:56:07 AM

They may be identifiedonly throughmutual inherencein one and the

same subject or supposit. Goodness and being, or ifyou will, nature,are
not identicalalthoughin realitytheyare inseparable.1
It seems obvious, therefore,thatfor Albertany explanationof the
good and its reference to being merely in terms of the traditional
doctrineof participationdoes not suffice.All thisdoes is to indicatethe
kindor typeof presence. Over and above this, one must explain, why,
and how, such a presence by participationis effected,i.e., a causal
explanationand knowledge of the good is required. To account for the
origin of goodness in creatures, then, one mustgroundhis explanation
on the four ultimate causes of Aristotle.This solutionto the Boethian
dilemma becomes a significantmethodologicalprinciple. When Albert
comes to treatof moral goodness, its variouselementswill be systematically integratedaccording to this hierarchyof Aristoteliancauses.
III. THE CAUSES OF MORAL VIRTUE
In the Tractatusde natura boni, Albert had commenced his moral disquisitionproperby pointingout a certaindisjunctionbetween the order
of nature and the human moral order.2 Some thingsare not caused by
human beings such as the created thingsin this world; other things,
however, are caused by us, namelyour voluntaryacts of which we are
the masters.Now just as in naturethere is one primarything- matterwhich serves as the subject for additional forms,so too in our moral
voluntaryactions there is a primarysubject in potencyto furthermoral
.3 The bonumin genere
,
specificationswhich is called bonumin genere
Albertadds, is simplythe humanact broughtto bear upon itsproportionate object: actussolussupermateriamdebitam
. For instance, the act of
from
a
those
particularcircumstances
feeding hungryman, abstracting
of time and place which surroundthe act, maybe called bonumin genere
A
Bonumin genere
, therefore,designatesthe firstmoment of goodness in
the order of morality,and it is subject to furtherincrementsof moral
perfection.
At the correspondingpoint in the De bono, that is, immediately
after the short disquisition on bonumnaturale
, Albert commences his
1Cf.Paraphrasis
VII,26.
, II,cap.6,ed.Borgnet,
2Thepassage
oftheDebono
isquoted
inquestion
, p. 29,n.42.
bytheeditors
3Weshall
ingenere.
bonum
Suchobvious
formula
retain
theLatin
renditions
as'general'
or'generic
bemeaningless
inthepresent
inkind'would
or'goodness
andlonger
context,
goodness',
qualified
force
usintocircumlocutions.
4 Cp.above,
p. 90.
97

11:56:07 AM

between the two main orders of moral

moral section by distinguishing
i
1
and
bonumconsuetudinis supernaturalgrace.1 Consuetudo
or
goodness:
4consuetudinalis'
- terms found in the Ethica vetus- were
employed by
mediaeval writers to designate moral virtues acquired at the level of
nature. For Albert too theyconnote moral excellence won throughthe
comprises three
repetitionof acts.2 In this treatise, bonumconsuetudinis
levels or types of moral perfection: bonumin genere
, the moral determinationsof circumstance ( bonumex circumstantia
), and virtue ( bonum
divisions
are
taken
over
These
Earlierwriters
virtutis
Albert.
politicae).
by
tradition
and
sanctioned
these
them. There is no
had coined
formulae,
attemptat this point to justifythe classificationby explicitlyinvokinga
hierarchyof potencies and correspondingdegrees of perfectionsuch
as Philip the Chancellorhad done, but it is evidentthatthissame scheme
is operativehere as well.3
These first three degrees of perfection are natural, rationally
discernibleelementsin the moralityof acts whose investigationlogically
precedes the order of divinelyinfusedgoodness. A numberof statements
in the De bonoclearlyindicate thatan elaborate studyof the perfections
of the supernaturalorder would follow as part of the De bonoA The De
bono, then,heraldsa noticeable departurefromthe traditionalprocedure
adhered to in mediaeval treatises: there is to be a treatmentof natural
virtueoutside the contextof grace and precedinga disquisitionupon the
supernaturalvirtues. This is possible because the De bono is a work
of Peter the Lombard. We may
patternedindependentlyof the Sentences
thereforeanticipatea treatmentof the acquired virtuesmore consonant
with theirnaturalstatus.
Indeed, all throughthiswork Albertappears to be cognizantof the
differencebetween the two moral orders. For instance,bonumin genere
,
he tells us, is still immediatelysusceptible to the more specificmoral
determinationsof virtue.s This latter superadded determinationis still
in potency to merit. Moral specificity,therefore,is alreadydiscernible
on the naturallevel, and prior to the order of merit. Grace, in turn,
1I, 2,p. 28,II. I I-l6.
2 ". . . consuetudo
secundum
... - I, 4, 2,p. 46,11.46-47.
estactus
tempus
multiplicatus
3Inhislater
boni.Etpenes
Summa
1,art.1 (De multiplication
, I, tr.4,qu.26,memb.
theologica
isa defence
ofthisclassification
there
ed.Borgnet,
XXXI,
231b,
resembling
closely
quidsumatur?),
kinds
tothedifferent
ofpotentiae.
"Bonum
andarranged
theChancellor,
thatofPhilip
according
nis "elevatum
levels
ofgoodness
a
are"adjuvant!
naturae
rationalis"
. Theprior
super
facultatem
gratiae
theChancellor's
see
Fora textindicating
infacltate
naturae
rationalis."
schema,
Philip
potentiam
VEM
O. Lottin,
, II,439,11.9-17.
*SeeProlegomena
#1,
pp.xb-xia.
5I, 2,4,adg,p. 30.
98

11:56:07 AM

the conditionof merit, neitherdestroysnor dispenseswith nature,but

rather,as its 'most connatural*excellence, raises it to its higheststate
of perfection.1
actions
A) Themoralstatusofrational, voluntaiy
Bonumin genereis clearlyincluded into the moral order. Even thoughits
status as a moral factor was not always clear among pre-Albertinian
scholars, these same authors from the time of Peter the Lombard
generally regarded it as the firstconsideration in any discussion of
morality.Now, in Albert's treatise, the firstarticle in the specifically
moral section is devoted to an analysisof bonumin genere.In spiteofthis,
however, Albert admits that the absolutelyfirstconsiderationin moral
, but the voluntaryact
speculation is not really the bonumin genere
as
such
considered
:
abstractly
isthatwhich
inmorals,
issusceptible
first
tothecondition
Theabsolutely
however,
thing
ofblame,whichisvice,andthisis thevolunorthecondition
whichisvirtue,
ofpraise,
Forthisactis
tobearuponitsobjectfollowing
choiceanddeliberation.
taryactbrought
ingenere
to eitherofthecontraries,
andequallyso. Bonum
does
, however,
susceptible
in morals,butrather
first
theabsolutely
notsignify
orderedto
principle
something
oneofthecontraries,
thatis,to thegoodofvirtue.2
Here we have a precision which seems to be absent from the earlier
Tractatus.The voluntaryact as such, a deliberated act bearing upon a
definite object, is an abstraction distinguishablefrom the bonumin
. It is the act seen as being equallysusceptibleto the conditionsof
genere
good or evil. Bonumin genereis reallythe same act, but now as havinga
certainordinationor determinationto subsequentmoral goodness.
The
Does this mean that the voluntaryact is morallyindifferent?
in
is
raised
Article
Seven
of
Two
"Whether
:
Question
question explicitly
in voluntaryacts thereis anythingindifferent
such thatit be neithergood
nor evil in genereor concretely(in specie)?"3This is indeed a perplexing
problem in the moral philosophy of Albertus Magnus, and a certain
forus to arriveat a definite
imprecisionin his writingsmakes it difficult
solution. When he explicitlyraises this question in Article Seven, he
seems to have in mindthe concrete individualact. In the last text quoted
from Article Four, wherein the voluntaryact is depicted as being
equally susceptibleto eithergood or evil, he was speakingof actionsin a
1IV,i, gyad12,p. 241,i i.4ff;
V,2,2,ad4,p. 28$.
2I, 2,4,sol.,p. 29.
3I, 2,7,p. 33,11.6^-67.
99

11:56:07 AM

general and abstract manner. Abstractlyconceived, the voluntaryact

could be viewed both as the absolutelyfirstmomentin the moral order,
in itselfsince it is equally open to good or
as well as morallyindifferent
evil.
The openingargumentsofArticleSevenprecedingAlbert'sown magisterialresolutionmentiontwo possible kindsofmorallyindifferent
acts:
the vain or futile act ( vanum
), and the useless or idle act (otiosum).A
definitionof the vain act Albert takesfromAristotle'sPhysics
: it is that
which is a means to some end, but which fallsshortof thatend.2 Now,
thatwhich is vain is condemnedby Holy Scripture(Psalms 4, 3) wherein
it is written"Why do you love vanityand seek afterlying?"; and so this
kindofindifferent
act ranksamongthoseacts whichare sinful.The definition of the idle act is taken from St. Gregory the Great's Moralia:
"the idle is that which lacks the character of rightfulnecessity or
dutifulservice".3 It is also condemned as sinful in the Gospel of St.
Matthew (12, 36) when Christstates"thatof everyidle word men speak,
they shall give account on the day of judgment". On the basis of Holy
Scripture,then, it would seem that these so-called morallyindifferent
acts in effectare evil acts.
Albert the Great does not seem entirelyopposed to this line of
reasoning.In his reply, he begins with a distinctionbetween the theo4
logian's position, and thatof the moral philosopher. Accordingto the
Christiantheologian,no deliberatedvoluntaryact is morallyindifferent
because he knows that all our actions should issue fromcharity,thatis,
from a love of God. Charity,an infusedperfectionby which we incline
to God, is a universalvirtue ( virtus. . . generalemovens
) movingus to the
s
acts of all other virtues. The moral philosopher, on the other hand,
philosophizingbeyond the pale of faithand Scripture,is ignorantof any
such universal virtue presiding over the economy of the moral life.
He knows only of a specificnumberof acquired virtues,each of which
has a definedand limitedmoral influence.At this level, then, it appears
naturalacts are possible, indifferent
thatindifferent
because theylack the
informationof charity.
1Thismight
inParaphrasis
theapparent
contradiction
, I, 6,ed.Borgnet,
VII,14: "Bonm
explain
etsubquoomnebonm
moris
autem
estactus
quodnihilestdebonomoris,
comprehenditur,
exratione
materiam
voluntarius
Cf.below,
determinatur."
quiadpropriam
p. 106n. i .
2I, 2,7,p. 34,il. 12-13.
Cf.Aristotle,
, II,6, i97b2-27.
Physics
3 "SeddicitGregorius,
ratione
iustae
necessitatis
autpiaeutilitatis'.
est,quodcaret
quod'otiosum
- I, 2,7,p. 33,11. 79-80.Cf.Sancii
Moralium
lib.VII,c. 17,n. 8;PL7^,800c.
Gregorii
Magni
I, 2,7,sol.,p. 34.
5 Cf.IV,i, 2,ad 23,p. 227.
IOO

11:56:07 AM

Accordingto St. Albert,then,the testimonyof Holy Scriptureadds

a new dimension to the moralityof acts of which the philosopher is
unmindful,and thisis the referencewhich all humanactions, externalas
well as internal, have to God. "Not everythingfutile", continues
futileis
Albert, "is condemnedby the moral philosopher,but everything
"
condemned by the theologian ;* and so at one point, he classes the
futilewith the evil.2
The idle act, as definedby St. Gregory,is also an indifferent
act,
and it too is condemnedby the Christiantheologian.Butin directcontrast
to certain contemporaryFranciscanauthors, notably John of Rupella,
Albert in Article Seven goes on to show what the otiosumis not. Now,
as Lottin has pointed out, the Franciscanthinkersof thistime regarded
3
anyact directed to a naturalend as morallyneutral. This is particularly
who
had
said that those acts
of
evidentin the writingsof John Rupella
whichare aimed at the dailynecessitiesof living,such as nourishingone's
In oppositionto this
self,are neithergood nor bad ; theyare indifferent.*
to
that
act
directed
to the alleviation
on
state
Albert
attitude,
any
goes
of our own naturalexigenciesor the pressingneeds of othersdoes indeed
have the"characterof rightful
), and so is
necessity"(ratioiustaenecessitatis
not indifferent.These purely natural exigencies arise from the daily
necessitiesof life and the toil of labor. Hence the activitiesof eating,
since theyprocede fromnatural
drinking,sleeping, are not indifferent
necessities; theyfallwithinthe moralorder. This applies also to the comfortsof peace and rest, conversation,strolling,singingand play, which
dispel the tedium and fatigueof labor. For support Albert appeals to a
Ethicsin which Aristotletreatsof wittinessor
passagein the Nicomachean
) as a virtue.s
urbanity(eutrapelia
There is anotherveryimportantdimensionto this problem of the
action is good or bad:
moralityof acts. Everydeliberated
andtheseareneither
are donewithout
indeliberation
... we saythatmanythings
norbad,norgoodbecausetheydo notfallintothesphereof morality.
different,
1 "Praeterea,
a theologo."
abethico,
sedomne
vanum
nonomne
vanum
vituperatur
vituperatur
-I, 2,7,p. 34,il. 36-37.
2Seebelow,
footnote
#76.
3PEM
, II,488-486.
4 "Indifferens
inbonm
ethic
sedictum,
nonsonat
velmalum
inmoribus;
dicoquod,secundum
malum
finem
malefitetmale
estfinis;
utireetloqui.Sienim
similiter
attendendus
fiat,
propter
Siveropropter
finem
utsiappeto
commedere
bene.Siveropropter
naturalem,
bonum,
appetitur.
necvituperabile;
est
nonestlaudabile
sustentationis
necessitatem
solum,
propter
propterea
- from
theSumma
devitiis
indifferens."
, quoted
II,470,n. 2.
PEM>
byO. Lottin,
5 Nic.Ethics
, II,7, iio8a23-27.
IOI

11:56:07 AM

are donewithdeliberation,
aregoodor bad,according
as
Whatever
however,
things
act(vanum
thefutile
) is calledevil.1
Here Albertis pointingout the keyprincipleof rationalethics: reason is
the indispensable condition of morality, while a non-rationalact is
But as far
simplynon-moral,thatis, neithergood, bad, nor indifferent.
as we can gatherfromhis words, the futileaction is stilla deliberatedor
act whose fullsignificanceescapes the
rationalact. It is also an indifferent
moral philosopher,but which the theologianrecognizesand so classifies
among evil acts. In the realm of natural ethics, then, it is possible to
have a concrete deliberated, but indifferent,act. The principle that
naturalreason is thatwhich essentiallyconstitutesan act as moral is not
accepted unconditionallyby Albert. In the final analysis, the rle of
reason is found wanting; unlike the universalvirtue of charity,it does
not universallyinitiatethe moral characterof all our naturalacts, and so
must be supplementedby the data of the theologian.
Concerningthe moralityof acts, then, Albert's theorybetraysnot
only a certain ambiguity,but also a qualifiedacceptance of the rle of
reason as an adequate determinerof moral specificity.At the same time,
it is importantto note that Albert is attemptingto validate and emphasize, to a greater extent than any of his predecessors, the purely
rational and natural factors in the morality of acts. Every naturally
virtuous act is a morally good act. Every rationalact is a moral act
(with the added stipulationthatfutileor idle acts are evil).2 In relation
to his predecessorsand contemporaries,Albert's position representsan
advance. At the same time, he falls short of St. Thomas for whom all
rational acts are ipsofacto moral.3 Lottin has aptly characterized St.
sur la voie d'une moralestrictement
Albert's position as a "mi-chemin
<
naturelle"
B) Thematerialcauseof virtue:bonumin genere
Like the absolute considerationof the voluntaryact, bonumin genereis
also an abstraction.It signifiesthis same human act not as being in a
state of absolute indterminationor equal liabilityto good or evil, but
1 u.. . dicimus
indifferentia
necbonavelmala,
etillanonsunt
sinedeliberatione
fiunt
quodmulta
bonavelmala
autem
cumdeliberatione
ingenere
moris.
eoquodnonsunt
fiunt,
sunt,
Quaecumque
- I, 2, 7,ad 1,p. 34.
dicitur
malum."
secundum
quodvanum
2Ouruseoftheterm
tothe
isintended
tomean
ofcourse,
"moral",
goodnrbad,andisopposed
non-moral
orindifferent.
3Seebelow,
p. 106.
PEM
, II,489.
I02

11:56:07 AM

more positivelyas having an inclination or disposition to the good.

Albert calls it a ifirstpotency' to the good.1 He also refersto bonumin
'
i
genereas the 'matter' and the materiacircaquam which, over and above
the concept of matter,includes as well a certainreferenceto the end of
the act.2 At the same time, it is the 'firstsubject' which receives and
supportsthe added determinationsof circumstanceand virtue.3
It seems obvious, then, that not unlike Philip the Chancellor,
Albert is conceiving bonumin genereas the material cause of virtue.*
To the standardizeddescriptionof bonumin genere- actussolussuper
- Albert adds a new
debitammateriam
precision which is helpfulto the
both strangeand
modern reader who is apt to findthe term ' debitum9
9
*
in
the
thirteenth
At
this
century, debitum had a
point
misleading.
strong juridified ring arisingfromits traditionalassociations with the
notionsof law, right( ius) and a legalisticconception of justice. Albert,
of
however,underthe influenceof Philip the Chancellor's interpretation
bonumin geneie, uses the termin a meta-juridical sense: and he warnsus
is not to be taken in a specific
thatin this context the notion of debitum
sense as the debitum
iustitiae.sThe main purpose of these earlyquestions
in the De bonois to renderan intelligibleaccountofthenatureand genesis
in question were the debitum
iuris
of moral virtue. Hence, if the debitum
which derivesfromjustice (as yet uninvestigated),we would be caught
in a circular argumentby tryingto invoke a special virtue in order to
here connotesa naturaland
account forvirtuein general. No, the debitum
and
its
the
act
between
correspondingmaterialobject:
rightproportion
for instance, feedinga hungryperson, or teachingan ignorantperson,
or consoling a sorrowful person. It is a proportion between two
natures,as it were. Hence, as the firstdegreeofmoralgoodnessfounded
on a proportion,bonumin genereappears as a true instanceof the transcendentalgood which, we recall, analogicallyembraces all instancesof
goodness througha communityof proportionality.Conversely,malum
in generesignifiesa privationof this proportion.
In the historyprevious to Albert, the formulabonumin genereis
characterizedby a certain ambivalence.6Sometimes it was viewed as a
1I, 2,4,ad i, p. 29.
2I, 2,4,passim,
pp.28-30.
3Ibid.
yad4,p. 30;art.6,sol.,p. 32.
4Thefollowing
debono
theSumma
indicate
thecontinuity
between
statements
from
Philip's
sample
ingenere
dicit
materiam
andAlbert's
: "Adquoddicendum
...
thought
quodbonum
puram
proprie
ingenere
bonum
ordinata
estadfinalem,
bonum
Eoautem
materialis
requiritur
tamquam
quodcausa
- Ms.Padua
adaliudbonum."
materiale
#156,fol.3rb,
, Antonianum
4va.
5I, 2,4,ad8,pp.29-30.
thedebitum
iustitiae
, seeV,3,2,ad7,p. 297.
Concerning
6 SeeO. Lottin,
PEM
, II,464-46$.
I03

11:56:07 AM

positive perfection,the firstin a series of moral perfections.On the

statusin which
other hand, it was given an almost entirelyindifferent
it was regarded as equally liable to corruptionby subsequent circumstances.1 Both themesare still discerniblein the De bono. The bonumin
geneie is a firstpotency, matter and subject with respect to specific
moral goodness. It is the act seen as havinga dispositionto goodness in
the same way that matterhas a dispositionto form. Albert also admits
that it can be specifiedand vitiated by circumstances.2However, this
possibilityof change in the moralityof an act by circumstances,from
bonumin genereto malumin specie, does not constituteits essence: it is
more of an accidentalproperty.The true essence of bonumin geneieis its
inherentdisposition or proclivityto goodness - ad bonummagisquam
is a by-product,so to speak, of the relatively
ad malum.The indifference
indeterminatemoral status of bonumin genere
. What is essentiallyinis the voluntaryact abstractlyconceived.
different
: Circumstances.
C) TheFormalCauseof Virtue
In the historyof moral speculationin the Middle Ages, Albert's Tractatus
de natura boni seems to have been the firstknown instance in which
3 Question
a distinctivetreatmentis given to the rle of circumstances.
De
bono
is
devoted
to
the
same analysis.The
three of TractatusI in the
inclusion of these treatiseswithin the Tractatusand the De bonois an
innovation. No longer is bonumex circumstantia
just a formulamentioned
in passing,one whose own statusas a moral factor,and whose relationship to the other moral factors,remainsin obscurity.On the contrary,
Albert's recognitionof theirfunctionas a necessarycause in the genesis
of virtuehas finallypromptedthe inclusionof a treatiseon the circumstances withinthe wider scheme of a naturalethic.
In this section of the De bono, Albert relies heavilyupon passages
and the De dijjerentiis
from Cicero's De inventione
topicisof Boethius.4
All the circumstancesenumeratedby Cicero, writesAlbert,are reducible

1See,forinstance,
Debono
, I, 2,4, #1,
p. 28.
2I, 2,gysol.,p.31. Onemajor
isthat
ofpredication
here
since
there
canbeanopposition
problem
bonum
ofanact(say,
between
thegenus
See,ibid.,11. 3-34.Albert
(malum).
) andthespecies
attempts
inInII Sent.,
moreexplicitly
d. 40,art.1,ad3,ed.Borgnet,
to answer
thisdifficulty
XXVII,
62$b.
3 Regarding
inclassical
writers
ofcircumstances
thedoctrine
Boethius,
Cicero,
(e.g.,Aristotle,
made
tothem
seeO. Lottin,
PEM
andthereference
,
moralists,bythemedieval
John
Damascene)
IV,SOS-SIJSeeDebonot
nn.34-41
Cf.Deinventione
, I, ch.24-27,
; ed.HMHubbell
I, 3,2,pp.39-42.
(Loeb
Classical
Library,
i9SS)>pp.68-80.
104

11:56:07 AM

to seven main headings: agent or person (quis), the nature of the act,
or whatwas done in the performanceof the act (quid), intention,motive,
or reasonforthe act (cur),the time (quando),the place (ubi), the manner
of performance(quomodo),and finallythe means or instrumentsinvolved
(quibusauxiliis).This enumeration,in effect,is a convenientabbreviation
of Cicero's long catalogue made by Boethius, and used and commented
upon by Albert.1 The Universal Doctor, of course, would know the
six major circumstanceslisted by Aristotle in Book III of the NicomacheanEthicswhich partially coincide with the seven headings just
listed2; but in the presentsection, Albertseems to preferthe testimony
of Cicero and Boethius.
4
A better name for circumstances,Albert points out, is singularia
because the moral philosopher is primarilyconcerned with concrete
actions which are immersedin individuatingconditions,and not simply
withproblematicor rhetoricalquestions.3 Indeed, Albertinsistsupon the
'
differencebetween circumstancesand singulars'.* Strictlyspeaking,
circumstancesare universalor generalconsiderationswhich are extrinsic
to the act, and which give rise to the rhetoricalsyllogismand question.
'Singulars',on the otherhand, are numericallyparticularizeddifferences
which characterize, and attach to, each and any act. One is universal
and extrinsicto the act; the other is real and, as we shall now see, intrinsicto the act's morality.Nevertheless,in deferenceto traditionand
'
forthe sake of convenience, Albert continuesto use the term circum'
stances' when what he reallymeans is singulars'.
Circumstancesinformour acts with the being of moral goodness
or evil ( vituperabile
). They do not constitutethe ontological
(honestum)
nature of the act as such, but they do confer upon it a moral being.
Hence, although extrinsic to the act as such, they are nevertheless
intrinsiccomponentsof its morality:
we saythatthesequalifying
To thefirst
therefore,
(talia)do not
principles
argument,
as it
as itis anact,butrather
theygiveitbeinginasmuch
givebeingtotheactinasmuch
totheact,theyarenot,
is goodor evil.Andforthisreason,
theyareextrinsic
although
orevil.s
extrinsic
tomoralgoodness
however,
andtheyareintrinsic
to virtue
. . .6
. . . givebeingto virtue
. . . circumstances
1Cf.Boethius,
Dedijjerentiis
, IV,PL64,1212D,io^D.
topicis
2 Nic.Ethics
Nicomaque
, t. II
, III, i, 111ia 2-6.Cf.comments
byR.A.Gauthier,
L'thique
Paris:19^9),18-186.
(Louvain,
3I, 3, i, ad4,ad,p. 38;I, 4, 4,ad p. $6.
4I, 3, i, ad i, p. 38,il. 33-38
; I, 4, 4,ad4, p. 56.
s I, 3, i, ad i, p. 38.
6Ibid.
yad3,p. 38.
ioS

11:56:07 AM

It is clear that St. Albert draws a line between the act conceived as a
psychologicalentity,and its moral accidents, so to speak.1 Moralityis
somethingsuperimposed,a qualitytacked on to the natureof an external
act. It does not permeatethe act as in St. Thomas forwhom the 'human
ac is throughand througha 'moral act'.2 At this crucial point, then,
Albert, not unlike many earlier and contemporarythinkers,seems to
regardthe physicaland substantialcore of a humanact as being essentially
infra-moral.The point is worthyof note if only to indicate one more
instancein the enduringhistoryof the fact-value distinction.
The 'circumstance*quid, however, raises some difficulty.
Inasmuch
as it designatesthe kind or natureof the act performed(e.g., adultery,
homicide), then surelyit must connote the very 'substance of the ac?
In his replies to thisobjection, Albertdoes not altogetherdeny thatthis
one circumstanceconnotes the essence or physicalsubtrateof an act.3
But this connotationis secondaryand minimal. He emphasizesthe fact
thatwhat quid reallydesignatesis the moralspeciesof the act, thatis, the
act (together with its material object) as enveloped in, and specified
by, circumstances.It primarilypoints up the moral characterof an act
which is constituted by circumstances. Albert appears unwilling to
allow quid any more than an oblique significationof the physical act
itself.
Good and evil, therefore,accrue to the agent and to his behaviour
not so much fromthe act as such, but fromthe mannerin which the act
is performed.Circumstancesare modesor waysofactingwhichinformthe
act with its moral character:
derives
fromthemanner
The beingofmoralgoodness,
moreover,
(in whichtheact
insucha waythatallthecircumstances
theactitself
rather
thanfrom
isperformed)
may
inBookII oftheEthics
Andthisis madeclearbyAristotle
where
be called'themanner'.
becauseweperform
hesaysthat'we arenotjustandtemperate
acts,
justandtemperate
do (utiustietcasti)'
.4
butbecauseweactasjustandtemperate
persons
1 "... actus
inmoribus,
sedefficitur
extra
etideonon
senonponit
secundum
mores;
potentiam
- InII Sent.,
d. 36,K,art.6,ad3,ed.Borgnet,
ingenere
XXVII,
est,sedextra
genus."
primm
isexplicity
"Utrum
bonum
etmalum
sunt
Ind. 40,A,art.1,p. 624a,theproblem
raised,
S922L.
inmoribus?"
Thefirst
thatbonum
voluntarie
actionis
constitutivae
differentiae
objection
suggests
onthecontrary,
favors
anaccidental
moral
oftheact.Albert,
substantiales
areformae
andmalum
accidunt
actioni."
etmalitia
"Dicendum
character:
quodbonitas
2 Cf.O. Lottin,
dela moralit
desactes
chez
Leslments
saint
Thomas
,
PEMy
II, 482-488;
d'Aquin
XXIV(1922),394-398.
dePhilosophie,
Revue
No-Scolastique
3I, 3,i, adi, p. 38; art.2,ad9,p.41.
4'Ibid.
vtus
, II,3, iio^b
, ed.Marchesi,
p. IV,11.25-26(Nic.Ethics
, art.i, ad 1,p. 38.Ethica
sedetquisicoperatur,
utiustietcasti
estnon,quihecoperatur
etcastus
autem
7-9):"Iustus
operantur."
I06

11:56:07 AM

Albert cites Aristotlewho says that it is not simplythe performanceof

just and temperateacts which make us to be so, but ratherour acting
in the mannerof those who are just and temperate.The ut of ut iustiet
castiin this text signifiesthe mode of circumstance,and not the habitus
of virtue itself.1 Obviously, I do not act already with the virtues of
justice and temperancesince it is precisely these which we are in the
process of tryingto account for. Virtues, at this point, are not the
conditionsof good acts, but the resultof morallygood acts.
Circumstances, then, inform our actions with moral specificity
when they actualize the potency towards goodness (i.e., the bonum
in genere
) which is in these acts. Indeed, it becomes apparentthatAlbert
envisagescircumstancesin the rle of formalcauses of an act's morality.
This formulahas actuallybeen suggestedin the opening argumentsof
Article One: ". . .it does not seem thatthese should be called circumstances,but ratherformsof the act . . . Therefore,it seems thatcircumstancesconstitutethe act as a formalcause".2 Albertdoes not dismissthis
proposal. His only rejoinder is that these circumstancesare not the
intrinsiccauses of the physicalact as such, but of its moral character.3
That is, theyare the formaland intrinsiccauses of naturalvirtue.
In describingcircumstancesas the 'modes' or 'forms' of our acts,
Albert has followed out a line of reasoningsuggestedby the vocabulary
of Philip the Chancellor.4 Moreover, for Albert, the element of cur,
the agent's intention,is included withinthe catalogueof circumstances.s
It is thatfor the sake of which the deed is performed,and so a cause of
that operation. Now, in the De bono, Albert really raises the problem
of intentiononly once; this is in the answer to an objection, and so the
treatmentis very brief and incomplete.6 He mentions two kinds of
intention. First, there is a 'simple intention' which sets up an end,
but which does not take into account the qualityof the means, or of the
end itself, or the proportion between the means and the end. This,
Albert says, is a 'foolish intention' (intentiostuha). The other kind of
intentionis one informedand directed by faith.This is the theological

1I, 4, 2,ad 14,p. go.

2 u.. . nonvidentur
formae
debere
dicicircumstantiae,
sedpotius
actus."-I, 3, 1, #1,p. 37.
- ibid.y
actum
utcausa
faciant
formalis."
#3.
videtur,
"Ergo
quodcircumstantiae
3Seeabove,
III,1, 1, ad20,p. 120.
p. 39.Also,
4Summa
huicenim
bonum
debono
assimilatur
formalis,
, Anton.
, Ms.Padua
1^6,fol.4vb:". . . causa
excircumstantia
velmodus
actionis."
quaeestforma
5 "Similiter
dicit
'cur'dicitintentionem
..." - I, 4, 4, #3,
agentis
p. 54,1. 44. "'Cur'autem
facti
etdicitBoethius,
causa,
est',ut
causam,
propter
quamfactum
quod'ea estuniuscuiusque
- I, 3, 2,p. 39,11. 80-83.
utsolus
haereditatem
occidit,
parentem
possideret."
6 I, 3,2,ad 10,p. 42; #10,
pp.40-41.
I07

11:56:07 AM

notionof intentionprevalentin Albert's time, and whose inspirationwas

Scriptural.The objection itselfrefersto a passage fromSt. Matthew's
Gospel (12,35*): "The good man from his good treasure brings forth
good things".The treasureof a man's heart, continuesthe objection, is
his intention,and it is this which determinesthe moral qualityof acts,
and which God will judge. Albert, moreover, must certainlyhave had
in mind the divinely orientated intention of which St. Paul speaks
, 14, 23): "forall thatis not fromfaithis sin".1
( Romans
Is no other kind of intentionconceivable? The issue at stake once
again, of course, is the realityand degree of naturalmoral goodness in
the moral philosophy of Albertus Magnus. Does Albert admit to an
intentionwhich, thoughnot informedby faith,is neverthelessable to
assessthe value of some end and the relationshipof the means to the end?
Surely the fact that thinkers of antiquity recognized and used this
circumstance cur, which Albert himself has equated with the term
'intention', would suggest that in spite of an absence of positive recognitionby Albert of a purelynaturalintentionin thepresentpassage,
he does not in his own mind exclude the possibility.Yet, with special
reference to this passage, Lottin believes this is absent fromAlbert's
thought.2
The brevityof thisparticularpassagewould seem to reflecthesitancy
on the part of Albert himself. Nevertheless, this same brevity is
significantin its implications.For a complete analysisof his theoryof
intention,Albert refersus to another work, namely to Book II of his
This would seem to indicatethatin his mind the
ScriptasuperSententias.
notion
of
intention,one informedby charityand faith,is
theological
out of place in the present discussion. The circumstancesare formal
causes of virtue. To invoke an intentioninformedby faithand charity
would nullifythe purpose at hand: namely,to renderan account of the
genesis of naturalvirtue. Then too, in a later section of the De bono, he
makes the statementthat the naturalvirtuesmay be distinguishedfrom
the theological perfectionson the basis of naturallyand supernaturally
3 It seems clear, then, thatsome understanding
of
orientatedintentions.
1St.Paul'stext
intheDebono
later
isquoted
, p. 276,11.31-32.
2 Lesvertus
etmdivale,
XX(19^3),33.
dethologie
ancienne
morales
, Recherches
acquises
3 V,4 (Deiustitia
toa
ontheSentences,
headmits
), 2,p. 301,11. 66-70.Inhiscommentary
speciali
sunt
duaeactiones
licetunasit
: "Adaliuddicendum,
intention
natural
morales,
quodtaliactione
abintentione
diversimode
inmoribus
informatur
: estenim
suipartes
diversas
: etquoad
naturaliter
suntduomoventia,
etad duo
et cumibisuntduaeintentiones,
movens:
intentio
principaliter
- InII Sent
duaeactiones."
abduobus
moventia
., d. 40,D, art.1,
moventibus]
sequuntur
[read
ad ed.Borgnet,
XXVII,
637a.
I08

11:56:07 AM

a naturalintentionis operative in the moral philosophyof St. Albert,

a naturalintentionexpressed by the term cur.
Must all the circumstancescoincide in the formationof virtue,or
does one sufficewithout the others? In answer to this problem, Albert
leaves no doubt thatall the circumstancesare involved, althoughone or
more of them may play a prediminantrle.1 At this point he credits
Aristotleand Pseudo-Dionysiuswith the followingdoctrine: "virtusest
. Virtue resultsfroma
ex una totaet sola causa, vitiumautemomnifariam"
total convergenceof all the elements or causes involved, whereas the
corruptionof any one of these sufficesto account forevil. The wording
of this statementis not only a curious amalgam of statementsby two
differentauthors; there is also a distortionin vocabulary.2Dionysius
had said that the good ( bonum
) is characterized by a wholeness or
its
to
with
causes. This is consonantwith Albert's
respect
completeness
own general conception of the good as a virtualwhole. In the present
context he ties it down to virtue which is a specifickind of goodness.
In Albert's mind, then, virtue presupposes a convergence of all the
circumstances.
Up to this point, Albert has analyzedthe intrinsiccauses of virtue;
and the account is structuredin terms of the principles enunciatedin
the preliminarymetaphysicaldiscourse. Both circumstancesand bonum
in genereare analogical varietiesof goodness. Bonumin genere
, resulting
from a fusingof two relativelyindeterminateprinciples, namely, an
action and its proportionateobject, is a natural instance of the good.
In theirreal and concrete setting,circumstancesinhere in the bonumin
genereas in their subject. The same kind of affinitywhich generally
unites act to its correlativepotency obtains here as well. As formalor
modal elementsproportionedto the potency of the act, circumstances
endow it with moral specificity.The goodness which resultsfromthis
'indivision' is the specificgoodness of virtue.
At the same time, we should not forgetthatthese two factorshave
been treatedas abstractions.
Since theyare distinguishableaspects of the
moralact, we are justifiedin abstractingthemfromtheirproperconcrete
1I, 3, i, ad6,p. 38.I,syi, ad22,p. 74,11. 22-24.
2Theformulation
toDionysius
attributed
an
ofthisprinciple,
alone,is really
byAlbert
usually
andDionysian
thethought
is genuinely
ofAristotelian
although
amalgam
vocabulary,
Dionysian.
runs
: "Bonum
exunaettotaestcausa,
Thecomplete
statement
ofthePseudo-Dionysius
malum
- De div
autem
ex multis
et particularibus."
. nom.,
IV,trans.
Saracenus,
,
Johannes
Dionysiaca
I (ed.Ph.Chevallier),
isfound
ofAlbert's
half
intheEthica
Theother
vetusy
298-299.
quotation
enimsimpliciter,
mali
ed.Marchesi,
1. 26 (Nic.Ethics
, II, ,1106b3^): "Boniquidem
p. VI,
w
autem
omnifariam.
I09

11:56:07 AM

settingin order to give each a separate and distinctconsideration. In

reality,however, theyexist only as integratedcomponentsof the individual act.
'
D) The Matter9of Virtue
In his general metaphysicsof the good, Albert had made it clear that
any account of the genesis of goodness must also include efficientand
finalcausation. The finalcause, as an object of desire, moves the efficient
cause which, in turn, moves the matter to a reception of forms.
I which is devoted to an analysisof the efficient
Question Four of Tractatus
causes of virtue shows clearly that Albert is faithfully
adheringto this
Article
of
this
One
same
contains a
however,
principle.
question,
discussionof what is called the ' materiavirtutis
' Having alreadytreated
of the bonumin generewhich is described in termsof 'matter', one might
be surprisedto see the same termand problemscroppingup again. As it
9 its
turnsout, however, the formula'materiavirtutis
in
presentcontextis
a far more comprehensivenotion than that used to describe bonumin
. Furthermore,thisarticlehas been promptedby certainstatements
genere
in the Ethicsof Aristotlein which it is said thatacquired virtuehas to do
with pleasure ( voluptas
, delectationes
) and pain (tristitia).1If such is the
case, then virtue should be situated and studied in referenceto these
connaturalpassions. But since theyare reallythe proper domain (materia)
of fortitudeand temperance,this would seem to limit the definitionof
moral virtueto only these two, therebyexcludingat one blow prudence
and justice fromthe moral order.2 Some sort of clarificationis wanting.
In the formula' materiavirtutis1
, not one, but severaldistinguishable
factorsare welded together. Some understandingof the complexities
involved is given by those texts in the De bonowhich most significantly
contain some allusion to the term materia
' It is found to embrace (a)
the materiadebita, better still, the act itselftaken at the level of bonum
in genere.Yet over and above this, it also includes referenceto (b) the
agent's intentionand the end, and (c) man's appetitivepowers together
with theirconcomitantfeelingsof pleasure and pain.3 At the same time,
1 "Circa
- Ethica
enimettristitias
estconsuetudinalis
vetus
virtus."
, ed. Marchesi,
voluptates
p.
- ibid.,
estcircapassiones
etoperationes."
Hecenim
consuetudinem.
III,li. 11-i2. "Dicoautem
p. VI,II. 11-12.
2Thisistheargument
inI, 4, 1,#2,
proposed
p. 44.
3Ibid.
aliuddicendum,
finis
in moribus
includitur
inmafsol.,pp.44-45.MAd
quodinveritate
teria
etvitiadifferunt
..." - II, 2, 3, ad 3, p. 102."Adtertium
dicendum,
quodvirtutes
per
- I, ,2,ad 3, p. 77. "Adaliuddicendum,
intentionis."
materiam,
quaeestfinis
quodmateria,
estmateria,
nondistinguit
virtutes
velvitia,
sedmateria,
quaetantum
quaeestfinis
potentiae,
I IO

11:56:07 AM

materiavirtutis
is reallysomethingcompletelyindividualized: theconcrete
act immersed in, and clothed by, all its moral circumstances,factors,
and concomitants,and brought to bear upon a proportionateobject.
The formula'materiacircaquam9 is employedas an equivalent.
In the solution to Article One, Albert explains that all acts and
by theircorrespondingobjects. This
powers of the soul are differentiated
is no less true of virtuousactions. The proximateobject of the moral act
is its movingcause or terminus(movens,
finis), and what this does is to
will pervadinganyparticular
of
the
movement
the
indeterminate
specify
most
the
decisive
featurein moralityact. The element of finality
prevails over this entire network. Necessarily, bare matter without
humanacts and
referenceto an end would failto adequatelydifferentiate
1
9
their proportionatequalities. In this way, the terms 'obiectum9
, finis ,
'
'opus', 'materia9,and materiacircaquam9are all intendedto convey the
same functionof determinationand specification.1In mostcases, theend
or terminusis simply the operation itselfas virtuous; in the case of
justice, it is a result (opertm)distinctfromthe operation.2 Regardless
of the type, it belongs to the very nature of these objective ends to
essentiallydeterminethe kind of virtuein each concrete act.3
Now, our external acts are performedthroughbodily organs,and
or feelings(passiones)
at the same time theyare accompaniedby affections
of pleasure and pain. These acts and their concomitantsensationsissue
directly from the sensible soul, that is, from the irascible and conof man's soul. Hence, Albert agrees that virtue may
cupiscible powers
'
et tristitias9
and ' circadelectationes
. But at the
be situated circapassiones9
same time, such statementstaken simply as theystandwould not adequately define the provinceof virtuesince theyignorethe other factors
involved, and especially a referenceto the primaryfactorof the final
cause.* Over and above the mere notion of passion,as we have seen, one
musttake into account the end or object of these appetitivepowers, and
indeed the entire complexus, as signifiedby the term 'materia9
. Hence,
because the specificationof natural moral virtues is not arrived at
merelyby their referenceto the passions, then by speakinganalogically
inmoralibus
forma
sicutestappetitus
velpars
Socrates."
enim
est,utdicit
; finis
appetitus
potissima
- Ill,4, 3, ad 3, p. 192."Sedmateria
estprincipium
circaquamfrequenter
rem,
cognoscendi
- I, 2,
inactibus
estmateria,
inquibus
nontantum
sedetiam
materia
finis."
animae,
praecipue
4,sol.,p. 29,Seealso,III,2,2,ad1, p. 137; II,2,4,ad6,p. log.
1II,i, 3,ad i, p. 90,i. 89-p.91,1.2;ad2,p. 91.
2 V,4, 7,sol.,p. 306.
3I, 4, 2,sol.,p. 49,il. 42-46;ibid.,
ad i,p. 0,1. 70.
4 I, 4, i, ad8,p. 46; I, Syi, ad22,p. 74,11.42-47.
Ill

11:56:07 AM

) we may say that prudence and justice are also referableto

(idifferente!
them.1
Matterof
virtue', therefore,is a comprehensiveformulaintended
to circumscribevirtue in its real and concrete setting. It is, to put it
simply,a comprehensiveview of the virtuousact in all its moralrelations.
Instead of connoting merely one aspect or facet of the moral act, it
signifiesrathera totalityof factorsor complexus. Now, it is from its
nature as an integratedwhole or complexus, and not fromthis or that
particularelement, that the humap act receives its moral specification,
i.e., virtue. In this way virtue reflectsthe conditionof totalitywhich
characterizesthe Pseudo-Dionysiantheoryof the good :
theDivine
FourofConcerning
Names
insaying
. . . andblessed
Dionysius
agreesinChapter
that'thegoodisconstituted
cause,buteviloriginates
bya totalandsingle
omnifariously'
ofvirtue
all thecircumthatforthereality
therearerequired
Bythisit is understood
with
the
act
as
it
is
with
the
end
to
stances
harmonizing
brought bearuponits
together
theresuffices
thecorruption
ofany
object.Forevilandvice,however,
proportionate
oneofthesebyitself.2
The formationof virtueentailsall the circumstancesand the end which
are proportionedto the act. This is consonant with the statementof
Pseudo-Dionysius, and so falls perfectlyin line with the Albertinian
visionof the good as somethingwhole and complete.
Causesof Virtue
E) TheEfficient
By situatingthe virtuousact in a much wider context, Article One has
shown that the formationof moral goodness rests upon a pluralityof
convergingelements: the act itself,end, circumstances,the powers of
man's soul, and the accompanyingaffectionsof pleasure and pain.
The account of the genesisof virtueup to thispoint, however, has dealt
onlywithtwo intrinsiccauses. A complete examinationmustalso include
the active or efficientcauses of morality, and the final cause. The
followingseven articles of Question Four are devoted to an analysisof
the efficientcauses of virtue. In dealing with thisproblem as well as the
notions of free choice, voluntariness,and deliberation, Albert relies
heavily upon the Ethicsof Aristotle. The integrationof this material
worked out at thisparticularpoint in the De bonois reallyan innovation.
In the traditionalAugustininconception of virtue with its emphasis
1I, 4, i, ad2,p. 4g.
2I, 5, i, ad22,p. 74,il. 19-2
g.
Ill

11:56:07 AM

upon the exclusivelydivine origin of virtue,no such causal explanation

was really called for. St. Albert, however, is concerned with virtue
acquired throughour own natural acts, and so the inclusion of these
considerationswithinhis generaldoctrineof virtueis both necessaryand
consistent.
Five positionsare suggestedin Article Two which would call for a
direct supernaturalinterventionto explain the cause of naturalvirtue.1
In his answer to the question raised, however, Albert outlines the
naturalsettingand originof moral virtue.2It is directlyand immediately
caused by the exercise of human acts (ab opere).Within our naturelies
an innate power or abilityto develop these perfections.The capacityis
innate, not the full-fledgedvirtue itselfwhich must be cultivatedby a
repetitionof acts.3 In the solution to Article Two, he goes on to say
thatthispurelynaturalabilityto generatevirtuecannot be conceived as
somethingpurely material and passive. Over and above this, one must
k
distinguishits active and immaterialcomponents: rightchoice (eligentia
recta
) which is combinationof rightreason (rectaratio) and will. Right
reason, Albert tells us, consistsin the correct discernmentof the mean
to be observedin our operations.In otherwords, our inherentcapability
to performvirtuousacts ultimatelystemsfromour facultiesof reasonand
will. Hence, he concludes, natureis not onlya materialor passivecause,
but in some way it is also the efficientcau1 of virtue.
Albertgoes on to saythatthe efficient
cause of virtueis the operation
seen in its dynamicactivity(in agere) and not simplyin its physicalbeing
(in esse) since thissubstratumis reallyoutside the moral order/ A helpful analogyis that of manual labourerswho develop those special limbs
they use in their work to greater and strongerproportionsthanother
men. So too in the case of virtue; its most efficaciouscause (potissima
causa) will be that immediate power of the soul which is called into
play. Operations by their very nature issue in virtue. On the other
hand, the bare performanceof actions withouta conscious attendanceto
the particularconditionsor circumstancesinvolvedwould not reallybe
an immediateefficientcause of virtue.s At most it could only be called
a remote cause. As we shall see, such actionswould, to a certainextent,
be involuntaryby reason of this ignorance. Hence, just as the formal
1I, 4, 2, #!-#,
p. 47.
2Ibid.
ysol.,andad i-ad4, p. 49.
3Ibid.
yad6,p. 49,11.74-78.
4 Seeabove,
pp.100n.i, 106n.i
s I, 4, 2,ad 14,p. so.
"3

11:56:07 AM

cause of virtue requires and presupposes the materialcause, so too the

operation as the efficientcause of virtue, if it is to be an adequate and
directcause of the virtuousact, entailstheformalcause ofcircumstances.
Virtue is describedas being a 'potential whole'.1 Now, in any such
whole no one part completelyconstitutesthe whole. Rather, the first
part or component is necessarilypresupposed by a second, and so on.
It is, as Albert says, in potency to subsequent augmentation: semper
ialis ad sequentem
. Hence, in the generationof virtue many
priormater
distinctacts are required. From the firstoperationa certain disposition
accrues to the soul and likewise this disposition is in potency to the
superimpositionof a second, and so on. In itself,a dispositionlacks the
stabilityand permanence of a virtuous habit.2 It is easily displaced
). But by a process of moral metamorphosis,so to speak,
(jacile mobile
many successive dispositionsare welded into a habit. No definiteand
exact number of operationscan be assignedto thiscumulativedevelopment.
So much for the proximate efficientcause of virtue. In Albert's
attemptto circumscribethis notion of efficientcause operative in the
moral order, the next step is to ascertain the remoteefficientcauses.
or deliberaSuch causes are remotebecause, as in the case ofvoluntariness
of
the
exercise
the
final
human
tion, they precede
operation which
in
the
of
In
issues
formation
itselfimmediately
virtue. his introductory
prefaceto this section, Albert observes that, sincehumanoperationsare
voluntary,then it behooves us to analyze this notion of voluntariness.3
This can be throwninto reliefby startingwith negativeconsiderations,
thatis, by contrastingit to thatwhich is involuntary.ArticlesThree and
Four, therefore,deal with the involuntary;Article Five establishesthe
positivenatureof voluntariness.
In the ensuingdiscussion, Albert relies heavilyupon the doctrine
of Aristotle. There are two kinds of involuntariness.Some acts are
involuntaryby reason of an external violence or compulsion worked
upon the agent.* Other acts are involuntarythroughignorance.s The

1Ibid.
as a "potential
whole"
yart.3, ad 9, p. go; ibid.,ad i.Virtue
(totum
) is a
potestativum
Whiletoocomplex
inthispaper,
itis
theme
theDebono.
toinvestigate
throughout
recurring
that
this
notion
conforms
toAlbert's
oftheontological
ofthe
worth
structure
remarking
conception
SeeI, 2,art.1and2,pp.22-27.
Asapplied
of
tovirtue,
theprinciple
natural
good(bonum
naturae).
isintended
lifeisprogressive
andthat
are
toshowthat
themoral
thevirtues
thetotum
potestativum
moral
organisms.
2I, 4, 3,ad10,p. so,
3Tr.I, qu.4, p. o,11.79-89.
4 Ibid.
yart.3, pp.f1-53.
5Ibid.
yart.4, pp.S4--S7II4

11:56:07 AM

ignorance in question is of the circumstances conditioning the act.

This may also be called 'ignorance of the fac (ignorantiafacti)
according
as the deed ( factum
) is taken in its real and concrete setting,and as
includingthe particularcircumstancesin which it is immersed.1Once
again, then, knowledge of all the circumstancesis an indispensable
conditionof the voluntaryact.
By this contrastto the kindsof involuntariness,Albert is now able
to establishpositivelythe natureof a voluntaryact.2 Two conditionsare
involved: first,the movingprincipleof the act mustbe withinthe agent
himself,and in this way it escapes the impedimentsof the act which is
exteriorlycoerced. Secondly, the agent must be aware of the particular
circumstancesof the action, and in thisway it is opposed to involuntariness throughignorance.
The second section given over to a studyof the remote causes of
virtue, includes another three articles in which special considerationis
devoted to the nature of choice ( prohaeresis
, eligentia
), deliberation
and
difference
consilium
the
between
and
these
Since we are
will.
(
),
with
concerned
virtue
which
is
a
of
the
primarily
species
good, considerations about will and voluntarinessin general are insufficient.
We must
know more in detail about the catenation,as it were, of the individual
acts which precede the formationof virtue. Voluntarygoodness ( bonum
which is the object of the will, lacks determination; it
voluntarium),
is the good as such, the good absolutelyconceived abstractingfromany
particular type or instance.3 The particular acts of deliberation and
choice which immediatelyissue in virtuous operations also have this
good ultimatelyas their end, but not as their immediate and proper
object. Rather, theyare directlyordered to particularinstancesof the
good, i.e., the means to the end. Moreover, in the case of deliberation,
we cannot say just any means, but ratherthose means whose usefulness
are open to question.* Still, we cannot even say all debatable means,
but more precisely those which we discern by reason as being helpful
in the attainmentof the end. We then desire what has been ascertained
as useful.
Choice, then, is not simplya power belonging exclusivelyto the
will, just as the will compenetrateswith reason, so too the element of
reason or intellectis indispensableto choice.5
1Ibid.
yad9,ad 10.p. j.
2I,4, , adi, p. 8. Etilica
ed.Marchesi,
vetus,
, III,3, 111ia 22-23):
p.XIII,11. io-ii (Nic.Ethics
videbitur
essecuius
inseipsocognoscente
". . . voluntarium
ed.,p. i,
[Debono
singula
principium
inquibus
n. 64: singularia],
operatio."
3I, 4, 8,sol.,p. 6.
4I, 4, 6, sol,,p. 61.
5Ibid.
yad,ad10,p. 61.
11S

11:56:07 AM

A final and necessary characteristicof choice is that we be the

4
masters of these actions: actus quorumnos dominisumus'l In all our
moral acts we are sufficient
agents. In this respect, however, one must
and
their resultanthabits.2 Aristotle, writes
between
acts
distinguish
that
the
we are
mastersof our individualoperationsfrom
Albert,has said
the beginning of the act to its completion. As to the habit or virtue
generatedby these acts, however, the same is not entirelytrue. We are
the mastersof habitsat theirinception. But since it is impossibleforus
to ascertainjust how much of a contributioneach operationmakes to the
formationof a habit, then we are to a certain extent 4involuntary'in
their possession.
: Happiness
F) TheFinal Causeoj Virtue
Hitherto, Albert has discussed the material,formaland efficientcauses
of virtue. Even thoughthereare indicationsthata treatmentof the final
cause of virtuewas to be included in the De bono, no distinctquestionor
treatisedealing with this mode of causalityis to be found.3The notion
offinis,however, appears oftenenough in this moral treatise,and so we
are able to arrive at some understandingof the meaningswhich Albert
gives to this term.
In his preliminarymetaphysicsof the good, Alberthad argued that
the good analyticallyincludes a referenceto end: of its very nature,
the good is that which is desired. The notion of end, therefore,is
necessarilyanalogical or, if you will, as flexible and relative a notion
as the good itself.Within any particularorder or perspective,it always
connotes that which is ultimatelywilled or desired.* In general, writes
Albert, one can distinguishtwo kinds of final causes: a proximate or
immediateend which is intendedin one act, and the remoteor ultimate
end intendedin all, or in a series of acts.s This is true both of the order
of natureas well as of the moral order. In the latter,the proximateend
or object would be that complexus known as the ' matterof virtue' or
materiacirca quam, the human act seen in all its dynamic complexity,
1I, y6,sol.,p. 6i, i. 30.Seealso,I, 4, 2, #12,
himself
writes:
p. 48.Aristotle
"Operationum
- Ethica
adfinem
domini
abinitio
vetus
enim
sumus."
, ed.Marchesi,
usque
quidem
p. XVIII,1. 26
isalsoquoted
Damascene
asthesource
ofthisstatement:
, III,8, 1114b31-32).
(Nic.Ethics
John
I, S*7, p. 62,il. f6ff.
2I, 4, 8,ad,pp.65-66.
3Seebelow,
p. 117n. 3.
4 ". . . finis
inquocumque
volitum
ultimum
. . - I, 4, 7,ad13,p. 64.
appellatur
5I, 4, i, sol.,pp.44-45.
116

11:56:07 AM

thevariousvirtuesand vices. The remote

whichspecifiesand differentiates
end, which is not intendedmerelyin one act or in one virtue, is man's
finalend: happinessor beatitude.
Another distinction, partially overlapping the first, is that of
'End
'end of the ac ( finisoperis
) and 'end of the agent' (finisoperantis).1
of
a
In
the
of the act' signifiesthe immediateobject
particularaction.
case of bonumin genere
, it would be the proportionateobject ( debita
materia
) of the act in question. In some cases, such as adultery,an act is
malumin genere
, and regardlessof the agent's intentionort)ther circumbecause the 'end of the act' is itself
it
be made
can
never
stances
' End of the good on the other
hand, obviouslydesigagent',
somethingevil.
nates the agent's motive or intention. In contrastto 'end of the act',
it usually connotes a more ultimategoal. Virtue, according to Albert,
maybe regardedeitheras the 'end of the act' or the 'end of the agent'
dependingupon which way we choose to look at it.2
Since thereis no questionor section in the De bonodevoted to man's
last end, it is difficult
to reconstructadequatelyAlberts' thoughton this
the
earlier
Tractatus
de naturaboni, the De bonowas to include
Like
point.
such a treatment.The Preface to Question Four clearly proposes this
move: aftera detailed analysisof the naturalvirtues,we are to expect a
"3
disquisitionupon "theend and perfectionof virtuewhich is happiness.
Both works,however, were abandonedin an incompletestateand so fall
short of this proposed endeavor. Consequentely,in the De bonowe are
leftwith only a few scatteredand cursoryremarksabout this.
Whether we choose to call it happiness ( felicitas
) or something
is
not
our
Albert
in
one
concern.*
text,
else,
present
Apparently
says
precisionsin doctrine and terminologywere to be made later on. Inasmuch as it is the end, it is the absolute good ( bonumhonestum
), and so
There
are
several
howits
own
desired
for
sake.
statements,
something
between
as
that
in
which
Albert
ever,
)
happiness( felicitas
distinguishes
to which the virtues are essentiallyordered, and 'eternal beatitude'
- man's
supernaturaldestiny which is not possible withoutgrace and
s
meritoriousworks. Felicitasviae, on the other hand, is another phrase
used by Albert which seems to connote that kind of happiness known
or experiencedby non-Christianthinkers( philosophi
) who philosophized
withoutthe benefitof faith,and who lacked grace.
1I, 2,6,ad6, p. 33.
2I, i, ad2-ad,3,p. 72.
3h 4, p. 43il - 3-* II, i, , sol.,p. 94,li. 36-39.
5I, 4, 7, #13,
p. 63; III,i, i, ad31,p. 121.
II7

11:56:07 AM

There are additional texts in the De bonowhich point to a fundamental relationshipobtainingbetween the virtuesand this concept of
happiness.1Happiness, we read, is a perfectionbut a dynamicperfection
(actus) of the soul which is consequent upon the possession of all the
perfectedvirtues. The presence of one complete and perfectedvirtue
does not suffice,but rather the possession of each and every natural
virtueis requiredin the attainmentofhappiness.In thisrespect,prudence
plays an important rle. With reference to happiness, Albert says
that it enjoys"a 'more excellent ac because it guides us to the primum
bonum
, God, whereinthe greatesthappinessis found.2Nevertheless,not
just prudence, but all the virtues, are essentially ordered to, and
consummatedin, happiness.Happiness,then,is trulythe end and perfection of naturalvirtuesin relationto which theystandas so manynecessarysteps or means.
The texts seem to show that Albert understood quite well the
Aristotelianidea of eudaimoniathroughand in the virtuouslife; but for
all this, the De bonogives only a sketchyidea about the finalend of man.
In spite of this reticence, however, a significantfeatureof Albert's
thoughtcomes to light. It concernshis method of procedure. Happiness
is that in which the virtues culminate. As so many necessarysteps or
meansin the acquisitionofhappiness,theirtreatmentwould seem logically enough to precede the analysisof happiness.
IV CONCLUSION
At this point Albert's account of the genesis of natural moral virtue
terminates.The next question, Question V of TractatusI, rounds out
general moral considerationswith an enquiryinto the essence of virtue
in general. The preceding articles, beginningwith bonumin genereand
ending with the passages on choice and deliberation, are clearly an
attemptto render an intelligibleaccount of the origin of the humanly
acquired virtues. This undertakingis an innovation. The Augustinin
definitionof virtue which attributedall moral excellence to a divine
infusionmade such an enquiryseem superfluous.St. Albert, however,
distinguishesbetween the order of acquired perfectionsand those which
are divinelyinfused; and since the formeraccrue to man throughhis own
agency,an investigationinto theiroriginis in order.
In his account, Albert draws upon an establishedvocabulary; and
1III, 3,ad8,p. 209,il. 29-30;IV,i, 4, ad7,p. 234,11.86-89; 2,ad 2,p. 80.
2IV,i, 2,ad 16,p. 226.Prudence
- ibid.,
is "essentialis
ad 19,p. 226,I. 91.
parsfelicitatis"
118

11:56:07 AM

yet his concern for methodological rigor can be seen in his program
to interpretand to integratethese inherited distinctionsin terms of
principlesenunciatedin his preliminarymetaphysicsof the good. Thus,
bonumin genereis a firstinstance of goodness grounded in the natural
proportion between an act and its object. Viewed in this light, it
enjoys a certain unity,but it still remains in potency to furthercompletion and actualizationthroughthe formaldeterminationsof circumstances. The resulting goodness is that of virtue which, as Albert
demonstratesin later sections of the De bono, manifestsitselfin various
modalities. In this way, bonumin genere
, circumstancesand, of course,
established
as
are
virtue,
genuinethoughanalogicalvarietiesof goodness.
The enquiry,moreover, is causal, and in this way conformsto the
principle establishedearlier by Albert that any enquiry into goodness
must be framed in terms of the four Aristotelian causes. Elements
traditionallyincluded in moral treatises fall into this framework.
Bonumin genereand circumstancesemerge as the intrinsic causes of
virtue. Incomplete expressionsof this doctrine, to be sure, are found
in Philip the Chancellor, but the consecutive and unifiedelaboration
of this theory originateswith Albert himself. For the firsttime too,
room is made fora briefbut distinctivetreatmentof the rle of circumstances. A new treatiseis also devoted to the efficientcause of virtue.
Here the inspirationis quite evidentlyAristotelian,and Albert relies
versionsof
heavilyupon the doctrineand vocabularyof the fragmentary
Ethics.Th incompletionof the De bonorobs us of a
the Nichomachean
more thoroughtreatmentof the finalcause of virtue.
This whole section, indeed, exemplifiesthe naturalistand humanist
strainsin Albert's ethical theory. Critical of a univocally theocentric
conception of moral worth, Albert attempted to enlarge the area of
humanmoral efficacyby makingman the responsibleagent in the generation of his own naturalexcellences. Though a certainunresolvedgap is
noticeable in his conceptionof the physicalstructureof the humanact in
relationto its moral determinations,it is still true to say thatfor Albert
nature, throughits human potentialities,becomes a real and significant
cause of moral values.
,
of Windsor
University
Windsor, Ontario, Canada.

119

11:56:07 AM

On The Genuine
Summule

Text of Peter
of Spain's
logicales

L. M. DE RIJK
IV The LecturaTractatuum
by Guillelmus Arnaldi, Master of Arts at
Toulouse (i 23-44). With a Note on the Date of Lambertof Auxerre's
Summule*
i - The Manuscripts
It has been Msgr. Grabmann'sgreat merit to have found an important
numberof commentarieson Peter of Spain's so-called Summule
,
logicales
he
. Unfortunately
partlydatingfromas earlyas the thirteenthcentury1
failedto finda similarwork, of a ratherearlydate indeed, whichhas been
handed down to us in no less than six manuscripts.Only two of them
give the correct name of the author. I found the most precious copy
of this work during my visit to the Biblioteca Provincialat Tarragona
(Spain) in October 19682. It is numberedCod. 27 and was described by
Jos Lpez de Toro in his catalogue*:
Arnaldi:
Glosas
sobre
lostratados
dePedro
Cod. 27 (s.n.): Guillermo
Vit.$o hoj.
Hispano.
sincubierta
s. XIV.
letr.franc,
Presumably,the date is to be correctedintos. XIII, probablyabout 1280.
The codex consists of 2 folios. Arnaldi's commentaryis found on
ff. ir-ir. Folios iv and 2r contain a set of logical notes writtenby
a later hand thanthatwhich wrote the commentary.The firstnote runs
as follows:
debet
esseprior
omnibus
Contra
Dicitactor
scientiis.
: iliascientia
debet
esse
quoddialetica
prior
adicitur
sed
adicitur
eritprior.
;
(/); gramatica
primo
ergo
gramatica
queprimo
Arnaldi's commentaryhas the followingincipit:
* Thepreceding
ofthisstudy
inthisJournal
6 (1968),pp.1-34;69-101,
and
parts
appeared
7 (1969),PP-8-61.
1SeehisHandschriftliche
andFunde
zuden
desPetrus
des
philosophischen
Forschungen
Hispanusy
Schriften
XXI(f 1277)in:Sitzungsberichte
derPhilos.
derBayer-Hist.
Johannes
Papstes
Abteilung
spteren
zuMnchen,
derWissenschaften
Akademie
ischen
1936Heft
9 [137pp.].
2I want
thanks
toMrFernando
Director
oftheBiblioteca
toexpress
Provincial
Conde,
mysincere
togivemealltheinformation
andcooperation
I needed.
atTarragona,
whowaskind
enough
3Contribucin
dela Biblioteca
Provincial
deTarragona
al conocimiento
:
, Tarragona
1936,pp.148-191
delosmanuscritos.
Relacin
I 20

11:56:15 AM

intertioDe Anima
f. ira: SicutdicitPhilosophus
estactusrationis
seuoperatio
, triplex
actusestsimplices
ut quid
intellectus,
quodidemest.Primus
aprehendere,
quiditates
esthomo,quidestanimal.
illassimplices
estcomponere
Secundus
( !).
quiditates
apreensas
Tertius
estdecurrere
a magisnotisad minus
nota1.
It ends as follows ($i rb) :
Nuncautemcontinuum
in infinitum
estin potentia
divisibile
et estin potensia
(!) ad
actumpermixtum
Et
ad
actum
et
ideo
non
est
frustra
visad
ideo
potensie.
purum
quam
actumnonreducatur,
ad actumpermixtum
sedsicutestinpotensia
ita
purum
potensie,
debetreduciad actumpermixtum
scilicetquodadhuchabeas(!) potentiam
potensie,
dividendi
ininfinitum.
XPSlaudetur
habetur
operisquiafinis
sit
iste
scritor
liber.
liber,
(!) crimine
Explicit
Then the explicitis read:
PetriYspanide ordinepredi
catorum
Expliciunt
(!).
glosulesupratractatus
magisti
toloseinartibus.
arnaldi
quasglosulas
composuit
guillermus
regens
//etdictek
magister
oes(?), quasipsemet
demarroncules
glosulesuntbernardi
scripsit.
The same hand wrote two other colophons:
Hie liberestscriptus
sitbenedictus
qui scripsit
Tresdigitiscribunt
necceteramembra
quiescunt.
NonvideatChristum
istum.
quidquis(!) furabitur
Tonifibroli
irodatur
(!) graciastocri.Amen.
A somewhatlater hand added the incomplete note :
Expliciunt
(!).
glosulesupratractatus
petriyspanide ordinepredicatorum
magisti
quasglosulas
compilavit
Anothercopy is foundin the same libraryunder nr. 23 (47). This codex
is anonymousand contains72 folios. It dates fromabout 1260. Only the
commentaryon the firstseven treatisesis given. (The text breaks off
in the discussion of the fallacysecundum
.) Afterthe
petitionem
principii
in
eo
.
.
sit
a
later
hand
added :
explicit(.
quod
ydemptitasconstructions)
Istalecturatractatuum
estftatris Bernardide Muoncula(l) quam emita Jratre
bg vilardel octosolidis.So this codex apparentlybelonged to one frater
Bernardus,who bought it froma companion and afterwardsfortunately
made a complete copy himself,which has been preserved in cod. 27.
This copy was made from a manuscriptwhich belonged to a family
differentfromthat of all our other copies, as may appear fromthe fact
2Forthecomplete
textoftheintroductory
seebelow,
part,
pp.130-134.
I 2I

11:56:15 AM

that MS Tarragonalj containsa divisiogeneralisof Peter's text which is

failingin all the other copies.1
Both manuscriptsoriginally formed part of the library of the
Cistercian monasterySantes Creus, near Tarragona. For that matter,
the codices 1-169 of the Biblioteca Provincial at Tarragona all come
fromSantes Creus and were writtenforthe greaterpart in the South of
France.2
A third copy is found in the Biblioteca Nacional in Madrid under nr
1070. This fourteenthcenturymanuscripthas been described in the
printed catalogue3. Our work is here entitled (f.3r) : Questiones
super
sumulaslogicalesPetri Yspani. It opens (f.3ra) with Ut vultphilosophus
in tertiode anima and ends (f. i i6rb) with the same words as Tarragona
ita debetreduciad actumpermixtum
27:...
, scilicetquod adhuc
potentie
habeat potentiamdividendiin infinitum
. The next two lines have been
erased. The colophon runsas follows:
LAUSTIBISIT CHRISTEQUONIAMLIBEREXPLICITISTE
EST <DE IURE>CMAGISTI
GUILLERMI
THEOBALDI
CUI DEBET<QUI>cMAGISNOMENCLERICIQUIAZIBALDI.
It is ratherenigmatic,indeed. This much seems to be certain,that
Theobaldimaybe takenas a scribal errorforArnaldi.
A fourthcopy has been preserved as cod. 1077 in the libraryof the
Muse Calvet at Avignon.It seems to date fromabout the middle of the
thirteenthcentury and consists of 2 folios. The incipitand explicit
are the same as those of Tarragona27 (except for the opening word ut
instead of sicut
). According to the catalogue* the original colophon
was found: ista lecturaest composita
a magistroG. Arnaldi. These words
are now partlyerased and a nineteenthcenturyhand wrote: ista lectura
estcomposita
a magistro
G. On the top of f. 1r is read procommuni
biblioteca
Predicatorum
Avenionensium
Fratrum
.
I found a fifthcopy in the Vatican Library, Vat. Lat. 3022. This copy,
too, was written about the middle of the thirteenth century.
1Seebelow,
p. 131f.
2SeeJ.Domnguez
dela Biblioteca
Manuscritos
Pblica
deTarragona.
Extracto
deBoletn
Bordona,
AosLlII-LIV
Tarragona.
Argueolgico
(19^3-^4).
3Inventario
dela Biblioteca
demanuscritos
Nacional
III,Madrid
1957.
general
4 Catalogue
desbibliothques
deFrance
desmanuscrits
, Dpartements
(Octavo
series),
gnral
publiques
XXVII(1894;byL.-H.Labande).
122

11:56:15 AM

On folio 2r of this codex a number of straynotes and scribal exercises

is found, while f.2v contains two astronomicaldrawings. A later hand
wrote between them in big capitals: VILANOVA.
Unfortunately
misled by this name and the erasure in MS. Avignon 1077 and unacquainted with the Tarragona copy I supposed that this commentary
was of the hand of the famousphysicianArnaldof Vilanova1. However,
the copy foundin Tarragonaputs the authorshipof Guillelmus Arnaldi
beyondall doubt.
On f.2v the possessor's mark is found2: pertinetreverendomagistro
sacripalacij. Jacobus Egidii (= Jaime Gil) was a
Jacoboegidij magistro
Spanish Black Friar. This fiftheenth
centurytheologian was sub-lector
of the conventof Barcelona in 1426 and lector in 1434. He had obtained
his master's degree in theologyat Montpellier. In 1436 he was given a
chair of theologyat the Cathedralschool of Tortosa.3 As is known, this
codex belonged to the Ancientstock of the Vatican manuscriptsentered
into this librarybefore 1600. The Spanishoriginof its fifteenth
century
possessor would make us thinkthat it came from the North of Spain,
but Jaime's stayin Montpellierseems to make its French originno less
possible. I thinkit most probable thatlike the Tarragonamanuscriptsit
was written in the South of France and brought into the Dominican
Conventof Barcelonaat a ratherearlydate.
The work is complete here and found on ff. 3ra-83va. The same
hand added the colophon: Hie liberestscriptus.qui scripsitsit benedictus.
Laus tibisit Christe
, quoniamliberexplicitiste. Aftersome eightblank lines
the same hand goes on with the firstpages of a treatiseoftheliberalarts
in the formof a divisioscientiarum.
I give the openinglines:
inprincipio
suemetaphisice,
omneshomines
natura
sciredeside<U>tvultPhilosophus
Istapropositio
ranti.
rationibus
declarari.
potestmultis
Primosic.Omneimperfectum
Sedhomoinprimasuicreatione
estquid
apptit
perfici.
et eius perfectio
est scientia.
scientiam
imperfectum,
Ergoomneshomines
appetunt
Maiorpatetper Philosophum
naturaliter.
PrimoPhisicorum
, ubi dicitquod modus
sicutturpepulcrum
et muliervirum.Minorpatetper Philosophum
apptitformam
PrimoDe anima
esttamquam
tabularasain
, quidicitquodanimainprimasuicreatione
autemscientiis
et virtutibus.
est,perficitur
qua nichildepictum
1SeeL. M.deRijk,
OnTheGenuine
Text
s Summule
VIVARIUM
6 (1968)
ofSpain1
logicales,
ofPeter
[pp.1-34],
p. 34.
2I owethisinformation
to thekindness
ofProfessor
Anneliese
MaieroftheVatican
Library.
3SeeR.Creytens
GilO.P.in:Archivm
Fratrum
10(1940),
Praedicatorum
O.P.,Lescritsde
Jacques
[pp.i8-168],
p. i^8.
123

11:56:15 AM

So seven rationesare given. The anonymousauthor begins the proper

work by invokingGod's assistance (83vb-84ra) :
in eiusnarratione
Sedquiasecundum
actorem
De causis
omneslingue,
ideode
deficiunt
eiuslaudibus
sui
humiliter
ut
bonitatem
supersedeo
ipsum
quoadpresens,
explorandoper
in mediodirigat,
ineffabilem
nostroassitprincipio,
ad finemincepti(84)operis
me producat.
laudabiliter
Divinoigiturimplorato
auxilioad philosophie
congitionem
accedamus.
aliqualiter
There is a set of interestingdefinitionsofphilosophia(84) :
autemphilosophia
Diffinitur
<sub>nomine
'scientie'
MS)quandoque
(scientia
4
'artis
' et 'metodi'quandoque
subnomine
,
',
; quandoque
'philosophie'
sapientie
quandoque
quandoque
' doctrine*
.
, quandoque
'discipline'
esthumanarum
AbYsidorosicdiffinitur:
certacognitio
cum
philosophia
divinarumque
Ab Ysaacsic diffinitur1:
est
coniuncta.
assimilatio
hominis
ordinevivendi
philosophia
cumcognitione
et amorsapientie
creatoris
eiusdem.Vel magistraliter
sic:
operibus
cuiusradixestamarssima,
estarborarduissima,
fructus
veroeiusdulcissimus
;
philosophia
amari
tudinem
nongustabit.
et quiradieis
de fructus
dulcedine
abhorruerit,
a Macrobio:scientia
sic diffinitur
estnobilispossessio
Subnomine'scientie'
animi,per
sacrispenetralibus
mentis
affectus
eternedilectionis
quamnobisthesaurus
ignascitur,
oculuscordisdeliciosus
hocest:per quammensdiescitin tenebris,
anime
acquiritur,
in
hec
in
celestem
inmortalem
caducum
in
hominem
terrenum,
mortalem,
<para)2disus,
actoritate
convertit.
sic diffinitur:
deumdeificemutationis
scientiaest
Magistraliter
nobilispossessioanime,que distributa
et avarum
per partessuscipitincrementum
cito
nisi
elabitur.
MS)
(!)
dedignata
(designate possessorem puplicetur
a Boetio; scientia
sicdiffinitur
esteorumque veresuntsiveque
Subnomine
'sapientie'
certacomprehensio
sortiuntur
substantiam
veritatis.
inpermutabilem
a Tullio:arsest(collectio)preceptorum
ad unumfinem
Subnomine
'artis'sicdiffinitur
finitum
sic: ars est infinitatis
Sed magistraliter
rationis
tendentium.
compendium,
natureconsilium,
minimam
imperiosum
quamsi perconsideres
insignemiraculum,
si veroad subiecta(substantia
invenies
invenies
MS) applicesmaximam
quantitatem,
potestatem.
sicdiffinitur:
estquidamhabitus
'doctrine'
ab oredoctoris
Subnomine
doctrina
progrein
animo
habitm
Sed disciplina
auditoris.
diensconsimilem
esthabitus
derelinquens
ex doctrina
doctoris.
inanimoauditoris
derelictus
est brevisvia errores
et
Visisistisdicamusde methodo.lindemethodus
devi<t)ans
tates
obliqui derelinquens.
Then follows an extensive divisiophilosophie
, which abruptlyends at
the end of f. 84vb.
The sixth copy of Guillelmus Arnaldi's commentaryon the Summule
has been preservedin cod. 999 of the Bibliothque de la Ville at Bor1Cp.,however,
Isaac'sdefinition
Dedivisione
Gundissalinus,
byDominicus
quoted
philosophie
hominis
estassimilado
creatoris
secundum
virtutem
ed.Baur,
humanitatis.
operibus
p. 6: philosophia
2 Hereis a littleholein theparchment.
124

11:56:15 AM

deaux1. This anonymouscopy is complete and occupies ff.ira-7va.

It has the explicit
ita debetreduciad actumpotencie
, scilicetquod
adhuc habeas (!) potenciamdividendiinnitum(!) et terminatur
lectura
The same hand added:
tractatuum.
VIRGOFECUNDATALAUDETURET INTEMERATA
NAMMEAPRINCIPIA
IUVITCOMPLEREMARIA.
Anotherlater hand added :
metibiconcessum
me
( ?)servatuereguberna
pietate
superna
Angelequi meusescustos
cunctastia( ?)
sittibicurameimichiprospere
There are two notes added by the respectiveowners:
inffronssadesio.
isteliberestpetri( + rasura)
qynati
traversi0
emia dominopetroJohannis
Isteliberestmeifratris
Johannis
quemrealiter
*
servientis
etad effitum
solvi.
( !) S. pretium
All these manuscriptswere writtenin the South of France and show the
characteristicsof the scriptoriaof thatregion.
2 - The author
was writtenby a Guillelmus
No doubt, this LecturaTractatuum
, or Guillermus, Arnaldiwho taughtthe liberal artsat Toulouse.2 As a matterof fact
I founda teacherof thatname in a numberof documentsconcerningthe
county of Toulouse. Magister Guillelmus (or Willelmus) Arnaldi is
or Lantariior Lantarum
mentionedas archidiaconus
Lantarensis
( Lantawas a
at
the
East
of
and
as
a
master
of
Toulouse
Toulouse)
parish
during
i 238-44. In the Cartularium
of RaymondVII, preservedin Paris,Archives
nationalesJ.J. i 9, he is mentionedseveral timesas a subscriber(I quote
fromthe copy Paris, B.N. Lat. 6009):
W. Arnaldi
archidiaconus
Lantarensis,
1238:Magister
(p. 344).
W. Arnaldi
archidiaconus
Lantarii,
1242:Magister
(p. 264).
W. Arnaldi
archidiaconus
Lantarensis,
1242:Magister
(p. 359).
i aprii1243:Magister
Guillelmus
Arnaldi
Archidiaconus
Lantarum,
(p. 216).
W. Arnaldi
archidiaconus
Lantarii,
1244:Magister
(p. 211).
The same documents are found in the Cartularium
of the Counts of
1Seethecatalogue
desbibliothques
desmanuscrits
deFrance.
(Catalogue
gnral
publiques
Dpartments.
XXIII(1894,byJ.Couderc).
(Octavo
series),
2Seeabove,
p. 121.
12S

11:56:15 AM

Toulouse, preserved in Aix-en-Provence,Bibliothque Mjanes, cod.

631 (671). Our entries are found on f. 44 v (1244); f. 3r (1242);
f. 63V (1238); f. 66r (1242).
That our authortaughtat the younguniversityof Toulouse appears
froma letter of a number of mastersof that universitywho informthe
Papal Legate Guy, bishop of Sora, that Count Raymond of Toulouse
had paid them their salariesin due time. Among the subscribersis our
Guillelmus:
et
Sicardus,canonicus
Narbonensis,
4, 1239)... magister
(letterdatedFebruary
tatemagisti.1
de eademUniversi
G. Arnaldi,
archidiaconus
Lantarensis,
magister
Since we have good reasonsto assume thatthisletterconcernsa payment
of salaries in arrearsfor the years 1235-3j2 Arnaldi's mastershipcan be
dated back up to 1235.
So Guillelmus Arnaldi's stayat Toulouse is well evidenced for the
years 1235-44. From the latteryear onwards his name does not occur a
single time in the Toulouse documents^. The possibilityis not to be
excluded that our Guillelmus Arnaldi became bishop of Carcassonne
Arnaldi
in 1248. As a matterof fact this bishop, named Guillelmus
, had
ecclesiaeCarcassonae
been archidiaconus
, as appars fromthe comparisonof
:
two documentsfrom 1248, published in Gallia Christiana
inanimam
eiusGuillelmus
, col. 4^0 B: . . . Juravit
VI, Instrumenta
prodomino
episcopo
Fideiusserunt
nihilominus
archidiaconus
Radulfi
majorecclesiaeCarcassonnae.
proeo
Pro
et
sacrista
archidiaconus
ecclesiae
R.
.
Arnaldi
.
.
Guillelmus
ejus
capitulovero
ante
archidicaconus
etfidejussit
Arnaldi
idemGuillelmus
juravit
proeo dominus
episcopus
dictus.
anno1248
nonmajori,Guillelmo
occurrit
VI, col. 8868: Ex archidicono,
episcopus
excambium
factum
a
senescal
CarConsilio
cum
menseaugusto,
capituli
quo probavit
cassonae
jussuLudovici
regis. . .
However, it is not certainthatbishop GuillelmusArnaldi,who had been
archidiabeforeand is to be distinguishedfroma Guillelmus
archidiaconus
conusmaior, was our Guillelmus Arnaldi who taughtthe liberal arts in
Toulouse and whose stayat Toulouse is evidenced forthe years 1235-44.
For that matterthe name Arnalduswas quite frequentin the South of
1See MarcelFournier,
en
desuniversits
leur
etprivilges
Lesstatuts
depuis
jusqu
franaises
fondation
deToulouse),
d'Orlans,
d'Angers,
p. 447.
1789I (Universits
2SeeHeinrich
bis14OO.
Berlin
derUniversitten
desMittelalters
Denifle
1885"
O.P.,DieEntstehung
Graz1956),
pp.232-233.
(reprint
2I haveinvestigated
which
havebeen
Toulouse
thirteenth
allthedocuments
concerning
century
ofthesedocuments,
Foran enumeration
andAix-en-Provence.
in Paris,Toulouse
preserved
de
Vhistoire
deFrance
ourelatifs
descartulaires
seeHenri
(Manuels
Stein,
gnrale
Bibliographie
franais
historique
IV),Paris1907,pp.^28-^32.
bibliographie
126

11:56:15 AM

France (and the North of Spain), indeed, and so was that of Guillelmus
Arnaldi
. Thus in the second document mentioned above a Guillelmus
ArnaldiGuitand a GuillelmusArnaldiMilossaare found among the subscribers. If your Guillelmus Arnaldi is to be identifiedwith the bishop
of Carcassonne (August 1248 - September 4th, i2)1 we know the
exact date of his death2.
3 - Other logical works by Guillelmus Arnaldi
Anothermanuscriptof the Muse Calvet, cod. 1089, datingfromthe end
of the thirteenthcentury,contains commentarieson the works of the
logica vetus.At the end of the Perihermeneiascommentarythe explicit
is found (f. 49 ra) : Explicitscriptum
edituma
superlogicm(!) veterem
stands
for
a
No
Guillelmo
As
matter
G
GAr.
Arnaldi.
Ar.
doubt,
magistro
of fact there followsa commentaryon De sexprincipiisof ps.-Gilbertde
*
de la Porre (ff. ora-6vb) with the explicit
: Explicitscriptum
magisti
Vitalissuperlogicamveterem
, where Vitalishas been writtenin rasuraand
originallywas followed by the letters Ar. The commentaryon De sex
seems to belong to the corpuscopied before.
principiis
This scriptum
superlogicamveterem
opens with a commentaryon
a
introduced
divisio
scientiarum
(ira-iorb):
by
Porphyry'sIsagoge,
in tertioDe Anima
noster
Ira: SicutdicitPhilosophus
intellectus
estquolibet
privatus
adintelliMS)intelligibili
MS)inactu,sedestinpotentia
(quodlibet
passiva
(intelligibile
Namintellectus
Et hocpotestsic declarari.
noster
quodlibet
gendum
per
intelligibile.
differentiam
et neutrum
sibideterminat;
se habetad quodlibet
quiaqua
intelligibile
ratione
sibiunumdeterminaret,
etreliquum,
scilicet
omniaalia.Quodest
eademratione
impossibile.
modisexponunt,
sedita (inMS)planius
iorb:Aliimultis
est.Inhocenimterminatur
sententia
lectionis
tertius
Deus.Incipit
liberPredicaetperconsequens
liber.Laudetur
mentorum.
The second part is a commentaryon Aristotle'sCategories
(iorb-2vb).
It has the followingincipit:
Isteliberdividitur
in trespartes,
scilicetin Antepredicamenta
iorb:Equivoca
et
dicuntur.
Predicamenta
et Postpredicamenta
Primain
Tertia:Dicitur
autem.
. Secundaibi: Singulum.
sunttria.Estenimibi moduspredicandi,
ordo.
tres,quiain Predicamentis
substantia,
Etsecundum
hochabettrespartes. . .
sententia
huiuslibri.Deus
2vb.... Adaliudpatetsolutio.In hocenimterminatur
laudetur.
liberPeriermenias.
Incipit
1Forthis
seeGallia
Christiana
VI,860-1028;
411-475.
bishop,
Appendix,
2There
isalsoa Guillelmus
anddiedMay29,1242atAvignonet
Arnaldi
O.P.,whowasaninquisitor
dessources
dumoyen
SeeUlysse
Chevalier,
(Haute
ge.Bio-bibliographie
Garonne).
Rpertoire
historiques
NewYorki960)I, col.1929.
(reprint
127

11:56:15 AM

The thirdpart containsa commentaryon ?erihermeneias(2vb-49ra):

Primum
consti
tuereetc. Secundum
constituere.
2rb:Primum
oportet
oportet
quod]vult
estoperatio
Unaestsimplicium
tertioDe anima,triplex
intellectus.
Philosophus
quidiTertiaest discursus
secundaapprehensarum
ad contatumapprehensio,
compositio.
ad primam
scilicetde simplicibus
De his que pertine<n)t
clusionem.
operationem,
De hisautemqueadsecundam,
Libro
Predicamentorum.
deterdeterminatur
quiditatibus,
minate*
libroisto.De hisautemquead tertiam,
novam.Etsicpatet
pertotamlogicam
debetordinari
Predicamentorum.
Ideocontinuatur
postLibrum
quodisteliberinmediate
sic. (49ra).
Next nine lines are foundof a text which opens as follows (49 ra):
tertioDe animaobiectum
intellectus
est(See below,p. 128).
Secundum
Philosophum
Folio 49 rb is blank and f. 49 v containsonly the wordsformaestcompositum etc. and two drawings. On f. ora the same hand that wrote the
foregoingtreatises, goes on with a commentaryon De sex principiis
(^ora-6^vb) :
Primo
Posteriorum
etetiam
inprincietc.Secundum
estcompositioni
: Forma
ora
Philosophum
cumeiuscausascognoscimus.
Causeautem,
scirearbitramur
unumquodque
pioPhisicorum
suntquatuor,scilicetefficiens
et finalis
et materialis
et
ut vultibidemPhilosophus,
dicunt
fuit
Aristotiles
Huiusautemlibricausaefficiens
formalis.
Quidam
quod
ignoratur.
AliiautemdicuntquidfuitAlpharabius,
commentator
in modoprocedendi.
utvidetur
Porretanus.
Sedde causanonestmagna
Aliidicunt
LibriDecausis.
vis,
quodGuilabertus
nonminus
valet(usqueMS)1.
scientia
namquecumque
( !) fecerit,
The greater part of these texts are also found in another manuscript
of the Muse Calvet at Avignon, cod. 1078. It dates from about the
same time as cod. 1089 and the copy is anonymous:
thegeneral
isfound
inAvignon
without
which
j ra.^ra; theIsagoge
prologue
commentary,
1089,ff.Ira-2rl).
ontheCategories
7ra.!8rb;thecommentary
onthePerihermeneias.
thecommentary
i8va-36va:
tertioDe anima
obiectum
intellectus
estuniversale.
; Secundum
36va-37^13
Philosophum
Namcumintellectus
iudicat
Sedprobatur
possitintelligere
singulare.
quodintellectus
illorumintelligit.
Cum igiturintellectus
differentiam
interaliquo duo, utrumque
et particulare,
interuniversale
iudicetdifferentiam
oportet
quodutrumque
intelligat.
et particulare
interuniversale
et singulare.
iudicat
Namipseintellectus
Quareintelligit
singulare.
1Another
desexprincipiis
oftheLiber
inCod.313 of
theauthor
about
Mediaeval
, isfound
opinion
III
SeeM. Grabmann,
Mittelalterliches
Geistesleben
f. 13o1".
ofInnsbruck,
theUniversittsbibliothek
ofGilbert
ofPoitiers
as thesupposed
explanation
(Mnchen
19^6),pp.83-84.Fora plausible
ofthework
tohisedition
Latinus
in:Aristoteles
intheintroduction
seeL. Minio-Paluello
author,
uLiber
sexprincipiorum"
vocatum
, Praefatio,
I, 7: Anonymi
vulgo
pp.XLIII-LV.
Fragmentm
128

11:56:15 AM

in tertioDe anima.Htdicitquoduniversale
et
AdhocsolvitPhilosophus
potestintelligi
lineam
ut
sed
Nam
universale
sed
differenti
modo.
rectam,
per
quamdam
singulare,
utperlineamreflexam1
...
singulare
This text ends as follows (3 7 rt)):
nonest
sedmutatio
. . . Sicgeneratio
Ultimo
notaquodgeneratio
nonestmotus
proprie
istiuslibri.Incipit(erased
Et hicterminan
turquestiones
motussedmutatio.
) libersex
liber
liberPeryarmenias.
words
ina different
( These
hand).Explicit
Incipit
principiorum.
wrote
the
in
that
these
words
the
same
hand
SexPrincipiorum
texts).
(
thecommentary
on Desexprincipiis.
37va-49vb:
In the collective manuscriptRipoll, Santa Maria 109 in the Archivo
General de la Corona de Aragn in Barcelona a commentaryon the
is foundon ff. i8ir-2 28v2. It opens as follows:
PriorAnalytics
in SecundoMetaphysice
estsimul
18ira Secundum
absurdum
quodvultPhilosophus
tioneseiendequod modus
quererescientiamet modumsciendi.Nam in acquisi
Et ideooportuit
sciendiprcdt.Omnesenimscientie
modosciendiutuntur.
quod
Et
illa
communis
scientia
essetdemodosciendi
communis
scientia.
dicitur
aliqua
logical*
The work is complete and ends on f. 228vb:
totius
libripriorm
sententia
lectionis
etperconsequens
Etinhocterminetur
expositio
AveMariagratia
Aristotitilis.
tecum,benedictus.
plenadominus
Expliciunt
glosetotius
Aristotilis
GmA1.
libripriorm
secundum
At the top of the firstpage (f. 18 1r) a somewhat later hand wrote:
glosetotiuslibri priormG Ai Garcia read GuillelmiAlberti. Grabmann
rejected this readingand attributed*the work to Guillelmus de Sancto
Amore, to whom the next work (a commentaryon the Posterior
Analytics)
is ascribed*. However, G. A1 cannot possibly stand for G. de Sancto
Amore.Therefore I propose to read GuillelmiArnaldi. It should be
noticed that a similar abbreviation ( G.Ar.) is used in the manuscript
Avignon1089.
1Incod.1089,f.49rathetextbreaks
off
here.
2Seethecatalogue
Patrm
II i, pp.
made
inBibliotheca
Latinorum
Garcia
Hispaniensis
byZacharias
in: Sitzungsberichte
derkaiserlichen
derWissenschaften
inWien,Phil.
Akademie
-Hist.
9-60,
aboutthemiddle
Klasse169,2(191^).Thispartofthemanuscript
dates
from
ofthethirteenth
century.
*Fortherestoftheincipit,
Mittelalterliche
lateinische
seeM. Grabmann,
und
Aristotelesbersetzungen
in Handschriften
Bibliotheken
Aristoteleskommentare
derBayerischen
, in: Sitzungsberichte
spanischer
derWissenschaften,
undHist.Klasse
Akademie
Philos.
-Philol.
1928,s (Mnchen
1928)p. 6.
opcit.,pp.ss-63.
5Thiscommentary
isattributed
ofSaint
adtoWilliam
Amour
byourmanuscript
only
bya later
atthetop
atthetopoff.229r,while
theattribution
ofthepreceding
work
toG.Ai,
added
scription
off. 228r,isbased
ontheexplicit
ofthework
Itseems
tobequitepossible
that
thecommenitself.
*(= Guillelmus
onthePosterior
tomaster
G.A
, too,belongs
Analytics
tary
Arnaldi).
129

11:56:15 AM

Thus we possess also a commentaryon the PriorAnalytics(and

, too,1) from the hand of our
possibly one on the PosteriorAnalytics
masterGuillelmusArnaldi.
4 - Analysisof the Lecturatractatuum
The MS Taragonaij (see above, p. 120 f.) seemsto be our bestmanuscript.
To be sure it has a number of omissions, due to haplology,but is free
frominterpolations2.I give the text of the firstlectioafterthis codex:
in tertioDe anima
seu
jra-vb;SicutdicitPhilosophus
, triplexest actusrationis
actusestsimplices
intellectus,
quiditates
apprehendere,
operatio
quodidemest.Primus
estcomponere
illassimplices
ut quidesthomo,quidestanimal.Secundum
quiditates
ad
Adprimum
a
notis
minus
Tertius
est
nota.
ordinatur
decurrere
apprehensas.
magis
LiberPeryarmenias
Liber Predicamentorum
totalogica
; ad tertiam
; ad secundum
actumrationis.
nova.Etsictotalogicaestcircailiumtriplicem
tradidit
et obscure,
in dictislibrisillamsubdifficultate
isteactor
SedquiaPhilosophus
esset
omnia
ut
iuvenibus
facilior
in
aditus,
quasi
petrus
hispanus
quePhilosophus
magister
inbrevi
etutilisummula
artistradidit,
comdictislibrispermodum
doctrine
permodum
P. Hispanus*,
huiuslibriquiafuitmagister
quiasimipilavi. Etsicpatetcausaefficiens
literpluresaliifecerunt
troctatus.
velmodussciendi.
intotalogicaestsillogismus
Causamaterialis
scilicetforma
tractatus
et forma
Causaformalis
sicutinaliislibrisestduplex,
tractandi.
libripercapitula
etcapitulorum
Forma
Formatractatus
estdivisio
diminutas.
perpartes
scilicet
tractandi
idemestquodmodusagendi.Qui estquintuplex,
diffinitivus,
divisivus,
nonestnecessarius
Et isteultimus
et exemplorum
positivus.
probativus,
inprobativus
solum
sed
addiscentes.
scientiam,
propter
propter
1Seethepreceding
a
ina thirteenth
Munich
. 14.412)
note.I found
(C.L.M
manuscript
century
a
Arnoldi
veteris
artis
f. 36ra). It contains
libros
(seetheexplicity
(ira-9ra)
Scriptum
super
quatuor
inTertio
De anima
noster
: Sicut
dicit
Aritstotiles
intellectus
ontheIsagoge
(Inc.
gloss
commentary
autem
InCateg.
rasainquanichil
estdepictum,
estsicut
tabula
(9rapossibilis
depingi).
possibilis
Prima
tribus
est
22ra;Inc.:Intellectus
devenit
noster
ad cognitionem
incogniti
operationibus.
ad alterum.
estunum
unumordinare
Secunda
entium
simpliciter
apprehensorum
simplicium
InDesex
rationis
exunoinferre
discursum
cumaltero.
Tertia
estsecundum
alterum.)
componere
estcompositioni
.
a fragment
wasadded
which
hand.(Inc.:Forma
(22rb-rb);
princ.
only,
byanother
Secundum
Inprincipio
libri
triadicenda
estquidestilludquodlogica
huius
sunt.Primum
inquirit.
estquomodo
estquomodo
Tertium
illudquoddocetur
dividatur.
logica
ipsadividatur
perlogicam,
a commentary
onPerihermeneias
secundum
ad reslogica).Finally,
(23ra-36ra)
quodcomparatur
insecundo
libriPredicamentorum
auctoritate
Aristotilis
estcircaprincipium
Inc.: Quiautdictum
De anima,
unaqueestindivisibilium
estoperatio
intellectus,
intelligentia
quaintellectus
triplex
aliaperquamcomponit
et dividit
in seipsa,
reiessentiam
Simplicia
uniuscuiusque
apprehendit
adcognitionem
notis
ab aliquo,utabaliquibus
et tertia
secundum
apprehensa,
quamdiscurrit
- Thesamehandgives(ff.37ra-48rb)
onDesexprinc.
another
, which
ignotorum.
commentary
sunt
asfollows:
volumen
iuniores
Sicut
dicitexpositor
maius
. . . veterum
Priscianir
opens
super
"Nani
sicut
nanicoorti
seeEdouard
humeros
Forthistopos,
gigantm
Jeauneau:
gigantm.
super
humeris
deChartres
in:VIVARIUM
Essai
deBernard
insidentes".
g (1967),pp.79-99.
d'interprtation
2TheMSAvignon
butitisdamaged
stains.
1077,
too,isquite
reliable,
bydamp
3 A contemporary
hadadded:deordine
.
predicatorum
fratrum
130

11:56:15 AM

Causafinalis
estduplex,scilicetfinis
intraet finis
extra.Finisintraestcognitio
eorum
in hoc libro. Finisextraest triplex,scilicetpropinquus
remotus
que traduntur
et ultimus;propinquus:cognitiologices; remotus:cognitiototiusphilosophie;
ultimus
: beatitudo
scientie
reducuntur.
anime,ad quamomnesfinaliter
us?Incipiunt
tractatus
Quistitul
magisti
p. hispani.
Cuipartiphilosophie
supponatur
patet,quiarationali.
His visisaccedendum
est ad formam
Isteautemliber<non)cdividitur
tractatus.
in
et tractatum.
Nonenimenarraiin generali
illa que posteadicturus
estin
proemium
inpartes
duas.Namprimodiffinit
dialeticam.
speciali.Seddividitur
primasuidivisione
Secundo
ordinem
Secunda
ibi
Sed
dicendorum.
:
Prima
in
ponit
quiadisputatio.
respectu
secundoex iliadiffinitione
tres.Namprimodiffinit
concludit
dialeticam,
corrolarium,
tertio
ibi: Etideo.Tertia:Dicitur
autem
vocabuli.Secunda
ponitethimologiam
dyaletica.
Hec estdivisiolectionis
in speciali.Sed in generali
dividi
in
potest
septemcapitula.
Primm
vocatur
Deintroductionibus
Depredicabilibus
Depredicamentis
, secundum
, tertium
,
, sextumDe fallaciis
, quintumDe locis
, septimumDe
quartumDe sillogismis
et ampliationibus.
restrictionibus
Secundaparsincipitibi: Predicabile. Tertia:Ad
*
ta.
: Propositio est oratio. Quinta
: Ratio
cognoscendumpredicameli Quarta
multipliciterdicitur.Sexta: Eorumque dicuntur.Septima:Dispositio. Hec
sitdivisio.
diffiniens
Sednotaquoddifferunt
sicprocedit
dialeticam.
Adprimam
dialetica
partem
et logica.Namdyaletica
ex probabilibus
et ex communibus
in qualibet
habetarguere
in QuartoMethaphysice
scientiavel in facltate.
Et ideo dicitPhilosophus
quod
circaidemlaborant
et
et
methafisicus
sophista,
quiacircaens.lindeensest
dyaleticus
subiectum
a Philosopho
inlibroTopicorum.
dialetice.
Etitadyaletica
determinatur
Sed
traditcognitionem
et esttradita
a Philosopho
in
inquantum
logicadicitur
sillogismi;
omnibuslibrislogicalibus.Est enimcommunis
ad dyaleticum
et demonstrativum
sillogismum.
Diffinit
estarsartium,
idestdenumero
dicens
: dyaletica
artium.
ergodyaleticam
septem
nobilior
aliis
Vel: arsartium
est
cumsitde acturationis
perexcellentiam,
quia
quiest
nobilioraliis, dyaletica,
viam
ad
habens
omnium
methodorum,
principia
inquam,
enimunomodobrevis
irt)idestomnium
Methodus
via,aliomodo
| scientiarum
specialium.
brevis
scientia.
Et ideo. Hic concludit
corrolarium.
habetviamad
Quia verumest quod dyaletica
omnium
et alie scientieerunttamquam
scientiarum
ideocumvia
terminus,
principia
sitpriortermino
vieetlogicasitviaetaliescientie
terminus
vieinacquisitione
tamquam
aliis.
debetesseprioromnibus
aliarum,
sequitur
quoddyaletica
Dicitur autem dyaletica. Hic ponitetimologiam
dicensquod dyaletica
dicitura
sermo
velratio
, vellexisratio;quasiduorum
, quodestsermo
,
'dya' quodestduoet logos
scilicetopponentis
in disputatione.
et respondentis
Et estintelligendum
vel
: duorum
remvelsecundum
Namidempotestesseopponens
secundum
rationem.
et respondens
sibiipsi.Etsictunenonsuntduorealiter
sedsoluminmodo.
' differunt
Notaquodistanomina,
scilicet'scientia
', 'sapientia''philosophia*
, 'facultas
ab hiis: 'ars','methodus*
. Namprimaquatuor
nominant
habitm
, 'doctrina'
'disciplina'
absolute
aliaveronominant
illumhabitm
incomparai
ionead opus.Primaetiam
anime,
Namsapientia
differunt.
additsaporem
quatuorinvicem
suprascientiam,
philosophia
facultas
facilitatem
alia quatuordifferunt.
Nam
amorem,
(facultatem
MS). Similiter
doctrina
dicitur
arsproutestindoctore,
et methodus
disciplina
proutestindiscipulis,
l

11:56:15 AM

enimsupraibrumPosteriorum1
Commentator
rationebrevitatis.
ponitdifferentiam
etfacultatem.
Etdicitquodmethodus
intermethodum
facultas
appropriatur
quadruvio,
faciunt
isteartes:arismetica,
verotrivio.Quadruvium
etastronomia.
musica,
geometria
Trivium
vero:gramatica,
logica,retorica.
estarsartium,
actor
dialetica
sitarsvel
dicit
<utrum)c
Queritur
quoddialetica
quia
Et videtur
scientia
etiamscientiarum.
ut
quodnonomnisarstenditad unumfinem,
ad unumfinem
dicitTullius:arsestcollectiomultorum
Sed
tendentium.
preceptorum
immoadtres,scilicet
adunumfinem,
nontendit
adexercitationes,
obviationes
dyaletica
utdicitPhilosophus
tertio
etphilosophie
nonest
Topicorum.
disciplinas,
Ergodyaletica
ars.
nonest scientia.Sed probabilia
De contingentibus
Preterea.
inquantum
contingentia
non
est
De quibusestdyaletica.
sunthuiusmodi.
scientia.
MaiorpatetperBoetium
Ergo
esteorum
inprimoArismetice,
queveresuntsivequesubstantiam
quidicitquodscientia
certacomprehensio
Minorpatetquodprobabile
sortiuntur
veritatis.
sit
inpermutabilem
sub
Nam
formidine
suum
dicitur
ad
(?)
oppositum
quiapotest
contingens. probabile
esseetnonessesicutcontingentia.
estex falsis.
Seddyaletica
ex falsis.
Nullascientia
Preterea.
procedit
aliquando
Ergonon
libroPosteriorum,
est scientia.MaiorpatetperAristotilem
vult
falsum
non
qui
quod
s<c)itur,
patetsimiliter
peripsumOctavoTopicorum,
quidicitquod
quianonest.Minor
veris.Etsicdyaletica
eritex
nichilprohibet
quibusdam
quedamfalsaesseprobabiliora
esse
falsa
cum
falsis,
possint probabilia.
etperrationem.
De omnieo estscientia
patetperPhilosophum
quodhabet
Oppositum
de subiecto.Seddyaletica
considerandas
subiectum
et parteset proprietates
esthuiuset similiter
habetproprietates
etpartes
tam
modi.Habetenimsubiectum
sillogismum
est
scientia.
formales.
materiales
quam
Ergo
recteagereet errare.Sed
Preterea.De omnieo est scientiacircaquod contingit
utde se patet.Ergoestscientia.
esthuiusmodi,
dyaletica
sit
Ad hoc dicendum
quodistaquestiopotestesseduplexet queritutrumdyaletica
scientia.Nampotestquerere(utrumid quod docetcausaset principia
sillogismi
Velpotestquerere)2
velfaciat
scientiam.
utrum
habitus
tus
sitscientia
dyaletici,
genera
Si
autem
sit
scientia.
ad
dico
queratur
quantum primum,
persillogismum
dyaleticum
namdocetcognitionem
et est etiamnecessaria
quod estscientiadyaletica
sillogismi
Namacceptisduabuspropositionibus
infallibilia.
dialeticiper principia
probabilibus
et in modoinfallibiliter
habetur
in figura
dialeticus.
debitomododispositis
sillogismus
scilicetquantum
ad secundum,
ad habitm
Si autemloquamur
quantum
per
generatum
esseconclusio
dicoquodnonestscientia
dialetici
falsa,
quiapotest
sillogismi
sillogismum,
utpatethie:
'omnis
mater
diligit
Medea
estmater
.
diligit'
ergoMedea
sedsolumopiniopropter
Nonenimestfides
deconclusione
probabilitatem
premissarum.
docensetillaestscientia
utens
Hocestquodsoletdiciquodestdyaletica
; etestdialetica
Ethocidemestsicutprimomodo.
et illanonestscientia.
cumdicit:omnisars.tendit
Adprimum
ad unumfinem,
dico
Adargumenta
dicendum.
Sed
minus
esse
est
verum
ad)
principales
possunt plures.
(quantum principlem.
quod
1Allother
commentator
Sed
librum
have:
Elenchorum.
supra
manuscripts quidam
2Supplied
theother
from
manuscripts.
132

11:56:15 AM

scilicetcognitionem
lindedyaletica
principlem,
primomododietahabetunumfinem
scilicetexercitatio
etobviatio
; illeautem,
proutestutensopinionem
dyaletici
sillogismi
etc.
ysuntminus
principales.
iva Ad aliud. Quandotu dicis: ex contingentibus
| non est
inquantum
contingentia
- dicendum
in se et
scientia
suntcontingentia,
; sedprobabilia
quodlicetprobabilia
sunt
ad sillogismum
absolutesintcontingentia,
tarnen
naturalia;
quiahis
dyaleticum
necessario
ponitur
dyaleticus
positis
sillogismus.
certeintelligitur
: perfalsaprincipia.
estexfalsis,
: nullascientia
Adaliud.Cumdieimus
enimsophistice
Ut
bene
esse
falsus.
habitus
Sedtarnen
patet.Cognitio
ageneratus potest
Nam
infallibilia.
in libroElencorum
scientietraditur
positoprincipio
per principia
motivodefectus
ponitur
equivocado.Et his duobuscognitis
cognosciequivocationis
esterror.
Abitus
turnaturaequivocationis.
equivocationis
persillogismum
ageneratus
Similiter
est de dyaletico
per ipsumpotestesse
quod habitusageneratus
sillogismo
et infallibilis.
necessaria
tamen
falsus,
semper
dyaletici
sillogismi
cognitio
hie maledicere.DicitAristotiles
estarsartium.Videtur
Dicitactorquoddyaletica
unisoliconvenit.
TertioTopicorum
: quodpersuperhabundantiam
dicitur,
Sedgramatica
et qua apertaomnes
estarsartium,
ut dicitAugustinus
: qua clausaomnesclauduntur
Nonergologicaestarsartium.
aperiuntur.
>
et etiamdyaletica,
Dicendum
perexcellentiam
potestdiciarsartium
quodgramatica
confessore
cantatur:
vides
sicut
de
tamendiversis
Quia
quod quolibet
respectibus.
seu
aliosin aliquaprerogativa
similisilli",quiaquilibetexcellebat
nonestinventus
excedit
scientia
alias
similiter
non
ita
habebat
alii,
quelibet
quod
proprietate
quam
in aliquaproprietate
quamhabetitaquodnonalie. Ut logicaexceditaliasquiaestde
etsic
ad modum
acturationis,
construendi;
aliis;etgramatica
quantum
quiestnobilior
estarsartium.
dealiis.Etsicpatetquomodo
dyaletica
uni
Adargumentum
dicitur,
patetsolutio.Cumdicitur:"quodpersuperhabundantiam
estineademproprietate,
sedindiversis
soliconvenit",
dicoquodverum
proprietatibus
convenire
etfortitudo
sicuttuvidesquodpulchritudo
convenire
possunt
potest
pluribus,
esse
fortissimus.
enim
Idem
unisecundum
diversas
pulcerrimus
potest
proprietates.
etaliaipsam
adunamproprietatem
aliamexcedere
Similiter
unascientia
potest
quantum
adaliamproprietatem.
quantum
idestscientiomnium
habetviamad principia
Dicit actorquoddyaletica
methodorum,
falsum
est.
viam
ad
habet
se.
arum.Contra.
est
methodus.
Quod
Ipsa
Ergoipsa
ita quodestsensus
unomodoquodhic est distributio
Ad hoc solvitur
accommoda,
omnium
a se; sicuthic: ' Deuscreavit
scientiarum
aliarum
quodhabetviamad principia
accommoda.
omnia1
a se.Sedhecsolutiononvalet,quianullaestdistributio
yidestomnia
sub
namdicide omniestquandonichilestsumere
Namqui omne
dicitnichilexcludit,
'
locutionis
subiectode quo nondicaturpredicatus.
Undede virtute
sequitur:Deus
creavit
. Etpropter
hocsolvitur
omnia;
aliter,secundum
quodprimo
ergocreavit
seipsum1
tur.
diceba
estintermethodum
et facultatem,
Differentia
appropriatur
quadruvio,
quiamethodus
methoomnium
habetviamadprincipia
: dyaletica
facultas
verotrivio.Etideointelligit
idestquadruvialium.
nonestquaSed dyaletica
dorum,idestscientiarum
specialium,
sedcommunis;
ideononvaletobiectio.
druvialis,
scientiarum
debetesseprior.Contra.Prius
Dicitactorquod in acquisitione
dyaletica
debetesseprior.
addiscimus
quamlogicam.
Ergogramatica
gramaticam
Adhoc solvitur
multismodis.(Quidamsolvunt
quod 'prius'diciturduobusmodis)1,
1Supplied
from
theother
manuscripts.
US

11:56:15 AM

i vb scilicet
viaoriginis
etvianobilita
dicitur
| tis.Etdicunt
priorviaoriginis,
quodgramatica
Tarnen
istasolutionichilvalet,quiavisum
sed logicaestpriorvianobilitatis.
estquod
uno modovia nobilitatis
est prior,scilicetin aliquaproprietate.
Propter
gramatica
dixerat
habetviamadprincipia
omnium
ita.Quiainmediate
quod(dyaletica
quodsolvitur
ideo concluditquod)1 in acquisitione
idestscientiarum
methodorum,
specialium,
enimnonestde
Gramatica
debetessepriorscilicetspecialium.
scientiarum,
dyaletica
illisspecialibus,
sedestcommunis.
Quarenonvalet.
scilicet
teorica
etpositiva,
Aliter
tarnen
lindegramasolvitur
sic.Duplexestgramatica,
in
tica positivabene priusaddiscitur
quamlogica. Tamentheorica,
que consistit
illa nonpotestperfecte
idestin modissignificando
s(c)irisine
principiis
gramatice,
scientiarum
debetesseprior.Et cumtu obicis
dyaletica
logica.Et sic in acquisitione
verum
est
nontamentheoricam.
addiscitur
positivam,
quodprius
gramatica,
The divisioin generaliof the whole work as it is givenin thismanuscript,
is not foundin the other manuscripts.Unlike the other commentators,
e.g. Robert Anglicus2, Guillelmus Arnaldi seems to divide Peter of
into seven capitula(f. i ra) :
Spaing tractatus
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII

De introductionibus
Depredicabilibus
Depredicamentis
De sillo
gismis
De locis
Defallaciis
De restrictionibus
etampliationibus.

However, when givingthe incipitsof these chapters,our authormentions

for the sixth chapter the opening words of our tract on supposition
(eorum que dicuntur, see ed. Bocheski, nr. 6.01). The opening
word of the seventh chapter as given by our author ( Dispositio
) must
word
of
the
so-called
the
be
as
read
,
Disputatio
opening
probably
.
Fallaciae maiores
. I give the chaptersas theyare discussedin MS Tarragona1
I De introductionibus : ira.3ra
II Depredicabilibus
: 3ra3-6va
III De predicamentis
: 6va4-i3va
: I3va-i6va
IV De sillo
gismis
V De locis
: 16.21vas
: 2iva6-2ra
VI De suppositionibus
: 2ra7-43rb
VII Defallaciis
etcetera
: 43rb8end.
VIII De relatione
(!)
1Supplied
theother
from
manuscripts.
2Seethepreceding
istobereadinstead
twelve
article
below,
(quoted
p. 136n. 1),p. 14(where
ofthirteen).
3Hieincipit
desuppositionibus.
depredicabilibus. 6Hicincipit
capitulum
capitulum
4 Hieincipit
defallaciis.
de
capitulum
predicamentis. 7Hicincipit
8Hicincipit
5Istasufficiunt
etcetera(l).
derelatione
decapitulo.
I34

11:56:15 AM

ends with the phrase:

On f. 45 rb the discussionof the relativaaccidentium
hecestsententia
lectionis.On the next line is read :
relationiactordeterminavit
Personalissubpostioetc. Superius
de subposi
tionibus,
dealiisproprietatibus,
Hiedeterminat
utde
terminorum.
bus,quesuntdueproprietates
et ampliatio
habentesse circa
restrictionibus
et ampliationibus.
Et quia restrictio
diffinitionem
incidentaliter
personalis
subpositionis
personalem
subpositionem,
repetit
uthabeat
sicde quointendit.
posuerat,
quamsuperius
In factthissection (45rb-45vb) deals with ampliatio.Then a freshstartis
made :
intoAppellano
a<ctor>
d(eterminavit)
) est etc.S<uperius>
Ampliatio(to be corrected
de ampliatione.
Hie prosequitur
et restrictione.
Et sic suntduepartes
de appellatone
in lectione.Secunda:Restrictio.
principales
So the firstpart of this lectio (45^-46 ra) discusses our tractatusXI,
the second part (46ra-rb) our nrs ii.oi-n .03. The nextlectio (46rb-va
deals withour nrs11.04-1 1. 10. Next followa lectioon our nrs 11. 11-11. 17
(46va-47ra) and a lectioon our nrs 11. 18-11.23 (47ra~rb)- The ^ast
lectionesdiscuss distributio
: 47rb-48ra (our nrs 12.01-1 2.08) ; 48ra-va
nrs
1
2.
2.09-1
(our
19); 48va-49ra (our nrs 12.20-12.25); 49fa-va
nrs
12.26-12.33); 49va-vb (our nrs 12.34-12.40); 49vb_^0rb
(our
nrs
12.41- 12.50) ; 5orb-vb (our nrs 12.51- 12.54), and finally
(our
ovb-irb (our nrs 12.55-12.58).
It is noticeable, indeed, that from 43 rb onwards our manuscript
no longeradds such titlesas : hie incipitcapitulumde . . . This should be
seen in connection with the fact that the last addition of this kind was
(43 rb): hie incipitde relationeet cetera(!)
As is easily seen, this general division of the Summulewould yield
eight chapters,not seven, as has been announced in the prologue. For
that matter this part of the prologue, which is not foundin any of our
other manuscripts,is also remarkablein that it calls the sixth chapter
De Jallaciis but gives as its incipitthe phrase Eorumque dicuntur
, being
the opening words of the tract on supposition, which is, in fact, the
sixth chapter in all good manuscriptsof the Summulelogicales. The
solutionof thisproblem seems to be thatour author considersthe tract
on suppositionas a kind of preliminarypart of De fallaciis, as appears
from the opening sentence of the chapter on supposition, as given in
MS Tarragona27 (f. 2iva-vb):
HieproseEorumque dicunturetc. Superius
actorde locisdyaleticis.
determinavit
ji S

11:56:15 AM

Setquiasuppositio
valetad cognitionem
desophisticis.
ut
fallaciarum,
quitur
quarumdam
ideoactorantequam
fallacie
determinet
de locisso (2ivb)phisticis,
idestde
accidentis,
determinai
licetinferius,
ubiderelatione
etampliafallaciis,
primode subpositionibus,
terminorum
deberetdeterminare,
moneet aliisproprietatibus
cumsubdeterminat,
terminorum.
quedamproprietas
positiositsimiliter
Thus we have a good explanationforthe factthatArnaldicalls Defallaciis
the sixth chapter and gives, at the same time, the phrase eorum que
.
dicuntur as its incipit
Besides, in the enumerationof the incipitsthose of the chapters
De relativi
s, De ampliationibus
, De appellationibus
, De resti
ictionibus,
are failing,while the incipitof the seventhand last
and De distributionibus
chapter mentioned by Arnaldi ( Dispositiofor: Disputatici)is that of the
tracton fallacies(Inc. disputatio est actus sillogisticus).
It seems to me thatthe generaldivisionof the Summule
logicalesas it
is given in MS Tarragona27, f. 1r, can onlypartiallybe explained in this
our chaptersVIIIway. To be sure, in Arnaldi's divisionof the Summule
XII (ed. Bocheski,nrs. 8.01-12.^8), which deal with the propertiesof
term other than supposition,are no more than appendixes to the tract
on supposition.Besides, the textof thisdivisiogeneralisis stillinconsistent
in that it mentions De fallaciis as the sixth chapter firstand gives the
word Disputatioas the opening word of the seventhchapterdiscussing
the propertiesof termother thansuppositionafterwards.
Therefore I am inclined to consider the text of this part of the
prologue as it has been handed down in MS Taragona27, to be corrupt.
The corruption might have started by the copyiss misreadingof VII
insteadof XII. If so, the misreadingmusthave been followed by a heavy
of the tracts.This much is certainthatwe have no reason to
reshuffling
doubt the correctnessof the usual division of Peter's Summule
logicales
into twelve chapters1.
On account of the interpolationCaliditas. . . etc. which occurs in
logicales(nr. 3.3 2)2, it should
nearlyall our manuscriptsof the Summule
be noticed that it is found as early as in Arnaldi's commentaryon the
Summule
. I give his gloss on the passage (nr. 3.32 ed. Bocheski) after
MS Taragonalj (f. i2ra):
1Compare
SeeL. M. de Rijk,OnTheGenuine
Text
ofRobert
Anglicus.
e.g.thecommentary
of
IIITwoRedactions
ofa Commentary
s Summule
Peter
logicales,
by
upontheSummule
ofSpain
in:VIVARIUM
Robertus
7 (1969),pp.8-61.
Anglicus
2Forthisinterpolation,
ofthisseries
: OnTheGenuine
Text
s
seethefirst
article
ofSpain*
ofPeter
intheManuscripts
in:
I General
Problems
Summule
concerning
logicales,
possible
interpolations
6 (1968),[pp.1-34],
VIVARIUM,
pp.3-4.
136

11:56:15 AM

actordeterminavit
Dicituralterumalteriopponi etc. Superius
deantepredicamentis
In hacparteintendit
de postpredicamentis.
et predicamentis.
determinare
Et dividitur
Primode opposi
in quinqusecundum
tione,secundode
quinqupostpredicamenta.
priori,tertiode simul,quartode motu,quintode habere.Secunda:Prius.Tertia:
Primeduesuntpresents
Simul.
lectionis.
Quarta:Motus.
Quinta:Habere.
induasdividitur.
Namprimodividit
de membris
; secundo
Quarum
oppositionem
prima
Ethecintres.Primoexcusat
sunt.
sedediffinitione
ibi): Queautem
(Secunda
prosequitur.
tertioque suntprivative
relati
ta.
vorum;secundoostendit
que suntcontraria;
opposi
Secundaistarum
Tertia:Privative
in duas.Primo
Secunda:Contraria.
dividitur
opposita.
diffinit
contraria.
Secundoremovet
dubium.
Secunda:Caliditas.
tur
illa
parsPrius.Et habetduas.Primoponitquatuormodospriorisusitatos.
Sequi
Secundo
Secunda:Preter
hosautem.
Prima
inquatuor
secundum
ponitunumnonusitatum.
modosprioris
(!) patet.
quatuor
quosponit.Ubipartesinsipiant
Hecestdivisio.
The followinggloss is devoted to the Caliditaspassage (i 2va) :
nonestinigneutaccidens
insubiecto
sedsicutsubstantiale
Quiaactordicitquodcaliditas
in eo cuiusest substantiale,
utrumhabeatveritatem.
Et videturqud
ideo queritur
non.Namomnisoperadoesta forma
et propriaoperatio
a forma
a
propria
[operatio
Sed
calefacere
a
et
substantiali.
est
Et
forma.
(est) propriaoperatio
propriaforma]
a forma
Sednonegreditur
abaliaforma
substantiali.
nisia caliditate.
ignis.Ergoegreditur
estforma
substantialis
ipsiusignis.
Ergocaliditas
There appear to be quite a numberof other objections againstthis view
of the (supposed) author and, accordingly,it is to be rejected (ibid.) :
breviter
estin igneutaccidens
in subiecto
Dicendum
et nonsicutsubquodcaliditas
stantiale
ineo cuiusestsubstantiale.
EthocdicitAverois
Phisicorum
supralibrum
Patetideoquodcaliditas
estinignesicutaccidens
insubiecto
et (non)1utsubstantiale,
nisitarnen
ut
idestconsequens
actor2,quod sit substantiale,
substantiam,
intelligat
risibile
hominissubstantiam.
Et ita potestexcusariquod
(visibileMS) consequitur
actorintelligit
substantiale
substantiam.
idest:consequens
Robert Anglicus^ has quite a differentsolution of the problem. He
9
'
distinguishestwo meaningsof the term ignis :
Vat.Lat. 3049,f. 3iva: Solutio.Dicendum
consideran.
quodignispotestdupliciter
Autinsuiessentia,
inMetaphisica
estforma
accidentalis
est;etsiccaliditas
proutscilicet
essentialis,
ignis.Autsecundum
quodignisestagensinmateria;et sicestforma
quod
essentialis
et hocmodoestignis
ignisnonpotestageresinecalore;calorestibiforma
resnaturalis.
Primomodorecedunt
actoritates
et argumenta.
1Supplied
from
theother
manuscripts.
2 Whowassupposed
tohave
hadjusttoopposite
view("Caliditas
autem
nonestinigneutaccidens
insubiecto,
sedsicut
ineocuius
see
substantiale
estsubstantiale".
Forthetextofthis
interpolation
Summule
, ed.Bocheski,
logicales
p. 33,n. 19.
3Forhisglosses,
seethepreceding
article
inthisJournal
ofthisseries,
7 (1969),pp.8-61.
137

11:56:15 AM

This solutionhas been furtherelaboratedin the Todi versionof Robert's

glosses:
estcircalitteram
Todicod. 4,f. 28ra:Sedsciendum
quodduplexestmateria
ignis,
vel
exquaetinqua.Exqua,utmateria
scilicet
lindeantecreationem
chaos,
mundi
prima
erantmixta
sicutessetfarina
etaquaetpostea divisa
elementa
fuerunt
in
; etillaconfusio
vocatur
a philosophis.
elementis
primamateria
inquaagitignis.Etiniliaestutinsubiecto.
Aliaestmateria
Ethec
ignisinqua,scilicet
huiuspartis.
estsententia
Autsecundum
Ibid.f. 28rb:. . . Ideonotandum
consideran.
quodignispotest
dupliciter
estinigneutaccidentalis.
eiusessentiam
Autsecundum
eiusoperationem
; etsiccaliditas
;
estinigneessentialis.
Etsicsumitur
etsiccaliditas
hie.
Two conclusions may be drawn. First, both Guillelmus Arnaldi and
Robert Anglicus found the interpolationCaliditas in their text of the
Summule.Second, their discussionsof the passage and their solutionsof
the problem seem to be entirelyindependentfromeach other.
The glosses devoted by Simon of Faversham1to our interpolation
are interesting.In the elaborate (and interpolated?)redactionpresented
by MS. Mnchen C.L.M. 14.697, a rather extensive discussion of this
passage is found (f. 3va):
sitignisubstantial
et de essentia
Item.Notacircahocquodauctordicitquodcaliditas
inlibroDesensu
esta Philosopho
etdesensato.
hocreprobatum
in
Item.Philosophus
ignis,
substantiali
nichilsitcontrarium.
Si igitur
dicitquodforme
caloressetde
Predicamentis
sit contrarium
essentiaignis,cumfrigidum
calido,ergosequeretur
quodsubstantia
est.Ergoilludex quo sequitur.
Hocautem
fuitillud
contrarium.
haberet
Quodfalsum
Item
quodcaloressetde essentia
ignis.Adidem
quoddicebatur
The objections are still without refutation.However, in the original
version of his glosses, found in MS Padua, Bibl. Antoniana,Scajff,
' 429,
Simon of Favershamis wise enough to make short work of the whole
a), which he rightlytakes as an interpolation:
passage ( ista tota litter
Padua,Bibl.Anton.Scajf.429, f. i8rb:Caliditas.Quicquidactordicat,istaopinio
etsensato.
Etistamtotam
litteram
(De) sensu
<a Commentatore)
supralibrum
reprobatur
libri
Melius
habent.
autem
est
ut
non
ibi
Private
:
habeatur,
(
!)
quidam
opposita
usque
auctoris
necipseearn
composuit.2
quianonfuitde intentione
So we see thatSimon rejects thispassage on good groundsjust as he did
J
with anotherspuriouspassage in his text of the Sumule
1Forhisglosses
article
ofthisseries
inthisJournal,
6 (1968),
ontheSummule
, seethesecond
- Recently
I found
a fourth,
in theBiblioteca
complete
copyof Simon's
glosses
pp.69-101.
anddates
from
thefifteenth
at Milan,cod.F. $6 Sup.(79fols.).Itis anonymous
Ambrosiana
century.
2Thediscussion
inourthird
ofSimon's
isfailing
B.N.Lat.16.126.
ofthis
Paris,
glosses,
copy
passage
3Forthispassage,
inthisJournal,
ofthisseries,
6 (1968),p. 100.
article
seeoursecond
138

11:56:15 AM

In the fifthtract (De locis) a discussionof thejcos-passage1is not found.

That Guillelmus Arnaldidid not read it in his text of the Summule
, may
from
his
divisio
textus
(f. i6va):
appear
in duas: primodeterminat
de argumento,
secundode locis. Secunda:
Et dividitur
' in
Primain duas.Namquia hic debetponerehoc nomen4ratio
autem.
Argumentum
'
diffinitione
neprocedat
hocnomenratio*
. Secundo
perequivocadistinguit
argumenti,
de quointendit.
Hecsecunda
Secunda:Ethocultimo
modo.
induas.
eligitilludmembrum
i
et diffinit
Namprimoeligitilludmembrum
de quo intendit
', secundo
argumentum
Prima
induas.Primodiffinit
etmedium
Secunda
: Argumentationis.
et
dividit.
argumentum
interilla. Secunda:Differ.
differentiam
secundoassignat
Sequitur
argumentationem,
Ethabetduas.Primodividit(diffinit
iIle pars: Argumentationis.
MS),secundomembra
in
data
est
Et
hec
tres.
Namprimoexcusando
declarat.
Secunda:Dijfnitio
sillogismi prius.
secundode entimemate,
tertiode exemplo.
se de sillogismo
determinat
de inductione,
Secundahabetduas.Primodiffinit
Tertia:Exemplum.
entimema.
Secunda:Entimema.
autem.
docetreducere
Secunda:Sciendum
Secundo
ad sillogismum.
Hecestdivisio
lectionis.
In the discussion, too, it appears that Guillelmus Arnaldi did not find
thejcos-passage in his text:
Et dicitquodentimema
estsillogismus
diffinit
inentimema.
f. i6vb: Consequenter
conclusio
ut.... Inistaargumenidestoratioinqua.... infertur
festinata,
perfectus,
homo
estanimaV
: 'omnis
. Etnonponitur
tationintelligitur
hecpropositio
quiasiponeretur
Et
statim
docet
reducere
esset
ad
ipsum
perfectus sillogismus.
sillogismum.
is interestingbecause of its couleur
Arnaldi's discussion of exemplum
locale:
Etdicitquodexemplum
estquando
f i7ra:Consequenter
actordeterminat
de exemplo.
in ipsis.
aliudparticulare
similitudinem
per
repertam
perunumparticulare
probatur
malum
est
Tolosanos
contra
Carcasonenses
Utsi dicam: ' Narbonenses
contra
; ergo
( /)
pucnare
Carcas
Narbonenses
contra
Nascones
malum
est.Ethicperilludparticulare
(on)(!) pugnare
contra
Nascones
Tolosanos
in
enses
aliudparticulare
, perilludsimilerepertum
probatur
contra
affines.
ipsis,quodestaffines
The MSS Avignon1077, Bordeaux999, Madrid 1070 and Vat. Lat. 3022
have Occytanos
instead of Nascones
, while MS Tarragona23 in a rather
and Bigterranos
shortredactionof the passagehas : TolosanoscontraVascones
Bearnenses
This
contra
much
is
certain, that
(f. 89r.)
)
(and Bigterrenses
Arnaldi's example refersto the South of France2. One need not wonder
1Forthispassage,
inthisJournal,
article
ofthisseries,
6 (1968),pp.2-3.
seeourfirst
2TheTolosani
ofToulouse,
theNarbonenses
aretheinhabitants
those
ofNarbonne,
theCarcasonenses
ofNavarra
andpartofBiscaja,
thoseof
those
those
ofCarcasonne,
theBiterrenses
theVascones
thoseofBeam.It is possible
read:
thatforBigorranos
oneshould
andtheBearnenses
Bziers,
ofBigorre,
nearBeam).Compare
thegeographical
names
(inhabitants
Bigorreanos
given
bythe
in Paris,
willbedisfound
B. N. Lat.667^,f.33vb.Thiscommentary
anonymous
commentary
inthenext
cussed
issue.
139

11:56:15 AM

about this, indeed, since Guillelmus Arnaldi was regensin artibusat

Toulouse.

I give the complete textof Arnaldi's glosseson the tractDe suppositionibus

(afterT = Tarragona27, ff.2iva-2ra).
desuppositionibus
f. 21va Hieincipit
capitulum
< LECTIOPRIMA)
HieproseEorumque dicunturetc. Superius
determinavit
actorde locisdyaleticis.
tio
valet
ad
de
Sed
fallaciarum,
quarundam
quitur sophisticis. quiasupposi
cognitionem
de locisso | phisticis,
2ivbutfallacie
ideoactorantequam
idestde
deteiminaret
accidentis,
desubposi
licetinferius
ubiderelatione
etampliatione
determinat
fallaciis,
tionibus,
primo
terminorum
cum subpositio
et aliisproprietatibus
deberetdeterminare,
determinat
visum
valet
adcognitionem
sitsimiliter
ut
terminorum.
Sed,
est,
proprietas
quia
quedam
de subpositionibus.
ideoprimodeterminat
fallaciarum,
quarundam
in duas.Primoactorpremi
ttitquoddam
Et dividitur
ad suumprincipale
preambulum
Et
intentum.
Secundo
de
intento.
Secunda.
est.
Subpositio debes(debetMS)
prosequitur
de intento.Namcum
determinet
s<c)ireque suntistapreambula
que ponitantequam
cuilibet
dicibilinondebeatur
sedsolumdicibiliincomplexo,
oportuit
quod
subpositio,
nondebetur
dicibileincomplexum.
Item.Subpositio
divideret
dicibilead accipiendum
dicibili
seddicibili
cuilibet
incomplexo
rempredicamentalem,
quiestterminus
significans
Et quiasimiliter
et ideoposuitsecundam
divisionem.
suppositio
presubponit
significaEtsicpatetqualiter
istasuntpreambula.
ideoactordiffinit
tionem,
significationem.
t alterum
Primahabetduas.Namprimoponitunamdivisionem;
secundosubdividi
autem
Et hec secundain duas: nam
membrum.
Secunda:Terminorum
incomplexorum.
diffinit
mentionem
designificatione,
illudmembrum
; secundo
quiafecerat
primodividit
secundo
Hecinduas:primodiffinit
dividit.
illudmembrum;
eam.Secunda:Significatio.
concludit
: Significations
. Primainduas: primodiffinit
Secunda
; secundo
significationem
cum
omnis
velobicitquedam.Secunda:Quare
res.
corrollarium
Ethabetduas: primo
illapars: Significations.
dividit
;
(diffinit
MS)significationem
Sequitur
duomembra
secundo
accipitquibusnomina
subpositionis
assignat
perillamdivisionem
vero
substantiva.
velinponit.
Secunda:Nomina
ilia
Et
habet
duas: primodiffinit
; (secundo
subpositionem
Sequitur pars:Subpositio.
Primain duas. Primodiffinit
SecundaCopulatio.
subpositionem)1;
copulationem.
etsignificationem.
Secunda:
inter
secundo
differunt.
subpositionem
ponitdifferentiam
Hec sitdivisio.
sic procedit
dividendo.
secundum
Ad primam
quodnotabatur
partem
estquodactorad cognitionem
eorumque hiedicuntur,
Ad evidentiam
intelligendum
solum
divisionem
ad significandum
quodsubpositio
primam
premittit
subpositionum
Secundam
divisionem
debeturincomplexo.
ponitad significandum
quod subpositio
terminm
rei.Ideodividit
ei quodremsignificai,
et nondispositionem
solumdebetur
visum
ut
est.
decern
Quia
presupponit
subpositio
predicamenta,
per
incomplexum
Et dividit
ideodiffinit
quiapenesduas
significationem
significationem.
significationem,
1Supplied
from
theother
manuscripts.
140

11:56:15 AM

Namei quodpermodum
ifferentias
duomodisignificationis
accipiuntur.
significationis
Ei
vero
modum
debetur
adiacentis,
perse stantis
quod
per
subponere.
copulare.
significai,
Ulterius
notandum
diciturmultismodis.Unoenimmododicitur
subquod'subpositio*
positioacceptiopropositionis
proveraet probata;et hoc modosubpositio
tamquam
in disputationibus,
et sic nonaccipitur
et vocaturalio modoypotesis'
hic
accipitur
'
4
alicuius
subaltero
. Alio modosumitur
, secundum
positio
'subpositio*
subpositio
quod
1;
ussubsuosuperiori,
uthomo
subanimali
subiectum
et inferi
dicitur
ponisub
predicato
et sic nonsumitur
hic 4subpositio
Tertiomododicitursubpositio
termini
acceptio
hic1subpositio1
communis
.
prore significata
peripsum;et sicsumitur
Adprimam
dicibileuteligatincomplexum,
lectionis
dividit
dicensquod
partem
igitur
4homo
ut
curri
cum
eorumque dicuntur
dicuntur
;
complexione,
quedamsine
quedam
*
4
ut 4homo
. Sed quiacuilibetincomplexo
nondebetur
complexione,
perse vel curri
t MS)alterum
membrum
et dicitquodterminorum
ideosubdividit
(subponi
subpositio,
substantiam
aut
aut
et sic de aliis.
quantitatem,
incomplexorum
unusquisque significat
Et talidebetur
talem
rem
subpositio
qui
significat.
mentionem
Etstatim
actordiffinit
quandodicitdutsignificat.
quiafecerat
significationem,
estrepresentatio
Et dicitquodsignificado
MS) per
(interpretado
prouthic sumitur,
vocemsecundum
) ad removendum
(Et dicitsecundum
placitum
placitum.
significationem
omnis
resconcludit
exdiffinitione
cum
Etstatim
cumdicit: quare
naturalem.
significationis
estpervocemrepresentatio
Dictum
estquodsignificado
corollarium.
; exhocconcludit:
cumomnisressituniversalis
velparticularis,
oportet
quodilledictiones
quenonsigniut'omnis''nullus'
etfigmenta
non
ficant
remuniversalem
velparticularem,
, etconsimilia,
4
Nam
io' et ita quodnonsinttermini.
aliquidprouthic sumitursignificat
significant
remuniversalem
velparticularem,
etsinon
habetsignificare
quilibetterminus
aliquam
' et 4nullus
*et talia
nondebeatur.
sinttermini,
linde4omnis
quodeissubpositio
signanon
sunttermini.
Et dicitquod significationis
alia est rei
actordividitsignificationem.
Consequenter
ut'homo'aliareiadiective
etistafit| per
2Ira substantive
substantiva,
; etistafitpernomina
*vel'curri
nomina
velperverba,ut4albus
.
adiectiva
Et statim
Namaliquisdubitaret
alia estrei
removet
dubium.
quaredicit: significationis
substantive
nonautemdicit:aliasubstantiva
lindedicitquodsubstantivatio
, aliaadiectiva.
etadiectivatio
rerum
suntquidammodi,idestquedamaccidentia,
ipsarum
qui(!) signiseuaccidentia,
et nonsuntmodi,idestdispositiones
ficante*,
(disipsius
significationis
de se estquoddam
: signifiaccidens.Et siipsedixisset
positionsMS).Namsignificado
essent
cationis
aliasubstantiva,
aliaadiectiva,
etadiectivatio
videretur
quodsubstantivatio
Ideoaddenotandum
modi,etdispositiones
quodnonestverum.
quodnon
significationis,
suntdispositiones
alia estrei
sed ipsarum
rerum,dicit:significationis
significationis,
et nondicit:aliasubstantivay
alia adiectiva.
adiective
, alia reisubstantive
Et dicit
ex istadivisione
Quibusnomina
accipitduomembra.
imponit.
Consequenter
verba
dicuntur
nomina
substantiva
nomina
et
adiectiva
sed
dicuntur
quod
subponere
dicuntur
suum,et
subponere
copulare.Et notaquodnominasubstantiva
significatum
suumethocsuo
adiectiva
dicuntur
ipsi(isitMS)verbo,sednomina
copulare
significatum
substantivo.
de subpositione
Et dicitquodsubpositio
diffiniendo
Consequenter
prosequitur
4 ipsam.
esse.
estacceptio
termini
substantivi
multis
modispotest
proaliquo.Etilludproaliquo1
4homo
Alio
Unomodoproaliquoidestprointentione
est
in
ut
modo
est
anima,
species7.
que
1Subanimali]
T
substantialiter
141

11:56:15 AM

ut 1homo
curri
relatoad subposita,
. Aliomodoproaliquo
proaliquoidestprosignificato
'
estnomen'
. Aliomodoproaliquoidestprovoce,ut
idestpromodosignificandi,
ut homo
'homo
locutionis
terminus
estdissilabum1
. Etintellige
ponatur
quodde virtute
ubicumque
intellectus
seutermini
de
suum
sed
potest
subponit significatum, possibilitate
aliquando
veram
etc.
locutionem
reddere
promodisignificandi
provoce,aliquando
et significationem
et dicitquod
intersubpositionem
ponitdifferentiam
Consequenter
namsignificado
vocis
et significado,
habetesseperinpositionem
differunt
suppositio
estacceptiotermini
iamsignificantis
sed subpositio
ad significandum,
proaliquare.
estipsiusvocis,sed subLindepriusestsignificado
quiasignificado
quamsubpositio,
et voce. Et istadifferunt
ex significato
quod unumest
positioest termini
agregati
scribit
cumilla,
sicut
altero,
linde
homo
vides
postea
accipitpennam,
quodprius
prius
cumilio, itapriusimponit
vocemad
et priuselevathomobaculum,
posteapercutit
etposteautitur
ipsavoceproaliquare; etistaestsubpositio.
significandum
adiectivi
dicensquodcopulatio
estacceptiotermini
Deindediffinit
pro
copulationem
'1
*
multis
hoc
est
modis.[Uno
et
sicut
ita
hie
pro
aliquo
superius
quod
aliquo
glosatur
ut 'album
estaccidens1
modoproaliquoidestprointentione,
. Aliomodoproaliquo
, idest
*album
ut 'album
estnomen
Alio
.
ut
curri
.
modosignificandi,
modo
pro
prosuppositis,
estdissillabum
Aliomodoproaliquoidestprovoce,ut 'album
']2.
Etinhocterminatur
lectio.
)
( Questiones
vel
extra
animam
velutrumque
rem
est
in
anima
voxsignificai
)
( Utrum
que
et
est
Circaistudcapitulum
presubponit3
quiasubpositio3
significationem
significado
rem
animam
vel
utrum
vox
extra
ideo
passionem
que
ipsiusvocis,
queritur
significet
Et videtur
estin animavelutrumque.
passionem
que estinanima,per
quodsignificet
libroPeryarmenias
que sunt
Philosophum
<qui>dicitquodvocessuntnotepassionum
inanima.Ergoetc.
remuniversalem.
Et
Nomencommune
Item.Arguode nominecommuni.
significai
remque estin anima.Preterea.
universale
habetessein anima.Ergonomensignificai
intellecnamde eodemconstituit
etnonexistente,
terminus
reexistente
Idemsignificai
non
res
sit.
cum
nonestdicendum
tum.Sedrenonexistente
rem,
quodsignificet
Ergo
remextrasedinanima.
videtur
quodvoxnonsignificet
Dicit enimquod
Aristotilis
PrimoElencorum.
Oppositum
patetper intentionem
de
rebus
voces
Preterea.
nominibus
res.
utimur.
Loquivolumus
ipsas
pro
Ergo
significant
et
ipsisrebusaliquando.
ipsasres.EthocdicitBoetius
quodvocessignificent
Ergooportet
4 quodin rebusquasvidithumanuni*
Alanus
nomen
Item.Ostendendo
imposuit.
genus*
'
4
estanimai
passionem
queestinanima- namista: homo
quodvoxnullomodosignificet
essetfalsa,
; quareoportet
quiaistapassiononestilla; etsicnonessetveranisiprorebus
remextra.Etsi tudicasquodsignificai
hocestfalsum,
quia
utrumque,
quodsignificent
veraest
curri
estlhomo
tuncessetdarepropositionem
que essetveravelfalsainsimul,
Et sic
homini
nonattribuitur
propassione.
prorebus,sedfalsaestin hoc quodcurrere
inmediate
etfalsum
eritveraetfalsa.Quodestinconveniens
et inpossibile,
quodverum
enuntiationem.
dividunt
1proaliquo]
T
other
MSS.superius
2notinT
3subpositio
T
other
MSS
; presubposito
presubponit
4Avalanus
T
5other
T
MSS;quodutimur
142

11:56:15 AM

aliisopinionibus,
relictis
turad
De istaquestione
dicendum
breviter,
quodvoxinponi
remet similitudinem
sivepas| sionem
22rbsignificandum
rei,quodidemest.Namvoxnon
turautem)1
remnisiprout(priusMS)intelligitur.
persuamsimilitu(Intelligi
significai
remnonperse sed
TertioDeanima.
dinemetnon2perse,utdicitur
Ergovoxsignificai
remetsimilitudinem
voxistaduo,scilicet
Sednonsignificai
rei,
persuamsimilitudinem.
tamen
namubicumque
alterum
unumest.
unum
utplurasedutunum,
utrobique
propter
nisipropter
est.Et
Et ideocumnonsignificet
similitudinem
rem,totumsignificatum
itaargumenta
passionem
quodsignificent
que
perhocsolutasunt.Namilla(que)probant
est
verum
estinanima,
rem,verum
; illaqueprobant
est,sednonsolum
quodsignificent
sednonsolum.
Adaliud.Quandoprobasquodvoxnullomodosignificet
passionem
que estin anima,
' . Dico
omo
Namintellecestanimal
: 4/i
non.
est: tudicisquodistaestfalsa
dicendum
quod
in similitudinibus
ts (non)iudicatidemptitatem
que suntin anima,sedin rebusper
Adargumentum
similitudines
perquodprobasquod
ipsas.Et itautrumque
significant.
non
scilicet
res
et
dicoquodimmo.Ettuarsimilitudo
rei,
possunt
significan,
utrumque,
sitveraetfalsa.Dicoquodnon,quia
quodeadem(pro)positio
guisquodtuncsequeretur
etnoniudicatur
unumperrepresentationem
voxsignificat
istaduoproutfaciunt
propoveldiversitatem
sito veraequefalsapenesidemptitatem
[et]sed
ipsarum
passionum,
est.Etestsolutio.
rerum
secundum
ipsarum
quodvisum
revoxremaneat
destructa
>
( Utrum
signicativa
Et videtur
re vox remaneat
Queriturutrumdestructa
primoquod re
significativa.
in
fine
libri.
auctoritatem
Boetii
destructa
vox nonsit significativa,
Divisionum;
per
esse desistit.Item.
qui dicit quod si res subiectanon sit, vox significativa
itaquodpriusest esse,postea
se habent
et significan
Essereiet intelligi
perordinem
esserei. Ergononpotest
nonremanet
Sed re destructa
posteasignifican.
intelligi,
non
estvoxsignificativa.
sic
re
Et
destructa
non
Quare poterit
significan.
intelligi.
re
est
intellectum
constitue
re.Seddestructa
tamen
tur,
quia
significare
Oppositum
argui
repotest
remanere
intellectum.
constituit
destructa
significativa.
Ergo
ipsavoxdeeodem
'
tunecorrupto
ilioquodsignifiUndevox ista4Petrus
aliquemhominem,
quesignificat
etsicidemsignificabit.
intellectum
cat,adhucde eodemconstituit
re
terminus
breviter
dicendum
Ad hancquestionem
quod idem(illudMS) significat
rem(absolute
et nonsub
ad significandum
sicutprius.Undevoxinponitur
destructa
Namnoninponitur
ad significandum
rem)3essenequead
temporis.
aliquadifferentia
remcuiacciditetquodsitactuvelnon
remnonessesedad significandum
significandum
remanet
etsignificat
idemsicutprius.Namde
re (vox)significativa
sit.Etideodestructa
Aristotilem
inPostpredicamentis,
Ethocetiamapparet
intellectum.
eodemconstituit
per
unavera,altera
siveressintsivenonsint,semper
qui dicitquodin contradictionibus
terminus
re destructa.
falsa.Ethocnonessetsi nonsignificaret
Quarepatetquodidem
redestructa.
significat
idestsinonsit
sicquodsi nullares(sit)subiecta*,
dicendum
AdBoetium
quodintelligit
4
ut' buf
iliavoxnonestsignificativa,
', baf'. Alio
aliquaresque pervocemsignificetur,
1Supplied
theother
from
MSS.
2etnonother
MSS
; voxT
3Supplied
from
theother
MSS.
4 Substantia
T
143

11:56:15 AM

sicquodsi nonsitressubiecta1
inanimavelinre extra,voxdesinit
esse
modosolvitur
significativa.
Adaliudquandodicisquodpriusestessereiquamintelligi
etsignificali,
dicendum
quod
licetsitpriusessereiquaminintellectu
vel<in)significando,
tamen
unumessenonest
unumcorrupto
esseactualireipostest
aliud2.Etideopotestremanere
alio,utcorrupto
remanere
esseinintellectu
et insignificando,
quia,utvisumest,hocessenonestillud
esse.Etsicpatetsolutio
questionis.
istaacceptio
sitab intellectu
)
( Utrum
est
a quo^sitistaacceptio,
actor
Quiadicit
quodsubpositio acceptiotermini,
queritur
utrumsitab intellectu.
termino
ab
accidit
Videtur
quodnon,quia
quodaccipiatur
Et si subpositio
intellectu.
essetab intellectu,
acciderettermino
quod subponeret.
Hocautemestfalsum,
estproprietas
essentialis
termini
substantivi4.
quiasubpositio
tamenarguitur
ab eodem
sic. A quo aliquishabetsuamsignificationem,
Oppositum
habetsuamsubpositionem.
suamsignificationem
habetab intellectu.
Sed terminus
Ergoetsubpositionem.
De istaquestione
estsubpositio.
suntopiniones.
sicsolvunt
etdicunt
Quidam
quodduplex
suumsignifiterminus
secundum
sermonis,
Quedamenimestde virtute
subponit
quod
ad
catum.Aliaest subpositio
termini.
de possibilitate*
Mododicuntquod quantum
est
termini
estistadiffinitio
de possibilitate
suppositionem
quehabetur
quodsubpositio
ab intellectu.
serSedquantum
ad subpositionem
acceptio(termini)
que estde virtute
nondaturilladiifinicio
monis,que dicitur
naturalis,
subpositio
subpositionis,
quiade
natura
suahabetsubponere
etnonab intellectu.
Et dicendum
subbenedictum,quia secundum
hoc diffinitio
quodhoc nonvidetur
non
esset
communis
cuilibet
Et
tamen
est
communis
.
dicta
est.
positionis
subpositioni
que
Secundo
istiquisicdicunt,
modomaledicunt
perhocquodterminus
quiacumdicitur
ab intellectu
cuiusoppositum
estverum.Namperhoc
accipiatur
quodsic subponat
subsie
sie
ab
Et
ideo
intellectu.
dicendum
quod
subponit aeeipitur
quia diffinitio
ab intelestcompetens.
Debetsie intelligi:
estacceptiotermini
positionis
subpositio
idestaptus
termini
estproprietas
lectu,idestsubpositio
ipseterminus,
proquoaeeipitur
estvox
natusaeeipiquantum
terminus
de se estab intellectu.
Undedicendum
quod
in
formaliter
se
et per rationem
habet
ad significandum
inposita
quam
significandi
Et sic ipsitermino
dicitur
sineaeeeptione
ab intellectu
debetur
significado
significare.
22vaetI subpositio.
Undecausaprxima
est
subpositionisipseterminus
persuumsignificatum.
habent
in oppositum
Ad argumenta
dicendum.
Quandotu probasquodab intellectu
namab intellectu
habetsignificationem
suam;ergosubpositionem,
subpositionem:
idest
dicendumquod ab intellectuinponenteterminus
suum habet effectum,
de se habet
rationem
Et istomodoet subpositio
est,sedtamenformaliter
significandi.
est invox significativa
sie et quod subponat
de se habetpostquam
quodsignificet;
et
sie
sua
ad
Et
natura
de
terminus.
posita significandum,
subponit.
appellatur
LECTIO
SECUNDA
actordeterminavit
de subpositione
Subpositionumalia communis,etc. Superius
1substantialis
T
2adT
3a quoother
MSS
; anT
4termino
T
substantivo
sbonitate
T
144

11:56:15 AM

Hicprosequitur
Etdividitur
in duas.Namprimoactordividit
subdivisive.
diffinitive.
etdiscretam,
etdeclarat
subdividit
alterum
Secundo
membra.
percommunem
positionem
Hec secundain duas. Primodividit
Secunda:Suppositionum
membrum.
communium.
naturalem
etdeclarat
communem
et
membra.
Secundo
accidentalem,
subpositionem
per
alterummembrum.
Hec secundain
Secunda:Accidentalium
subdividit
subpositionum.
et personalem.
accidentalem
Secundo
duas.Primodividit
subpositionem
persimplicem
induas.Primm
membra.
Secunda:Simplex
declarat
declarat
<Ethecsecunda
subpositio.
in
Secundo
Prima
membrum.
aliud.
Secunda
Personalis
ibi:
duas.
)I.
subpositio
primm
Secundodividit.Secunda:Item.Subpositionum
Primodiffinit
simplicem
suppositionem.
intres.Primodividit
Hecsecunda
simplicem
subpositionem
pertriamembra.
simplicium.
memterminm
habere
ad
Secundo
simplicem
suppositionem
probat
quantum tertium
Tertioprobat
membrum.
adsecundum
idestpostdictionem
brum,
exceptivam.
quantum
omne
animal
terminus
in
hominem.
Tertia:Quodautem
Secunda:Undenonsequitur:
preter
illa
Et
habet
:
Personalis.
Primo
diffinit
Secundo
earn.
dividit.
duas.
predicato.
Sequitur pars
Ethecinduas.Primodividit
Personalium.
Secunda:Item.
personalem
perdeterminatam
Ethecin duas.
declarat
membra.
Secunda:Determinata
etconfusam.
Secundo
subpositio.
Ubi
Secundoreliquum.
unummembrum.
Primodeclarat
Secunda:Confusa
subpositio.
Primain duas.Primodiffinit
determinatam
Secundo
lectioterminatur.
subpositionem.
Hecest
illarum.
beneesseassignatam.
Secunda:Quodautem
utraque
probatdiffinitionem
divisio.
alia
Dividitsubpositionem
dicensquodsubpositionum
sicprocedit.
Adprimam
partem
fitperterminm
comCommunis
aliadiscreta.
dicitur
communis,
subpositio
quando
ut 'Sor'.
ut'homo
'. Discreta
dicitur
discretum,
munem,
quefitperterminm
se prout
aut
secundum
terminus
:
consideran
Debesintelligere
potestdupliciter
quod
suamsignificationem
Si consideretur
estquedamres,autsecundum
proutestsignum.
sui totalitatem
et sic sumitur
dicendo:
modo,hec potestessevel secundum
primo
'omnis
velpromodosignificandi
estnomen'
ut'homo
inquantitate'
homo
esttotum
essentiali,
' vel
'
' vel
estnominativi
casus
estvox
ut '/jomo
vel accidentali,
(pro)
provoce,ut homo
estdissillabum'
vocis,utihomo
proprietate
istomodononintendimus.
termini
Sedde subpositione
Nuncautemdesubpositione
que
inhacparte.Etsecundum
intendimus
hocdividitur
suamsignificationem
estsecundum
hicsubpositio.
notandum
Ulterius
actor,hicnonaccipitur
subpositionis
quamtradidit
quoddiversitas
eius
a
et locutionem
reddit
eiusquodterminus
sed
subponit, parte proquo subponit
a parteeiusquodsubponit
nonvarietur
veram.Quodsubpositio
terminus,
patet,quia
etidemsignificai
siveinoratione
terminus
ubicumque
ponatur,
prosignificato
subponit
a parteeius
non
Sicpatetquoddiversitas
siveextraorationem.
subpositionis accipitur
diversas
causasveritatis.
secundum
seddiversificatur
terminus,
subpositio
quodsubponit
'homo
curriprosubpositis.
Et sicsunt
verificatur
estspecies'
Ut lhomo
prointentione;
modosverificandi
secundum
diversos
locutiones.Patetigitur
diversesubpositiones
secundum
dividatur,
quiailla[m]quamhabetterminus
signique (quod MS)subpositio
seudivisio
nonaccipitur
a parteilliusquodsubponit
Etpatetquoddiversitas
ficationem.
seda parteverificandi
locutionem.
idesta partesignificati,
terminus,
Et dicitquodcommunis
alia
alianaturalis,
communem
Deindedividit
subpositionem.
Et dicitquodnaturalis
estacceptioteimini
Declaratmembra.
accidentalis.
subpositio
illisproquibusaptusnatusestparticipan,
ut'Ao/no'
communis
perseprout
proomnibus
1Supplied
MSS.
from
theother

11:56:15 AM

t proomnibus
vel erunt.Modo
nonponiturin oratione,
subponi
qui suntvelfuerent
estacceptio
termini
notaquodnaturalis
communis
idest
communi,
subpositio
proforma
esse
in
habet
autem
dicuntur
quodsignificatum
subpositis.
Subposita
pro significato;
idestrationem
estparticipantis
termini
termini,
accipiunt
quiparticipant,
quiaparticipare
ut dicitur
libroThopicorum.
Nuncautemtamexistentia
rationem
non
sumere,
quam
insuosignificato
existentia
includunt
formam
ut' Antitermini,
MS)
subposita
(significata
' et 'Cesar'insuo
includunt
huiusnominis
christus
'homo',
significato1
significata
quiaad |
hominem
suntinposita.
Sicigitur
terminus
.22vbsignificandum
communis,
patetquodquilibet
denatura
insubpositione
communi
ut'homo'
insuissubysubponit
proforma
quesalvatur
illa
sunt
actu
existentia
sive
sive
solum2
in
existt.
non,
subposita
positis,
quod significando
existentia
rerum
Namactualis
nichilfacitad veritatem
NamdataquodCesar
orationis.
esthomo'.
Etpropter
nonsithecestvera:' Cesar
hocnonsequitur:'ergoCesar
est
'
sit
Tuncdeclarat
est
termini
accidentalis
communis
quid
subpositio: acceptio
prohis
4homo
t adiunctum,
ut 'homo
curri
cucurrit'
subponit
pro
presentibuss,
proquibusexigi
'homo
cur
ret'profuturis.
propreteritis,
4
estsuperius,
curri
Etnota,quodvisum
, cum'homo'
quodcumdicitur:homo
ubicumque
et 'homo'non significet
subponat
ponatursuumsignificatum
quam
magispresentes
velpretritos,
ideohicnonsubponit
solumpropresentibus.
futuros
Sedtarnen
hocest
actorquod significatur
starepro presentibus,
verum.Et ita intelligit
idestpro illis
redditlocutionem
hic:
veram,et cumhoc nonexcluditquinstetproaliis.Similiter
etsimiliter
infuturo.
'homo
(cu)currit'
Deindedividit
accidentalem
dicensquodaccidentalium
subpositionem,
subpositionum
aliapersonalis.
alia simplex,
Et declarat
Et primoquidsitsimplex.Et dicit
membra.
estacceptiotermini
communis
subpositio
prore universali
quodsimplex
per
significata
estspecies'
vel 'animalestgenus',et sic de aliis.linde (notandum)*,
ipsum,ut 'homo
utmeliores
habetsimplicem
dicunt,
quodterminus
subpositionem
quandoscatprointentione
inanimaetinre
que estinanima.Namresnonhabetnisiduplexesse,scilicet
extra.Et quandostatpro essequodhabetin anima,tuncestsubpositio
ut
simplex,
'homo
estspecies'
stat
terminus
. Similiter
dicitur
re
ut
'homo
personalis
quando
pro extra,
subcurri.lindesi dicatur:'Sorestindividuum'
potestdiciquodibihabeatsimplicem
cumstetprointentione
queestinanima.Ettuarguis
positionem,
quodquandoaliqua
est quod illudquod continetur
sub uno
duo ex oppositodistinguuntur,
inpossibile
sub alio. Et subpositio
contineatur
communem
et
dividitur
et
sicillud
discretam,
per
subcommuni
nonpoterit
subdiscreta.
contineri
Sedsimplex
continetur
quodcontinetur
subdiscreta.
subcommuni
Dicendum
sustinendo
quiasubaccidentali.
Ergononcontinetur
est
si
'Sor
est
individuum'
ibi
est
Nam
dicatur:
dictum
,
quod
simplex
subpositio.
quod
et personalem,
itasubpositio
sicutaccidentalis
dividitur
discreta
per
simplicem
potest
ut 'Sorestindividuum'
ut 'Sorcurri
dividiin simplicem,
.
, et personalem,
communem
Etadargumenta
divisio
et
nonestdata
dicendum
discretam
quodprima
per
ex parterei,sedpotiusex partevocis.Et ideoquantum
ad illudpenesquoddividitur
subuno,noncontinetur
subalio.Etitaquiapenesresnondividunilludquodcontinetur
et personalem
tamcommuni
tur,potestistadivisopersimplicem
utriquecompetere
quamdiscrete.
1insuosignificato
other
MSS; significando
T
2solvit
T.
3presenti
T
huius
* Supplied
theother
from
MSS.
146

11:56:15 AM

aliaest
Deindedivid.it
onem,dicensquod simplicis
simplicem
subpositi
subpositionis
4
termini
communis
ut'/io/no
estspecies1
etsicdealiis;
estgenus',
, animal
positiinsubiecto,
aliaesttermini
communis
ut (omnis
homo
estanimai'
. Vult
affirmato,
positiinpredicato
4
'
actorquod animalhabeatibi simplicem
tamen
non
est
verum,
Quod
subpositionem.
ut statim
Aliaesttermini
communis
ut
videbitur.
dictionem
positi
post
exceptivam,
4omne
4
'
animal
hominem
estirrationale
'. (Ibi vultactorsimpliciter
preter
quod *hominem
'
habeatsimplicem
Et
istud
scilicet
le
hominem
membrum,
subpositionem.probat
quod
habeatsimplicem
Namnonsequitur:'omne
animalpreter
hominem
est
subpositionem.
irrationale
hunehominem'.
a simplici
Sedestibi procesus
ad
)x; ergoomneanimalpreter
sicuthic: lhomo
estspecies
; ergoaliquishomo'.
personalem,
4
breviter
animal
hominem
estirrationale
Dicendum
',
preter
quodcumdicitursic: omne
4
'
in
le hominem
nonhabetsimplicem
subpositionem
quianonstatprointentione
queest
4
actorisdicendum
anima.Et ad argumentum
quodverumestquodnonsequitur:omne
animal
hominem
estirrationale
hunc
hominem'
; ergo
, sednonesthuiuscausaquod
preter
preter
a simplici
adpersonalem,
a maiori
sedquiaproceditur
ad minoprocedatur
subpositioni
4
hominem'
hunc
sedcumdicitur4preter
rem,quiacumdicitur:preter
(nonrestringitur,
iam
minorem
habet
restrictam.
habet
hominem')2
subpositionem,
quia
Deindeprobat
communis
actorsecundum
scilicetquodterminus
membrum,
positusin
Namcumdiciturita: omnium
affirmato
habeatsimplicem
subpositionem.
predicato
estdisciplina'
estfalsanisiisteterminus
eadem
, dicitactorquodhecpropositio
oppositorum
4
'
non
haberet
est
|
disciplina
subpositionem,
disciplinas
simplicem
quia
aliquaparticularis
nammedicina
est(solum)saniet egri,et si(c) de aliis.
oppositorum,
23raque sit omnium
dicendum
cumdicitur
Itadicitactor.Sedtamen
eadem
estdisciplina'
: omnium
,
oppositorum
4omnis
ibi 'disciplina'
et
homo
animai
habetpersonalem
est
', ibi
subpositionem,
4animai
' habet
et nonsimplicem.
Et sic de consimilibus.
subpositionem
personalem
4
4omnis
'
homo
estanimai'
Namcumdicitur:
Probatio
, ibi animaihabeat
personalem.
quod
'
4omnis
' habet
4
estquodle 4homo
homo
estanimai
', planum
personalem.
Ergole animai
essetfalsa.Namhomononestanimai
oportet
prout
quodhabeat,quiaaliterpropositio
estgenus,
reextra.Quarehabebit
sedproutestresextra.Etsicsubponet
personalem
pro
' cumdicimushic: 4omnis
' vel in
homo
estanimai
Item.Si le 4animai
subpositionem.
consimilibus
haberet
simplicem
subpositionem,
sequeretur
quodin omnibonosilloessetfallacia
ex variatione
medii.Quodest
accidentis
primefigure
gismoinprimomodo4
' ibile 4animai
' habet
animal
estsubstantia
etsi in
Namdicendoomne
falsum.
personalem
4omnis
' haberet
variatio
in
homo
est
animai
esset
minori
dicendo
predicato
simplicem,
mediiet fallacia
Et hoc estfalsum.
estquodterminus
accidentis.
Quaremanifestum
communis
affirmato
habetpersonalem
et nonsimsubpositionem
positusin predicato
plicem.
in convertente
habetterminus
et in conversa.Et
Preterea.Eandemsuppositionem
inparticularem,
in libroPriorm,
universalis
affirmativa
convertitur
utvultAristotiles
animai
est
homo'
ut 1omnis
homo
estanimai;
Sed
manifestum
estquodinista
.
ergoquoddam
' habet
hocquodest4animai
personalem
subpositionem.
particulari
Ergoprimahabebat
communis
in ilio predicato
affirmato.
(Et hoc est verumquod terminus
personalem
'
4
non
in
habet
affirmato)*
subpositionem
simplicem
positus predicato
simplicem
accipiendo
t prointentione
proutterminus
subponi
queestinanima.
1Supplied
from
theother
MSS.
2Supplied
from
theother
MSS.
3Discreta
T.
4 Supplied
theother
from
MSS.
147

11:56:15 AM

Sed alii accipiuntaliter1simplicem

et dicuntquod quandoterminus
subpositionem'
communis
statpronatura
et nonproaliquosubposito
communi
sedpro
determinato,
natura
communi
tantum
tunchabetsimplicem.
habetesseinsubpositis,
Etsicaccique
*
' verumest
communis
in predicato
affirmato
piendosimplicem
quodterminus
positus
sed
habetsimplicem.
Sedsicnondicimus
stat
proprie
simplicem, quando pio intentione
Et cumdiciturquod non
que est in anima.Et sic loquendononhabetsimplicem.
'omnis
homo
estanimai
; ergohocanimai1
, concedo.Sednonestcausa,utdictum
sequitur:
a simplici
seda maiori
adpersonalem
adminorem.
est,quodsitprocessus
subpositione
Etadaliudquandoactordicitquodcumdicitur:*omnium
esteadem
oppositorum
disciplina
' haberet
4
simplicem
quod hec essetfalsa(ni)sihoc quodest disciplina
subpositionem
dicendum
etnon
habetpersonalem
immo)1
quodimmo(estveraetnonhabetsimplicem,
estsensus,
utactordicit,quodaliquaparticularis
unasitomnium
oppositorum,
quiale
4
' licetstet
nonstattamenprounaparticulari
disciplina
proparticularibus
disciplinis,
'
eadem
estdisciplina
determinate.
Sedestsensus4oppositorum
(sic: saniet egri
disciplina
eademestdisciplina)2,
utmedicina;
etcongrui
etincongrui,
utgramatica,
etsicdealiis.
diffinit
Et dicitquodpersonalis
estacceptioterConsequenter
personalem.
subpositio
minicommunis
ut 4homo
curri.Et statim
istam(et dicit
dividit
prosuisinferioribus,
et
Tunc
confusam.
dividitur
determinatam
declarat
per
quodpersonalis
quesitdeterminataet dicitquod determinata
communis
diciturquamhabetterminus
sumptus>3
indefinite
vel cumsignoparticulari,
ut homo
currivel *quidam
homo
curri.Etvides
reddere
locutionem
determinata
veram
determinate
subpositio
quoddicitur
quando
potest
ut 4homo
curri.
Undeipsestatim
declarat
diffinitionem
deterprounovelpropluribus,
minate
scilicet
velcumsignoparticulari
indefinite
subpositionis,
quodterminus
sumptus
4
habeatdeterminatam.
curri
Undedicitquodinistis:'homo
homo
curri
etsicde
, quidam
aliisle 'homo'
t tamprocurrentibus
non
tamen
locutioreddit
currentibus,
subponi
quam
nemveram
Namaliudestsubponere,
aliudestlocutionem
veram
reddere.
procrrente.
Utpatetquiaibi 4homo
curri
hominibus
sedsolumprocrrente
proomnibus
subponit,
redditlocutionem
veram.
actorperaliamrationem
indefinite
habeat
Consequenter
probat
quodterminus
sumptus
determinatam
utdicitactor,si dicatur:4animal
estSor',4animal
est
subpositionem,
quia,
' et sic de
' immoestibifallacia
Plato
non
animai
est
omnis
homo
singulis, sequitur:'ergo
dictionis
a pluribus
ad unamdeterminatam
in conclusione.
determinatis
procedendo
4
habetdeterminatam
Etsicle animaV
Etestterminus
indefinite
subpositionem.
sumptus.
habetdeterminatam
indefinite
subpositionem.
Ergosumptus
Inhocterminatur
sententia
lectionis.
)
( Questiones
Circahanclectionem
huiuspropositionis
sunt
Est
de virtute
plura querenda. querendum
4homo
estspecies'
.
4hominis
'
velhabens
nomine
)
( Utrum
quiditas
quiditatem
signicetur
4
nominehominis
23rbEtprimoqueritur
', utrum
| velhabens
quidsignificetur
quiditas
quidialionomine
Etarguitur
tatem.Etsicde quolibet
illudquodsignificatur
quod
aggregati.
4hominis
' nonsit
4
Namquicquid
nomine
nomine
tantum.
humanitatis'
quiditas
significatur
4hominis
'
' et
4homo
nomine
de
Cuius
declaratio
est
plus.
.quia
predicatur
significatur
1Supplied
from
theother
MSS.
2Supplied
from
theother
MSS.
3Supplied
from
theother
MSS.
148

11:56:15 AM

4humanitas
' autemnon.Hoc autemnonesset
(ni)siplussignificaretur
(nosubpositis,
4hominis
'
4humanita . Sednon
nisihabens
humanitatem.
mine)
(ti)s'
plus
quam
significatur
4
'
hominis
ethabens
quiditatem.
quiditas
significatur
Ergonomine
' et *humanitas
4Homo
' sunt
etabstractum.
Preterea.
sicutconcretum
Quodpatet.Namin
substantie
concretum
abstractum
vero
de
(non).Et sicse
subpositis
predicatur,
genere4
4humanitas
'
' non.Etita
et 4humanitas
de subpositis,
4/iomo'
habenthomo'
quod
predicatur
' estconcretum.
4homo
abstractum.
Sedconcretum
Quarepatetquod
plusquam
significai
'
4hominis
et habensquiditatem.
nomine
significatur
quiditas
Diffinitum
In oppositum
et diffinitio
idemsignificant.
Sedpartesdiffinitionis
arguitur.
ut diciturSextoMethaphysice.
Nuncautemhabensquiditatem
nonest
suntforme,
4hominis
' non
nomine
forma
videtur
sed
forme,
Quare
quod
subpositum.
nequepars
nomineestunumperse:
habensquiditatem.
Preterea.Quod significatur
significetur
nonfaceret
unumvere.Sed ex subposito
aliterex partibus
et quiditate
diffinitionibus
est extraintellectum
nonfitunumperse. Namsubpositum
quiditatis.
Ergovidetur
4/i
omo'
non
habens
quiditatem.
quod
significet
' et 4
sed aliteret
nomine4hominis
Dicuntquidamquodidemsignificatur
humanitatis'
4
'
est
in
nomine
hominis
sed nomine
aliter,quia
subpositis,
quiditasprout
significatur
4humanitatis'
esseverum,quiaqui
cumintentione
ad subposita.
Sed hoc nonvidetur
Similiter
aliterquamsitinre,falsum
modoopposito
intelligit.
significans
quam
intelligit
nonhabeat
essenisiinsubpositis,
falsum
Ideocumhumanitas
nature,
competat
significai.
nisifalsomodo.Et tamennonest
torumsignifican
nonpotestcumprecisione
subposi
falsomodosignificetur,
humanitas
dicendo4/iec
dicerequod humanitas
; (ergo)etc.'
'
4
nonnisi
in suppositis,
humanitatem
non
Undesi diceretur
quod humanitas
significai
verum
esse
in
tunc
esset.
non
tamen
modum
Sed
dari
subpositis,
posset
per
qui' repugnet
de subiecto
nonpredicatur.
causaquare4humanitas
Quarepatetquodnonbenedicerent
' idem
4homo
' et 4humanits
sedaliteret aliter.
significant
quod
' solum
'
sed 4homo
Et ideo dicendumquod 4humanitas
quiditatem
significai,
plus
4habens
inseparatis
humanitatem
Adcuiusevidentiam
intelligendum
quod
quam
significai
4
' et 4
a materia
nondiffer
. Nam(ad)omne
quiditatem*
quodquidest' idest'habens
quiditas
illuci
adquodpertinet
Etideo
pertinet
quodquidest,quiaineisnonestmateria.
quiditas,
a
materia
in
est
dicitPhilosophus
Septimo
quod separatis
unumquodqueillud
Methaphysice
de abstracto
ut
est per essentiam
suam.Undein illisconcretum
predicatur,
quod
4intellectus
autemmateriam
differt
etquodquidest
estintellectualitas'
. Inhabentibus
quiditas
Namadaliquidpertinet
diversitatem
materie
adformam.
propter
quodquidestadquod
etde subposito
nonpertinet
Namquodquidestpertinet
ad subpositum
prediquiditas.
autem
non.Etsicpatet(quod)quodquidestincludit
Preterea.
catur,
subpositum.
quiditas
estabstractum.
Homoestconcretum
humanitas
substantie,
Ergocumconcretum
significet
manifestum
estquod
et hocnonestnisihabens
quiditatem,
plusquamsuumabstractum
4/omo'
nonsignificai
solumquiditatem
sedhabens
quiditatem.
cumdicitquodidemsignificai
Hiisvisisdicendum
nomen
Adprimum,
ad argumenta.
nonsignificet
nisihabens
verum
est.(Cum)arguis
quoddiffinitio
quoddiffinitio,
quididicoquodymo.Et(cum)tuprobasquodnon,quiadicitur
tatem,
Septimo
Mathephysice
suntforme,
idest
dicendum
quodintelligit
quodsuntforme,
quodpartesdiffinitionis
habent
modum
datesse,itapartes
diffinitionis,
forme,
quesuntgenuset
quiasicutforma
dantessesuisinferioribus.
differentia,
fitunum
ethabente
sicut
Adaliuddicendum
quiditatem1
peressentiam
quodex quiditate
1exhumanitate
etquiditate
T.
149

11:56:15 AM

nonhabetaliquidinactupreter
exmateria
Namhabens
etforma.
quiditatem
quiditatem.
nonsitde intellectu
ex hocnonarguitur
Etlicethabenshumanitatem
quiditatis,
quin
'
*
extraintellectum
fiatunumperessentiam
es illis.Na, rationale
'animalis*
est,tamen
uthomo.
exanimali
fitunumperesse(ntiam),
etrationali
'homo
istius
estspecies
*)
(De virtute
propositions
estspecies*
istiuspropositionis
. Etvidetur
de virtute
: 'homo
Queritur
quodsitfalsa,nam
nonpredicatur.
de composito
Sedspeciesestquidsimplex,
homoverocomsimplex
estspecies*
siveseparatum
. Item.Abstractum
nonpotest
: 'homo
positum.
Ergohecestfalsa
Sed
est
ab
vereaffirmative
de separato
homine,
predicari. species separatum
quiaestin
estspecies*
.
homoauteminre extra.Quarepatetquodhecestfalsa:'homo
anima,
Sedcontra.Probatio
et diffinitum.
diffinitio,
predicatur
quodsitvera.De quocumque
1 depluribus
numero
Seddiffinitio
, predicatur
differentibus
que est: quodpredicatur
speciei1
de pluribus
23va de homine,
differentibus
nam| homopotest
numero.
predicari
Ergospecies
de pluribus
differentibus
numero,(quia) de homine.Quareilia est
potestpredicari
estspecies*
.
vera:lhomo
nosterestvirtus
dicendum
Adhancquestionem
quodintellectus
passiva.Ideooportet
ad intelligendum.
moveatur
Nuncautemressuntque se
quodab aliquoextrnseco
faciunt
actu
redditur
per sui speciem.Et sic per speciesrerumintellectus
intelligi
non
sunt
in
Nam
res
intellecte
Et
est
sed
rerum.
hoc
anima,
species
quod
intelligens.
TertioDe animaquodlapisnonestin animasedspecieslapidis.Et
dicitPhilosophus
Patetquodresnonsitinanima.Namsicutdicit(Philosophus)
Tertio
De anima
preterea.
ita
intellectus
ad
sensus
se
habet
ad
Nunc
sicut
autem
color
sensibile,
intelligibile.
quod
estinintellectu,
sedspecies
nonestinoculo,sedspeciescolors.Ergonecintelligibile
Ex hisiampatetquodspeciesse habetad intellectum
nonsecundum
quod
intelligibilis.
sedsicutintellectus
Et
redditur
intellectum
estproprie,
intelligens.hecspeciesvocatur
Namhecestfalsa:'resestsimilitudo
Ethecde renonpredicatur.
similitudo
sua*;
rerum.
de separato.
Et de iliamalequidemdicere
nonpredicatur
tur'homo
est
namseparatum
Alio
modo
est
similitudo
sua.
dicitur
non
homo
de
', quia
speciesquepredicatur
species
ineo quodquid.Etitaspeciesinre,utresipsaab intelnumero
differentibus
pluribus
humana
utintelligatur
Namcumsitinipsanatura
lectuconcipitur.
reperire
perspeciem
istam
cum
considerei
talemnaturam
in
est
anima
;
speciemet considerei
quesolet
que
illi
rei
materiam
sic
in
intellecte
rationem
tribuit
differentibus,
per
reperiri subpositis
speciei; etsicde aliissuomodo.Etsicpatetquodspeciesab animafactaestab ipsare.
estspecies*.
turdicendo'homo
Et ideode ipsapredica
(Et sic patetquodipsaestvera:
De anima
EthocestquoddicitAverois
'homo
estspecies*).
supraPrimm
quodintellectus
abanimatribuit
inrebus,et hocest:reiintellecte
intellectus
agensfacituniversalitatem
velgenus,et sicde aliis.Et intelligit
essespeciem
quodspeciesnonestquidsimplex,
etintentione.
Etideoderepotest
exresubiecta
suomodo,
predicari
ymoestagregatum
notaquodsicutnatura
de subiecto.Ulterius
rei que estin
sicutaccidensconcretum
nonintelligendo
>icessespeciem
uthomoestin intellectu
particularia,
particularibus,
non
tamen
secundum
in
est
in
est
(r)ei
particularibus,
quod
particularibus.
competit que
et quomodoverificata*.
estspecies*
Etitapatetquodistaestvera:'homo
Adprimum.
de
Cumdicitur:"simplex
Adiliaque probant
quodsitfalsa,dicendum.
linde
visum
est
concedo,
est
similitudo
non
quodsp'ecies
prout
composito predicatur",
Sed proutpredicatur
rei que estin anima,nonpredicatur.
est,ut
quidcompositum
1subponitur
T
predicari
150

11:56:15 AM

Adaliudsimiliter
visumestiam.Et resextra;subiecta
tarnen
intentioni.
patetsolutio
de separato,
estnon
quiailla similitudo
que separata
quod nonpredicatur
separatum
sedrespredicatur
utpatuit.Etresistanonestseparata.
predicatur,
Ethecsufficiant.
TERTIA
LECTIO
unummembrum
actordeclaravit
subConfusasubpositioetc. Superius
personalis
Hic
alio
idest
scilicet
de
determinata
de
membro,
tionis,
prosequitur
posi
subpositione.
de confusa.
Et habetduas.PrimodifHnit,
secundodividit.Secunda:Item.Confusarum.
alterum
Hec secundain duas.Primodividitet declaratmembra.
Secundoreprobat
Prima
induas.Primo
facit
membrum
Secunda
: Sedergo
credo.
dictum
divisionis.
est.
quod
contrarietatem
dubiumsivesolvitquamdam
Secundoremovet
que videtursequiex
confusam
sub. Primain duas.Primodividit
dictis.Secunda:Sednevideatur
opposition
membra
inter
innuendo
aliam
di
Secundo
visionem
differentiam
positionem.
assignat
'homo
isteterminus
*.Hecsitdivisio1.
confuse
Secunda:Unde
subpositionis.
Et dicitquodconfusa
In primapartediffnit
confusam
tionem.
est
subpositio
subposi
Et
mediante
universali.
termini
communis
acceptio
propluribus '
signo
glosapropluribus
*: ibi
ut omnis
homo
estanimai
'homo*
subtermino,
statpro
contentis
idestproomnibus
iliosigno'omnis*.
mediante
quolibet
subposito
Etdicitquodconfusarum
aliaestconfusa
confusam
dividit
subpositionem.
Consequenter
1omnis*
et
modus
nam
est
etmodus,
est
idest
necessitate
vel
modi
,
(idem
signum
signum
signi
necessitate
rei. Et declaratmembra.
(Ut cum
; alia est confusa
[non]
determinatio)
'homo*
necessitate
huiussigni1omnis*
isteterminus
homo
estanimai1)2
dicitur:'omnis
Similiter
cumunicuique
confundi
tur,pro quolibetsuo supposito.
tur,idestdistribui
'animai
* confunditur
itas, necessitate
rei iste terminus
hominisua insitanimai
pro
cumunicuique
'homo*.
homini
suainsit
totanimalibus
(Similiter
proquothominibus
rei iste terminus'est* confunditur
essentia,necessitate
pro tot essentiispro
'homo*
membra.Consequenter
>3. Et sic declaravit
ipse assignat
quot hominibus
confuse
aliamdivisionem
innuendo
Et dicit
intermembra
differentiam
subpositionis.
'homo
* dicitur
'
isteterminus
confuse
et
homo
estanimai*
subponere
quodhic: omnis
tenetur
confuse
et distributive
mobiliter
et distributive,
homine,
quia ' pro quolibet
ut omnis
homo
sed mobiliter
; ergoSor; ergo
pro tantoquia licetfaceredescensum,
'animal*
teneridistributive
et confuse,
Plato
Dicituristeterminus
, etsicde singulis*.
bene
immo
inmobiliter
non
stat
sed
mobiliter,
quia
quia nonlicet
pro subpositis,
homo
estanimai*;
fieridescensum
hocanimai*.
subeo. Namnonsequitur:'omnis
ergo
sicuthic: 'homo
ad personalem,
estdignssima
creaturaa simplici
23vbI Sedestibiprocessus
rum
est
Sed
'rosa
rosa*.
homo*,
vel:
;
; ergoaliquis
pulcherrima
florumergoaliqua
protanto
a partesubiecti,
sedin illa: 'omnis
differunt
homo
est
suppositio
quiainistisestsimplex
hieactorunamdivisionem
a partepredicati.
animai*
Et itainnuit
quamposteadestruet
aliamobilis.
aliaestconfusa
inmobilis,
subpositionum
quodconfusarum
scilicet
homo
est
actordicithicquodsuperius
Sedvidetis
dixerat,
quodhic: 'omnis
quod
*habet
*'animal
cuiusoppositum
estprobatum
animal
subpositionem,
superius
simplicem
estdignssima
et est verum.Similiter
hic actorinnuitquod hic: ' homo
creaturarum*
,
1TheMSSBordeaux
ad
lectionis
1070have:Hecestdivisio
999,Vat.Lat.3022,andMadrid
usque
Sedegocredo.
lectionostra.
illampartem:
Etibiterminetur
1077has:Hecestdivisio
Avignon
lectionis.
2Supplied
theother
from
MSS.
3Supplied
from
theother
MSS.
l51

11:56:15 AM

'/}
Et hoc similitei
omo'habetsimplicem
estfalsum.
Si verum
estillud
subpositionem.
scilicet
terminus
est
habeat1
dictum,
quod
simplicem
quod superius
subpositionem
creaturarum
quandostatpro esse quod est in anima.Namhie: 'homoestdignssima
sedproessequodhabetinreextra.Ethoc
'homo1
nonstatproessequodhabetinanima,
humane
Periarmenias,
patetperexpositorem
supralibrum
quidicitquodnature
accepte
nonproessequodhabetinanima,sedinre
ab intellectu
competit
predicatum
aliquod
4
'
creaturarum
illudpredicatum
nature
extra,sicuthic: homo
(est)dignssima
competit
humane
ab
intellectu
tantum2
esse
apprehense
pro
quodhabetin re extra.Quare
patet
sedpersonalem.
Nampossumus
dicere: 4homo
est
simplicem
quodnonhabet
suppositionem
Namsensusistiuspropositionis
estquod non
creaturarum;
ergoaliquishomo'.
dignssima
est aliquishomoquinsitnobilior
aliiscreaturis
NamdicitAristotiles
omnibus.
Tertio
si
est
melior
et
homo
homo
est
Topicorum
optimoequo, simplicit^
quod optimus
meliorequo,quia dicitibidemquodin unoquoque(genere)estreperire
unamperSed perfectio
est nobiliorin hominequamin aliiscreaturis,
fectionem.
quia habet
Et ideohomoestnobilior
animamintellectivam.
omnibus
aliiscreaturis.
Et sic patet
hic personalem
Similiter
hic: 4rosaestpulcherrima
quod 'homo'habet
suppositionem.
' habet
4rosa
4
Et
personalem
suppositionem.sequiturrosaestpulcherrima
orum'<quod
'. Namsensusestquodnonestaliquarosaquinsit pulcrior
; ergoaliquarosa
orum)*
'
aliisfloribus,
et statibi 4rosa
proessequodhabetin re extraet nonin anima.Et sic
etnonsimplicem.
habetpersonalem
suppositionem
actor
removet
dubium
seu quandamcontrari
etatem incidentem
ex
Consequenter
4animaV
Nam
dixit
modo
actor
cum
homo
lomnis
est
animai
le
dicitur:
',
predictis.
quod
habetsimplicem
Et superius
in principio
lectionis
dixitquodhabebat
subpositionem.
Et isteduesuntopposite
et nonpossunt
confusam.
starein eodem.Namconfusa
sub
et
et
continetur
sunt
duo
videtur
sint
personali
personalis simplex opposite.
quod
' si le 4Ergo
' habet
ineodemcumdicitur:4omnis
homo
estanimai
animai
et
opposita
simplicem
4
confusam.
Ad hoc ipsesolvit.Et dicitquodle animal1
consideran.
potestdupliciter
Unomodosecundum
incommuni.
Etsicsimplicem
habet.
quodstatpronatura
generis
Aliomodosecundum
iammultiplicatur
etsichabetconquodistanatura
persubposita,
fusam
etnonmobilem
Undedicitactorquodconfusa
bene
etinmobilis
sedinmobilem.
stare
secundum
idest
cum
secundum
diversos
Sed
diversa,
potest
simplici
respectus.
confusa
mobilis
starecumsimplici
necsecundum
idemnecsecundum
(non)potest
diversa,
nec diversis
idestnec unorespectu
Et itasolvitactor.Tarnen
secundum
respectibus.
' non habet
iam videtisquod le 4animal
veritatem
subpositionem,
simplicem
ymo
et nonconfusam,
ut diceturinferius
ab actore,ymohabetbenedeterpersonalem,
minatam.
>
<Questiones
Circahanclectionem
de
lectione,quiaactordixitquod non
potestqueri precedenti
4animal
est
:
animal
est
Plato
aliis
homo
et
sic
animal
estomnis
de
Sor,
; ergo
's, sedest
sequitur
a pluribus
Etideopossunt
determinatis
adunamdeterminatam.
processus
subpositionibus
hicduoqueri.Primm,
utrum
a pluribus
ad unamdeterminatam
determinatis
processus
4animalestomnis
faciatfallaciam
homo'
dictionis.
virtute
de
Secundum
huius:
f
figure
actor.De primoqueretur
infallacia
dictionis.
Seddesecundo
quamnegat
queritur
figure
hic:
1habebat
2tarnen
3similiter
T.
T.
MSS.
4 Supplied
from
theother
MSS.
5omnis
homo
estanimal
T.
1S2

11:56:15 AM

'
estomnis
homo
Utrum
(hec)sitvera:'animal
Etprimo
libroPeriarmenias.
Quidicitquodnulla
quodsitfalsa1,
arguitur
perAristotilem
estiliain qua universale
: nullaesty
idest
universaliter
; et glosatur
predicatur
sumptum
homo'
estomnis
falsa.Sedhicestinpredicto,
. Quarevidetur
essefalsa.
dicendo:1animal
'
' nullum
animal
estomnis
homo
homo
Preterea.
sic: 4animal
estomnis
animal
; ergo
;
Arguitur
nonestanimal'
Nonminor;
. Conclusio
estfalsaetinpossibilis.
Ergoaliquapremissarum.
in singulis,
quodpatetperinductionem
quiaasinusnonestomnishomoet homonon
homo'
estomnishomo.Quaremaiorestfalsa;scilicetista: 4animal
estomnis
. Preterea.
4
homo'
estomnis
etsi aliquodanimal
animal
estomnis
est
homo;
Sequituranimal
ergoaliquod
omnishomo,ergoSorvel Platoestomnishomo.Sedhoc estfalsum.
et prima,
Ergo
4
In oppositum
sic. Hec estvera:| 4omnis
homo'.
24rascilicethec: aimalestomnis
arguitur
4
termini
homo
estanimal'
non
, ergoest hec: animalestomnis
homo'namsignificatum
in subiectovel predicato.
mutatur
nequemodussignificandi
per hoc quod ponitur
Etsicvidetur
quodsitvera.
Adistamquestionem
estvera.Namsicutanimaicompetit
dicendum
quodsimpliciter
sic homopro quolibetsubposito
hominipro quolibetsubposito
hominis,
competit
animalipro (quibusdam
homo
suissubpositis)2.
Et ideo sicutistaestvera: 1omnis
est
4
' et
.
animai
dubitai
homo
dubitat
estomnis
de
alia,
de
linde
', itaet ista: animai
una,
qui
1
estPlato,et sicdealiis.
homo
estSor,ergoanimai
estomnis
; ergoanimai
sequitur:animai
estomnis
Ethocintelligas
homo'.
hec: 'animal
Quaresimpliciter3
primaestvera,scilicet
4omnis
'4
si
Nam
teneatur
manifeste
le
teneatur
distributive.
collective,
positoquod
essetfalsa.
Etprimoad primm.
Adargumenta
dicendum.
Quando
ipsamessefalsam
que probant
ilia
in
dicitPhilosophus
est
nulla
universale
universaliter
sumptum
quod
qua
predicatur,
estinplusquamsubiectum,
ut 4homo
dicendum
quandopredicatum
quodipseintelligit
animal'
nonsitinplus,beneestvera,lindeetiamistaestvera:
estomne
. Sedsipredicatum
' et sicde consimilibus.
4homo
homo
estomnis
nullum
Ad aliud.Cumarguispersillogismum
ex oppositis:uianimaiestomnis
homo;
animal
omnis
animai
non
estfalsa",concedo;"ergo
est
estanimai'
, (conclusio
homo;
ergo
et etiamconcedo;et tu dicis: "ergononminor,scilicetista:
aliqua
premissarum",
4nullum
animalestomnis
dicoquodymominorestfalsa,hecscilicet:4nullum
homo')*;
animalestomnis
dico quod tu non probas
homo'.Et tu probasper inductionem;
immoarguisab insufficienti.
nonestomnis
Namdebesinducere:4homo
sufficienter,
Et tuncestfalsa.Namvisumestquodhecestvera:4homo
Etsic
homo'.
estomnis
homo'.
4
estomnis
animal
homo'.
patetquodhecestfalsa:nullum
4animai
estomnis
homo
animai
est
Adaliudpatetsolutio.Cumdicis: sequitur
; ergo
aliquod
omnis
homo'
, concedo;et si: aliquodanimaiestomnishomo;ergoSorvelPlatoet sic
4
dealiis,certeverum
estsubdisiunctione
quodestvera: ergoSorvelPlatosubdisiunctione
4 Sor
estomnis
homo'
bene
sed
non
est
omnis
homo'
;
, (sedsubdisiunctione
sequitur:ergo
4 SorvelPlato
Et
est
vera:
et
sic
de
aliis
est
omnis
sic
,
homo')6.
sequitur:
ergo
patetquod
4animai
estomnis
homo'
.
1fallacia
T.
2rasura
inTsupplied
from
theother
MSS.
3similiter
T.
4animal
T
5Supplied
from
theother
MSS.
*Supplied
from
theother
MSS.
lS 3

11:56:15 AM

LECTIO
QUARTA
confuse
actorposuitunamdivisionem
Sed ego credo etc.Superius
Hic
subpositionis.
Et
tur
in
ad
alterum
illamdivisionem
membrum.
Primo
dividi
duas.
destruit
quantum
solvitad rationem
Secundo
rationes.
destruit
illudmembrum
perquamipsi
perquatuor
Primain quatuor
secundum
SeSecunda:Causaautem1.
rationes.
movebantur.
quatuor
Totum
Tertia:Item.
universale.
videtur.
cunda:Item.Hocidem
ilia.
Quarta:Item.
Comparatio
Primain duas.Primoenimdeclarat
minorem.
Secundoponitmaiorem.
Secunda:Sed
Hecestdivisiolectionis
intra.
natura
generis.
f
homo
sic procedit.Dixitsuperius
est
Ad (primam)
quodcumdicitur:omnis
partem
lanimaV
habetconfusam
animaV
inmobilem.
Mododestruit
, isteterminus
subpositionem
inpredicai positus
habeat
confusam
hocetdicitactorquod2noncreditquodterminus
nec
Et
rationes.
Prima
est
mobilem
inmobilem.
hoc
probat perquatuor
subpositionem
vel inmobiliter
nonestgenus.Sed cum
mobiliter
talis. Naturagenerismultiplicata
mobiliter
homo
estanimal
confundi
dicitur:'omnis
', ibipredicatur
genus.Ergononpotest
4animal
' non
velinmobiliter.
Etsicilleterminus
habetconfusam
mobilem
subpositionem
Inhacrati
scilicet
necinmobilem.
onesicprocedit
declarat
hanc
minorem,
quodprimo
'
homo
omnequodde
estanimaV
predicatur
quod: omnis
genus.Nam,utdicitPorphirius,
' non
homo
autequale.Sedhic: 4omnis
estanimal
aliopredicatur,
autestmaiusautminus
predicatur
Ergoessentiale.
Ergogenusvel
equale.Ergomaius.Sed nonaccidentale.
ibi differentia.
differentia.
Sednonpredicatur
Ergogenus.Sedposteaponitmaiorem,
etc. Consequenter
probatactorpersecundam
generis
que*
quandodicit:Sed*natura
formabitis
non differ
a primanisiquiaalio modoprobatminorem,
lindesimiliter
velinmobiliter
nonestgenus
rationem
mobiliter
: natura
; sedomnis
multiplicata
generis
mobiliter
vel
homoest animal;ibi predicatur
genus;ergononpotestmultiplican6;
alio modoquamprius,scilicetquodhic
in littera
Et minorem
inmobiliter.
declarat
in PrimoTopicorum,
omnequodde alio
predicatur
genus.Quia,ut vultAristotiles
autnonconversim.
Si conversim,
autestdiffinitio,
autpredicatur
conversim,
predicatur
autcaditindiffinitione,
autnon.Sinon,
autproprium.
Sinonconversimi,
sicestaccidens.
' ibinon
homo
estanimal
differenveldifferentia.
Sed1omnis
Sisic,autestgenus
predicatur
' non
Etvidequodverum
estquodibi*animai
estdeclarata.
tia.Ergogenus.Etsicminor
ut
nec
mobilem
nec
actor
habetconfusam
dicet
inmobilem,
inferius,
quia,
subpositionem
a partesubiecti
estnecessitate
etbeneomnisconfusa
positum
subpositio
signi.Etsignum
a partepredicati.
Nonenimpotest
nonpotestdistribuere
terminm
(positum)
attingere
Namsignum
bene
de signointelligas
afirmativo.
| universale
predicatum;
negativum
24.ri)
cum
actor
natura
distribuii
virtute
Sed
dicit
quod
predicatum
generis
negationis.
nonestgenus,si ipseintelligat
de natura
mobiliter
velinmobiliter
multiplicata
generis
estquod(non)multiplicatur
sicverum
persubposita.
proutestintentio
queestinanima,
benemultiplicatur
ut
animai
est
Sed natura
res,
,
persubposita,
quiain
prout
generis
tishabetesse.
subposi
4
homo
estanimaV
, ibiisteterminus
quod omnis
probat
peraliamrationem
Consequenter
1Theother
terminatur.
MSS.add:ubilectio
2quodactorT
3questione
T
*siT
5quodT
6predicari
T
7estproprium
T
lS4-

11:56:15 AM

' nonhabeatconfusam
'animal
Totumin quantitate
et
mobiliter
nequeinmobiliter.
Et esttotumin quantitate)1
totumuniversale
<exopposita
duplex,ut
distinguuntur.
etperfectum,
utquando
inquantitate
totum
dicitactor.Estenimquoddam
completum
ut quandoconfunditur
interminus
confunditur
Est aliudincompletum,
mobiliter.
estoppositum
totiuniversale,
ut
Et sivesitcompletum
mobiliter.
siveincompletum,
homo
estanimal'
vultactor.Etduoopposita
nonpossunt
stareineodem.Sedhic: 'omnis
,
Et ita
animalesttotumuniversale,
cumsitgenus.Et sic nonesttotumin quantitate.
nonconfunditur
mobiliter
nec inmobiliter,
confundere
tur,totumin
quiasi mobiliter
inquantitate
essettotum
esset.Si veroinmobiliter,
incompletum.
quantitate
perfectum
istorum
Sednullum
potestesse.Ergo2etc.
et
Sed in hoc quoddicitactorquodest quoddamtotumin quantitate
incompletum
estetcompletum,
nonbenedicit.Namomnetotuminquantitate
perfectum
inperfectum,
esttotumuniversale
idestterminus
universaliter,
(sumptum)
quiatotumin quantitate
libro
Etitaestibidicide omni.Sed,utdicitAristotiles
communis
cumsignouniversali.
de quo nondicatur
dicide omniestquandonichilestsumeresubsubiecto
Priorm,
sitperfectum
et completum.
predicatum.
quodomnetotuminquantitate
Ergooportet
omnesiste
mobiliter
distribuit.
Etsemper
Unde
universale
distribuit,
quidquid
signum
' et 1omnis
1omnis
homo
inmari*.
timet
mulier
timet
inpartu
suntfalsede virtute
locutionis:
et perfectum
est.
Etsicpatetquodomnetotum
inquantitate
completum
'
'
rationem
ad probandum
quodle animalnonhabetconConsequenter
ponitquartam3
illa secundum
Et dicitquod comparado
fusammobiliter
(quam)
nequeinmobiliter.
estabillasecundum
inferiora
diversa
reducitur
ad
adsuperius
reducuntur
quamsuperius*
nonpoterunt
simulesseineodem.Sed
Etitacumsintdiverse
inferioras.
comparationes,
homo
in hac: 4omnis
estanimai''animaistatibi in comparatione
prima,scilicetprout
in
in communi.
reducuntur
in superius,
namstatpronatura
inferiora6
Ergononstabit
in
scilicet
reducitur
idest
secunda
inferiora, multiplicatur
proutsuperius
comparatione,
'animal'in hac: 'omnis
isteterminus
perea. Etsie patetquodnonpoterit
multiplican
necinmobiliter.
mobiliter
homo
confusam
estanimal'.Quarenonhabebit
subpositionem
' nonconfundiDicitactoretverum
dicit:quod4animal
concedimus.
<Etistaargumenta
sententia
turmobiliter
lectionis.
necinmobiliter)?.
Etinhocterminatur
(Questiones)
terminus
)
( Utrum
possit
subponere
provoce

'
estvox'.Arguitur
utrumterminus
Queritur
provoce,dicendohomo
possitsubponere
in
Dicit
enim
albumestnomen
Elenchis.
intentionem
Aristotilis
quodsic,per
quod
'
etreset dicitquodnomenestvox.Etita*album
Dicit
potestsumi
provoce.Preterea.
'

et curri
libroPeriarmenias
estnomen
estverbum.Etverbum
Philosophus
quod cursus
est vox. Ergoetc. In oppositum
ad
Quandocumque
aliquidest indifferens
arguitur.
ilio
est
tantum
tenetur
ad
coartatum
alterum
cohartatum.
ad
pro
aliquaplura,ipsum
quod
ad quodeumque
indifferens
anteinpositionem
Ergovox quandosumitur
significatum
1Supplied
theother
from
MSS.
2genus
T
3quandam
T
4 inferius
T
5superiora
T
6superiora
T
7 Supplied
from
theother
MSS.
*ss

11:56:15 AM

ad significatimi
solumtenebitur
tandum
<vel>ad seipsam,
ipsacoartata
prore
represen
teneri
estvox'
voce.Quareestfalsa:' homo
Etideononpoterit
. Etsicde
pro
significata.
' indifferens
sitadrationale
etirrationale,
Maiormanifesta
similibus.
est.Namcum'animal
ad
iam
removetur
ibi
differentia
'rationale'
Minor
contrahitur
,
(ir)rationale.
per
quando
estdifferens
ut accipiatur
ad significandum
patetde se quodvox (anteinpositionem)
provocevelprosignificato.
Ergoetc.
locutionis
nonpotestsubdicendum
Ad hancquestionem
(terminus
quodde virtute
Kecestfalsa4homo
estvox
'. Adhocdeclaranlocutionis)1
ponere
provoce,ymodevirtute
ad signidumaccipioduaspositiones2.
Quarum
primaestquodvoxex quoestinposita
suum
Secunda
estquodquanficandum
subponit significatum.
positio
ponatur
ubicumque
si rpugnt
ei quodperterminm
attribuitur
do aliquodpredicatum
subiecto,
signifi'
'homo
estvox
estfalsa.Tuncergodicendum
catur,propositio
perprimam
positionem
4
'
estvox.Sedpersecundam
sensus
est: ressignificata
nominehominis
positionem,
quando
est
falsa.
subiecto,
(Sic
predicatum
ergopatetperquamviamistapropositio
rpugnt
attributa
estvociactualiter
et representat
estfalsa.Namex quo ratiosignificandi
suum
exhoctollitur
provoce,quiaperrationem
acceptio
representat
significandi
significatum,
nonestvox. Et forte
scilicetresipsa.Namressignificata
aliquidcui Vox'rpugnt,
contrahoc. Namposterior
acceptionondebettollere3
priorem.Ergo
aliquisargueret
voxpossetaccipiproseipsa,posterior
cumanteinpositionem
idestprosigacceptio,
adhuc
Dicendum
immo
non
aufert
voce.
nificato,
possit
accipipro
primam
quin
quod
potest
'homo
' sitindifferens
Ut
Cum
cumposterior
hic.
tollere
patet
prime.
priorem,
repugnet
ad nigrum.
sitalbus,ipsofactoalbononestindifferens
| etalbum*
24vaad nigrum
antequam
inhomine
utpossetaccipiproalbovelpronigroquamquodesset
Etpriorfuitacceptio
aufert
istaacceptioposterior
cumsitei opposita.
actualiter
albus.Et tarnen
primam,
Namcontinuum
ad divisionem
in
Similiter
hoc patetin continuo.
(est) in potentia
utinforma
turforma
carnis.Etperistamposteriorem
Etperposterius
infinitum.
acceplicetinquantum
continuum
sit divisibile
in
tionemtollitur
prior.Namcontinuum
forma
nonestpossibiledividiin infinitum.
tarnen
carnis,
infinitum,
proutinformatur
NamdicitPhilosophus
libroPhisicorum
carnem.
quodestdareminimam
Ergosimiliter
sitindifferens
vel
inproposito.
Cumvoxanteinpositionem
ad representandum
seipsam
ab inponente
rem
estratiosignificandi
ad significandum
aliudextrase, cumei tributa
nonsitvox,exhocestquodprima
actualiter
voci,cumressignificata
proqua rpugnt
'
non
stare
scilicet
potest
provoce.Sic eritistafalsa6:homo
acceptiopotesttollis,
quod
estvox'.
'
estvox'
Sedaliquisforte
diceret
, quiavoxnonsolumse habetin
quodhecestvera homo
ex voceet
extra
sed
nominaiaggregatum
rationesignidesignantis
terminm,
aliquid
Nam
attribuitur
altera
Et
ita
est
vera
accidens.
pro
parte
per
aggregato
significatione.
SicutpatetperAristotilem
locutioveraperaccidens.
Et itaredditur
Quinto
aggregati.
'
sanatur
esseveras
: 'homo
et
talespropositiones
Coraxsanatur,
Phisicorum
ponentem
quia
*
' essetvera acci'homo
estvox
videquiaoculus.Etitadiceret
aliquisquodista: homo
per
estanimai'
dens.Sedhocnonpoteststare,quiatunchecessetfalsa:'homo
, si aggregatum
ex
voce
et attrialio
et
ex voceet significatione
de
predicaretur
aggregato
significato
1Supplied
from
theother
MSS.
2propositiones
MSS.
3intelligere
T
4nigrum
T
5copulari
T
6fallacia
T
1^6

11:56:15 AM

illisubiecto
cumproalteraparteaggregati
bueretur
subiecto,
predicatum
repugnarei
nonesthecvox'animal
'. Etsic essetfalsahec:
scilicetprovoce.Namhecvox'homo'
4homo
estanimai.Et si aliquisdicatquidimmoveraperaccidens,quia predicatum
Namsi hoc
rationepartisverificatur
hoc nonpotesthabereveritatem.
de aggregato,
albusesthomo
. Ethocestfalsum.
essetverum,
hecpropositio
vera: 'homo
redderetur
niger'
' de virtute
ut visumest. Et
hec estfalsa'homo
estvox
locutionis,
Quarepatetquod
'
virtute
locutionis
nomen
terhomo
'homo
est
de
ut
est
et
dissillabum'
,
consimiles,
quia
etnonprovocenecpromodosignificando
solumsubponit
minus
proilioquodsignificat
'
"4
et 4curri
est
Adargumenta
dicendum.
QuodAristotiles
ponitistas: albumestnomen,
de
locutionis
sunt
sed
omnes
iste
de
virtute
verbum
dicendum
false,
",
possibilitate
quod
verifican
etc.
possunt
LECTIO
QUINTA
rationes
divisionem
actordestruxit
Causa autemetc. Superius
quamdam
perquatuor
in
Hic removet
causamperquamipsimovebantur
datamab antiquis.
quod terminus
Et ostendit
inmobilem.
quodnon
subpositionem
positushabebatconfusam
predicato
istam
divisionem
Etsiedestruxit
haberemobilem
quamlatenpostest
nequeinmobilem.
Inhacparte
vultremoaliainmobilis.
terposuerat,
scilicetquodaliaestconfusa
mobilis,
in predicato
habereconfusam
terminm
verecausamperquamipsidicebant
positum
illamdivisionem.
et ponebant
subpositionem
Et petestdividiin partestres.Primorepetitcausameorumper quammovebantur.
divisionis
cuiusdam
Tertioex ipsa infertdestruetionem
Secundocausamdestruit.
Et
hoc
Secunda
in
enim
hoc.
Tertia:
dicemus.
Dicimus
Secunda:
(quod)
propter
precedentis.
causam
in duas.Primoadducitquoddamsimileper quod destruit
istarum
dividitur
inproposito.
Secunda:Similiter
eorum.Secundoapplicaiilludsimilead propositum.
*animal1
adistum
terminm
. Secundo
induas.Primoenimdestruit
Hecsecunda
quantum
'
'
'
est
Similiter
hoc
verbum
.
es
verbum
l.
Secunda:
hoc
ad
quantum
Seilladivisionem.
in tres2.Primodestruit
dividitur
hocdestruimus
Et illaparsPropter
Tertioinfert
corrolarium.
Secundo:Quiahumanitas.
cundoprobat
subpositum.
quoddam
Hecestdivisio.
Tertia:Etpropter
hocsignum
sivemodus.
causamprimoperquamdicebant
Ad primam
sic
quodterRepetit
partem procedit.
ut destruat
causam.Et
minusin predicato
subpositionem,
positushaberetconfusam
illam
Et repetit
facilisestad solvendum.
dicitquodcausaperquamipsimovebantur
insit
sua
animalitas
et
homini
causam
cum
: ipsi dicebant
essentia,
unicuique
quod'
'
'homo
hominibus
necessario
tenebitur
hocnomen'animai
proquot
prototanimalibus
'
'
4
'
homo
. Etistadicebant
etsimiliter
hocverbumestprototessentiis
proquothominibus
' homo
'
*animal'
et
iste
terminus
causam
iste
terminus
istam
habe<re)nt
propter
quia
istamcausam.Et
Et statimintendit
destruere
confusam
inmobilem
subpositionem.
Et
nullaest apparentia.
adducitquoddamsimile.Et dicit:quod in hoc argumento
'omnis
vb
homo
est
ut
cum
dicimus
in
hoc
albus',
24 intellige:
quodsequitur:
ar|gumento
'omnis
necesseestquod
essequinsitanimal,
homo
sithominem
estniger'
t cuminpossibile
essedicerequodilla
et tamenfatuum
totanimalitates
quothumanitates,
intelligantur
.
animalitatum
sit ibi ex parteistiuspredicati
multitudo
quod est 'albus'vel 'niger'
ex
constituitur
Immodicitactorquod 'homo',logiceloquendoet nonnaturaliter,

' et 'rationali'.
hominis
inse includit
Admultiplicationem
'animai'.
animali
Etsic'homo'
1quantum
T
adistum
terminm
homo
2duasT
157

11:56:15 AM

cumdicitur:*omnis
homo
estalbus*
. Etillamultitudo
animalitatis,
multiplicado1
sequitur
sedquia'homo'
inse includit
nonestibiexpartepredicati,
animalitatum
'animal'.
Et dicitquodsimiliter
estin proposito.
Cumdicimus
Modoapplicatad propositum.
'
'
'omnis
et confunditur,
homo
et ad multitudinem
estanimai
', hic homomultiplicatur
nonestab istopredicato
animalitatum.
Sedillamultitudo
multitudo
hominis
sequitur
' sed ab ilio animali
'
'
in homine.lindeibi 'animai
quod
intelligitur
quod est animai
4animaV
in
Et
illud
non
et
subiecto.
quodpredicatur multiplicatur
predicatur
intelligitur
in homine.Ut patethic: 'omne
animairationale
mortale
est
sed illudquodintelligitur
' etilludnon
'animai
' hic
estin
sedilludquodpositum
animai
;
multiplicatur,
predicatur
Similiter
dicitipse de hoc verbo'est'quodnonconfunditur
subiectomultiplicatur.
Namverumest quod ad multitudinem
nec inmobiliter.
hominis
mobiliter
sequitur
scilicet
essentiarum.
Sed hoc dixitactor:habebatde se ipsumsubiectum,
multitudo
existeret
inoratione.
'homo'
, antequam
illa divisioque dicebatquodalia eratconfusa
alia
Sic igiturestdestructa
mobilitei,
Nam
visum
est
cum
homo
nulla
est
inmobilis.
'omnis
est
dicitur:
inmobiliter,
quod
quia
utipsiponebant,
necmobilem
animai
confusam,
', le 'animai'necle 'est'nonhabebant
actorquamdam
Etpropter
etdicit
hocdestruit
divisionem
necinmobilem.
precedentem
etqueprecedebat
aliainmobilis,
illarum
hanc.Dicendum
: aliamobilis,
hanc,scilicet
quod
necessitate
rei. Destruit
signivel modi,et quedamnecessitate
quedamest confusa
rei immoomnisconfusa
necessitate
estnecessitate
modoistamquodnullaestconfusa
'
'
animal
rationale
mortale
est
omne
ibi
Sicut
hic
dicit
animal', le animalin
actor,
signi.
homo
estanimai'virtute
virtute
hic: 'omnis
subiectoconfunditur
signi,similiter
signi
inhomine
'animai'quodintelligitur
confunditur
prototanimalibus
quotsunthomines.
totsuntanimalitates
Etpropter
hocdicitquod,naturaliter
loquendo,
quothumanitates.
nam
est
humanitas
inomnibus
Etdicitactor'naturaliter
eadem
,
loquendo' logiceloquendo
estin omnibus
et intellige
sicutidemhomoin communi
eadem
quodlogiceloquendo
verumesteademin specie,sedin numero
nonesteadem,
in omnibus,
esthumanitas
nonsuntidem.Etdeclarat
similiter
sicutnecSornecPlatoinnumero
(naturaloquendo
a
inmeetinte. Namsicutanimameaestdiversa
nonesteademhumanitas
liter)qualiter
abhumanitate
meaque estperanimam
tua.Etita
meam,estdiversa
tua,itahumanitas
'animai
'
universale
'hominem'
confundit
dicitactor:confundendo
quodintelligitur
signum
Etsicomnisconfusa
estnecessitate
ineo, quod<est>contractum
adhominem.
subpositio
signi.
)
( Questiones
adiectivus
terminus
)
(Utrum
possit
subponere
Et
terminus
videtur
utrum
adiectivus
Queritur
possitsubponere.
quodnon.Quodhabet
Sedadiectivum
nonhabetrationem
rationem
inherendi
subponendi.
permodum
significai
nonsubponit.
Item.Regulaestin gramatica
inherendi.
quodnullum
Ergoadiectivum
nonsubponit.
adiectivum
materie,
subponit.
Ergoetc.Item.Quodnonhabetrationem
est
Probatio
t rationem
materie.
etc.
minoris.
nonhaben
Sedadiectiva
Proprium
Ergo
rationem
forme.
inherent.
Sedadiectiva
forme
ut(dicit)Alanus.
inherere,
Ergohabent
non
rationem
materie.
Preterea.
Etsicpatetquodnonhabent
Que suntdiverse
species,
et substantivum
suntoppositespecies
Sed adiectivum
habenteandemproprietatem.
eandemproprietatem.
ed substantiva
nominis.Ergonon communicant
subponunt.
nonsubponunt.
Ergoadiectiva
1multitudo
T
158

11:56:15 AM

lindeterminus
In oppositum
tarnen
debeturtermino,
est. Sed
Subpositio
arguitur.
terminus
adiectivus
adiectivus
estetiamterminus.
terminus
poterit
subponere.
Ergo
sedcopulant.
nonsubponunt,
de istaquestione
Sedex
Quidamdixerunt
quodadiectiva
Namipsibenedicuntquod
eis quod subponat
adiectivum.
dictiseorumostenditur
t terminus
estacceptiotermini
ab intellectu.
pro quo
subpositio
Ergoproeo subponi
accidentalis
etid quodaccipitur
ab intellectu
Sedterminus
accipitur
accipitur
subponit.
ab intellectu
concedere1
accidentali.
subponant.
quodadiectiva
proforma
Ergohabent
Ethocestverum.
et nonrespectu
Et dicuntquidamquodsubponit
forme
orationis
intellectus.
respectu
'
' multis
inoppositum
modis
facta
tarnen
propter
quod subpositio
argumenta
Intelligendum
inesse2
25radicitur.Uno mododicitursubponere
actum.
| subportantis
quod significai
et nona logico.Et sic manifestum
estquodadiectiva
non
Et sicaccipitur
a gramatico
4
'
in
idemquodypotesis,
sicutdicitur
Aliomododicitursubpositio
possunt
subponere.
'
'
ibi
sumitur
et
ita
:
unum", quod
subpositio
pro
disputatione
egoarguam;
'
' subponam
ab intellectu
Aliomododicitur
proaliquo.
subpositio
acceptioipsiustermini
ypotesi.
Etsicaccipitur
a logico.Etsicadiectiva
possunt
subponere.
triaargumenta
nonpossit
Etperhocpatetsolutio
adprima
queprobant
quodadiectivum
ilia
ad
ultimum
Et
de
bene
concedo.
Sed
dicendum
de
subponere subpositione
gramaticali.
aliquomodononpossitsubponere
quiadiverse
quodilludprobatquod<adiectivum>
suntopposite
etsubstantivum
nonhabent
eandem
; sedadiectivum
species
proprietatem
dicendum
nominis
non
eandem
habebunt
,
; ergo
proprietatem
quodopposite
species
sedbeneeandem
comnonhabent
eandem
propriam,
proprietatem
proprietatem
species
et asinus
communem
habent
munem
eandemproprietatem
habere.Undehomo
possunt
estproprietas
Etsubponere
communis.
quodsentiunt.

From this treatise,just as from the introductorysection of the whole

commentary(see above, pp. 130-134) it clearlyappears that Guillelmus
Arnaldi and Robert Anglicus apparently did not know each other's
work on the subject. Thereforeit is impossibleto establishthe chronological order of the commentariesby Robert Anglicus and Guillelmus
Arnaldi.
The remainingtreatises(De relativis
, De appellatio, De ampliationibus
do
not
need
nibus, De restrictionibus
and De distributionibus
)
discussing
here.
In one of the forthcomingissues of thisjournal I hope to conclude
this series of articles on the genuine text of Peter of Spain's Summule
logicaleswith a discussionof some anonymousthirteenthcenturycommentarieson the Summule
. Besides, some general conclusions will be
drawn on account of the texts of Peter's work these commentators
apparentlyhad at their elbows.
1Subponere
T
2other
T
MSS.; in[o]ratione
1S9

11:56:15 AM

A NoteOnTheDdteOfLambert
s Summule
ofAuxerre*
between
theusualtextofPeterofSpain'sSummule
ofresemblances
A number
found
and
ofAuxerre'
s treatise
ofthesametitlehadfrequently
thatofLambert
raisedthequestion
ofthesetexts.As is known,Konstant
Michalski
oftheinterdependence
the
defended
1. Asa matter
ofPeterofSpainuponLambert
ofAuxerre
ofthelargedependence
thesis
textsofbothworksandthetextual
offactMichalski
hadto workuponinterpolated
istdisappear
forthegreater
resemblances
alludedto bythePolishMediaeval
partwhen
Grabmann
theauthentic
textsareconsidered.
heldtheinverse
opinionandespecially
work:Ut noviartium
wordsof Lambert's
auditores
pointedto theopening
plenius
ea
in
edocentur
summulis
. . . etc.andsawanallusion
to thetitleofPeter's
intelligantque
in thesewords.2However,theoriginal
titleof Peter'sworkwas
Summule
logicales
inourpreceding
Tractatus
shown
Thequestion
articles.
of
, aswasfrequently
, notSummule
or notLambert
wasreallyinfluenced
whether
byPeter'sworkseemsto be farmore
Itwillnotbe discussed
here.
complicated.
is thatofthechronologic
A different
orderofPeter'sandLambert's
works.
question
is important
fortheproblem
ofintei
evenifit is notdecisive,
Itssolution
dependence,
s dependence
sincepriority
ofoneworkto theotherdoesnotimplythelatter'
upon
theformer.
ofa commentary
As to Peter'swork,fromtheexistence
on it whichdatesfromas
as
i
's
our
article
on
Guillelmus
the
conclusion
the
mustbedrawn
Arnaldi)
240 (see
early
hisSummule
thatPeterofSpaincannothavewritten
: Tractatus)
after
(or better
logicales
i 240.
to havewritten
is commonly
hisSummule*
Lambert
ofAuxerre
before125-3.
supposed
in
a
Biblioteca
As is known,Berhard
found
Universitaria
Padua
,
(
manuscript
Geyer
attheendofa copyofLambert's
Summule
;4
cod. 647)thefollowing
colophon
a quodamfratre
de ordinepredicatorum,
summule
editein francia
Expliciunt
qui
et posteafuitpenitentiarius
vocaturfrater
lambertus
dominipape,sed quando
in domofratrum
fuitmagister
ad
composuit
qui estsepultus
parisius
legisnavarre,
sanctum
Jacobum.
mostprobably
wrotehisSummule
from
thatLambert
thiscolophon
Geyerhasconcluded
II ofNavarra
before
thelatter
inPariswhenhewastheteacher
ofTheobald
followed
his
in 12^3. However,
of Navarra
TheobaldI on thethrone
father
Geyerseemsto have
of factit contains
four
thecolophonon severalpoints.As a matter
misinterpreted
:
points
1K. Michalski,
leXlVe
Oxford
et Paris
sicle
Lescourants
, Cracovia
1921,
pendant
philosophiques
p.
2 M. Grabmann,
zu denphilosophischen
undFunde
desPetrus
Forschungen
Schrien
Handschriftliche
derBayer.
XXI(f 1277)in:Sitzunsgber.
desspteren
Akad.
d.Wissensch.
Hispanusy
Johannes
Papstes
Phil.
-Hist.
Abt.1936,Heft
9,pp.41-42.
3Thework
consists
ofeleven
, (3) Deargumen(2) Depredicabilibus
(1) Deintroductionibusy
chapters:
tation
, (6) Desuppositionibusy
dialeticis,
, (4) Delocis
sophisticis
(7) Deappellasillogistica
(g)Delocis
Somelater
tane
, (11) Derelatione.
, (8) Derestrictioney
(10)Dedistributionibus
(9) Deampliatione,
aninterpolation
consistDepredicamentis
ofthework
, butthisiscertainly
givea tract
manuscripts
withinterspersed
ofthesametitletogether
comments.
tract
ofSpain's
ingofthetextofPeter
4 Thepagesofthisfourteenth
It consists
arenotnumbered.
oftwoparts:
manuscript
century
Summule
Summule
ofSpain's
(pp.3-163).The
(1) thetextofPeter
(pp.1-98)and(2) Lambert's
blank
lines.
isfound
some
onp. i63battheend,after
colophon
160

11:56:15 AM

in Francia
editedhisSummule
(Paris>
(1) Lambert
wasafterwards
ofthePope
(2) Lambert
penitentiary
he wastheteacher
oftheKingofNavarra
theSummule
(3) whencomposing
was
in
of
in
he
the
Cloister
Saint
Paris.
buried
(4)
Jacques
canbe made.First,
wearetoldthatLambert
edited
Someobservations
hisworkinParis,
thathe wrote
it there.Secondly,
he wroteit in behalf
ofhis
not,as Geyerassumed,
theKingofNavarra
werecalled
, as theTheobalds
, nottheCount
ofChampagne
teaching
totheNavarra
ortheCount
before
accession
I ofNavarra
their
throne,
, as Henry
ofRosnai
seemsthemoreimportant,
Thisdistinction
hisaccession.
(1270-74)was calledbefore
ofourcolophon
sincetheauthor
tohavehada soundsenseofchronology,
asmay
appears
hisdistinction
between
oftheworkand
be seenfrom
thecomposition
andtheedition
hisexplicit
waspenitentiary
ofthePopeafter
from
information
theedition
thatLambert
a specialpointseemsto be madeofthefactthatLambert
ofhisSummule
. Besides,
had
ofno lessa personthana King.
beentheteacher
ourconsideration
inthisrespect,
I doesnotseemto deserve
sincehe became
Theobald
whenhe was alreadyin his thirty
fourth
year(May7, 1234)1and
Kingof Navarra
is notlikelyto havebeen,as a king,a pupilofLambert's.
I (theFat)
therefore
Henry
sonofTheobald
ofNavarra
I, whogot a
(December1270-July1274)wasa younger
in 1271,so thathisbeinga pupilofLambert's
whenhe wasalready
daughter
kingis
notveryplausible
either.
wellis Theobald
The onlypersonforwhomall datafitin extremely
II. He musthave
hisfather
beenbornin1240sinceheistoldtohavesucceeded
I after
thelatter'
s
Theobald
ofhismother
of
death(July12^3)undertheguardianship
whenhe
Margaret Bourbon,
He married
whowasbornon March2, 1242as a
wasinhisthirteenth
Isabella,
year2.
ofKingLouisIX ofFrance,beforeJuly21, i2$*.He wasanointed
daughter
kingin
127whenhe wasseventeen
yearsold. Thisyoungking(whowasat thetimeofhis
accession
onlytwelveyearsofage)is quitelikelyto havebeenLambert's
Royalpupil,
at Troyes).
nodoubtattheCourt(atPamplona,
or,morelikely,
datesforLambert's
Summule.
Theworkwaswritten
atTroyes
So we havethefollowing
when
not
in
between
and
1
the
was
anointed
andis
Paris,
12^3
257
(orPamplona),
king
hisstudies.
Itwaspublished
afterwards
inParis,
whenLambert
wasa
likelytohavefinished
member
oftheDominican
Convent
he becamepenitentiary
ofthePope.
there,before
we do notknowso farwhichPopemadehimhispenitentiary.
He might
Unfortunately
havebeena PopeofFrenchorigin,e.g. UrbanIV (1261-64;Jacques
or,
Pantaleon)
V (1276; PeterofTarentaise
moreprobably,
Innocent
O.P.), whohadbeenhimself
a member
oftheSaintJacques
in Parisfrom12-64and 1267-69.So the
Convent
Lambert's
12^3-^7(atTroyes
of
Summule
be
dated
between
composition
may
orPamplona)
anditspublication
between
12j and1276,mostlikely
about1260(inParis).No doubt
1Hewasborn
some
time
after
hisfather's
death
(onMay24,1201)atTroyes.
2SeeNouvelle
lestemps
lesplusreculs
aveclesrenseignebiographie
gnrale
depuis
jusqu'1850-60,
ments
et l'indication
dessources
consulter,
Didot
bibliographiques
publie
parMMFirmin
Frres
sousla direction
de M. le Dr. Hoefer.
Vol.45 Paris1866(reprint
Copenhague
1969),
Chevalier's
n1250seems
s.v.Thibaut
V. - Ulysse
tobea misprint.
des
(U. Chevalier,
Rpertoire
dumoyen
sources
NewYork1969),col.4452).
II,(Reprint
historiques
ge.Bio-Bibliographie
3Forthedates,seeStammtafeln
zurGeschichte
derEuropischen
Staaten
(Europische
Stammtafeln).
II Dieauszerdeutschen
Staaten
vonWilhelm
KarlPrinz
vonIsenburg,
i960,Tafel
42and43,
Marburg
which,
however,
gives1237asTheobald's
wrongly
birth-year.
161

11:56:15 AM

inwhichit wasedited,as mayappearfrom

wehavetheworkinthelaterredaction
the
1
inwhichevery
allusion
to theRoyalpupilis missing.
incipit
1AsfarasI know
ineleven
isextant
: Paris
thework
B.N. Lat.7392; 13.966; 13.967;
manuscripts
Eibl.Municipale
cod.2401;Lamballe
Bibl.
16.617;Nouv.
(nowinParis,
Acq.lat.827;Troyes,
cod.2; Padua,
Bibl.Municipale
Bibl.Univ.
cod.647;Erfurt
Oct.66
Amplon.
Nat.),cod.i ; Semur,
andPrague,
ascribed
toWalther
Univ.
thecommentary
Libr.
cod.893(with
of
Burley),
(wrongly
oftheTracts
theTracts
inMonteofPrague).
Besides,
III,IVandVandparts
I, IIarefound
John
wasannounced
dellaBadiay
ofthework
in 1963by
Archivio
cod.362VV.- Anedition
cassino,
dela Socit
Franco
Alessio
oftheUniversity
ofMilan.(SeeBulletin
Professor
nurnationale
pour
dela Philosophie
Mdivale
l'Etude
to
s (1963),p. 11 C 36).Ashewaskind
[S.I.E.P.M.],
enough
wasprinting
Asfara I know
ofMarch
ithasnotyet
inform
me(letter
then.
18,1968)thework
beenpublished.
To be continued
Nijmegen
Sophiaweg73

Books Received
LafabledeDaphne
demtamorphose
YvesF. - A. Giraud,
dansla
, essaisuruntype
vgtale
littrature
et danslesartsjusqu'la findu XVllesicle
, (Histoiredes ides,et critique
- vol.92), 574pp. + 12plates,Droz,Genve,1968;prijsZw. Fr. 68.00.
littraire
versionem
BibliaSacraiuxtavulgtm
/. Gribomont
B. Fischer,
, adiuvantibus
, H. F. D.
etbrevi
instruxit
R. Weber
, recensuit
, 1 vol. Wrtembergische
, W.Thiele
apparatu
Sparks
1969;prijsD.M. 6.00.
Bibelanstalt,
Stuttgart,
FaithofThomas
JamesA. Mhler,S. J., TheBeginning
Life.TheDynamic
OfEternal
andInterpretation
NewYork,1968.
, Origins
, 144pp. Philosophical
Aquinas
Library,
162

11:56:15 AM