TEXTS CONCERNING GILBERT OF POITIERS GEOFFREY'S SCRIPTURA When in the last decade of the twelfth century St. Bernard's former secretary, Geoflrey of Auxerre, wrote to Cardinal Albinus his report ‘on the so-called capitula formulated at Reims against Gilbert he asked ‘a confrere to look for a scriptura he had written on the capitula almost forty years earlier. The scriplura, he assures the cardinal, was edited together with the creed which had been presented to Pope Eugene IIT and the Roman Church by ten archbishops, almost all bishops still at Reims, many abbots and schoolmen. Their names were added to the document : subscriplis nominibus singulorum', The writing answering Geoffrey's description of the seriplura is not the so-called Libellus but a text first edited by Dom J. Leclereq?. We know that the Libellus was written after Gilbert’s death (1154)*, Hence it cannot be the document. presented to the pope and the Roman curia in 1148. In its original form, the Libellus seems to have been without the capitula now found at the end of the tract*. Moreover, the Libellus is too long to have been written during the consistory of Reims which lasted two days. It does not contain the nomina subscripla mentioned by Geoffrey. The patristic collection of the scriplura is most likely an expanded version of the scedula presented at Reims by Abbot Godescale (1) Guoreney, Ep. ad Albinum 13, 68 ; ed. N. HARING, in : Analecta Cist. 22 (1968), 80 : PL 185, 595 A. (2) Teztes sur Saint Bernard et Gilbert de 1a Porrée, in : Mediaeval Studies 14 (1952), 102-128 ; re-edited by N. Hanina, The Writings against Gilbert of Poitiers by Geoffrey Anal. Cist. 22 (1966), 31-35. Satisnuny, Hist. pont. 11 ; ed. Reg. L. Poot (Oxford 1927), 26. (4) They found in Ms. Budapest, Nat Mus. Széchényi 16, f. 49-70. This ‘may explain thelr absence from the Hist. pentifcalis, whose author copied the creed from the Libellus.170 NM. HATING of Saint-Martin®. Geoffrey does not state that either the capitula or the patristic collection was presented to the pope or the curia. About 1152-1154 Geoffrey «edited » (edideram) an augmented text out of which grew his Libellus composed after Gilbert's death (1154). J. Mabillon who was the first historian to make use of the scriptura mentions that he discovered it in an Ottoboni manuscript*. In 1952, J. Leclereq published it from MS. Vat. Reg. Lat. 278, f. 72-73. At a later date (1957) F. Pelster published a careful analysis of its contents’. Since then three additional manuscripts containing the seriplura have been found. In his Diarium Italicum Bernard de Montfaucon* describes a manuscript preserved at the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana at Florence : « Codex membr. XIII circiter saeculi, Hilarii de ‘Trinitate libri XII... Errores Gilberti Pictauensis episcopi damnati in Remensi concilio sub papa Eugenio, Fides Remensis concilii ab abate Clareuallis Bernardo dictata. Liber Boetii Seuerini de Trinitate...» The manuscript, written in the second half of the thirteenth century, belongs to the category known as Conventi Soppressi and bears the pressmark 193. It had been the property of the Benedictines of Santa Maria in Florence*. Our text is found on f, 133-133v. The title reads : « Errores Gilleberti Pictauensis episcopi in Remensi concilio dampnati sub papa Eugenio. Then follow the four capitula, The text of the capilula agrees with the sicul-tradition of text-form B.'*, The four capitula are followed by a patristic collection beginning with : Contra. Augustinus... The third excerpt in this collection is ascribed to Theodoricus Grecus, a name which occurs as Gregorius or rather Gregus in MS. Vat. Reg. Lat. 278, f. 72. Where the Vatican manuscript reads Beda the Florence manuscript rightly reads Boelhius. It is worth noting that the four capitula precede the floritegium in the Florence manuscript while in the Vatican manuscript each capitulum is followed by the patristic excerpts that allegedly oppose the capitulum in question. The creed which is without a title in the Vatican manuscript is here described as : « Fides Remensis concilii ab abate Clareuallis Bernardo dictata » (f. 133). The text of the creed (f. 133-133v) does not deviate (6) Cf. Hanno, The Writings against Gilbert, 19. (6) Annales OSB 79, 4 ; ed. Lucca 6 (1745), 400-401. (7) Petrus Lombardus und die Verhandlungen aber die Streitfrage des Gilbertus Porreta in Paris (1147) und Reims (1148), in : Miscell, Lombardiana (Novara 1967), 45-73. (8) B. px Montraucon, Diarium ilalicum c. 25 (Paris 1702), 370. (9) B. pz Montravcon, Bibl. bibl. mss. nova 1 (Paris 1739), 416 B. (10) N. Hanina, « Das sogenannte Glaubensbekenntais des Reimser Konsistortums ‘von 1148 », in : Seholastik 40 (1965), 87.GILBERT OF POITIERS 7 from the lezlus receplus™ except for the omission of the words siue substan- liam diuinam in the fourth paragraph. The scriptura ends in the first column of the 18th line. The rest of the folio is blank. There is no evidence of any nomina subseripta. A second copy was noticed in 1947 by R. W. Hunt among notable accessions of the Bodleian Library : « Panormia, by Ivo of Chartres. ‘Twelfth century (Ms. Lat. misc. d. 74). This is a copy of the commoner recension with the text ending at VIII. 136, At the end are added in a contemporary hand the decrees of the Lateran Council, 1139, and the Council of Reims, 1148, in the version of Sirmond. This last includes some material relating to the trial of Gilbert de la Porrée which does not appear to have been printed, though it is contained in other manus- scripts", The manuscript later belonged to Roger de Coneway, twenty- second Minister of the Franciscan Province of England » The text of the Panormia ends with the colophon : ¢Finito libro reddatur cena magistro » ({. 96v). Apart from very insignificant variants the text of the Lateran decrees (1139) agrees with the text available in Mansi but canon xiii (de usurariis) is missing (f. 97). Another hand wrote down the (18) canons of the Council of Reims" in 1148. The same scribe added the text entitled : Errores Geleberli ({. 98v). ‘The four capitula which are supposed to be Gilbert's errors belong to icut-tradition'* of text-form B. The patristic collection begins with : «Contra. Augustinus...» The third excerpt is attributed to Theodoricus Grecus (f. 98v), but the spelling is Theodoritus in the second excerpt copied from Theodoret. The creed which follows is attributed neither to St. Bernard nor to a council. Without a word of introduction the creed is accompanied by the adjectival forms of twelve cities (Reims, Bourges, Bordeaux, Tours, Trier, Caesarea, York, Canterbury, Soissons, Chalons) in exactly the same sequence as they occur in the Vatican manuscript. The scriptura ends in the twelfth line (with 43 lines to a page) of the second column. The rest of the folio is blank. Presumably the scribe's exemplar was also fragmentary at the end. A third copy of the scriptura was noticed by H. 0. Coxe” in Ms. Oxford, Corpus Christi College 137, described as «membr. 4° f. 99s. xii ex.». (11) N. Hanno, Das sogenannte Glaubensbekenninis, 89, (12) In a footnote Dr. Hunt refers to Dom Wilmart's description of Ms. Vat. Reg. Lat. 278, (13) R. W. Huns, «Notable Accessions : Manuscripts», in : Bodleian Library Record 2 (1947), 169. (14) Manst 21, 526 €-533 D. (15) Manst 21, 713E-718B (J. Sirmond). (16) Hamino, Das sogenannte Giaubensbekenntnis, 87. (1) H. 0. Coxe, Cat. codd. mss. Ozon. 2 (Oxtord 1852) 51-53.172 N. M. HARING It was donated on 23 April 1615 by a scholar of Corpus Christi College, Henry Passy (1561-1616), «and his colleagues »"*. According to Coxe the 36th item in this miscellaneous manuseript is an ezcerptum e Gilleberto Porrelano, ep. picl., de fide catholica ({. 97v), while the 37th item is the ‘Symbolum concilii rem. primi (f. 97v). The context of these two items is significant. They are preceded by letters concerning William of York and Abelard®. Two poems on Pope Innocent® reflect the same period. So does a poem® attributed to « Hugerius », bishop of Angers, who was probably no other than Gilbert's contemporary, Ulger of Angers (1125- 1149). }£.On the same folio (f. 99v) begins what H. 0. Coxe calls an excerplum ¢ Gilleberlo Porretano which is in reality the Laon-Douai version of the capitula followed by the so-called creed®. The inscription over the capitula reads : ¢ Gillebertus Porreta pictauensis episcopus. » The creed is entitled : «Concilium Remense contra.» Immediately after the creed we find another set of the four eapitula, not in the Laon-Douai version but in the jcul-tradition™ of text-form B, written by a different hand. ‘The capital letter G. in the margin obviously stands for Gilbert. The patristic collec- tion, written by the same scribe, is introduced by Contra. Theodoret is twice spelled Theodoricus. The same scribe added to the patristic flrilegium the list of those archbishops « who were present » : Nomina iscoporum qui interfuerunt. However, the bishop of Tournai, listed in the Vatican manuscript® is not mentioned™. The list of the abbots and schoolmen agrees verbatim with the enumeration found (18) Diet. of Nat. Biography 18 (London 1909) 375. (19) St. Bernard's epistolary, Nrs. 238 (f. 90), 239 (f. 91v), 236 (f. 92v) ; PL 185, 427 ; 431A ; 424B. Pope Eugene's letter to the clergy and the people of York ; ed. H. 0. Coxe, Catal. 2, 52. Ph. Jaret, Reg. Pont. Rom. 2 (Leipzig 1888) 30, Nr. 8863. (20) St. Bernard's epistolary, Nrs. 189 (f. 94), 188 (¢, 96v), and 194 (f. 97) ; PL. 185, 304A ; 351A; 359D. In St. Bernard's letter to Pope Innocent 11 (PL 185, 394A) the final sentence reads : « Quod melius Nicolaus iste meus immo et uester uiua uoce refert » (the word uoce is missing in the manuscript). (21) Fol. 98v-99 : « Versus Hugerii de Innocente papa : Papa nocens quo nemo nocentior... que tam diffcili fasce leuauit humum. + To this correspond on f. 99-99v the ¢ Versus Brientit de eodem : Papa decens quo nemo decentior... que pape tanti morte gravavit humum, + (22) Fol. 99v : Hugerius episcopus Andogauensis cum ulderet_monumentum Gerberti madens dixit : Non plangit papam Gerbertum quod moriatur / Sed quod Papa mori differt nimis atque moratur / Non sunt he lacrime conpuneti pro moriente / ‘Sed madet ex ira pro sano proque uigente. (23) N. Hanino, Das sogenannte Glaubensbekenninis, (24) Das 20g. Glaubensdekenntnis, 87. (25) Since his presence is mentioned by Mabillon (p. 401), his absence from the list may safely be regarded as an omission. (26) Parisian is spelled + parisiacensis » rather than « parisiensis ». 8-79,GILBERT OF POITIERS 173 in the Vatican manuscript”. To fill the last line of the folio the scribe wrote the sentence : «Ego sum pastor bonus qui pono animam.» Half of f, 101 is occupied by a text beginning with the statement : ¢ Tres sorores fuerunt Maria mater domi In the second half of the 17th century William Fulman (1632-1683) inserted this text of the scriplura in the 17th volume of his Colleclanea (f. 222-223v) now preserved in Corpus Christi College, Oxford, under the pressmark 311. H. O. Coxe® divides it into two items or parts the first of which (Nr. 22) he calls Anonymi de s, Trinitate libellus, the second (Nr. 23) Concilii Khemensis decreta contra Gilbertum subiunelis nominibus archiepiscoporur In the margin of f. 222 (Concilium Remense contra) Fulman suggests that the creed dates back to the Council of Reims held in 1119 ¢ rather than » the Council of 1148. This erroneous view was caused by Matthew Paris#, Fulman did not miss the letter G. in the margin opposite the second version of the eapitula. While copying the florilegium he did not realize that the sentence et Trinilas uere unilas (f. 223), found in the margin of f, 100 of his exemplar, belonged to Theodoret rather than Augustine. In Ms. Vat. Reg. 562 (1135) which dates back to the end of the 16th or the beginning of the 17th centuries there is another copy of the canons issued by Eugene at Re 4°. Added to them are the so-called Assertiones Gitberti Piclauiensis episcopi better known as capitula. They belong to the quemadmodum-tradition of text-form B". The title, Assertiones, also used by Sirmond and Baronius, may have been the title found in the copy which the bishop of Auxerre, Jacques Amyot (1571-1593), sent to Pope Gregory XIII (1572-1585). When G. Baronius wrote his Annales the canones fidei concerning Gilbert. were not to be found at the Vatican®. The creed (f. 65v) which accompanies the Asserliones bears the hea- ding : Anno domini 1148 symbolum istud sub Eugenio Papa in Remensi Concilio formatum (= firmatum) est a patribus decem provinciarum. »%, The creed as circulated in Rome and adopted by Baronius, Sirmond, ius 1852), 151, (27) «Gauterius» is spelied « Gua (28) Cat. codd. mss. Ozon. 2 (Oxte (29) Das s09. Glaubensbekenntnis, 81. (80) Ms. Vat. Reg. Lat. 562, f. 62-65. (81) Das sog. Glaubensbekenntnis, 87. (32) Gt. Das s09. Glaubensbekenntnis, 81-82. The same title occurs twice in Ms. Rome, Vallicell. G 24, f. 283 and 295. According to B. de Montfaucon, Bibl, bibl. mss. nove 1 (Paris : apud Briasson 1739) 121D, the Assertiones are also found in Ms. Vat Lat. 4982. (83) C. Banontus, Annal. eci, (ad ann. 1148) ; ed. A. THxiNER 19 (Bar-le-Due 1869) 19, Nr. 9 : «Desiderantur in Vaticano canones Adei spectantes ed damnationem errorum Giliberti quos ex Gallicano (codice) posuimus. » (34) The same heading is found in Baronius (Sirmond, Hardovin, and Mansi), Annal. ecel. 19 (Bar-le-Duc 1869) 18, Nr. 9.174 N. Mo HARING and Mansi begins with : « Credimus et confitemur simplicem (or : simpliciter) naturam. In all known copies the words aeternitate aelernum in the first section are missing*®. ‘A suspicion that this edition of both capitula and creed is related to the seriptura could be caused by the heading in which it is stated that the -symbolum was firmalum by ten archbishops, for just as many archbishops are listed in Geoffrey's scriptura, Concerning the original form of the scriplura the available evidence allows us to draw several conclusions. First of all, it consisted of four parts : four capitula, a patristic collection introduced by Contra, a creed, and an incomplete list of those who attended the meeting at which the matter was discussed. The heading seems to have read: Errores Gisleberti Piclauensis episcopi. The textual form in which these capitula appear became more widely known than any other version. The reason why the text in Corpus Christi College contains two versions of the eapitula was tthe presence in England of another version represented on the Continent by the Laon-Douai version, later found in English chronicles, This version may actually be the older of the two, for the wording of the capitula was obviously tampered with by Geoffrey. When Geoffrey's scriplura became known to the librarian possessing the manuscript now preserved in Corpus Christi College Library, Oxford, he omitted the creed in the scriptura because its wordings was identical with that. of the creed which accompanied the other version. The additional manuscripts” enable us to improve upon the previous editions of the capilula and the patristic collection. The creed and the nomina subscripta remain unaltered. Ennones GisLenenti Episcort Prcravensis 1 Quod diuina natura que diuinitas dicitur deus non sit sed forma qua dous est sicut humanitas homo non est sed forma qua homo est. 2 Quod cum Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus unum esse dicuntur non nisi una divinitate esse intelligantur nec conuerti possit ut unus deus uel una substantia uel unum aliquid Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus esse dicatur. 3 Quod tres persone tribus unitatibus sint tria et distincte tribus proprietatibus que non sunt ipse persone sed sunt tres®* eterne et ab inuicem et a diuina substantia numero differentes. (85) Cf. Das sog. Glaubensbekenninis, 82. (86) Das sog. Glaubensbekenntnis, 80. (87) Ms. Oxford, Corpus Christi College 137, f. 100 (two hands). Ms. Oxtord, Bodl. Lat, mise. 4. 47, f. 98v. Ms. Florence, Bibl. Laur., Conv. Soppr. . (38) Instead of « tres eterne » Walter of Saint-Victor reads his Contra quatuor fab, Francie IV, 86 ; ed. P. Guonieux, AHDLMA 19 (1952), 332.GILBERT OF POITIERS 175 ConrRa 1 Augustinus : Omnis natura aut deus est aut a deo*, 2 In libro De Trinitate: Deus non ea magnitudine magnus est que non est quod ipse. Alioquin illa erit maior magnitudo quam deus*®. 8 Theodoricus Grecus : Ibi enim unitas uere est Trinitas et Trinitas uere est unitas*!, 4 Augustinus De fide ad Petrum: Quia in illo uno uero deo Trinitate non solum quod unus deus est® sed etiam quod Trinitas est naturaliter uerum est propterea ipse deus uerus in personis Trinitas est, in una natura unus est®, 5 Athanasius Contra Arrium et Sabeltium: Iluc mihi necessario uideo festinandum ut! tres unum esse et unum tres esse etsi non ratione qua homo sum tamen auctoritate perdoceam*, 6 Theodoricus* : Existentis scientia est deus. Deus est Trinitas®. 7 Augustinus De Trinitale: Consequenter intelligitur non tantum de Patre dixisse Apostolum Qui solus habel inmortalitatem sed de uno solo deo quod est Trinitas' 8 Idem** : Supernarum uirtutum carmina unum tres esse et tres unum. esse demonstrant®*, 9 Idem : Nec Sabellium incurrimus tres unum deum fatendo nec tue perfidie eis irretimur dum hunc deum Trinitatem esse ingenue confitemur' 10 Augustinus De essentia diuinitalis: Deus simplex est natura et inmutabilis et inperturbata. Nec aliud est ipse nec aliud quod habet (99) Ct. De Trin. (40) De Trin, (41) De Trin. ; ed. EB. Scuwanrz, Acta cone, cecum. I, 6, 183. PG 83, 1171B. (42) deus es: eet deus Laurensiana. 43) Fotorrivs, De fdead Petrum (44) ut: ait Bodi. (45) Victuivs, Contra Arrianos 11, 43; PL 62, 2254. ) Theodoricus : Theodoritus Bodt. ) De Trinitate; od. E. Scuwanre, Acta cone. cecum. Hf, 5, 150, PG 83, 1167A. (48) De Trin. 1, 6, 103 CCL 80, 39. (49) The appearance of idem (= Augustine) instead of Athanasius (— Vigilius) points to « scribal omission unless we assume that Geoffrey himself made the erroneous attribution. (50) Viortivs, Contra Arrianoe It, 42 PL. 62, 226. (61) Viotutvs, Contra Arrianos 11, 46; PL 62, 227D. (62) Peeudo-Augustine, De easentia diuinitt 2 CCL SIA, 714. PL 65, 678D.176 N. M. HARING 11 Idem habes in Ieronimo De essentia dei®. 12 Idem in ¥: 18 Boethius De Trinitate: Hoc vere est unum in quo nullus est numerus quia nullum in eo aliud preter id quod est. 14 Ieronimus Ad Damasum papam: Non enim nomina tantummodo sed etiam nominum proprietates i.e. personas uel — ut Greci exprimunt — ypostases™ hoc est. subsistentias confitemur®. 15 Leo papa : Assumpta est a maiestate humilitas, a uirtute infirmitas, ab eternitate mortalitas. Et natura inuiolabilis nature est unita passi bili**. 16 Idem : Carnem sibi inuiolabilis Verbi deitas coaptauit'*. 17 Gregorius : Venit ad nos calciata divinitas It may be recalled here that in the Laurenziana manuscript the creed (following the patristic collection) is called Fides Remensis ab abbate Clareuallis Bernardo dietata ({. 133). No such heading is found in the Bodleian manuscript. In the Oxford manuscript (Corpus Christi Gollege 137, f. 99) where the creed precedes the scriplura the heading reads : Concilium Remense contra, 0 GEOFFREY'S REPORT ON GILBERT IN THE GESTA OF CARDINAL ALBINUS In 1182 Albinus was created cardinal-deacon of Santa Maria Nuova by Pope Lucius III (1181-1185). In the spring of 1185 the same pontiff made him cardinal-priest of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. In the early (83) Peeudo-Jerome, Ep. 14; PL 30, 176. (64) Elym. V, 1, 26 (ed. Linpsay). (90) De Trin! 2, 40-42 ; ed. STEWART-RAND 10 : ¢ Quocirea hoc uere unum In quo nullus numerus, nullum in eo aliud preterquam id quod est. » (56) ypostases : yportaiei Bodi. (87) Peacius, Libellus Adel 6 ; PL 48, 489C. (68) Sermo 21, 2; PL 54, 192A. (69) Sermo 25, 2; PL 54, 209A. (60) Hom. in Bv. VII, 3; PL 76, 1101D. According to the arrangement found in Ms, Vat. Reg. Lat. 278, f, 72-73; ed. N. Hanino, in : Anal. Cist, 22 (1966), 31-34, statements 1-2 contradict the frst capitulum, 3-9 the second, 10-14 the third, and 16-17 the fourth. (61) Wauren of Satnt-Victor, Contra quatuor lab. Francie 1V, 56; ed. P. GLORIKUX ‘382, reads : « Simbolum contra ex Remensi concilio. »GILBERT OF POITIERS 177 summer of 1189 Clement III (1187-1191) raised him to the see of Albano, The cardinal’s last signature is found in a papal letter dated 12 July 11961, Together with Cardinal Peter of S. Lorenzo in Damaso Albinus was a papal legate in Sicily, as we learn from a letter written by Pope Clement IIT in 188%, In 1187/8 Albinus, then cardinal-priest of 3. Croce, acted as the pope's uicarius in a litigation which he had ordered bishops Gentilis of Osimo (1177-1205) and Boniface of Narni (1180-1214) to settle. On 7 March 1191 Clement III confirmed their decision’, In a document of 7 July 1191 King Tancred refers to Albinus as his dear friend and + the pope's vicar » The title « the pope's vicar » is of importance in any attempt to date Geoffrey's two letters to Cardinal Albinus, Despite his many activities Albinus found time to write his Gesta pauperis scolaris Albini, divided into eleven books, completed by 1192, and still preserved in Ms. Vat. Ottob. Lat. 3057, f. 1-160v. In his autobiographical introduction he points out that, being too poor to buy books when he was a student, he copied excerpts from various authors and kept them in scedulis et protocollis (t. Iv). Finally, he decided to put the pieces together in mundo quater- norum for the benefit of any poor student who could not afford to buy books. The numerous theological excerpts (f. 2-34v) which follow imme- diately after the introduction are primarily concerned with the question of ¢ cult and adoration +°. ‘The cardinal’s collection is of special interest to us because without an explanation of any kind he entered two letters written to him by Geoffrey of Clairvaux, better known as Geoffrey of Auxerre, whose Libellus is likewise included in the cardinal’s Gesta. This is in fact the first manuscript evidence of those two letters first published in 1607 . ius*. A collation shows that Baronius did not use the Gesta of Cardinal Albinus. The first letter (f. 34v-36v) begins with the address : « Amantissimo patri et domino A., dei gratia Albanensi episcopo, domini pape uicario, fr. Gaufr. de Claraualle : Minimum id quod est. 9. The address of the second letter (f, 36v-37v) agrees verbatim with that of the previous one. Then follows Geoffrey's Libellus (f. 37v-42v), introduced with the sentence : « Incipit prehatio fr. Gaufridi de Claraualle in tracta- tum de capitulis magistri Gisleberti Porrate. Quatuor in his scedulis... »* (1) Ph. Jared, Reg. Pont. Rom. 2 (Leipzig 1888) 625, Nr. 17416. (2) P. F, Keun, Italia pontificia 8 (Berlin 1935) 56, Nr. 222. (3) alia pontifieia 4 (Berlin 1909) 10, Nes. 5-6. (4) Atalia pontiftcia 8 (Berlin 1935) 84, Ni (6) The papal notary Master Michael dedicated to Albinus, bishop of Albano, ‘the pope's vicar », a short treatise on this question preserved in Ms. Troyes 1721. (6) Annales ecel. 12 (Vatican 1607), 352-357 and 812-814, (7) Edited in Anatecta Cist. 22 (1966), 69-81. (8) Edited in Anatecta Cist. 22, 36-69. The text in Lidellus 5, 33 (p. 67) attributed to Hugh of Saint-Vietor is found in De Sacr, II, 1, 11; PL 176, 4054.178 N. M. HARING It is agreed that the author of the Liber censuum compiled by the papal chamberlain Censius in 1192 used the Gesla pauperis scolaris Albini as one of his major sources »*. The present copy of the Gesta is considered by V. Fenicchia to be ¢non autografo, ma certo coevo »1°, Accordingly, Geoffrey's dossier must have been in the cardinal’s possession about 1191 or earlier, for he was made bishop of Albano in the early summer of 1189. If we suppose that Geoffrey’s reply was written about 1190, the seriptura was compiled about 1152 The absence of the scriplura from the cardinal’s Gesta might be inter- preted in the sense that Geoffrey sent the Libellus rather than the scriptura when he replied to the cardinal’s request. But there is no evidence in the cardinal’s copy of any archbishops, bishops, abbots, and scholars whose names were, according to Geoffrey, attached to the creed", Geoffrey wrote his Libellus after Gilbert's death (4 September 1154) when he was abbot of Igny"8, a promotion he received about 11564. He remarks in his letter to Albinus that the scriplura was written some 40 years earlier. It the Libellus is considered identical with the seriplura the date of the Libellus would move the date of the letter to Albinus to approximately 1195, a date which conflicts with the previously established date of the Gesla pauperis scolaris Albini. Cardinal Albinus could easily have received the Libellus when Geoffrey was abbot of Fossanova (1170/1-1176/8) or at a later date. In the second letter to Albinus Geoffrey implies that he was on friendly terms with the cardinal : + Ad partes enim Gallie sicut nostis hoc anno cum uestra benedictione reuersus...»1* It seems that Geoffrey also sent his Vila s. Bernardi and St. Bernard’s letters to the curia concerning Abelard'*. ‘There is no evidence of these writings in the Gesta. Hence it should not surprise us to discover that the scriptura is not contained in the cardinal’s Gesta which happens to include the first known manuscript. evidence of Geoffrey's report to the cardinal. (8) Ct. J. Giuenmisr, in : The New Catholic Encyclopedia 8 (New York 1967), 962. (10) Dizionario biografico degli Italiani 2 (Rome 1960), 11. (11) See also N. Hanino, The Writings, 18-19, (12) Bp. ad Albinum 13, 68 ; ed. Hanixo, 80. The copy of the Libellus preserved in the Gesla does not contain the capitula. They were also absent from Geoffrey's original edition. (13) John ot Salisbury, Hist. pont., 11 ; ed. Poote, 26. (14) M.A. Dotien, in : Cothoticisme 4 (Paris 1956), 1849. (15) MS. Vat. Ottob. 3057, f. 36v-37. C. BaRoxtus, Annales eccl. 12 (Rome 1607), 812; ed. Tueinen 19, 574. H. GRUNDMANN, «Zur Biographie Joachims von Flore ‘und Rainers von Ponza s, in : Deutsches Archiv 16 (1960), 514, expresses the vi {hat this letter is the continuation of one single letter to Albinus printed by Baroni in a separate section of the Annales. The separate address in the Gesta (as well a in Baronius) militates against this view. (16) Ep. ad Albinum 14, 72; ed. HARING, 81 : + Vnde uestro si placuerit desiderio per libellum De uita 4. Bernardi et per eius epistolas missas ad curiam satisfet, »GILBERT OF POITIERS 179 UL THE YORK-MINSTER COLLECTION H. Schenkl! describes Ms. York Minster XVI. A. 8 as ¢ fol.,m. s. xii/xiti Boethii opera minora mit ausfiihrlichem Commentar ». The author of this commentary is Gilbert of Poitiers. A more recent hand calls the work : Boetius de Trinitate (f. 1). It is written in an elegant hand with 39 lines to a page. Illuminations were planned but never executed. Since Gilberts first prologue is missing the commentary begins with mnium que rebus...? A separate text of the Boethian tractate accompanies the entire commentary, beginning on f. 2. No notes are found in the margins. The comment on the first tractate ends on f. 28 where the rubric : Jlem commen- tum eiusdem G. super Boetium de eadem Trinitate introduces the commentary on the second tractate. It ends on f, 33v. The next, tractate ({. 33v-46) is announced by the rubric (f. 33v) : Idem G. super Boelium quomodo substantic... The introduction to the fourth tractate (f. 46-85v) reads : Ilem G. super Boelium aduersus Nestorium et Eulicen de una persona Christi et daabus naturis (f. 46). The commentary is followed by the tractate (f. 85v-88v) entitled : De fundamentis christiane fidei, generally attributed to Boethit ‘Added to these texts is a collection of patristic excerpts the first. part of which (f. 88v-90v) is also found in Ms. Dublin, Trin, Coll. 303 (f. 97- 100), written about 1200 or in the first quarter of the 13th century*. (1) H. Scmenxt, Bibl. Patrum Latinorum Britannica (Vienna 1894), 52. (2) 1 owe the identifcation to the kindness and generosity of fr. L. Bataillon who, ‘on 17 January 1967, sent me a «petite liste de manuscrits des commentaires de Gilbert ». Of the ten items listed, only MSS. Arras 581 and Madrid, Bibl. Nac. 521 have been collated for the edition of Gilbert's commentaries in Studies and Texts 13 (Toronto 1966). MS. Prague, Univ. IV. D. 13 (f.201-202) contains only the two prologues and seventeen paragraphs of Gilbert's introduction (ed. Haring 53-66). MS. Oxford, Bodl. 38220, f. 54, is a fragment containing the end of Gilbert's De Trinitate I (6, 17 ; ed. Haring, 155) and the beginning of the next treatise, F. MADEN and H. H. E. Crasten, A Summary Catalogue 6 (Oxford 1924), 434. MSS. Mainz, Stadt- Dibl. 1. 87 and Basel, Univ. A. VI. 24 (incomplete) are both of the 15th eentury. MS. Paris, Bibl. nat. Lat. 1204 which is also listed by M. Manitius, Gesch. der lat. Literatur 3 (Munich 1931), 213, is a prayer book. Ph. Laven, Bibl. nationale: Cat. gén. des mss. latins 1 (Paris 1939), 444. MSS. Prague, Univ. UI. E, 4 and Sankt-Polten, Bischon. ‘Alumnat B. 189a are both 13th century copies. More detailed information is provided in the present paper. (3) ed. HaniNa, 87-62. In point of time this is Gilbert's first prologue, The text belongs to the Sorbonne family. (4) e4. Stewant-Rab, 52-70. (6) Edited by M. L. Couxen, in : Mediaeval Studies 27 (1965), 152-183. The quotation on p. 175 is missing in the York-Minster Collection. The fact that in some ins- Nr.180 N. M. HARING The collection is closely related to the much larger compilation made about 1180 by Adhemar von Saint-Ruf to prove that patristic authors do not contradict but support Gilbert's teaching. Like the Dublin collec- tion the first part of the York-Minster collection ends with the creed which is preceded by the Laon-Douai version* of the capilula already found at the beginning of the same collection. Then follows a collection (f. 90v-91v) which has many texts in common with the seriptura. In the following transcription lengthy texts are not given in full unless abbre- viations or alterations were made by the compiler or scribe. As a rule, the excerpts are remarkably accurate. 1 Augustinus : Omnis natura aut deus est aut a deo = Seriplura 1. 2 Deus non ca magnitudine magnus... erit maior magnitudo quam deus = Scriptura 2. 8 Augustinus ; Deu Scriptura 10. 4 Hylarius in libro X° De Trinilale capitulo formam serui non... est aliud quam deum esse’. 5 Augustinus libro XV° De Trinitale capitulo xxii? : In illius summa simplicitate nature... et Filius et Spiritus sanctus *. : Qui nouerunt eum ignorant dies... aliud esse et aliud implex est natura... ipse et aliud quod habet = Ut assumpsisse 7 Item Gregorius : Sciendum est inquit quod fuere... claritas, ipsa claritas natura e: 8 Isidorus : Non usu nostro aliud deum. 9 Leo papa : Omnia que habet Pater mea. existere™, 10 Theodoricus Grecus : Ibi enim unitas uere est Trinitas et Trinitas uere est unitas = Scriptura 3, 11 Augustinus De fide ad Petrum: Quia in illo uno uero... una natura ‘unus est = Seriplura 4. aliud quod in ipso est". omnia habere quod semper tances the patristic source is identified more accurately in the Minster Collection favours the view that the York-Minster text is closer to the original. (6) Das sogenannte Glaubensbekenntnis, 78-79. (7) De Trin. X, 22; PL 10, 3608. (8) De Trin, XV, 22, 42 ; CCL 50A, 519-520. (12) Sermo 75, 3; PL 64, 402B. :GILBERT OF POITIERS 181 12 Athanasius Contra Arrium et Sabellium: Iluc mihi uideo necessario festinandum... qua homo sum tamen auctoritate perdoceam = Serip- tura 5. 18 Theodoricus : Existentis scientia est deus : deus est Trinitas = Scriptura 6. 14 Augustinus : Consequenter intelligitur non tantum de... solo deo quod est Trinitas = Scriptura 7. 15 Idem* : Supernarum uirtutum carmina unum tres esse et tres [f. 91] unum esse demonstrant = Scriptura 8. 16 Idem : Nec Sabellium incurrimus tres unum... deum Trinitatem esse ingenue confitemur = Scriptura 9. 17 Augustinus in libro De fide Trinitatis ad Petrum diaconum : Tri uera non esset si... excedit magnitudine aut superat potestate'*, 18 Eusebius Emisenus'* in Sermone de simbolo: Quomodo si cereus illu- minetur ex... numerari potest sed distingui non potest”, 19 Idem in eodem ; Quam bene per totum simbolum... trina autem repeticione Trinitas declaratur**, 20 Item idem in alio sermone de eodem : Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus deus deus deus... Trinitas gradum tamen nescit equalitas"®, 21 = Augustinus Super Johannem: Pater non de Filio deus Filius de Patre deus quia® Pater Filio gignendo dedit ut deus esset, ut sibi coeternus eset, ut equalis esset, Hoc est quod maius est omnibus, Quomodo uita Filius et habens uitam Filius? Quod habet hoc est. Tu aliud es, aliud habes. Habes sapientiam. Nunquid tu es ipsa sapientia? Dei Filius habet sapientiam ut sit ipsa sapientia®, 22 Boetius De Trinitale: Hoc uere unum in quo nullus est numerus quia nullum in eo aliud preter id quod est. Neque enim subiectum fieri potest. Forma enim est. Forme uero subiecte esse non possunt®. qua : quia MS. (14) This identification of Augustine and Athanasius (Vigilius) shows convincingly that the author made use of the Scriptura, Fuucentius, De fide ad Perum I, 4; CCL 91A, 713-714. (16) The author is a certain Eusebius Gallicanus. E, Dexxen, Clovis Patrum Lotinorum, in : Sacris Erudiri 3 (1961), 212. G. Monin, + La collection gallicane dite A'Eustbe d’Emése , in : Zeitschrift far neulest. Wissenschaft 34 (1935), 92-115. (17) Mazima Bibliotheca vet. Patrum 6 (Lyons 1677) 629D : + Homilia prima de symbolo, » (18) Marima Bibliotheca 6, 629C. (19) Mazima Bibl. 6, 630C : « Homilia secunda de symbolo. + (20) quia : ideo Augustine. (21) Abbreviated from In Ioh. Tr. 48, 6; CCL 36, 415-416. (22) Abbreviated from De Trin, 2; ed. StaWART-RAND, 10. Cf. Georrney, Libellus 4, 14; ed. Hanino, 57.182 N. M. HARING 28° Augustinus in libro De Trinitate: Reuera enim cum Pater non... illud diceretur sed ne taceretur®. 24 Idem in tricesimo IX® sermone Super Iohannem : Quia ipsa diuinitas est, est... queris tres, non est numerus*, 25 Gregorius Naz De Epiphaniis: Vno lumine illuminamini et tribus... gloria in secula seculorum. Amen*, 26 Item : Proprietas ergo unicuique inmobilis [f. 91v} est. Alioquin nec proprietas si transfunditur, transfertur in alterum. Unus ergo deus in his tribus et hec tria unus deus*. 27 Leo papa : Assumpta est a maiestate humilitas, a uirtute infirmitas, ab eternitate mortalitas. Et natura inuiolabilis nature est unita passibili = Scriptura 15. 28 Idem : Carnem sibi inuiolabilis Verbi deitas coaptauit = Seriptura 16. 29 Ieronimus* in Epistola ad Paulam el Eustochium de assumplione beate Marie: Alia est natura qua deus... atque indiuisam fides catholica est. 80 Idem in* cadem : Diuinitatis substantia in utero Virginis... habitat inquit omnis plenitudo diuinitatis corporaliter®. 81 Idem in eadem : Sic quippe oportet cuncta considerare... humanitas in deum assumpta®*. 82 Idem Ad Damasum papam De fide: Passus est dei Filius non puta- tiue... sed secundum illam que assumpta est, 33 Gregorius papa : Incarnatus dominus ueniens calciatus... calcia- mentum meum quia dum per carnem gentibus innotuit quasi calciata ad nos diuinitas uenit™, 4 Item Gregorius : Accendit mulier lucernam quia dei... testa est, diuinitas in carne®. 85 Idem : Potest per pedes domini ipsum incarnationis eius misterium intelligi quo divinitas terram tetigit quia carnem assumpsit*™, (23) De Trin. V, 8, 10 ; CCL 50, 217. (24) In Joh. Tr. 39, (25) De tuminibus 1 (26) De luminibus 12; CSEL 46, 123. (27) Bp. 9; PL 30, 130D-131A. (28) The words in eadem stand on an erasure followed by a lacuna. (29) Ep. 9; PL 30, 131BC. (80) Ep. 9; PL 30, 136A. (31) Prtactus, Lid. dei 5 ; PL 45, 1716. (82) Abbr. from Hom. in Ev. 1, 7, 3; PL 76, 1101CD. (83) Hom. in Bv. Il, 34, 6; PL 76, 12494. (34) Hom. in Ho, 11, 33, 6; PL 76, 1242D.GILBERT OF POITIERS 183, ue naturam nostre 87 Idem : Ipse est in humilitate nostra qui est in maiestate diuina uerus homo et uerus deus*. 88 Idem : Illa essentia que semper ubique tota fuit locali descensione non eguit et tam ei proprium fuit tota(m) homini inseri quam ei proprium quod in principio erat Verbum®. 89 Augustinus : Illa natura que semper genita manet... natiuitatem ineffabilis in se diuinitas accepisset®®. 40 Prima pars huius proemii que mala, si rationum communium et propriarum in singulis facultatibus ignoretur differentia, proueniant ostendit. Secunda exempli causa nominatim, qui quibusque de causis et in que specialiter mala proruerint demonstrat. Tercia pars quare et quibus et unde et quomodo scribat aperit™. The collection contains twelve (1-3. 10-16. 27-28) texts of Geoffrey's Scriptura (1. 2. 10. 3-9. 16-17) in exactly the same length. One group of seven texts (10-16) which according to the Scriptura contradict the second capitulum are copied in the same order. Hence there is no doubt that the compiler was familiar with such a collection of texts as Geoffrey’s Scriptura. The abbreviated text from Boethius (Nr. 22) occurs in the same form in Geoffrey's Libellus**. Noteworthy is the appearance of three texts attributed to Eusebius Emisenus (Nrs. 18-20), for three such texts, though not of identical length, occur in the collection of Adhemar of Saint-Ruf®, The first two quotations are derived from the same sermon. A text copied from Gregory of Nazianzus (Nr. 26) is likewise common to both collections®. Otherwise points of contact with Adhemar of Saint-Ruf are less apparent. The remarks at the end of the York-Minster collection point to a large work from which the texts were borrowed. We are told that (85) Sermo 24, 1; PL 64, 204A. (88) Sermo 25, 3; PL 54, 209C. (87) Abbr. trom Sermo 25, 3; PL 94, 210. (38) Furoenrius, De fide ad Petrum II, 14; CCL 914, 720. (39) The text ends in the middle of line 34 on f. Oly. Some 20 lines and f, 9 are blank. (40) Libettus 4, 14 ; ed. Hanno, 87. Seo also Bernard, De consid. V, 7, 17 (PL 182, 798C) ; 0d. J. Lectencg, H. M. Rocuats, S. Bernardi opera omnia 3 (Rome 1963), 481. (41) N. Hanine, « Die Vatersammlung des Adhemar von Saint-Ruf in Valence », in : Scholastik 38 (1963), 415. Nrs. 30-32, (42) Die Vatersammiung, 43 (Nr. 21).184 N. M. HARING 4 the first. part of this introduction shows what evils follow if in the various disciplines the difference between common and special reasons is ignored ». This was one of Gilbert’s preoccupations who discusses the matter at length in the preface to his commentary®. The second part, we learn, shows, for instance, by name those who «tumbled down » and for what reasons and into what particular evils. The third part reveals why he wrote, to whom, from what. point of view, and with what method. We may conclude that the author was a Porretan, Iv THE BASEL COLLECTION A collection of a different kind is attached to Gilbert's commentary on Boethius in Ms. Basel, Univ. Bibl, 0. II, 24, f. 158-164, The manuscript is written with great skill and is, according to M. Grabmann, «ein Monument der Verherrlichung Gilberts »t. Gilbert's commentary end on f. 157v with : «Explicit expositio Gisilberti Pictauiensis episcopi super B. contra Euticen et Nestorium.» The collection which begins ‘on f. 158 consists mainly of texts from St. John Damascene copied from Lombard’s Sentences. In the manuscript, words which to the compiler's mind deserve special attention are marked with two superscript. dots. A marginal note opposite the first excerpts reads « Nota : ideoque quia ‘enim inest deitas ideo est deus. » Other marginal notes draw the reader's attention to doctrinal points of interest to students of Gilbert's doctrine. Since the scribe’s transcription is very accurate there is no need to publish the passages in their entirety. An equal sign indicates those texts that are of equal length in Lombard and the Basel collection. 1 Tohannes Damascenus in libro De Trinitale inter Grecos magnus : Confitemur diuinitatis naturam omnem perfecte... Filius perfectus deus Spiritus sanctus = Sent. I, 13, 3; ed. Quaracchi (1916) 126. 2 Idem in eodem : Communia et uniuersalia predicantur de... et non natura differunt postases = Sent. I, 19, 9; p. 133%, 8 Idem in eodem : Substantia significat communem et circumplec- tivam.., sanctum Petrum Paulum et huiusmodi = Sent. 1, 19, 9; p. 133. (43) De Trin. 1, 2,1 1. ed. Haninc, 57 Mt (1) Geschichte der schol. Methode 2 (Freiburg i.B. 1911), 415. N. Hanino, The Commentaries on Boethius by Gilbert of Poitiers, in : Studies and Tests 13 (Toronto 1966), 16-17. (2) Lombard introduces this text by saying : « Vnde Tohannes Damascenus inter Grecos doctores magnus in libro quem de Trinitate script...GILBERT OF POITIERS 185 4 Idem in eodem : In deitate unam tantum naturam confitemur et tres ypostases secundum ueritatem entes i.e. personas = Sent. I, 25, 3; p. 163. 5 Idem in eodem : Non differunt ab inuicem ypostases secundum substantiam sed secundum caracterica ydiomata... Caracterica uero sunt i.e. determinatiua ypostaseon non nature. Etenim ypostases deter- Sen. 1, 27, 35 p. 173. 6 Item idem : Esse quidem temporaliter et eternaliter... uero a paternali ypostasi secedentem* = Sent. 1, 27, 3; p. 173. 7 Idem : Diflerentia ypostaseon i.e. personarum in... inconuersibiliter‘, Tres enim sunt etsi... neque secedunt a paternali ypostasi = Sent. I, 27,3; p. 173. 8 Idem : Non est idem dicere naturam uel personam' = Sent. III, 7,1; p. 583. 9 Iohannes (f. 158v] Damascenus : Sciendum quidem quod diuinitatis et humanitatis nomen substantiarum scilicet naturarum est representa- tiuum = Sent. III, 2, 1; p. 554. 10 Idem : Cum unam hominum naturam dicimus... omnes enim ex corpore et anima compositi*... nec aliquando fiet alius?... est idem et homo perfectus = Sent. III, 2, 1; p. 554-555. 11 Idem : Omnia que in nostra natura... enim inassumptibile est, incurabile est = Sent. II, 2, 1; p. 585. 12 Idem : Assumpsit igitur dei Filius carnem et animam sed carnem mediante anima. Unitum est carni per medium intelleclum Verbum dei. Tante enim subtilitatis atque simplicitatis est diuina essentia ut corpori de limo terre formato uniri non congruerit, nisi mediante rationali essen- tia = Sent. IIT, 2, 2; p. 556%. 18 Idem : Post concessum autem sancte Virginis... [f. 159] ... caro animata rationali et intellectiuo = Sent. III, 3, 1; p. 558. 14 Incarnatum? est igitur Verbum est... sed in ipsa actu incarnationis = Sent. III, 3, 4} p. 562. (8) Marginal note : « Aliud differre, aliud este secedere. + (4) Lombard : incontustbititer. (6) Marginal note : « Non idem naturam et personam. » (6) Marginal note: « Nota compositi ex anima et corpore. + (7) Marginal note : «qui sit Christus qui similiter participet dei et hominis ratio- rnibus sicut multi sunt homines qui participant ratione anime et corporis et ideo, que ‘nulla est multorum christorum, non est communis species in Christo Thesu +. (8) Only the italicized part is authentic. The rest aro Lombard's own words. (9) Idem is omitted.186 N. M. HARING 15 Idem : In humanatione dei Verbi animus... omnem deitatis naturam 16 Idem : Eadem est natura in singula... quod proprietatis est habens -ypostaseos i.e. persone!® = Sent. III, 5, 1; p. 570. 17 In® domino nostro Ihesu Christo... a matre et reliquis hor Sent. III, 6, 3; p. 57. 18 Idem : Unam ypostasim Filii dei confitemur... [f. 159v)... hoc quidem refulget in miraculis = Sent. II, 6, 3; p. 577-578. 19 Idem : Johannes D(amascenus) : Inconuerse et inalterabiliter unite... nee horum alicui homousion dicitur = Sent. III, 7, 2; p. 585. 20 Idem : Si igitur secundum hereticos Christus... significatiuum scilicet deitatis et humanitatis = Sent. III, 7, 2; p. 585. 21 Idem : Ex deitate autem et humanitate, confitemur = Sent. IIT, 7, 2; p. 585. 22 Idem : Due sunt nature Christi ratione... [f. 160)... personam Verbi et carnis!# = Sent. III, 9, 1; pp. 591-592. 28° Incipit [f. 160v] Expositio idei sancti leronimi presbiteri : Credimus in deum Patrem omnipotentem cunctorum... [f. 161-161v)... nos liberi confiteamur esse arbitrii. Hee fides, papa beatissime, quam... non catho- Ticum non me hereticum conprobabit. Explicit™, 24 Incipit Expositio fidei sancti Ambrosii episcopi Mediolanensis : Abraham trecentos decem et octo duxit ad... {f. 162-164)... cum cantauero tibi et anima mea redemisti**, ibus = et in duabus naturis Some marginal notes deserve being recorded. In the margin of f. 161 the word: ic autem confitemur in Christo unam esse personam ut dicamus duas perfectas et integras esse substantias » receive this comment : «Ex hac auctoritate quidam conatur probare nomine humanitatis non debere intelligi proprietatem quandam et formam substantialem qua homo est homo sed potius partes hominis scilicet animam et, corpus. » This quidam belonged to a group of theologians who favoured the so-called partes-theory in describing the Hypostatic Union in Christ’. (10) The addition ¢4.¢. persone + is Lombard’s own. (11) Idem is omitted. (12) Numbers 19-21 constitute one single chapter in Lombard. (13) With the exception of the first seven lines f. 160 is blank. (14) Professio dei Pelagil; ed. A. Haun, Bibl. der Symbole (Hildesheim 1962), 288-292, (15) Aunnose, De fide ad Grotionum, Prol. 3-4 and 1, 1, 6; PL 16, 551A-552B. ‘The next folio (164v) is blank. (18) Gerhoch of Relchersberg accused Abelard and his followers of this theory. P. GLASSEN, Gerhoch von Reicheraberg (Wiesbaden 1960), 91.GILBERT OF POITIERS 187 ‘The words in St. Ambrose : ¢ Filius quia genitus a Patre » (f. 162v) are given the following marginal comment : « Nota quare Filius. Ergo Filius dicitur quia genitus, deitatis natura non est Filius quia non e: genita a Patre. Aut si est Filius — ut quidam errant et desipiunt — genita est a Patre. » Another marginal note on St. Ambrose’s!” words : «non confusum, non unum » (f, 162v) reads : ¢ Quod Hilarius!® solitarium uel unicum uel singulare dicit, Ambrosius dicit confusum » (f. 162v). A marginal note to «numeri quantitatem »!* provides the following explanation : «Numeri quantitatem quam intelligit diuersas naturas esse quibus numerus sit addictus. In deo utique Trinitas numerus est sed non quantitas numeri : numerus quidem distributionis non conlectionis. v ADHEMAR’S COLLECTION IN Ms. VIENNA 795 (8. zii) According to the Tabulae of the National Library of Vienna’, the 12th century Latin manuscript with the pressmark 755, formerly Theol. 300, contains St. Hilary’s De synodis (f. 1-27), excerpts® from St. Hilary's De Trinitate (f. 27-50v), and «loci excerpti e patribus » (f. 51-116). The ex-libris entered in the 13th century reads : + Iste liber est s. Iohannis in Seyts Ordinis Cartusiensis. » Seitz, in Untersteiermark, Austria, was founded in 1160 by the Chartreuse of Grenoble, not far from Valence, where Master Adhemar was a Canon Regular at Saint-Ru! About 1180 Adhemar completed a collection of auctoritates, divided into TIT (1159-1181) and a number of religious houses¢. The loci exeerpti is an abbreviated edition of this collection two copies of which (Mss 240 and 295) are preserved in Stift Zwettl (Austria). Another copy, now lost, is known to have been preserved in the library of Stift Heiligenkreuz whose community founded Zwettl in 1138 (17) De fide ad Grat. 1, 2, 17; PL 16, 555B. (18) De Trin. VII, 31 and De synodis 68; PL 10, 226A and 525B. (19) De fide ad Grat. 1, 2 19; PL 16, S85C. (1) Tabulae cod. manuscriptorum 1 (Vienna 1864), 127. (2) They are called Nole in libro Beati Hilarii de Trinitate also found in Ms. Klosterneuburg 777, f. 30-58y and in MS. Val. Lat, 254, f. 21-39v (s. xii). (8) N. Hanina, «In Search of Adbemar's Patristic Collection +, in: Mediaeval Studies 28 (1966), 336-346 and «Die Vatersamt von Saint-Rut {in Valence », in : Scholastik 38 (1963), 402-420. (4) N. Hanno, « The Porretans and the Greek Fathers », in : Mediaevat Studies 24 (1962), 193-1 (8) N. Hanno, ¢Eine Zwettler Abktrzung der Vatersammlung Adhemars von Saint-Ruf », in : Theologie und Phil. 1 (1966), 31.188 N. M. HARING ‘The text of the copy extant in Vienna seems to be superior to the text represented by Mss Zwettl 240 and 295. For the anonymous texts of Dist. X, 11-14 are correctly attributed (f. 65-65v) to Synodus septimus (11), Hylarius (12), Idem in xii synodo (13), and Idem in Syno- dis (14). The excerpt from St. Augustine in Dist. XIV, 8 ends with the sentence :¢ Nullus autem pater de filio est quod est sed filio pater est. » This sentence is missing in Mss Zwettl 240 and 295. A comparison reveals also that after Dist. XVII, 21 a text is missing in Zwettl 240 and 295 which reads Item ad Paulam et Eustochium : Unde mihi uidetur quod altitudinem... non alienum a natura uel genere. »* The additional text indicates that the Carthusian copy was not made from the two extant Cistercian copies. They, in turn, may depend on the copy owned by the Carthusians’, VI ANOTHER REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ARSENAL COLLECTION (MS. SANKT POLTEN, DIOZESANBIBL. 8) In Ms. Paris, Arsenal 1117B a short. patristic collection is attached to Gilbert's commentary with texts from Athanasius igilius of Thapse) Didymus, Theodoret, Pope Hormisdas, Sophronius, Augustine and Ambrose?. This collection is also found in Ms. St. Polten, Didzesan- bibl. 84, formerly Bischofl. Alumnat B 189a, as can be gathered from the exlibris on the inside of the front-cover : « Ex bibl. Seminarii episcop. ad S. Hippolytum. » It is believed that it was once owned by the Cister- cians of Vallis Dei* near Ybbs (Danube) in Lower Austria, founded in 1338 by the Wilhering community. The copy, however, is older. It dates back to the 13th century. On f. 1 there are two inscriptions : « Liber Boetii sancte Trinitatis. Augustinus de diffinitionibus ecclesiasticorum dogmatum.» In reality the volume is a copy of Gilbert's commentary on the Theological Tractates of Boethius. The two prologues (¢ Libros questionum», f. Iv-2v, and «Omnium que rebus », f. 2v-3v) are followed by the commentary on the first tractate accompanied by a separate text of the opusculum. Certain (8) Pseudo-Jerome, Ep. 9, 10; PL 30, 133BC. Ct. Aounwan, Tract. de Trin. 11, 97; ed. N. Hamina, in : AHDLMA 31 (1964), 160. (7) It may be noted here that the text in Dist. xxiv, 15 is derived from Alcuin, De fide «. Trinitatia (1, 9; PL 101, 19AG) as implied in the introduction. Ct. Hanixo, Eine Zuelller Abkarzuns (1) Edited in Mediaeval Studies 28 (1966), 340-343. (2) L. Janauscusx, Orig. Cist. (Vienna 1877) 271, Nr. 706.GILBERT OF POITIERS 189 marginal notes reveal that the manuscript belongs to the Clairvaux family* represented by Mss Troyes 1841, Zwettl 248 and 253, Heiligenkreuz 593, and Vienna 1618. The ending : « Expli t primus: (f. 31) points to Ms. Zwett! 2484. The explicit of the second tractate « Explicit liber secundus » (f. 56) also agrees with that of Ms. Zwettl 248°. Within this tractate the folio numbers leap from f. 33 to f. 55, but the text is complete. In the upper margin of f. 62 an ex-libris reads :« Andreas Brenn vom Mollestadt zu Prag, written in the 18th or 19th centuries. ‘The same ez-libris in the lower margin of f. 18 has been partly erased. ‘The rubric : ¢ Explicit liber tercius » (f. 68) agrees again with the reading of Ms. Zwettl 248%. The text of Gilbert's commentary ends on f. 101v. The patristic collection begins on f. 102. The Athanasius text which opens the collection in the Arsenal manuscript is missing. The other texts are as follows : 2 Didimus : Filius in Patris appellatione... Patrem et Patris ad Filium. 8 Idem : Quecumque sunt Filii hec eadem... gratiam multorum sanc- torum sit Pater. 4 Idem : Quomodo ergo serui qui in... unitate sit iunctus ad Filium. 5 Theodoritus : Natura et substantia hoc quod... enim natura et sub- tantia est. @ Hormisda papa : Adoremus Patrem et Filium et... quod est proprium nominum transferatur. 7 Sophronius : Trinitatem in unitate credimus et... que inconfuse ‘unamquamque figurant personam. 8 Augustinus Ad Marimum: Hee omnia nec confuse unum... cum sint tria, unum sunt. 9 Augustinus ueleris ef noue questiones legis: Unus quidem sed non singularis habet exterius in misterio alterum qui sit cum altero. 10 Ambrosius : Quod unius est substantie separari non potest etsi non sit singularitatis sed unitatis. 11 Augustinus in sermone de Trinitate : Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus non diuiduntur in divinitate sed in personarum qualitate. 12 Idem in eodem : Diuiduntur proprietatibus sed natura sociantur. The treatise De diffinitione ecclesiasticorum dogmatum ({. 102v-105v), noticed on f. 1, is followed by musical notations (f. 106) and a fragmentary treatise (f. 108-164v). Other tracts cover the rest of the volume (f. 165- 243), (8) N. Hanino, The Commentaries, 35. See p. 73, note 69. (4) The Commentaries, 157. (8) The Commentaries, 180. (6) The Commentaries, 230.190 No M. HARING vu OTHER COMPLETE OR FRAGMENTARY COPIES OF GILBERT'S COMMENTARY ON THE THEOLOGICAL TRACTATES OF BOETHIUS Ms, Prague, Univ. 479 (I11.E.4), f. 1-62 (s. ziti) ‘We have seen that Ms. Sankt Polten 84 was for some time in the hands of a private owner in Prague. The University Library of Prague possesses a copy described in the catalogue as : « membran. saec. XIII M1. 62, 26x 18 cm 1. Anicii Manlii T. Sev. Boethii Liber de duabus naturis cum uberrima expositione marginali »*. This rather misleading title is actually found on f. I at the head of Gilbert's prologue : « Liber questionum » (f. 1-1v). The prologue is followed by Gilbert’s second prologue (f. 1v-2v) : « Omnium que rebus ». A separate text of the Theological Tractates is written alongside the commentary. The text of Gilbert’s commentary on the first tractate (f. 2v-26) is complete but the text of the commentary on the second tractate, which begins on f. 26, breaks off on f. 29v (quire number 4) with the words : « manifes- tum est quod non des. The rest of the text and more than half of Gilbert commentary on the third tractate (De Hebdomadibus) is missing, for {. 30 begins with the words : « quo album est». The text of the third tractate ends on f. 32. The text of the commentary on the Contra Eulychen (f. 32-62) is complete. Gilbert is not mentioned anywhere in the volume and no ex-libris of a previous owner is to be found in it. Ms. Prague, Univ. 667 (1V.D.13), f. 201-202 (, aiii) ‘The University Library of Prague holds a ¢recueil de questions théo- logiques » which has been carefully analyzed by Bertrand-G. Guyot who maintains that «1'écriture ou plutot les écritures ne laissent aucun doute sur la date : nous sommes au milieu du x11 siécle»#. Guyot noticed that on f. 201-202 the recueil contains the first (f. 201) and second (f. 201v) prologues and a few pages of Gilbert’s commentary on the first tractate’. (1) J. Tromtan, Catal. codd. mss. tat. univ. pragensis 1 (Prague 1905) 190-1 ‘An earlier pressmark reads Y. 1. 2. n. 93, (2) De Trin. 11, 2, |. Hanna, 177. (8) De Hetd. 2, 139 ; ed. Haninc, 217. It seems that two quires have been removed. (4) BG. Guvor, « Quaestiones Guerrici, Alexandri et aliorum magistrorum pari- siensium (Praha, Univ. IV, D. 13)», in : Archivum fratram Praedicatorum 32 (1962), 5-128. (6) De Trin. 1, 3, 17; ed. HaniNo, 66 : quorum auetoritati quedam dignitas inesse ‘cognoseitur///GILBERT OF POITIERS 191 The text is beautifully written but without any reference to The reason for interrupting the transcription is not. apparent’ author. Ms. Ozford, Bodl., Lat. mise. e. 42, formerly 36220 (s. xiii) In the summary catalogue of the Bodleian Library Ms. 36220 is des- cribed as being «in Latin, on parchment, made up of three Mss written in the 12th and 13th contt. in England... 54 leaves, chiefly in double columns’. The third and last part (C) consisting of two folios dates back to the early 13th century and contains «two leaves from a Ms. of Boethius’ theological works with the commentary of Gilbertus Porretanus ». The fragment on f. 53 begins with the words : « Nam Plato et Cicero »* and includes what the catalogue calls : «the commencement of the comment on the Liber de Praedicatione trium personarum »*. The next: folio (f. 54) belongs to a copy of Gilbert's commentary on the De Hebdo- ‘madibus and begins with the words : ¢ quoniam et quod coneipimus... 94°. The volume was purchased by one William Martin on 14 August 1568 for 3s 4d and bought on 22 August 1913 from L. Morshead, esq. of Treniffle, Lanceston (Cornwall). Ms. Vienna, Nationalbibl., Lat. 1031, f. 1-73 (s. ziti) The national Library of Vienna owns two copies of Gilbert's commen- tary on the Theological Tractates. Ms. 1618 (s. xii) belongs to the Clairvaux family and is no longer complete. Ms. 1031, formerly Theol. 410, is described in the Tabulae: «m. xiii. 73, 4°, Anicius Manlius Torquatus Boethius, De Trinitate cum commentariorum Gilberti Porretani episcopi pictaviensis libris IV. Denis I, 331 », The volume contains both prologues : « Libros questionum (f. I-Iv) and ¢ Omnium que rebus » (f. 1v-2v). A separate text of the Tractales accompa- nies the entire commentary. The order of the tractates is undisturbed : I (f. 2v) II (f. 26) LIT (f. 29v) IV (f. 40). The commentary ends on f. 73 with the addition : «Amen ». Sixteen lines of the folio are blank. No mention is made of Gilbert and no ex-libris indicates a previous owner. (6) The fragment is not mentioned in J. Truman, Catal. 1, 267. (7) F. MaDAN and H. H. E. Crasten, A Summary Catalogue of Western Manuscripts in the Bod. Library at Ozford 4 (Oxford 1924), 434. 6, 175 ed. Hanan 1 prol.; ed. Hanino, exact words are not provided by the 190, It seems that in the commentary the text Uhis text begins on f. 54 with the words (11) N, Hanno, The Commentaries, 30. (12) Tabulae codd, mes. in Bibl. Palatina Vindobonensi 1 (Vienna 1864), 179.192 N. M. HARING Ms. Admont, Slifisbibl. 594, f. 1-82 (s. aii) The handwritten catalogue of Admont Library compiled by J. Wichner'* dates this manuscript s. ziv. It is more accurately dated '. zii, for the script still shows the caudate letter ¢ and other characte- risties of the late 12th century. Gilbert's first prologue « Libros questionum » on {. Iv (glued to the cover) is followed by the prologue «Omnium que rebus > (f. 2v). Side by side with the commentary the volume contains a separate text of the Theological Tractales. The text of the commentary on the first tractate (f. 3v-25) is incomplete because of a number of rather long lacunae. The catalogue notes : « Sechs Blatter sind ausgeschnitten. » In fact, after f. 18v, which ends with the words : ¢ genere multa diuersa sunt + the removal of two folios is the cause of @ lacuna which extends to «tempus confertur. Nichil enim... » (f. 19). On f. 19v the sentence : « Et sic quidem hoe nomine quod» continues (t 20) : ein motu est interminabilem...»*7 Some 18 lines on f. 20 have been cut away. Therefore another lacuna in the same folio (20) after ‘alicubi uel esse aliquando uel»! extends to (f. 20v) «modo pendet ex altero 91, The loss of a folio following f. 22 has caused a lacuna which extends from (f. 22v) «uidetur que subsistentium qua ratione »%° to (f. 23) eet Spiritus sanctus a se inuicem »#. After the prologue to the second tractate (f. 26-30) a rubric reads : « Incipit liber secundus » (f. 26) to which corres- ponds on f. 30 : « Explicit secundus liber. Incipit prologus expositoris. » The rubrics « Explicit. prologus expositionis. Incipit liber tercius » (£. 31) lead over to Gilbert's commentary on the third tractate (f. 30-40). A lacuna after f. 45v in the commentary on the Contra Eulychen (f. 40v-82v) has been caused by the removal of one folio. It extends from «qualitate affici significatur »® on {. 45v to the sentence (f. 47) «secundum aliquos intelligatur substantia...» Folio 49 is likewise missing, causing a lacuna from « genus qualitatis etiam quasdam (f. 48v)™ to the sentence (f. 50) eet de quibus non predicetur... # Since f. 65 is missing there is another lacuna from « concupiscentia sed sola ineffabili » (13) Catalogus Admuntensis 236. (14) De Trin. 1, 4, 45; ed. Hamino, 124, (15) De Trin. 1, 4, 64; ed. Hanino, 127. (16) De Trin. 1, 4, 83;; ed. Haine, 132, (12) De Ten 4 81; 9 Hann, 133. De Trin. I, 4, 91 ; ed. Hamino, 133, (19) De Trin 1497; ed: Hanne, 138, (20) De Trin. 1, 5, 21; ed. Hamino, 143. (21) De Trin. 1, 5, 44; ed. HamiNa, 148. (22) Contra But. 1, 40; ed. Haninc, 250. (23) Contra But. 1, 67; ed. Hamino, 254. (24) Contra But. 1, 93; ed. Hamto, 262. (25) Contra But. 2, 6; ed. Hanina, 266.GILBERT OF POITIERS 193 (f. 64v)* to (£. 66) « taceamus homo corporis animatione...»® The disappea- rance of f. 77 is the cause of a lacuna from (f. 76v) humanitatis naturali unitate»? to (f. 78) «ueram substantiam submotis »*, ‘The commentary ends on f. 82v with « Explicit liber Boecii de sancta Trinitate » to which a different hand added the colophon : « Finito libro sit laus et gloria Christo. » Of a much later date is the addition : « Vinum dulce bibit qui cum penna bene seribit. » The text belongs to the Clairvaux family. Ms. Basel, Universitatsbibl. A.VI. 24, [. 1-113 (s. x0) ‘The university library of Basel also owns two copies of Gilbert's commentaries on the Theological Tractales of Boethius. The older of the two (0.11.24) dates back to the twelfth century and is a fine specimen of the scribal art of the period. The second copy was not made until the 15th century and bears the pressmark A. VI. 24. According to G, Haenel’s collection of library catalogues, Ms. Basel, Universitatsbibl. A. VI. 24. was placed in the theology section of the paper codices. It is described* as : « de maximis theologiae tr. ex mendoso exem- plari transcriptus ut ibi fatetur scriptor. fol. » This description does not apply to the volume at present preserved under the same pressmark. More pertinent is the notice given by B. de Montfaucon : ¢ Gisilberti Pictav. episcopi expositio super Boetii librum de hebdomadibus bonorum (theol. chartacee). »*, ‘The volume opens with (f. 1-21) the text of the Theological Tractates in the following order : De Hebdomadibus, De Trinitate 1 and 11, Contra Eulychen. In keeping with this unusual order Gilbert's commentary on the De Hebdomadibus (f. 22-35) precedes the others. Its explicit is the first reference to Gilbert. as the author : « Explicit exposicio Gisilberti pictauiensis episcopi super Boetii librum de hebdomadibus bonorum » (f. 35). On the next folio (f. 35v) begins Gilbert's prologue (¢ Libros questionum »), written after the trial at Reims in 1148 (f. 36v-36v). It is succeeded by the other prologue («Omnium que rebus») which was the original introduction to the commentary (f. 36v-38). (28) Contra But. 6, 18; ed. Hanino, 318, (27) Contra But. 6, 3 ; ed. Hanino, (28) Contra But. 7, 35 ed. Hanno, 349. (29) Contra But, 7, 50; ed. Hanine, 352, ibroram mss. (Leiptig 1830), 896. Rather critical of this ‘work are, Meyer and M. Burckhardt, Die mittlatterl. Handschiften dder Universitatebibliothek Basel 1 (Basel 1960), p. «x : « Die Basel betreftende Parti in Haenels Handschriftenubersicht stellt nichts anderes der als einen durch verschiedene Versehen verunstalteten Abdruck von Zwingers Titelverzeichnis.» Ct. H. ScunsinER, ‘« Mittelalterl. Katalogisierungs praxis», in : Zentralblatt far Bibliothekaweaen 44 (1927) 12 (31) B. pe Montraucon, Bibl. bidl, mss. nova | (Paris 1739), 611D.194 N. M. HARING The explicit ({. 38) at the end of the tractate on the Trinity states = i pictauiensis episcopi super Boetium de Trinitate. Incipit exposicio eiusdem in librum Boetii ad Iohannem diaconum utrum Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus de deitate substan- tialiter predicentur »#. This commentary ends on f. 72. The last commentary (f. 72v-113) concludes with the statement : «Explicit expositio Gisilberti pictaviensis episcopi super Boetium contra Euthicen et Nestorium. » Iluminations on f. 1 and 22 testify to the great care with which the text has been written. It seems that the manuscript belonged to the Carthusian monastery in Basel whose Prior Henry Arnoldi (d. 1480) and Prior Jacob Louber are known to have been outstanding librarians ®. Ms. Mainz, Stadtbibl. I. 87, f. 1-137 (s. 20) Closely related to Ms. Basel, Univ. A. VI. 24, is the fifteenth-century paper-copy of Gilbert’s commentary preserved in Ms. Mainz, Stadtbibl. I, 87. The information provided by the handwritten catalogue® is hardly worth reproducing with the exception of the notice that the book once belonged to the Carthusians (pressmark 150)*. Like the Basel manuscript it places Gilbert's commentary on the De Hebdomadibus at the beginning (f. 1-13v)%. A separate text of the tractate begins on f. 2. Then follows Gilbert's commentary on the Contra Kulychen (f. S3v-00), likewise with a separate text of the same tractate. The explicit attached to Gilbert's commentary reads : ¢ Explicit liber Boetii contra Euthicen et Nestorium de duabus naturis in Christo » (f. 55). On the same folio the explicit under the text of the tractate states : « Explicit expositio Gisilberti pictaviensis episcopi super Boetium contra Euthicen et Nestorium.» The explicit agrees verbatim with the explicit of Ms. Basel, Univ. A. VI. 24, f. 113. We learn from a notice found on the same folio (55) that the copy was made in 1453. On f. 55v-56 there is a fragment of St. Hilary’s Contra Constantinum Imperatorem* followed by a Liber seplem Omeliarum beati Tohannis Crisostomi in laudem Pauli Apostoli (f. 56v-77v). Folios 78-89v are blank. Then we find Gilbert's prologue ¢ Libros questionum » (88-83v) and the prologue «Omnium que rebus (f. 84-85). The latter usually heads Gilbert's commentaries. We have met with the same sequence (82) Predicentur ; predicuntur MS, (33) G, Mayan and M. Buncxuanor, Die mitelalterl, Handschriften, p. xv. (34) Catal. codd. mss. Bibliothecae Moguntinae, 21-25. (85) H. Scunerpen, Die Bibliothek der ehemaligen Mainzer Kerthause (Leipzig 1927), does not reter to this work. Ct. H. Scunzimen, Mittelallerliche Katalogisierungs- prazis, 16-19. (86) The folios are not numbered in the manuscript. (87) PL 10, 578.GILBERT OF POITIERS 195 in the Basel manuscript*®, Where Gilbert. attacks his critics in this pro- logue®® a marginal note in German expresses warm, but slightly vulgar, agreement : ¢ wesch yn den balg ». Gilbert's commentary on the De Trinitale (f. 85-114) which now follows is also accompanied by a separate text of the tractate and ends with the words : «Explicit liber Boetii de sancta et deifica Trinitate cum expositione Gisilberti episcopi pictaviensis » (f. 114). A more recent hand entered the remark : « Hune Gilliberti librum repre- hendit sanctus Bernardus super Cantica sermone 80 quasi versus finem. YVade nee catholicus est liber iste sed in multis erroneus » (f. 114). Then follows the incipit of Gilbert's commentary on the second Theological Traclate: « Incipit expositio Gisilberti episcopi_pictaviensi librum Boetii ad Iohannem dyaconum utrum Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus de deitate substantialiter predicentur » (f. 114v). This incipit also agrees verbatim with that found in Ms. Basel, Univ. A. VI.24, f. 38 quoted above. Both the commentary and the text of the tractate end on f. 137. ‘The next item is a letter dealing with « the three vows and other virtues » written by the Dominican Superior General Humbertus de Romanis (f. 137-147v). The authenticity of the short tract on the Eucharist attri- buted to Bonaventure (f. 147v-151) was doubted by a reader who made the annotation : ¢ dubito an ipse fecit » (f. 151v). The work found on f. 152-154 ends with the colophon : « Explicit liber beati Augustini de contemplatione Ghristi, etc., per Teodericum. de Oppenheym »*. Folio 154v is blank. Then follow (f. 155-157v) two letters by St. Bernard to the Carthusians, The words «Ad domnum papam Honorium » at the end of the second letter are the heading of the next letter in St. Bernard’s epistolary®. There is no denying the close relationship between this manuscript and Ms. Basel, Univ. A. VI. 24. It would indeed be interesting to learn why Carthusians of the fifteenth century considered Gilbert's commen- taries worth copying. Marginal notes in the Mainz manuscript show that. the work was studied. There are indications that Ms. Basel, Univ. A. VI. 24 was copied from Ms. Basel, Univ. O. II. 24 (s. xii) where we meet, with the identical ending of the first tractate : « Explicit expositio Gisilberti pictaviensis episcopi super Boetium de Trinitate and an identical incipil of the second tractate*. The explicit terminating the third tractate (88) The reversed sequence is also found in MS. Paris, Maz. 656. (89) De Trin. 1, 1, 9 prol. ; ed. Hanno, 86 : quamuls nos ab eis dissentire garriant quidam... (40) Oppenheim near Mainz. (41) Epp. 11 and 12 ; PL 182, 108B-116B. The numbers xi and xii have been retained by the copyist. (42) Bp. 13; PL 182, 116B-117A. The text of this letter is missing. (43) See The Commentaries; ed. Haninc, 187 and 161.196 1X. M. HARING also agrees literally with the text of Ms. Basel, Univ. A. VI. 244. Further text collations would most likely confirm these findings. The fact that. Ms. Mainz, Stadtbibl. I. 87 contains a fragment of Hilary’s Contra Constantinum Imperatorem, also found in Ms. Basel, Univ. 0. 11. 24, {. 1-8v, strengthens this view. vil MARGINAL NOTES BORROWED FROM GILBERT Ms. Val. Lal. 5136, f. 56-72 (s. xii) Ms. Vat. Lat. 5136 contains an annotated text of Cicero's De officiis (£. 1-56) and the text of Boethius’ first theological tractate on the Trinity. Some examples will suffice to show that the interlinear and marginal notes are derived from Gilbert's commentary. The comment on Inuesti- gatam reads : «Hic commemorandum est quod non omnis contradict questi... et diuersorum generum rationibus diuersis i.e. theolocis ac loyeis » (f. 56) which is an abbreviation of Gilbert's text®. The note : + Quisquis ergo philosophie secreta talibus pandit ut ita dicatur eam prostituit et quantum in se est dignitatem eius minus admirabilem facit. Quod quoniam multiloquiis et sermone triuio contingere solet iteral transcription’, The annotator used such passages (1. 56) as «Tria quippe sunt... »* «Sicut enim medicine officium...»* oF (t. 57) ¢Putant quidam imperiti...»* The notes «Sicut enim non est quo...¥ or (f. 57v) «Nota quod Pater... »* or (f. 60) «Quod essentia dicitur una... »* all date back to Gilbert. Ms. Toronto, Institule of Mediaeval Studies The library of the Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies possesses ‘@ manuscript whose main contents are the five Theological Tractates of Boethius. It is described in the sales catalogue as «Boethius. De Trinitate cum glossis Gilberti Porretani. — De fide catholica. — De duabus naturis et una persona Christi. Folio (308-226 mm), Italian manu- (44) Ibidem, 230. (1) The accessus to this work is found on f. 72. (2) De Trin. 1, 3, 3-10 prol. ; ed. Hanino, 63-65. (3) De Trin. 1, 3, 19 prol.; ed. Hanino, 67. (4) De Trin. I, 3, 21-25 prol. ; ed. Hanina, 67-68, (5) De Trin, 1, 3, 29-30 prol. ; ed. Hanns, 69-70. (6) De Trin. 1, 2, 79-86 ; ed. Hanino, 95-97. (7) De Trin.t, 2, 54-59 ; ed. Hanno, (9) De Trin, 11, 1, 21; ed. Hanno,GILBERT OF POITIERS 197 script on vellum, ff. 21, written in fine Gothic script medium small size, 34 long lines to a page; with very wide margins containing in many ‘cases the commentary ; initial capitals, chapter headings, and paragraph marks in red ; one blank margin cut away otherwise in good condition ; bound in old vellum, with the bookplate of J. P. R. Lyell. About 1380. » The last tractate ends on the tenth line of f. 19v and is followed by a tract entitled : «Utrum otium sit peccatum (f. 19v-21). Twelve headings of further questions are noted on f. 21, but no answers are provided. Inside the front cover in the upper loft hand comer we find the entry ¢ R. 17/2/42 C.V.V. » written in pencil. There are no indications of a previous owner. Not all marginal notes are derived from Gilbert. Among those derived from Gilbert some are explicitly attributed to him. The first marginal note reads : « Gilbertus. Libros questionum Agnitii... celeberrimis aucto- ribus nititur. Agnitius fortitudine Seuerinus gravitate opitulatione Boetius meritis Manlius (f. 1). This information is taken from Gilbert's first prologue!®, The continuation of this note, likewise attributed to Gilbert, fills the lower margin of the folio : « Gilbertus. Deus de quo in hiis agitur libris... applicatione aperiat®. Nos auctoritate nostra nichil... non recita- torum sed interpretum facimus!®, Multi sunt qui cum... magnificos infamant 9%, In the right hand margin there is a passage taken from Gilbert's second prologue but not attributed to him : «Omnium que rebus... recipit non diuisionum. Iterum est naturalium proprium... unum numero faciat subsistentem*. Has igitur naturalium rationes multi heretici natu- ralium proprias minime attendentes in theologia usurpauerunt »"*. The marginal note on the word questionem in Boethius is undoubtedly inspired by Gilbert!” : «Ex affirmatione et negatione questio constat. Non tamen omnis contradicitio questio est. Cuius enim altera pars aut simpliciter falsa aut vera est ut : homo non est animal, homo est animal, questio non est nec illa que pro neutra continet rationes ut astria peruia (= paria) sunt aut non sunt. Sed illa que pro utraque parte rationes apparentes ostendit ut alias » (f. 1). ‘The note : ¢ Quisquis philosophie secreta talibus pandit ut ita dicatur prostituit et, quantum in se est, dignitatem eius minus admirabilem facit » (t. 1) is likewise copied from Gilbert, A rather long note, attributed (10) De Trin. 4, 1, 1 and 6 prol. ; ed. HARING, 53-54. (11) De Trin. 1, 1, 24 prol.; ed. Haninc, 83-54. (12) Cf. De Trin. 1, 1, 7-8 prol.; ed. HARING, 54. (13) Cf. De Trin. 1, 1, 9-14 prol.; ed. Haina, 56-06. (14) De Trin. 1, 2, 1 prol.; ed. Hanno, 57. (15) De Trin. 1, 2, 6 prol.; ed. Hanino, 58, (18) De Trin. 1, 2, 8 prot. ed. Hanino, 69. (17) De Trin, 1, 3, 3 prol.; ed. Hanino, 63, (18) De Trin. 1, 8, 19 prol. ; ed. Hantno, 67.198 N. M. HARING to Gilbert, occurs on f. 2 : « Gilbertus. Gum numerando dicimus... recte diuidens ait : unus quo numeramus »**. The marginal text : «Non enii Pater... essens una qua sunt usya » (f. 2) is also borrowed from Gilbert™ So is the note dealing with the categories (f. 2v) : « Hic commemorandum est quod cum... et in rationalibus falsum uero +. Neither this note nor the previous one is attributed to Gilbert. The annotator’s explanation of perpetuitas (f. 3) is also taken from Gilbert's commentary®. But the borrowing is not acknowledged. However, he does acknowledge Gilbert™ as the author of another note on f. 3: « Eque enim uniuersa... possunt non esse +. On f. 3v-5 the notes are much less numerous. The note on the word coniunclum (3v) is obviously based on Gilbert's interpretation™. A very long excerpt dealing with the second Boethian axiom in the De Hebdomadibus is found on f. Sv : «Gilbertus. Diuersum est. esse. Diuersorum philosophorum... cum abstracta non sit non est nisi concer- natur»*. The note on the ninth axiom (f. 5v) is similarly abbreviated from Gilbert's text™. Several other notes on f. Sv-6v are derived from the same source without acknowledgement. The theological tractate De fide catholica (f. 6v-9v) is not annotated. But Gilbert's name appears ‘again in the notes to the Contra Eutychen (f. 10-19v). Here, too, the number of notes decreases gradually. Gilbert’s influence is less apparent in the brief interlinear notes found throughout the Boett text. Ix AN ALTERCATION BETWEEN CLAREMBALD AND GILBERT (MS. OXFORD, BODL. LAUD. MISC. 495, 8, XII) ‘The Allercatio inter Clar et magistrum G in Ms. Oxford, Bodl. Library, Laud. misc. 495 (S. C. number 2322), {. 103v-105v, is found imbedded in a collection of short questiones. The title seems original and authentic, not a later addition, but the names of Clarembald and Gilbert do not occur in the alleged altercation. Depite the dramatic connotation of the title the exposition is calm and peaceful. ‘The ealtercation », as we may expect, concerns the Trinity. We are (19) Abbreviated from De Trin. I, 3, 10-20; ed. Hantwo, 103-106. (20) De Trin. I, 3, 59-54 ; ed. Hanino, 113. The note on dualifas (t. 2) is inspired (25) De Hebd. 1, 27-36 ; ed. Hanino, 193-194. (20) De Hebd. 1, 71-77; ed, Hanino, 203-204.GILBERT OF POrTIE! 199 told that in discussing the divine persons and the proprietates constituting them some scholars deny and others affirm the identity of person and proprietas in God. Those who deny the identity quote the text of the Mass : «In sub- stantia unitas, in personis proprietas»!. According to Geoffrey of Auxerre this text was cited by Gilbert at the consistory of Reims in 1148%. It soon became a «very famous»? quotation among those who reasoned that a proprieas which is in a person and distinguishes one person from the other is not the person itself. They also quoted the text : « Aliud est quo est, aliud quo Pater est.» In other words, that by which the Father is Father is not the same as that by which he exists. Moreover, they pointed out, St. Augustine teaches that there are three relations in God by which the divine persons are interrelated. These relations are nothing else but the proprietates. Hence they are not identical with the persons to whom they are related. After noting some arguments from reason the author of the Allercatio denies the validity of these arguments and of the interpretation given to the patristic texts. To show the identity of person and proprietas in the Trinity the author then quotes the popular text, generally attri- buted to St. Jerome, in which the identification is made : « proprietates i.e. personas». In addition he turns to a text from Isidore expressing the absolute simplicity of the \e natures. Finally, the broader question is raised concerning the signification of the divine names. If the word God and the word person, we are told, signify different realities we destroy the oneness of God ; if they signify the very same thing we destroy the Trinity. The author admits that the problem is difficult and agrees with his adversaries that, basically, human words are insufficient to espress divine mysteries. It is well known that Clarembald, archdeacon of Arras, opposed Gilbert of Poitiers. But in his extant works he does not touch on the (1) Preface on the Feast of the Trinity, for drawing my attention to the Allercatio. (2) Libellus contra capitula Gislebertt 4, 19; Hamino, in : Anal. Cist. 22 (1966), 58. (8) Rovent or Meus, Sent. 1, 5, 1; ed. Manrin-GaLter, in : Spicil. . Lovan. 25 (Louvain 1952), 163. The text is cited by Abelard, Theologia Summi Boni 111; PL 178, ter Lombard, Sent. I, 93, 1 ; ed. Quaracchi (1916), 207 ; Everard of Ypres, Hanino, in : Mediaeoa! Studies 15 (1958), 261 and 271 ; Peter of Poitiers, 25 ; PL 211, 884A ; Quacstiones Vareavienses ; ea. F. SrecMOu.en, in : Miscell. Giov. Mercoti %, Studi Testi 122 (Vatican 1946), 295-300. (4) Fides Pelagit; PL. 48, 489 or ed. A. Hanx, Bibl. der Symbole (Breslau 1897), 289, The text is quoted by the author of the Summa sententiarum 11, 11; PL 176, 59; Lombard, Sent. 1, 25, 34 and I, 93, 1; ed. Quaracchi 163 and 207 ; Geoffrey of Auxerre, Scriptura 16 and Libellus 4, 46 ; ed. Hanno, 32 and 61 ; Everard of Ypres, Dialogus ; ed. Hanino, 261. (6) Blymol. VIL, 1, 26 (ed. Linpsay). Geovenny, Seriptura 14 and Litellus 4, 42; ed. Hamino, 32 and 61. wish to thank fr, L. Bataillon, 0. P.200 N. M. HARING question of the divine proprielales. For that reason his works do not assist us in an attempt to establish him as the author of the Altercation. At the same time the text seems to contain nothing that militates against his authorship. ALTERCATIO INTER CLAR ET MAGISTRUM G 1 Cum diuina substantia sit tres persone et e conuerso, ubi tanta est identitas ut in essentia nulla sit diuersitas, de ipsis proprietatibus quibus persone differunt disseramus. De his quoque questio* magna est utrum uidelicet sint persone uel utrum proprietas Patris Pater et ita de aliis. 2 Alii enim eas personas esse negant, alii affirmant. Qui autem negant, et auctoritate et ratione contendunt illud inducentes canonicum : In substantia unitas, in personis proprietas’. Si enim proprietas persone ‘est qua persona ab alia differt, quomodo erit persona cuius est proprietas ? Nullo modo, inquiunt. 8 Inducunt et illud quia aliud est deum esse, aliud Patrem esse, quia aliud est quo est, aliud quo Pater est. Hoc enim commune trium est. et non est ad aliud. Hoc uero unius est et ad aliud. Et ideo est id unde Pater est ie. proprietas que Patris est. tres ibi esse relationes non tamen accidentia quibus uidelicet persone referantur et iccirco, ut aiunt, relationes persone esse non possunt. Nulla enim que referuntur sunt illa quibus referuntur. Proprietates autem sunt ille relationes*®, Quare, ut inferunt, proprietates ille non sunt ille persone. 5 Idem autem et ratione ostendere nituntur hoc modo : gignere, inquiunt, Patris est. Hic de aliquo sermo est. De persona ergo uel de alio. Sed non de persona. Quid enim esset dicere : persona est persona? Relinquitur ‘ergo quod de alio i.e. de proprietate que non est persona. 6 Item ratiocinantur hoc pacto : si filiatio idem est, inquiunt, quod Filius est, cum Filius in Patre sit [f. 104), erit et in Patre filiatio. Vel si paternitas idem quod Pater, cum sit in Filio, et in Filio erit pater~ nitas”, ‘7 = Inductis seu auctoritatibus seu rationibus, nune conuenit respondere: primam primo determinantes que forte uidetur precipua. Que est : In substantia unitas, in personis proprietas. Quod est dicere substantiam (6) It was debated at the consistory of Reims in 1148 according to Geoffrey, Libellus 4, 19-37 ; ed. Hanino, 58-60. (2) Preface on the Feast of the Trinity. (8) Avoustive, De Trin. VII, 1, 2 (PL 42, 935) ; CCL 50, 247. Ct. De Trin. V, 5, 6 (PL 42, 914) ; CCL 50, 210. Lombard, Sent. 1, 26, 2; p. 165. Sent. 1, 27,13 p. 171. (11) Sent. 1, 26, 2; p. 165.GILBERT OF POITIERS 201 quidem unam et ipsam omnibus communem : personas uero propris inter se distinctas ut nulla earum alia esse possit. Quod autem inducunt aliud deum et aliud Patrem esse siue aliud quo est aliud quo Pater est eo, inquam, non cogimur id non aliter esse intelligendum nisi uidelicet Patrem essentiam habere communem cum ceteris siue etiam quod deus est: illud uero singulare et solitarium quod Pater est. Et si is aliquid questionis habere uidebuntur. 9 Quod uero de relationibus illis obiciunt non obest. Ille enim non sunt relationes accidentia, ut dicit Aristotiles. Quod ipse duobus probat Augustinus quia si accidentia essent, cum ille relationes ab eterno, et. accident lis esset. Has ergo relationes non intelligimus nisi personas ipsas inter se relatas et ipsas relationes earum proprietates esse. 10 Restat dicere de rationibus que et ipse non alent. Quod enim dicunt non per se agi de persona cum dicitur : gignere Patris est, gigni Fil Spiritus sancti procedere eo scilicet quia nichil est dicere gignere est gignere uel persona et ita de aliis. 11 Vt eos paucis confundamus eam afferamus locutionem? quam ecclesia celebrem habet que de deo dicit : cui est intelligere. Hic enim etsi per hec uerba de deo uiuente uel intelligent loquimur non tamen dicetur : esse uiuere uel intelligere deus est sicut item cum dicatur dei est creare hic deus uel illic per uerbum creationis non intelligitur nisi deus ereans. Nemo autem dicit : creare est deus. 12 Ad hune autem modum cum dicimus : gignere Patris est ibi gone- rantem i.e, Patrem intelligimus. Nec ideo gignere est Pater cum hoc nichil esse dicamus. Sed et extrema illorum ratiocinatio que friuola’ est facile infirmatur. Cum enim Filius in Patre uel Pater in Filio™, non tamen filiatio in Patre uel paternitas in Filio. Hoc enim esset Patrem Filium esse et Filium Patrem', 18 Superest de illis dicere qui illas proprietates personas affirmant qui partem suam auctoritate et ratione confirmant. Teronimus** enim De ezplanatione fidei ad Damasum papam sic ait : Non solum nomina sed et nominum proprietates i.e. personas uel — sicut Greci dicunt — tres ypostases i.e. subsistencias confitemur. Quod uero ibidem ait : Arrium confundentes unam eandemque substantiam dicimus et Sabellii (12) Cf. Avoustine, De Trin. VI, 4, 6 (PL 42, 917) ; CCL 60, 233. Sent. 1, 8, 5; p. 62. (13) CtansmBato, De Trinitate 4, 5 ; ed. N. Hanino, Life and Works of Clarembatd, in : Tests and Studies 10 (Toronto 1965) 148 : «friuola ot puerili sententia », (14) Sent. 1, 19, 45 p. 126. ) Sent. 1, 33, 1; p. 209. ) Fides Pelagii 6 ; PL. 48, 489¢.202 N. M. HARING impietatem declinantes tres personas sub proprietate expressas distin- 14 Ysidorus™ quoque: Deus, inquit, iccirco simplex est siue non amit- tendo quod habet siue quia non aliud est ipse et aliud quod in ipso est. Ex qua auctoritate habemus, cum earum proprietatum queque sit in deo et ipsas deum esse et ita proprietates ueraciter personas esse. 15 Nunc ad rationes ueniamus. Ille enim proprietates cum sint in deo aut insunt accidentaliter aut naturaliter. Non autem insunt accidentaliter quia sic deus uariaretur. Cum ergo naturaliter insint, aut a se sunt aut th {f. 103) alio, Sod nulla illaram deus eet. Quomodo ergo a se erunt? Nichil quippe a se est. quod deus non sit. Vnde si ab ali, utpote a personis, aut inerunt a personis ita quod omnes ab omnibus aut ita quod singule 4 singulis aut quolibet modo aliter. 16 Sed si omnes ab omnibus tunc paternitas a Filio uel uel Spiritu sancto. Quod esset ex illis Patrem esse. Si uero singule a singulis utpote unum illorum a Patre et non ab aliis et sic de ceteris, quomodo, inquam, hoc esse potest ut aliquid quod deus non est sit ab una illarum personarum et non ab altera cum ita indiuisibiliter sint ut quicquid ab ista et ab alia esse appareat? 17 Sed ualidiori contra eos utimur ratione. Quomodo enim in deo uera crit simplicitas cum aliud sit proprictas et aliud cuius est proprietas, presertim cum in nominibus personarum utpote in hoc nomine Pater iddam affirmant cum ipsa proprietate que sunt quasi alterutrum con- iuncta ex qua coniunctione Pater est. Sed fingat qui possit quis illa coniunxerit?*. Voluit enim esse ex forma et tam formam quam formatum nominare. 18 Item si a deo. Sed constat quia non temporaliter. Ergo eternaliter. Ergo aut per generationem aut per processionem. Si autem per genera- tionem, erit Filius. Si uero per processionem, Spiritus sanctus. Alios enim essendi modos non inuenimus in deo. 19 Item cum sint eterne deo uidentur coeterne, eternitas est in eis et sic deitas. Quare sunt deus. Item de una illarum procedamus ut idem de aliis intelligatur. Dicimus quia paternitas bonum est cum sit bonum, icuius bonum esse necesse est. Dicant igitur oportet quia bonum Patris et si bonum Patris aut summum aut non summum. Sed dicere quod non summum, amentia est. Ergo summum est. Quare et deus quippe nichil summum bonum nisi quod ipse. Hee hactenus contra Trinitatis aduersarios qui proprietates personas esse non recipiunt. 20 Probato quod proprietates persone sunt et persone proprietates, nune de significatione nominum agendum est de quibus plurimum dubi- (12) Btymol, VI, 1, 26 (ed. Linsey). (18) Borrutus, De consol. 111, 10, 53; ed. Stawant-Ranp (Cambridge, Mase, 1953), 268,GILBERT OF POITIERS 203 tatur. Queritur inprimis utrum idem siue diuersa significent. De nominibus substantialibus quod idem significent constat. De personalibus quod diuersa significent uidetur. 21 Vnde sic opponitur : hoc nomen persona aliud notat quam hoc nomen deus. Et queritur quid aliud. Quod non inuenitur. Si uero idem, cur potius tres persone quam tres dii dicuntur cum nulla sit in signifi- catione diuersitas? Similiter hoc nomen Filius aut aliud significat quam hoe nomen Pater aut idem. Sed quomodo aliud cum omnino sit idem Pater quod Filius? 22 Si uero idem notant quare non dicitur Pater Filius et Filius Pater sed potius Pater non est Filius nec Filius Pater? Nunquid et cum Pater sit deus negamus Patrem aliquid esse quod Filius sit? Quod forte uidetur. Aut non remoues a Patre illud quod hoc nomen significat aut quod non significat. Sed dicere id quod non significat ibi remoueri rationi non uidetur consentaneum. Si ero illud quod significat cum hoc sit Filius, - necessario negas in Patre esse quod Filius est. Quod rursum falsum est. 28 Rursus quomodo quis dicet hec nomina diuinam substantiam non significare et de ea non agi cum dico Pater non est Filius (f. 105). de Patre, et de eo agi necesse est. Si autem de deo, et de diui , quid dicis de ea? Nunquid eam non esse Filium? Quod non est uerum quippe eadem substantia est Pater et Filius. Iecirco de corum nominum significatione non minima recte est dubitatio quod difficilis est undique impugnatio. 2% Obiecta pro posse nostro determinauimus dicentes primo de nomi- nibus non personalibus que eandem penitus in deo habent significationem ut iustus misericors et similia que omnia cum deo conueniunt secundum diuersos effectus quos in nobis operatur, in ipso tamen diuersa non ponunt immo idem cum ipso notant et idem omnibus subest. 25 De nominibus uero personalibus ut Pater Filius id asserunt quod in deo non idem nec diuersa significant et tamen diuersos quasi diuersas personas et ideo diversas habere significationes et cum quis dixerit : Pater non est Fi jueratur de quo id agatur dicunt de Patre et ita de deo. 26 Sed si querendo dixeris de deo qui est Filius an de deo qui non est Filius astruunt id non esse inquirendum et ideo ad hoc non esse respon- dendum sicut etiam, ut aiunt, cum dico : deus genuit deum, de deo loquor. Sed querere de deo qui est Filius uel de deo qui non est Filius non conuenit. Nec mireris, inquiunt, si aliarum locutionum iura hic deficiunt. Nomina enim hec sunt de quibus nemo est qui sufficienter disserat quippe sicut res ipsa nominum ineffabilis est ita et ipsa nomina quodam modo ineffabilia sunt, N. M. Haninc.