Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T06:24:15.311Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Simon Magus, Nicolas of Antioch, and Muhammad1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2009

Alberto Ferreiro
Alberto Ferreiro
Affiliation:
Alberto Ferreiro is Professor of European History at Seattle Pacific University.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Scholars of the Middle Ages have established that in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, there was an intellectual shift in the Christian polemic against Islam. Whereas in earlier centuries heresiologists defined Islam as pagan, in the high Middle Ages the prevailing opinion emerged that it was instead a heresy. Medieval writers, who drew upon a rich theological tradition dating to the patristic era, sustained and expanded this new perspective. Many of the patristic theological refutations against heretics proved once again useful as groups such as the Waldensians, Albigensians, and others made serious challenges against the dominant orthodoxy. Even though Islam had already been a formidable presence in the Mediterranean—especially since the conquest of the Iberian Peninsula in the early eighth century—in the high Middle Ages the continued expansion of Islam, including its defeat of the Crusaders, was perceived to be an increased threat to Christendom. A corollary development was the greater interest in Islam—mainly to discredit or refute it—by some leading western Christian theologians. One thing is certain: medieval writers were intent on demonstrating the heretical nature of Islamic doctrines and the perversity of Islamic morality. Medieval polemicists, however, resorted to a standard theological weapon to assault Islam, typology. Through typology medieval writers were capable of constructing alleged historical and doctrinal links between Muhammad and two of the most notorious “types” of heresy from early Christianity: Simon Magus and Nicolas of Antioch.

Type
Research Article
Information
Church History , Volume 72 , Issue 1 , March 2003 , pp. 53 - 70
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Church History 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2. Tolan, John V., “Anti-hagiography: Embrico of Mainz's Vita Mahumeti,” Journal of Medieval History 22 (1996): 25–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See the collection of essays in Medieval Christian Perceptions of Islam, ed. Tolan, John V.. Garland Medieval Casebooks, 10. (New York: Garland, 1996)Google Scholar. Still relevant and fundamental, Norman, Daniel, Islam and the West. Making of an Image. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), 163–94Google Scholar. For a survey see, Southern, R. W., Western Views of Islam in the Middle Ages. (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1962), 16–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar. John of Damascus had paved the way in this transition, Sahas, D. J., John of Damascus on Islam. The “Heresy of the Ishmaelites.”(Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1972), 3–95 and 131–37.Google Scholar

3. For the figure of Simon Magus in patristic and medieval thought see, Ferreiro, A. “Simon Magus: The Patristic-Medieval Traditions and Historiography,” Apocrypha 7 (1996): 147–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4. For Peter the Venerable see, Petri, Venerabilis, Epistola 17, Opera omnia, ed. Migne, J. -P. Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series Latina (Paris: J. -P. Migne, 1890) [hereafter PL] 189:340–41Google Scholar and Adversis nefandum sectam Saracenorum libri duo. PL 189:665. Also useful are Mandonnet, P. -F., “Pierre le Vénérable et son activité littéraire contre L'Islam,” Revue Thomiste 1 (1893): 328–42Google Scholar; Alphandéry, P., “Mahomet-Antichrist dans le Moyen Age latin,” Mélanges Hartwig Derenbourg, (Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1909), 261–77Google Scholar; D'Alverny, M -Th., “Deux traductions latines du Coran au Moyen Age,” Archives d'histoire, doctrine et littérature du Moyen Age 16 (1948): 69–131Google Scholar and D'Alverny, M. -Th., “Pierre le Vénérable et la Légende de Mahomet,” A Cluny. Congrès Scientifique;… Odon et Odilon 9–11 juillet 1949. (Dijon: Bernigaud and Privat, 1950), 161–70Google Scholar. Kritzeck, J., Peter the Venerable and Islam. Princeton Oriental Studies, 23 (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1964)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Constable, G., The Letters of Peter the Venerable. 2 vols. (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1967)Google Scholar. John, Tolan, “Peter the Venerable on the Diabolical Heresy of the Saracens,” in The Devil, Heresy, and Witchcraft in the Middle Ages: Essays in Honor of Jeffrey B. Russell. Cultures, Beliefs, and Traditions, 6, ed. Ferreiro, A.. (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1998), 345–67.Google Scholar

On the Liber Nicholay see, D'Ancona, A., “La leggenda di Maometto in occidente,” Giornale storico della letteratura Italiana 13 (1889): 199–281Google Scholar. An edition with analysis of the Pisa Anonymous is in Mancini, A., “Per lo studio della leggenda di Maometto in Occidente,” Rendiconti della R. Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei 10, ser. 6 (1934): 325–49Google Scholar. This study is reproduced in, Studi di Critica e Storia Letteraria di Alessandro D'Ancona. 2nd ed. (Bologna: Nicola Zanichelli, 1912), 1:165–306.Google Scholar

5. The most thorough treatment of Embrico of Mainz's Vita Mahumeti is by Guy, Cambier, Embricon de Mayence La Vie de Mahomet. Collection Latomus, 52 (Bruxelles: Latomus, Revue d'études Latines, 1961)Google Scholar. See also his, “Embricon de Mayence (1010?–1077) est-il l'auteur de la Vita Mahumeti”? Latomus 16 (1957): 468–79Google Scholar and “L'épisode des taureaux dans La légende de Mahomet (ms. 50, Bibl. du Sém. de Pise),” in Collection Latomus, Hommages à Léon Hermann (Bruxelles: Latomus, Revue d'études Latines, 1960), 44:228–36Google Scholar. The only study to begin an exploration between Embrico's Vita Mahumeti and the apocryphal legends about Simon Peter is in Tolan, John V., “Anti-hagiography,” 25–41.Google Scholar

6. Irenaeus, , Adversus haereses in Contre les hérésies. Livre 1.2., ed. Rousseau, A.. Sources Chrétiennes, 264. (Paris: Les Editions du Cerf, 1979), 312–13.Google Scholar

7. Ferreiro, , “Jerome's polemic against Priscillian in his Letter to Ctesiphon (133, 4)” Revue des Études Augustiniennes 39.2 (1993): 309–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Ferreiro, , “Simon Magus and Priscillian in the Commonitorium of Vincent of Lérins,” Vigiliae Christianae 49 (1995): 180–88.Google Scholar

8. The Nicolaitans have received more extensive commentary in modern scholarship. For the patristic era and scholarly issues see, Fox, Kenneth A., “The Nicolaitans, Nicolaus, and the early Church,” Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 23.4 (1994): 485–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar. A discussion of Nicolaitans, Jerome, and Priscillian is in Ferreiro, A., “Jerome's polemic against Priscillian,” 309–32Google Scholar. Michael Topham engages briefly the possible association of the Nicolaitans with the enigmatic beast bearing the 666 name in the Apocalypse of John, , “Hanniqolaītēs,” The Expository Times 98.2 (1986): 44–45Google Scholar. The following studies focus principally on questions related to the early Church Fathers: Prigent, P., “L'hérésie Asiate et l'église confessante de l'apocalypse à Ignace,” Vigiliae Christianae 31 (1977): 1–22Google Scholar; Brox, N., “Nikolaos und Nikolaiten,” Vigiliae Christianae 19 (1965): 23–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Maurice, Goguel, “Les Nicolaïtes,” Revue de l'histoire des religions 58 (1937): 5–36Google Scholar; Adolf von, Harnack, “The sect of the Nicolaitans and Nicolaus, the deacon in Jerusalem,” Journal of Religion 3 (1923): 413–22Google Scholar; van den Bergh van Eysinga, G. A., “Die in der Apocalypse bekämpfte Gnosis,” Zeitschrift für die Neue Testamentliche Wissenschaft 13 (1912): 293–305Google Scholar; Wohlenberg, G., “Nikolaus von Antiochien und die Nikolaiten.” Neue Kirchliche Zeitschrift 6 (1895): 923–61Google Scholar; and Leonhard, Seesemann, “Die Nikolaiten. Ein beitrag zur ältesten häresiologie,” Theologische Studien und Kritiken 66 (1893): 47–82.Google Scholar

9. Clement of Alexandria disagreed with Irenaeus on the question about whether the Nicolas of the New Testament was himself immoral and encouraged his followers to be likewise. Kenneth Fox has argued that Irenaeus and Clement did not disagree that the New Testament Nicolas founded the sect then existing in the second century. Clement, moreover, did depart from Irenaeus when he condemned the Nicolaitans for justifying their sexual behavior in part by claiming to imitate the moral dictates of their founder. Clement of Alexandria, , Stromata III, Cap IV, Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller. 2 band, ed. Stählin, O., (Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs'sche Buchhandlung, 1906), 1:207–8Google Scholar. Fox, , “The Nicolaitans,” 490 and 495.Google Scholar

10. For patristic sources see, Amann, É., “Nicolaites,” Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique 11.1 (1931) cols. 499–506Google Scholar. The text of Isidore is in, Reta, J. Oroz and others, San Isidoro de Sevilla. Etimologías I (Libros 1–X). Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 433, (Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 1982), 698–701Google Scholar. Also, Ferreiro, , “Jerome's polemic,” 316–19Google Scholar. Priscillian, , Tractates, 1, 6, 23–26 and 1, 27, 4–7Google Scholar, in Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, 18, (Vindobonae: Hoelder-Pinchler-Tempsky, 1889), 7 and 23Google Scholar. Priscillian not only deemed it necessary to disassociate himself from Nicolaitism (the topos), but even Jerome, in the early fifth century, used it to discredit Priscillian and the sect. See Ferreiro, , “Priscillian and Nicolaitism,” Vigiliae Christianae 52.4 (1998): 382–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11. Consult the edition, Actus Petri cum Simone= (Acta Petri) and Passio Sanctorum Apostolorum Petri et Pauli=(Passio) Acta Aposotolorum Apocrypha., ed. Lipsius, R. A. and Bonnet, M.. (Heldesheim-New York: Georg Olms, 1972)Google Scholar. For a late artistic example see, Ferreiro, A., “Simon Magus and Simon Peter in a Baroque altar relief in the Cathedral of Oviedo, Spain,” Hagiographica 5 (1998): 141–58, ill.Google Scholar

12. Tolan, , “Anti-hagiography,” 25–41Google Scholar. An example is the earliest biography of Muhammad by Ibn Ishaq's Sirah. A thorough study is in Newby, G. D., The Making of the Last Prophet. A reconstruction of the earliest biography of Muhammad. (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1989) See especially the discussion at pages 1–32Google Scholar. Consult also Southern, , Western Views of Islam, 29–33.Google Scholar

13. Hinc populis seditiosam murmurationem agentibus Simon excitatus est in zelum, et coepit de Petro multa mala dicere, dicens eum magnum esse et seductorem. credebant autem illi hi qui mirabantur signa eius, Passio, cap. 11, 129–31.

14. Acta Petri, cap. 25–26, 72–73.

15. Ada Petri, cap. 31–32, 81–85. Simon autem male tractatus inuenit qui eum tollerent in grauato extra Roman Aricia. et ibi paucos dies fecit et inde tultus est quasi exiliaticum ab urbe nomine Castorem Terracina et ibi duo medici concidebant eum, extremum autem die angelum satanae fecerunt ut expiraret, Acta Petri, cap. 32, 85.

16. Et continuo dismissus cecidit in locum qui Sacra Via dicitur, et in quattuor parties fractus quattuor silices adunauit, qui sunt ad testimonium uictoriae apostolicae useque in hodiernum diem, Passio, cap. 56, 167.

17. The flight of Simon Magus is at Acta Petri, cap. 32, 83 and Passio, cap. 50–56, 163–67. A brief discussion is in Ferreiro, , “Simon Magus: Patristic-Medieval Traditions,” 164–65.Google Scholar

18. “A marvelous incident at Rheims,” in Heresies of the High Middle Ages, trans. Wakefield, W. L. and Evans, A. P., (New York: Columbia University Press, 1969), 251–54 and 727.Google Scholar

19. White, L. Jr., “Eilmer of Malmesbury, an eleventh century aviator,” Technology and Culture 2 (1961): 97–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

20. On the flight of Muhammad see, Comfort, W. W., “The literary role of the Saracens in the French Epic,” Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 55 (1940): 628–59, at 634–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar. By far the most thorough treatment to date is by Eckhard, A., “Le cercueil Flottant de Mahomet,” Mélanges de philologie romane el de littérature médiévale offerts a Ernest Hoepffner, (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1949), 77–88Google Scholar. Also Sendino, J. Muñoz, La Escala de Mahoma. (Madrid: Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores, 1949), 151–55.Google Scholar

21. Cambier, , Embricon de Mayence, 52–53 and 56Google Scholar. Tolan, , “Anti-hagiography,” 35.Google Scholar

22. Cambier, , Embricon de Mayence, 58–59Google Scholar. Tolan, , “Anti-hagiography,” 35–36.Google Scholar

23. Eckhard, , “Le cercueil Flottant,” 82Google Scholar. See the detailed recent study by, Tolan, J. V., “Un cadavre mutilé: le déchirement polémique de Mahomet (1),” Le Moyen Age 104 (1998): 53–72Google Scholar. Southern, , Western Views of Islam, 31.Google Scholar

24. Pliny, in Historia Naturale 34Google Scholar, 14 mentions a temple built by Plotemius for Queen Arimis that used magnets to suspend a statue in her honor. In the Middle Ages even Rufinus, Bede, and Cassiodorus mediated and kept alive the belief in the magical properties of magnets to defy gravity, as it were. Augustine expressed a more rational position in that he attributed the use of magnets to suspend objects to natural forces used by human ingenuity and less so to supernatural powers. Isidore of Seville, (Orig. Etym. XVI, 1) in his entry on magnetism cited Pliny and Augustine as his source. Eckhard, , “Le cercueil Flottant,” 80–82.Google Scholar

25. Ibid., 82.

26. Ibid., 83. Tolan, , “Un cadavre mutilé,” 63.Google Scholar

27. Eckhard, , “Le cercueil Flottant,” 86.Google Scholar

28. Ibid., 85. See D'Ancona, , “La leggenda di Maometto,” 199–281Google Scholar. See also Tolan, , “Un cadavre mutilé,” 65.Google Scholar

29. Cambier, , Embricon de Mayence, 12Google Scholar. Tolan, , “Anti-hagiography,” 31–35.Google Scholar

30. Acta Petri, cap. 13–14, 60–61.

31. Cambier, , Embricon de Mayence, 12Google Scholar. Tolan, , “Anti-hagiography” 35–36.Google Scholar

32. Tolan, , “Anti-hagiography,” 27 and 41Google Scholar. Tolan, , “Un cadavre mutilé,” 57 and 62Google Scholar; Tolan, , “The Diabolical Heresy,” 359–62Google Scholar. Nero and Simon Magus are presented as close associates in the Passio, cap. 57–58, 167–70, where Nero ordered the arrest of Peter and Paul after Simon Magus's death. John of Damascus called Islam the “forerunner of the Antichrist,” in Sahas, John of Damascus, 68 and 133.Google Scholar

33. Cambier, , “L'épisode des taureaux,” 231–34Google Scholar. Cambier, , Embricon de Mayence, 63Google Scholar. Tolan, , “Anti-hagiography,” 36–37.Google Scholar

34. Tolan, , “Anti-hagiography,” 38.Google Scholar

35. Acta Petri, cap. 8–14, 54–61. For a treatment of the dog legends and Simon Magus see, Ferreiro, , “Simon Magus, Dogs, and Simon Peter,” in The Devil, Heresy, and Witchcraft, 45–89 ill.Google Scholar

36. Acta Petri, cap. 9–14, 56–61. “Et respiciens Petus canem magnum catena grande ligatum, accedens soluit eum, cards autem solutus uocem humanam accipiens dixit ad Petrum,” cap. 9, 56–57.

37. Passio, cap. 25–27, 140–43. Petrus uero extendens manus in orationem, ostendit canibus eum quern benedixerant panem: quern ut uiderunt canes subito nusquam conparuerunt, cap. 27, 143. Ferreiro, , “Simon Magus, Dogs, and Simon Peter,” 74–80 and 86–88.Google Scholar

38. Passio, cap. 25, 140–41.

39. For the Pisa text see, Mancini, , “Per lo studio,” 325–49.Google Scholar

40. In the eleventh century the Gregorian Reform papacy confronted the pervasive practice of clerical marriage. The issue had been long disputed in the western Church, but it was not until the eleventh century that the papacy prohibited clerical marriage altogether. To do so, the papacy issued a series of papal bulls spanning from the Lateran Council of 1059, convened by Nicolas II, to the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215 under Innocent III. Earlier in 1022, however, the German Emperor Henry II called a Synod at Pavia that condemned clerical marriage and at which he threatened to punish these clerics by personally deposing them. There were those in the Church who went further than condemning clerical marriage as a mortal sin; they also categorized it as a heresy. To do so, moreover, these polemicists harkened back to the patristic era to revive the Nicolaitan heresy to condemn medieval clerical marriage.

Leading the way in the eleventh century to identify married clergy as Nicolaitans was Peter Damian. In the twelfth century Gerhoh of Reichensberg wrote a lengthy theological excursus wherein he argued, among other things, why both Simoniacs and Nicolaitans were deserving of the name “heretics.” Ulrich D'Insola, on the other side of the debate, rejected the epitaph of Nicolaitan to argue that secular clergy should be allowed to marry. These defenders of “Nicolaitism,” as applied to married clergy, remained a minority that did not prevail against the plenary papal ban in the Western Church. Russell, J. B., Dissent and Reform in the Early Middle Ages. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1965), 136–43, at 138. See note 3 for the sources.Google Scholar

41. Kritzeck, , Peter the Venerable, 37–38Google Scholar. Tolan, , “Diabolical Heresy,” 356–67Google Scholar. Southern, , Western Views of Islam, 37–41.Google Scholar

42. Ibid., 39. Daniel, , Islam and the West, 183–88.Google Scholar

43. Kritzeck, , Peter the Venerable, 40–41Google Scholar. Tolan, , “Diabolical Heresy,” 347–48.Google Scholar

44. Kritzeck, , Peter the Venerable, 37Google Scholar. For the letter see, Constable, , Letters of Peter, 1:274–99 and 2:275–84.Google Scholar

45. D'Alverny, , “Pierre le Vénérable,” 166Google Scholar. For Robert of Ketton see, Burman, Thomas E., “Tafsīr and Translation: Traditional Arabic Qur'ān Exegesis and the Latin Qur'ans of Robert of Ketton and Mark of Toledo,” Speculum 73.3 (1998): 703–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Tolan, , “Diabolical Heresy,” 354–58Google Scholar. Southern, , Western Views of Islam, 37.Google Scholar

46. Fox, , “The Nicolaitans,” 493Google Scholar. Peter the Venerable, Epistola 17, PL 189:340. For the Summa totius text, PL 189:653. For an early Christian usage of the Nicolaitan type see, Ferreiro, A., “Priscillian and Nicolaitism,” 382–92.Google Scholar

47. (The italics reflects the textual differences of the Summa totius.) Putant etiam enim quidam hunc Nicholaum illum unum ex septem diaconibus primis exstitisse diaconibus fuisse, et Nicholaitarum ab eo dictorum sectam, quae etiam in apochalipsi Joannis arguitur (Apoc. II), nominator, hanc modernorum Sarracenorum legem existere. Somniant et aliis alios, et sicut lectionis incuriosi et rerum gestarum ignari, sicut et in aliis casibus, falsa quaelibet opinantur, in Constable, , Letters of Peter, 2:295Google Scholar. See also Ibid., 2:275–84. The Letter is also in PL 189:340 and at 653 in the Summa totius. See Tolan, “Diabolical Heresy,” on Peter and the Church Fathers, 361 and note 34.

48. Constable, , Letters of Peter, 2:295.Google Scholar

49. See notes 6 and 7.

50. Transeo antiquos ipsa antiquitate minus famosos haereticos, Basilidem, Apellem, Marcionem, Hermogenem, Cataphrigas, Eucratitas, Montanum cum Prisca et Maximilla feminis insanis, Novatianum, Eunomium, multaque alia Christiani nominis monstra, in Peter the Venerable, PL 189:665. Kritzeck, , Peter the Venerable, 221, 37, and 41.Google Scholar

51. Ireneus nostrae Lugdunensis Galliae famosus episcopus et martyr, in Peter the Venerable, PL 189:665. Kritzeck, , Peter the Venerable, 221.Google Scholar

52. Ad praecipuas diabolicae pravitatis pestes, quibus maxime Satanas Ecclesiam Dei inficere et velut robustioribus machinis subvertere conatus est, venio: Dico autem, Manichaeos, Arianos, Macedonianos, Sabellianos, Donatistas, Pelagianos, omniumque ultimos Nestorianos, et Eutichianos, in Peter the Venerable, PL 189:665. Kritzeck, , Peter the Venerable, 221.Google Scholar

53. Peter the Venerable, PL 189:665. Ferreiro, , “Jerome's polemic,” 322–24.Google Scholar

54. Peter the Venerable, PL 189:665–67. Kritzeck, , Peter the Venerable, 37–41Google Scholar. John of Damascus identified an “Arian monk” named Bahira who foretold the coining of Muhammad, Sahas, , John of Damascus, 73–74.Google Scholar

55. PL 189:665–67. Kritzeck, , Peter the Venerable, 37–38.Google Scholar

56. “Dedit Satan successum errori and monachum haereticum pseudoprophetae conjunxit,” Epistola, 17, PL 189:341. Constable, , Letters, II, 284Google Scholar. See also, Abel, A., “Bahīrá,” The Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1960), 1:922–23Google Scholar. See Tolan, , “Diabolical Heresy,” 359.Google Scholar

57. D'Ancona, , “La leggenda di Maometto,” 246–47Google Scholar. A study, edition, and translation of the “Papa Osius” text is in, Wolf, K. B., “The Earliest Latin Lives of Muhammad,” in Conversion and Continuity. Papers in Mediaeval Studies, 9., ed. Gervers, M. and Bikhazi, R. J.. (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1990), 89–101.Google Scholar

58. Kritzeck, , Peter the Venerable, 129–34Google Scholar. Cambier, , Embricon de Mayence, 6–12.Google Scholar

59. D'Ancona, , “La leggenda di Maometto,” 270–71.Google Scholar

60. Legimus in hystoriis romanorum quad nycolaus, qui Machometus dicitur, unus fuit de septem dyaconibus cardinalibus ecclesie romane, in Mancini, , “Per lo studio,” 327–28, note 4.Google Scholar

61. Hic cum esset in gramatica, dyalectica et astronomia doctus ac in factis secularibus eruditus et omnes diversas linguas loqui sciret et necesse esset, in Ibid. See also D'Ancona, , “La leggenda di Maometto,” 278–79.Google Scholar

62. Sulpicius, Severus, Chronicon, II, caps. 47–48, 50Google Scholar. Corpus Scriptorium Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, 1 (Vindobonae: Hoelder-Pinchler-Tempsky, 1866), 100–103.Google Scholar

63. Fuit in diebus apostolorum vir nomine Nicolaus per omnia reprobus et maledictus: de septem tamen dyaconibus unus erat, sicut et Iudas traditor ex Christi discipulis unus exstiterat, in Mancini, , “Per lo studio,” 330Google Scholar. For Bahira as an “Arian” in John of Damascus see, Sahas, , John of Damascus, 73–74 and 133.Google Scholar

64. Non solum enim hec red multas alias blasfemias et scandali verba de suo spurcissimo corde invenit. Et alios multos perditos quos habebat discipulos docuit, et sic adversus Catholicam ecclesiam diaboli malicia armavit. Siquidem inter ceteros sue malitie discipulos insignis existerat unus nomine et rationaliter Maurus, in Mancini, , “Per lo studio,” 331Google Scholar. See also, D'Alverny, , “Pierre le Vénérable,” 165–66Google Scholar. Cambier, , “L'épisode des taureaux,” 229.Google Scholar

65. Igirur predictus et maledictus Maurus cepit illum studiose scientiam et licteraturam omnium linguarum docere, in Mancini, , “Per lo studio,” 333.Google Scholar

66. Ibid., 326–27.

67. Hic post obitum beati Clementis pape, qui tercius a Petro beato rexit monarchiam et cathedram digne sedit apostolicam, in Ibid., 330.