¹ For biographies of Durand, see Savigny, Friedrich Carl von, Geschichte des römischen Rechts im Mittelalter (2d ed.; 7 vols.; Heidelberg: Mohr & Zimmer, 1834–1951) 5Google Scholar. 571–602; Schulte, Johann Friedrich Ritter von, Die Geschichte der Quellen und Literatur des canonischen Rechts von Gratian bis auf die Gegenwart (3 vols.; Stuttgart: Enke, 1875–1880) 2Google Scholar. 144–56; Clerc, Victor Le, “Guillaume Duranti, Évêque de Mende, suraommé le Spéculateur,” in Histoire Littéraire de la France (Paris: Académie royale des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, 1895) 20Google Scholar. 411–80; Michel Andrieu, “Guillaume Durand et son Pontifical,” in idem, ed., Le Pontifical romain au moyen-âge, vol 3: Le Pontifical de Guillaume Durand (Studi e Testi 88; Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1940) 3–22Google Scholar; Faletti, Louis, “Guillaume Durand,” Dictionnaire de droit canonique 5 (1953) 1014–75Google Scholar. The most up-to-date bibliography can be found in Gy, Pierre-Marie, ed., Guillaume Durand, évêque de Mende (v. 1230–1296): Canoniste, liturgiste et homme politique (Paris: Éditions du Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1992)Google Scholar.

² The groundbreaking work on the manuscript tradition of the text was done by Menard, Clarence C., in “William Durand's Rationale divinorum officiorum. Preliminaries to a New Critical Edition” (Ph.D. diss., Gregorian University, 1967)Google Scholar. Menard's work has been brought up to date and superseded by Anselme Davril, “Les états successifs du texte du Rationale de Guillaume Durand et la préparation de l'édition critique,” in Gy, Guillaume Durand, 137–42. For a summary of the status of scholarship on the Rationale, see Thibodeau, Timothy, “William Durand: ‘Compilator Rationalis,’” Ecclesia Orans 9 (1992) 97–113Google Scholar.

³ Hence the founder of Solesmes, Prosper Guéranger, declared (Institutions liturgiques [2 vols.; Paris: Débécourt, 1840–1841] 1Google Scholar. 355), “On peut considérer ce livre comme le dernier mot du moyen-âge sur la mystique du culte divin” (“This work can be considered the final word from the Middle Ages on the mystery of divine cult”).

⁴ For a discussion of the synthetic nature of Durand's commentary and his use of previous expositions, see Timothy Thibodeau, “Les sources du Rationale de Guillaume Durand,” in Gy, Guillaume Durand, 143–53; and Roger E. Reynolds, “Guillaume Durand parmi les théologiens médiévaux de la Liturgie,” in Gy, Guillaume Durand, 154–68. There is an enormous amount of literature on the subject of expositiones missae. Representative works include: Wilmart, Andre, “Expositio missae,” DACL 5.1 (1922) 1014–27Google Scholar; Franz, Adolf, Die Messe im deutschen Mittelalter: Beiträge zur Geschichte der Liturgie und des religiösen Volkslebens (1902; reprinted Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchsgesellschaft, 1963)Google Scholar; Jungmann, Joseph, The Mass of the Roman Rite: Its Origins and Development (2 vols.; trans. Brunner, Francis A.; Westminster, MD: Christian Classics, 1951–1955) 1Google Scholar. 74–127; Häussling, Angelus, “Messe (Expositiones Missae),” Dictionnaire de Spiritualité 10 (1980) 1083–90Google Scholar; Schaefer, Mary M., “Twelfth-Century Latin Commentaries on the Mass: Christological and Ecclesiological Dimensions” (Ph.D. diss., University of Notre Dame, 1983)Google Scholar; Reynolds, Roger E., “Liturgy, Treatises on,” Dictionary of the Middle Ages 7 (1986) 624–33Google Scholar; Vogel, Cyrille, Medieval Liturgy. An Introduction to the Sources (trans, and rev. Storey, William G. and Rasmussen, Niels Krogh; Washington, DC: Pastoral Press, 1986) esp. 12–16Google Scholar.

⁵ Byzantine liturgical commentaries demonstrate the same penchant for uncovering the inner meaning of the rites of the church through allegorical interpretations. See Bornert, René, Les commentaires Byzantins de la divine Liturgie du VII^e au XV^e siècle (Paris: Institut français d'études byzantines, 1966)Google Scholar. See also Robert F. Taft's note on Byzantine commentaries and their editions in The Great Entrance: A History of the Transfer of Gifts and Other Preanaphoral Rites of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom (OCA 200; Rome: Pontificium Institutum Studiorum Orientalium, 1975) xxxviii–xxxixGoogle Scholar.

⁶ Amalarii episcopi opera liturgica omnia (Studi e Testi 138–40; 3 vols.; ed. Hanssens, I. M.; Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1948–1950)Google Scholar.

⁷ This is not to say that there were no critics of allegorical exposition in the Middle Ages. For example, Durand's contemporary, Albert the Great (1200–1280), authored a scholastic commentary on the Mass, the Liber de sacrificio missae (B. Alberti Magni Opera Omnia [38 vols.; ed. Borgnet, August and Borgnet, Aemille; Paris: Vives, 1890–1899] 38Google Scholar. 1–165), which was critical of the superabundance of allegories associated with the Mass in previous liturgical expositions. His criticisms, however, went unheeded. Jungmann (The Mass of the Roman Rite, 1. 113) was at a loss to explain why scholasticism did not have a greater impact on the genre of liturgical exposition: “The allegorical method of contemplating and explaining the liturgy had to face a crisis in the thirteenth century, and it is really a matter of wonder… that the old method should survive unscathed in the period to follow.”

⁸ Of course, Luther's comments came at a time of revolutionary reappraisal of medieval scriptural exegesis. See Lubac, Henri De, Exégèse Médiévale: Les quatres sens de l'Écriture (2 vols. in 4; Paris: Aubier, 1959–1964)Google Scholar 2.2. 369–513. It is worth noting, however, that the last work of Luther's contemporary Thomas More, De tristitia Christi, is an allegorical reflection on Christ's passion, which bears a striking resemblance to the pious commemorations found i n many medieval allegorical liturgical expositions. See Marius, Richard, Thomas More: A Biography (New York/Toronto: Knopf, 1984) 482–89Google Scholar.

⁹ (Ps.-) Dionysius Areopagita Ecclesiastica hierarchia (PG 3. 369–854).

¹⁰ Luther, Martin, Three Treatises (ed. and trans. Jacobs, C. M., Steinhaeuser, A. T. W., Lambert, W. A.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 241Google Scholar. For Luther's liturgical theology, see Meyer, H. B., Luther und die Messe (Paderborn: Verlag Bonifacius-Druckerei, 1965)Google Scholar; Alexander, J. N., “Luther's Reform of the Daily Office,” Worship 57 (1983) 348–60Google Scholar. For liturgiology in the Reformation era, see Vogel, Medieval Liturgy, 17–21; Old, Hughes Oliphant, The Patristic Roots of Reformed Worship (Zurich: Theologischer Verlag, 1975)Google Scholar; Pahl, Irmgard, Coena Domini. Die Liturgie des Abendmahls seit der Reformation, vol. 1: Texte des 16.117. Jahrhunderts (Spicilegium Friburgense 29; Freiburg: Universitätsverlag Freiburg Schweiz, 1983)Google Scholar; White, James F., Protestant Worship: Traditions in Transition (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1989)Google Scholar.

¹¹ Bouyer, Louis, Liturgical Piety (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1955) 16Google Scholar.

¹² See, for example, John Van Engen's comments on Rupert of Deutz's Liber de divinis officiis (ca. 1111–1112), in Rupert of Deutz (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983) 58–67Google Scholar.

¹³ Chenu, Marie-Dominique, “The Symbolist Mentality,” in idem, ed., Nature, Man and Society in the Twelfth Century (trans. Taylor, Jerome and Little, Lester K.; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979) 99–145Google Scholar. See also Ladner, Gerhart B., “Medieval and Modern Understanding of Symbolism: A Comparison,” Speculum 54 (1979) 223–56Google Scholar; and Pickering, Frederick, “Exegesis and Imagination,” in idem, Essays on Medieval German Literature and Iconography (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980) 31–45Google Scholar. In his discussion of twelfth-century thought, Van Engen notes (Rupert of Deutz, 72 n. 63) that “symbolism” and “symbolist mentality” may be inadequate terms for expressing the nuance and complexity of both the ideas and forms of expression that they seek to describe. He refers to a “poetic imagination” operative in medieval literature, an imagination that is hard to name, but he proposes the term “figural thought” for the biblical-exegetical and liturgical expository methods of Rupert of Deutz. Such a term is an accurate description of Durand's liturgiology since his stated objective is to decipher the enigmata figurarum of the divine offices.

¹⁴ Smalley, Beryl, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1964)Google Scholar; idem, “The Bible in the Medieval Schools,” in Lampe, Geoffrey William Hugo, ed., The Cambridge History of the Bible (3 vols.; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969) 2Google Scholar. 197–220; Smalley, Beryl, The Gospel in the Schools c. 1100-c. 1280 (London: Hambeldon, 1985)Google Scholar.

¹⁵ Leclercq, Jean, The Love of Learning and the Desire for God: A Study of Monastic Culture (trans. Misrahi, Catharine; New York: Fordham University Press, 1982) 250Google Scholar.

¹⁶ All citations from the Rationale are from the forthcoming critical edition of the Latin text by Anselme Davril and myself for CChr Continuatio Mediaevalis. All English translations of the Latin text are my own. Book and chapter number will be provided for each citation. Durand Rationale prologue 1 (“Quecumque in ecclesiasticis officiis rebus ac ornamentis consistunt, divinis plena sunt signis atque misteriis, ac singula celesti sunt dulcedine redundantia, si diligentem tamen habeant inspectorem qui norrit mel de petra sugere oleumque de durissimo saxo. Quis tamen novit ordinem celi, et rationes ipsius ponet in terra? Scrutator quippe maiestatis opprimetur a gloria. Si quidem puteus altus est et in quo aquam hauriam non habeo, nisi porrigat ille qui dat omnibus affluenter, et non improperat, ut inter medium montium transeuntem hauriam aquam in gaudio de fontibus Salvatoris. Licet igitur non omnium que a maioribus tradita sunt ratio reddi possit… idcirco ego Guilelmus sancte Mimatensis ecclesie, sola Dei patientia dictus episcopus, pulsans pulsabo ad hostium, si forte clavis David aperire dignetur, ut introducat me rex in cellam vinarium in qua michi supernum demonstretur exemplar quod Moysi fuit in monte monstratum; quatenus de singulis que in ecclesiasticis officiis, rebus aut ornamentis consistunt, quid significent et figurent, eo valeam revelante clare et aperte disserere et rationes ponere, qui linguas infantium facit disertas cuius spiritus ubi vult spirat, dividens singulis prout vult ad laudem et gloriam trinitatis”). Durand is citing almost verbatim the prologue of Innocent III's commentary on the Mass, De missarum mysteriis. For an edition of this commentary, see Wright, David F., “A Medieval Commentary on the Mass: Particulae 2–3 and 5–6 of the De missarum mysteriis (ca. 1195) of Lothar of Segni (Pope Innocent III)” (Ph.D. diss., University of Notre Dame, 1977) 93–94Google Scholar.

¹⁷ In Rationale 1.3.17, Durand refers to Gregory the Great's comments on the spiritual meaning of the rationale iudicii. See Gregorius Magnus Registrum epistolarum 1.24; 6.63 (CChr Continuatio Mediaevalis 140; ed. Dag Norberg; Turnholt: Brepols, 1982) 23, 438. Durand also discusses this vestment in Rationale 3.17.1.

¹⁸ Durand may also be alluding to an actual liturgical vestment called the rationale which was worn in place of the pallium by some archbishops, primarily in Germanic lands. See Braun, Joseph, Die liturgische Gewandung im Occident und Orient (Freiburg im Breisgau/St. Louis, MO: Herder, 1907) 676–700Google Scholar; and Honselmann, Klemens, Das Rationale der Bischöfe (Paderborn: Verein für Geschichte und Altertumskunde Westfalens, 1975) 29Google Scholar. There is a direct reference to this vestment in the “Missa Flacii Illyrici,” Codex Helmstudiensis 1151, Herzog August Bibliothek, Wolfenbüttel. This tenth-to-eleventh-century Roman liturgy contains a prayer that is recited by the bishop as he vests himself with the rationale: “AD RATIONALE. Da mihi, Domine, veritatem tuam firmiter retinere et doctrinam veritatis plebi tuae digne aperire” (“Grant, O Lord, that I might firmly hold your true teachings and worthily reveal them to your people”). This text has been edited by Joanne Pierce who provided me with the reference from her “Sacerdotal Spirituality at Mass: Text and Study of the Prayerbook of Sigebert of Minden (1022–1036)” (Ph.D. diss., University of Notre Dame, 1988) 161Google Scholar.

¹⁹ Durand Rationale prologue 16 (“Sane liber iste Rationalis vocabulo describitur. Nam quemadmodum in rationali iudicii quod legalis pontifex ferebat in pectore scriptum erat manifestatio et veritas, sic et hic rationes varietatum in divinis officiis et earum veritas describuntur et manifestantur quas in scrinio pectoris sui ecclesiarum prelati et sacerdotes debent fideliter conservare ‹ XXXVI Dist., c. Ecce›. Et sicut in illo erat lapis in cuius splendore filii Israel deum sibi fore propitium agnoscebant, sic et devotus lector ex huius lectionis splendore in divinorum officiorum misteriis eruditus agnoscit deum fore nobis propitium, nisi forte eius indignationem culpe offendiculo improvide incurramus”). The bracketed reference is a marginal note made by Durand in the original manuscripts. It refers to the Decretum of the twelfth-century canonist Gratian: Dist. 36, c. 2, Gratiani, Dictum, in Corpus luris Canonici (2 vols.; ed. Friedberg, Aemilius; Leipzig: Tauchnitz, 1879) 1Google Scholar. 134: “Ecce, quod sacrarum litterarum oportet episcopum habere peritiam: unde in veteri testamento inter cetera ornamenta pontifex rationale ferebat in pectore, in quo scribebatur manifestatio et veritas, quia in pectore pontificis manifesta debet esse cognitio veritatis” (“A bishop should have a deep knowledge of the sacred scriptures, for in the Old Testament, among other vestments, the [high] priest bore on his breast the rationale-upon which was written, ‘revelation and truth’—because the priest should have a clear knowledge of the truth in his heart.”).

²⁰ The definitive study of the doctrine of four senses in medieval scriptural exegesis is still Henri De Lubac's, Exégèse Médiévale.

²¹ Durand Rationale prologue 16 (“Illud quoque quatuor coloribus auroque contextum erat et hic, ut premissum est, rationes varietatum in ecclesiasticis rebus atque officiis quatuor sensibus, videlicet ystorico, allegorico, tropologico et anagogico, fide media colorantur”).

²² For the degree of Durand's indebtedness to previous expositors and his “compilation” method of liturgical commentary, see Timothy Thibodeau, “Les Sources du Rationale,” 144–51.

²³ Smalley, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages, xi; idem, “The Bible in the Medieval Schools,” 197–99.

²⁴ Smalley writes (“The Bible in the Medieval Schools,” 197), “The Latin Vulgate was a ‘set text’ in the theological faculties of schools and universities throughout the middle ages. Its central place as a teaching book goes far to explain both the achievements and the limitations of medieval exegesis.”

²⁵ Chenu, “The Symbolist Mentality,” 110.

²⁶ Jean Leclercq, The Love of Learning, 75. Leclercq's observations about the “monastic imagination” in the Middle Ages can also be applied to clerical culture at large: “The memory, fashioned wholly by the Bible and nurtured entirely by biblical words and the images they evoke, causes them [i.e. medieval authors] to express themselves spontaneously in a biblical vocabulary. Reminiscences are not quotations, elements of phrases borrowed from another. They are the words of the person using them; they belong to him.”

²⁷ Leclercq, Jean, “Écrits monastiques sur la Bible au IX^e-XII^e siècle,” MS 15 (1953) 95–106Google Scholar; idem, “From Gregory the Great to St Bernard,” in Lampe, The Cambridge History of the Bible, 2. 194. See also Stephen Joseph Peter van Dijk, “The Bible in Liturgical Use,” in Lampe, The Cambridge History of the Bible, 2. 200–252; Daniélou, Jean, The Bible and the Liturgy (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1956)Google Scholar; Gy, Pierre-Marie, “La Bible dans la liturgie au Moyen Age,” in Riché, Pierre and Lobrichon, Guy, eds., Le Moyen Age et la Bible (Paris: Beauchesne, 1984) 537–52Google Scholar; Bradshaw, Paul F., “The Use of the Bible in the Liturgy: Some Historical Perspectives,” Studia Liturgica 22 (1992) 35–52Google Scholar.

²⁸ Rupert of Deutz Liber de divinis officiis (CChr Continuatio Mediaevalis 7; ed. Haacke, Hrabunus; Turnholt: Brepols, 1967)Google Scholar.

²⁹ Van Engen, Rupert of Deutz, 62. One can find the same concerns expressed in other contemporary liturgical expositions, e.g., Honorius Augustodunensis Gemma animae praefatio (PL 172. 543); Beleth, JohnSumma de ecclesiasticis officiis prologue (CChr Continuatio Mediaevalis 41a; ed. Douteil, Heriberto; Turnholt: Brepols, 1976) 1–2Google Scholar.

³⁰ There is much literature on this subject. Representative works include: Tolhurst, John Basil Lowder, The Monastic Breviary of Hyde Abbey, Winchester (Henry Bradshaw Society 80; London: Henry Bradshaw Society, 1942)Google Scholar; Joseph, StephenDijk, Peter Van and Walker, J. Hazelden, The Origins of the Modern Roman Liturgy (Westminster, MD: Newman, 1960)Google Scholar; Vogüé, Adalbert de, La Règie de Saint Benoît (SC 184–186a; 4 vols.; Paris: Cerf, 1971–1977)Google Scholar; Bradshaw, Paul F., Daily Prayer in the Early Church (New York: Oxford University Press, 1982)Google Scholar; Taft, Robert, The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1986)Google Scholar; Reynolds, Roger E., “Divine Office, Roman,” Dictionary of the Middle Ages 1 (1986) 624–33Google Scholar.

³¹ Elected bishop of Mende in 1285, Durand was the first prelate to issue synodical statutes for his diocese. See J. Berthelé and M. Valmary, “Les instructions et constitutions de Guillaume Durand le Spéculateur,” Mémoires de l'Academie des sciences et lettres de Montpellier, 2d ser., 3 (1905) 1–148, in which we find a number of chapters on the devout celebration of the liturgy. In the prologue of the Rationale (prologue 3), Durand sharply criticizes the great mass of clergy who “manage the church's affairs and conduct its worship on a day to day basis [while] having little or no understanding of what the divine offices signify or why they were instituted” (“[I]psi hodie, ut plurimum de hiis que usu cotidiano in ecclesiasticis contractant rebus, et proferunt officiis, quid significent, et quare instituta sint, modicum apprehendunt aut nichil”).

³² For a discussion of the preeminent place of the Psalter in Christian prayer, see Fischer, Balthasar, “Le Christ dans les psaumes: La dévotion aux psaumes dans l'Église des Martyrs,” La Maison Dieu 27 (1951) 86–113Google Scholar; idem, Die Psalmen als Stimme der Kirche: Gesammelte Studien zur christlichen Psalmenfrömmigkeit (Trier: Paulinus, 1982)Google Scholar. There are dozens of medieval commentaries on the Psalter. See Eynde, Damien Van den, “Literary Notes on the Earliest Scholastic Commentarii in Psalmos,” Franciscan Studies 14 (1954) 121–54Google Scholar; 17 (1957) 149–72; Flint, Valerie Irene Jean, “Some Notes on Early Twelfth-Century Commentaries on the Psalms,” RBén 38 (1971) 80–88Google Scholar; Hartmann, W., “Psalmenkommentare aus der Zeit der Reform und der Frühscholastik,” Studi Gregoriani 9 (1972) 313–66Google Scholar; Colish, Marcia L., “Psalterium Scholasticorum: Peter Lombard and the Emergence of Scholastic Psalms Exegesis,” Speculum (1992) 531–48Google Scholar.

³³ Leclercq, “From Gregory the Great to St. Bernard,” 189.

³⁴ Hence Rupert of Deutz's view in his Liber de divinis officiis prologue 1 (CChr Continuatio Mediaevalis 7. 5) that scripture should serve as the measure or rule by which the divine offices are interpreted: “Ea quae per anni circulum ordine constituto in divinis aguntur officiis, et attentum auditorem et eruditum, ut bene exponantur, expetunt venerabilium Scripturarum didascalum atque symmisten” (“The yearly cycle of rites, as performed in the divine offices, can only be understood well by the attentive and learned student when sacred scripture is used as the rule or norm [of interpretation]”).

³⁵ Particularly useful to Amalarius was Bede's De tabernaculo et vasis eius ac vestibus sacerdotum libri III (CChr Series Latina 119a; ed. Hurst, David; Turnholt: Brepols, 1968)Google Scholar. Another important source is Bede's In Lucae evangelium expositio (CChr Series Latina 120; ed. Hurst, David; Turnholt: Brepols, 1960)Google Scholar.

³⁶ Jungmann argues (The Mass of the Roman Rite, 1. 117) that allegorical commentary of the “Amalarian type” profoundly influenced the development of the liturgy itself: “It is no wonder that the allegorical method which reigned supreme through so many centuries should leave its traces on the Mass-liturgy which has come down to us. The Middle Ages inserted certain rites to make the sacred drama more potent. Amongst these… is the ceremony of hiding the paten under the corporal at the offertory—to signify our Lord's self-abasement and the hiding of His divinity in His Passion.”

³⁷ Amalarius passed on to medieval expositors, in a greatly embellished and expanded form, a patristic understanding of the symbolism of the divine offices that existed in embryonic form in (Ps.-?) Hippolytus of Rome's (ca. 215) Apostolic Tradition; see Hippolytus of Rome, La Tradition Apostolique (SC 11b; ed. Botte, Bernard; Paris: Cerf, 1984)Google Scholar. For a full treatment of the patristic symbolical interpretation of the liturgy, see Jungmann, Joseph A., The Early Liturgy to the Time of Gregory the Great (trans. Brunner, Francis A.; Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1959) 47–71Google Scholar; Martimort, Aimé Georges, Dalmais, Irénée H., and Jounel, Pierre, The Church at Prayer, vol. 4: The Liturgy and Time (trans. O'Connell, Matthew J.; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1986) 164–70Google Scholar, 256–72; Bradshaw, Daily Prayer in the Early Church; Taft, The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West, 14–56.

³⁸ Durand received his doctorate in canon law at the University of Bologna (ca. 1263) where he may have lectured before holding a teaching post at the University of Modena. See Sarti, Maria and Fattorini, M., De claris archigymnasi Boloniensis professoribus a saeculo XI usque ad saeculum XIV (2d ed.; 2 vols.; Bologna: Ex Officia Regia Fratrum Merlani, 1888–1896) 1Google Scholar. 466; and Mor, Carlo Guido and Pietro, P. Di, Storia dell'Università di Modena (2 vols.; Florence: Olschki, 1975) 1Google Scholar. 241.

³⁹ Most notably, Innocent III De missarum mysteriis; and Sicard of Cremona Mitrale sive de ecclesiasticis officiis (PL 213. 13–434).

⁴⁰ Durand Rationale prologue 9 (“Sciendum quoque est quod in divinis scripturis est sensus ystoricus, allegoricus, tropologicus et anagogicus”).

⁴¹ Ibid., prologue 9–12 (“Ystoria est significatio vocum ad res, quando, videlicet res quelibet quomodo secundum litteram gesta sit piano sermone refertur…. Allegoria est quando aliud sonat in littera et alia in spiritu, ut quando per unum factum aliud intelligitur…. Tropologia est conversio ad mores seu moralis locutio ad correctionem et morum institutionem, mistice vel aperte respiciens…. Anagoge dicitur ab ana, quod est sursum, et goge, quod est ductio, quasi sursum ductio. Unde sensus anagogicus dicitur qui a visilibus ad invisibilia ducit”).

⁴² Ibid., prologue 12 (“Similiter Ierusalem intelligitur ystorice civitas ilia terrestris quam peregrini petunt; allegorice ecclesia militans; tropologice qualibet fidelis anima; anagogice celestis Ierusalem sive patria”).

⁴³ In his discussion of Amalarius of Metz, Jungmann noted (The Mass of the Roman Rite 1. 89) that we cannot speak of allegory, pure and simple in medieval liturgical exposition. He distinguished four types of liturgical allegory: (1) moral allegory (ethical admonitions); (2) typological allegory (fulfillments of Old Testament prophecy); (3) rememorative allegory (linkage of events in salvation history); (4) anagogic or eschatological allegory (allusions to the consummation of history or the end time). Medieval allegorists employed all of these forms of allegory to varying degrees; in Durand's commentary, the typological and rememorative forms of allegory predominate.

⁴⁴ Ibid.

⁴⁵ De Lubac notes (Éxégése médiévale 1.1. 132–35) that typology is a more modern term and that in medieval exegesis it is difficult to distinguish between allegory and typology per se. Durand's use of rememorative allegory is often indistinguishable from what we would call typology, e.g., how everything in the Old Testament prefigures the New.

⁴⁶ Gregory the Great Expositio in canticis canticorum (CChr Series Latina 144; ed. Verbraken, Pierre; Turnholt: Brepols, 1963)Google Scholar, praefatio 2, 3–4 (“Allegoria enim animae longe a deo positae quasi quandam machinam facit, ut per illam levetur ad deum” [“Allegory works like a machine for souls that are far removed from God, so that through it they will be raised toward God”]).

⁴⁷ Durand Rationale prologue 10 (“Allegoria est quando aliud sonat in littera et aliud in spiritu, ut quando per unum factum aliud intelligitur. Quod si sit visibile est simpliciter allegoria, si invisibile et celeste tune dicitur anagoge. Est etiam allegoria quando per alienum sermonem alienus status designatur, ut cum Christi presentia et ecclesie sacramenta verbis, vel misticis rebus designantur verbis ut ibi: Egredietur virga de radice lesse, quod aperte sonat: Nascetur virgo Maria de stirpe David qui fuit filius Yesse. Misticis rebus ut populus ab egyptiaca servitute per agni sanguinem liberatus, significat ecclesiam passione Christi a demoniaca servitute ereptam. Et dicitur allegoria ab aleon grece, quod est alienum et gore, quod est sensus quasi alienus sensus”). See Sicard Mitrale 1.3 (PL 213. 47) from whom Durand cites this text. Sicard appears to have taken his definition from Amalarius Liber Officialis 1.18 (in Amalarii episcopi opera omnia, 2. 114–20), who in turn took his text verbatim from Bede De tabernaculo 1 (CChr Series Latina 119a. 25).

⁴⁸ Durand Rationale prologue 16.