¹ A recent and comprehensive treatment of English cathedrals and the secular clergy that staffed them during the century and a half following the Norman Conquest is that of Thomas, H., The secular clergy in England, 1066–1216, Oxford 2014CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Also of interest, albeit for an earlier period, is a study of one English cathedral and its intellectual community: Webber, T., Scribes and scholars at Salisbury Cathedral, c. 1075–c.1125, Oxford 1992CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

² Thomson, R. M., Catalogue of the manuscripts of Lincoln Cathedral Chapter Library, Woodbridge 1989, 225Google Scholar: mss 6, 17, 160, 170 and 176 for the Lombard on the Pauline Epistles; mss 18, 30, 41, 43, 139, 144, 147, 152 and 175 on the Psalms; mss 31, 39, 99, 168 and 230 on the Sentences.

³ Mynors, R. and Thomson, R. M., Catalogue of the manuscripts of Hereford Cathedral Library, Woodbridge 1993, 143Google Scholar: mss O.IV.6 and P.V.13 for the Lombard on the Pauline Epistles; mss O.IX.9, 41, 43, 139, 144, 147, 152 and 175 on the Psalms; and mss O.III.12, O.V.6 (bk iv only), O.VIII.9, P.II.2 (bk iv only), P.III.10 (bk iv only), P.III.11, and P.VI.9 on the Sentences.

⁴ Thomson, R. M., A descriptive catalogue of the medieval manuscripts in Worcester Cathedral Library, Cambridge 2001, p. xxviiGoogle Scholar, citing at n. 86: ‘Glossed copies of the Sentences: F. 8, 46, 53, 64, 88, 98, 134, 176. Commentaries: F. 2, 39, 43, 50, 54, 56, 60, 67, 69, 107–9, 139, 164, 167, Q. 20, 31, 35, 69, 71.’

⁵ For Durham these are mss A.II.9, A.II.10, A.II.19, A.III.7, B.I.1, B.I.2, B.I.3 and B.I.4; for Salisbury mss 29, 75, 86.

⁶ Thomson, Lincoln Cathedral Library, p. xv.

⁷ Ker, N. R. (ed.), Medieval libraries of Great Britain: a list of surviving books, 2nd edn, London 1964Google Scholar.

⁸ Thomson, Lincoln Cathedral Library, p. xiii, citing reproductions in Giraldi Cambrensis Opera vii (RS, 1877), 165–71, esp. at p. 168Google Scholar, and in Woolley, R. M., Catalogue of the manuscripts of Lincoln Cathedral Chapter Library, London 1927, list at pp. v–ixGoogle Scholar.

⁹ Neve, J. Le, Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae, 1066-1300, III: Lincoln, comp. Greenway, D. E., London 1977, 16Google Scholar. On the role of chancellors see Vincent's, N. review of Post, G., The papacy and the rise of the universities, ed. Courtenay, W. J., Leiden 2017Google Scholar, this Journal lxx (2019), 603–5.

¹⁰ Thomson, Lincoln Cathedral Library, p. xiii. Thomson here notes that ‘[i]ts significance and interest lie rather in the high proportion of books surviving from its pre-Reformation collection, and in the rich documentary evidence which enables them to be placed in their historical context’.

¹¹ Hamo himself donated three such works (items 80–2 on Hamo's list), the first of which (‘De dono Hamonis cancelarii. Psalterium iuxta glosaturam gilleberti porrete. simul cum textu. et cum rubea coopertura’ [‘From the gift of Hamo the chancellor. A Psalter according to the gloss of Gilbert of Poitiers. with the text and covered with rubrication’]) survives in the present-day library as ms 174. Thomson dates the manuscript itself to the mid-twelth century (ibid. p. 140). On Gilbert's work on the Psalms see Diaz, T.-G., The Psalms commentary of Gilbert of Poitiers: from lectio divina to the lecture room, New York 1996CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Diaz, adding to the list of Gilbertine manuscripts compiled by Häring, N. M., ‘Handschriftliches zu den Werken Gilberts Bischof von Poitiers’, Revue d'histoire des textes viii (1979), 133–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar, dates the work (p. 31) to shortly after 1141. I also do not discuss two important bequests by Bishop Robert de Chesney (1148–66): an early copy of Gilbert's gloss on the Psalms (item 60 on Hamo's list: ‘De dono Roberti secundi. bone memorie episcope … Psalterium iuxta glosaturam Gilleberti. sine textu’ [‘From the gift of Robert the second, bishop of blessed memory … a Psalter according to the gloss of Gilbert. without the text’]), and his copy of Peter Lombard's Great Gloss on the Psalms (item 55 on Hamo's list: ‘De dono hugonis linc. episcopi … et psalterium cum magna glosatura. quod G. precentor habet’ [‘From the gift of bishop Hugh of Lincoln … and a Psalter with the Great Gloss, which G. the chorus master has’]). Making use of the Le Neve's Fasti (iii. 13–14) to identify the precentor named as ‘probably Geoffrey of Deeping, 1206–25’, Thomson believes that this may be ms 147 in the current collection: Lincoln Cathedral library, 114. Others in the bishop's circle had copies of this same work, which they also donated (item 84 on Hamo's list: ‘De dono David Archidiaconi. Psalterium tripartitum iuxta glosaturam magistri petri’ [‘From the gift of David the Archdeacon. A tripartite Psalter according to the gloss of Master Peter’]), which Thomson identifies as ms 18 in the current collection: Lincoln Cathedral library, 15. Hamo's list also includes the bequest of Robert Blund (item 90): ‘De dono Magistri Roberti Blund. Psalterium glosatum.’

¹² The first such work is a copy of the biblical Gloss on the Pauline Epistles ascribed to Hamo: ‘De dono Iordani thesaurarii. Haimo super Epistulas Pauli’ (‘From the gift of Jordan the treasurer. Hamo on the Letters of Paul’). Next (item 84) is a copy of the Lombard on the Pauline Epistles, the second manuscript in a gift of three by Master Ralph the physician: ‘De dono Magistri Radulfi Medici. Epistole Pauli glosate’ (‘From the gift of Master Ralph the physician. The Letters of Paul glossed’). Next (item 91) is another gift of the Lombard by Robert Blund, who to his gift of the Lombard's gloss of the Psalms added a volume of the Lombard's gloss on the Pauline Epistles: ‘De dono Magistri Roberti Blund … et Epistole Pauli glosate’ (‘From the gift of Master Robert Blund … and the Letters of Paul glossed’). There is one more copy listed (item 95), a gift of Archdeacon Alexander, ‘De dono Alexandri Archidiaconi. Epistole Pauli glosate’ (‘From the gift of Alexander the archdeacon. The Letters of Paul glossed’), which Thomson believes may be ms 170 in the current collection: Lincoln Cathedral Library, 137. Lincoln's current collection also includes early copies of the Lombard's lectures on Paul, and the first manuscript work on these lectures since Brady's time is being done by Peter O'Hagan, who has examined the lectures on Paul in English cathedral school libraries: ‘Teaching the tradition: twelfth-century scholastic commentaries on Paul's letter to the Romans’, unpubl. PhD diss. Toronto 2017. See also his ‘Glossing the Gloss: reading Peter Lombard's Collectanea on the Pauline Epistles as a historical act’, Traditio lxxiii (2018), 83–116Google Scholar.

¹³ A good example is Hereford ms P.V.13, which was pre-prepared for teaching with several columns marked out on either side of the two main columns, all of which were subsequently filled with discrete layers of classroom teaching. One finds in Hereford ms P.V.13 the teaching of Peter Lombard on the Pauline Epistles, glossed and critiqued once, and then glossed and critiqued again by yet another overlay of potent and independent teaching. The obvious question is whose teaching is recorded in the pre-formatted columns found in the inner and outer margins of these manuscripts. Is all of this teaching owing to Parisian masters or could some be attributable to the many masters at Hereford? The only way to know for sure will be to transcribe and edit all such marginal material.

¹⁴ Magistri Petri Lombardi Parisiensis Episcopi sententiae in IV libris distinctae, ed. I. Brady, Grottaferrata 1971–81, prolegomena to Sentences, 2, 22*–23*. This is surprising, since Brady's was the third, and therefore one might suppose definitive, Franciscan edition within a hundred years. See Brady, I., ‘The three editions of the “Liber Sententiarum” of Master Peter Lombard (1882–1977)’, Archivum Franciscanum Historicum lxx (1977), 400–11Google Scholar.

¹⁵ According to Thomson, Lincoln ms 31 was ‘[w]ritten thoughout, including rubrication and marginal auctoritates, in the same expert English hand as ms 96’, another manuscript included in the same donation: Lincoln Cathedral library, 23.

¹⁶ Brady rejected for good reasons the longstanding notion that Troyes ms 900 was copied during Peter Lombard's lifetime, relying instead on four other manuscripts that he dated to the twelfth century. See the discussion in prolegomena to Sentence 1 (1971), 131*–136*.

¹⁷ Mynors and Thomson, Hereford Cathedral Library, p. xviii, with the list of manuscripts at n. 29. Thomson's description of the manuscript is at pp. 57–8.

¹⁸ Ibid. listing the nine at n. 33.

¹⁹ Ibid. listing the two manuscripts at n. 35.

²⁰ Ibid.

²¹ Ibid. 57.

²² Ibid.

²³ Ibid. noting de Ghellinck, J., ‘Les Notes marginales du “Liber Sententiarum”’, Revue d'histoire ecclésiastique xiv (1913), 511–36Google Scholar.

²⁴ Thus Thomson, in his description of the hands, records that there are ‘[l]ong headings and marginal notes, section-nos. and authorities in red’: Mynors and Thomson, Hereford Cathedral Library, 57.

²⁵ See Peter Lombard, II Sentences, dist. 13, cap. 7.1 through 7.5 (Brady edn [1971], 393–5). As the point to be made here is historical rather than theological, a transcription and translation of the marginal expositor's remarks is presented, together with footnotes providing the relevant (and translated) portions of the Lombard's discussion at issue.

²⁶ ‘Pater operatur per Filium, et Pater et Filius sunt eiusdem naturae et simul operantur, et sic hoc verbum “operator” significat divinam (corr. et expunx. by the same scribe ex “divinum”) essentiam et consignificat effectum in creatura. Vel Pater operatur per Filium id est Pater generat Filium in quo operatur id est qui operatur Patre auctore, et sic hoc verbum “operatur” notionem significat et effectum in creatura consignificat. Hos duos modos videtur velle assignare Magister, sed non plane hoc facit. Immo diligenter attendenti videbitur etiam tantum modum secundum. Cum enim Magister dicit, “Potest et aliter illud exponi,” alia quidem ponit verba, sed qualiter aliam ponat summam non est facile assignare. Item nota quod si usus haberet, satis posset competenter dici, “Filius operatur per Patrem,” et sic magis videretur attribui auctoritas Patri, quam si dicatur: “Pater operatur per Filium,” ut cum dicitur: “Do<minus fecit per servum modo> aliquo minori quod fecit aliquis per dominum suum,” sed Magister, quia nec usus, hoc non admittit. P.’: Hereford ms O.VIII.9, fo. 48va, left margin; cf. ‘Hic quaeri solet quomodo accipiendum sit quod dicitur: Pater operari in Filio vel per Filium, vel in Spiritu Sancto’ (‘Here one is accustomed to ask how should be understood what is said: The Father works in the Son or through the Son, or in the Holy Spirit’): Peter Lombard, II Sentences, dist. 13, cap. 7.1 (Brady edn [1971], 393, lines 19–21); ‘Putaverunt quidam haeretici quod Pater velut auctor et artifex, Filio et Spiritu Sancto in rerum operatione quasi instrumento uteretur, ex praedictis verbis errandi occasionem sumentes. Quod velut blasphemum atque sanae doctrinae adversum abicit pia fides’ (‘Certain heretics, taking up the opportunity of erring through the aforesaid words, thought that the Father, as if the creator and artisan, made use of the Son and the Holy Spirit in the accomplishing of all things as if by an instrument. This position holy faith rejects as blasphemy and the opposite to sound doctrine’): Peter Lombard, II Sentences, dist. 13, cap. 7.2 (Brady edn [1971], 394, lines 4–7); ‘Alia praedictorum expositio. Potest et aliter illud accipi ut dicatur Pater in Filio vel per Filium operari, quia eum genuit omnium opificem; sicut dicitur per eum iudicare quia genuit iudicem’ (‘Another explanation of the aforesaid words. This can also be understood differently, such that the Father be said to work in the Son or through the Son, since the Father begat the Son as the creator of all things; just as the Father is said to judge through the Son, since he begat the Son as judge’): Peter Lombard, II Sentences, dist. 13, cap. 7.5 (Brady edn [1971], 394, lines 23–5); and ‘Contra hanc expositionem surgit haereticus. Sed dicit haereticus: Hac ratione posset dixisse Filium operari per Patrem vel in Patre, et Spiritum Sanctum cum utroque vel per utrumque, quia Filius cum Patre et Spiritus Sanctus cum utroque operatur. Responsio: Cui breviter respondetur ideo illud dictum esse, et non istud, ut in Patre monstraretur auctoritas. Non enim Pater a Filio sed Filius a Patre operatur, et Spiritus Sanctus ab utroque’ (‘Against this exposition the heretic arises. But the heretic says: By this account it could have been said that the Son works through the Father or in the Father, and the Holy Spirit with both or through both, since the Son works with the Father and the Holy Spirit with both. My response: To which it can be responded briefly that what the Church teaches was said, and not what the heretic says, that authority might be demonstrated in the Father. For it is not that the Father works from the Son but that the Son works from the Father, and the Holy Spirit from both.’): Peter Lombard, II Sentences, dist. 13, cap. 7.4 (Brady edn [1971], 394, lines 14–20).

²⁷ Mynors and Thomson, Hereford Cathedral Library, 57.

²⁸ Petrus or Philippus would be common twelfth-century names beginning with P, and there were canons called Peter and Philip at Hereford, such as Master Peter of Abergavenny. If so, the gloss would probably be c. 1200. Paul was very unusual as a given name for men in twelfth-century England. W. could stand for several names: Walter or for Guillelmus with a W, i.e. Willelmus.

²⁹ ‘Ergo cum dico: “Pater operatur per Filium,” hoc verbum “operatur” notat auctoritatem et ita notionem scilicet generationem. In quo ergo differt haec expositio a scribente P.’

³⁰ ‘Verum hic ab eis responderi deposco cur dicant rem aliquam’: Peter Lombard, I Sentences, dist. 44, cap. 1. 3 (Brady edn [1971], 304, lines 13–14).

³¹ ‘id est extempore. Et notat quod Magister loquitur secundum suam opinionem quam concedit quicumque: “semel est verum, semper est verum.” Nos autem concedimus quod Deus noviter id est extempore … .Voluntas tamen eius est aeterna. G’.

³² ‘Sic ordina litteram.’ So also throughout. See, for example, the following instruction found to the left of fo. 100va: ‘Haec suple’ (‘Supply these things’).

³³ Thus, for example, we find at fo. 26v, left margin: ‘Haec argumentatio est minus competens: Pater essentia divina est aequalis Filio, ergo essentia divina est aequalis Filio’ (‘This argument is less competent: the Father is equal to the Son in divine essence, therefore divine essence is equal to the Son’). And again in the same place: ‘Notat magister exponit omnes huiusmodi: Pater est aequalis Filio, similiter similis Filio per abnegationem. Sicut et huiusmodi: Pater est unus; Pater et Filius sunt duae Personae’ (‘Note that the Master explains every argument of this kind: the Father is equal to the Son, likewise he is similar to the Son through negation. Just as <he explains every argument> of this kind: the Father is one; the Father and the Son are two Persons’).

³⁴ Throughout there is an evaluation of Peter Lombard's solutions and methods, as at 56va, left margin: ‘Magister tamen in … capitulo priorem quaestionem et non posteriorem videtur absolvere’ (‘But the Master in … this chapter seems to solve the former and not the latter question’).

³⁵ Thus at fo. 68r, at the bottom of the column: ‘Dicunt quidam quod diversa’ (‘Certain thinkers say that different’) and at fo. 68rb, right margin: ‘Respondeo’ (‘I respond’).

³⁶ Barrow, J., ‘The canons and citizens of Hereford c. 1160 – c. 1240’, Midland History xxiv (1999), 1–23 at p. 17Google Scholar, citing at n. 35 her earlier ‘Education and the recruitment of cathedral canons in England and Germany’, Viator xx (1989), 117–38Google Scholar. See also her monograph The clergy in the medieval world: secular clerics, their families and careers in north western Europe, c. 800–c. 1200, Cambridge 2015Google Scholar.

³⁷ Eadem, ‘The canons and citizens of Hereford’, 17. Other teachers at Hereford in the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries include Master Nicholas Divinus, Master Simon de Melun, Master Peter of Abergavenny (all three termed theologus in the cathedral obit book) and Master Albinus. For a letter to the latter from Gerald of Wales, who comments on Albinus running the Hereford schools in the early thirteenth century, see Speculum duorum, ed. Y. Lefèvre and R. B. C. Huygens, Cardiff 1974, esp. p. 157. For all of these masters see the entries in Le Neve, J., Fasti ecclesiae anglicanae, 1066-1300, VIII: Hereford, comp. Barrow, J. S., London 2002Google Scholar. See also Barrow, J., ‘From Athelstan to Aigueblanche’, in Aylmer, G. and Tiller, J. (eds), Hereford Cathedral: a history, London 2000Google Scholar.

³⁸ Barrow, J., ‘A twelfth-century bishop and literary patron: William de Vere’, Viator xviii (1987), 175–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³⁹ Like the early versions of the Sentences in Lincoln mss 31 and 230, that in Hereford ms O.VIII.9 needs to be edited, and sooner rather than later, for it not only represents an early stage in the process of the transformation of the Sentences into a textbook, but its margins are unfathomably rich in details likely to be of great interest to a wide range of medievalists.

⁴⁰ See, for example, the schedula inserted between folios 96v and 97r with teaching relating the Sentences to the ecclesiastical history: ‘In ecclesiastica hystoria legitur quod Alexander episcopus Alexandriae’ (‘In the ecclesiastical history we read that Alexander, bishop of Alexandria’).

⁴¹ Clark, M. J., ‘An early version of Peter Lombard's lectures on the Sentences’, Traditio lxxiv (2019), 223–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴² Thomson, Lincoln Cathedral Library, 189.

⁴³ ‘Incipit liber secundus de incarnatione Verbi’: Lincoln, ms 230, fo. 40r; ‘Incipit liber tertius de signis sacramentalibus et de eis quae ipsis adiacent et postremo de Resurrectione’ (‘Here begins the third book about sacramental signs and about those things that are related to them and finally about the Resurrection’): fo. 101v.

⁴⁴ Thus the transition between books ii and iii continues on without interruption: ‘de statu solis et lune. Qualiter vel quales boni vel mali resurgant et qualiter post resurrectionem se habeant’ (‘ about the state of the sun and the moon. In what way and what state the good and the evil will rise again and in what state they will be after the resurrection of the dead’). The last four words (‘post resurrectionem se habeant’) continue on to fo. 102r, where book iii begins. The Lombard's combining of the incipit for book iii with the heading for the first chapter of book iii is a sign of this version's antiquity. The Lombard started this proto-version of the Sentences around what in Brady's edition is book ii distinction 11, following what is known as the treatise on the angels, which was evidently, together with the whole of the later book i, not part of the earliest version of the Sentences.

⁴⁵ I am grateful to Nicholas Vincent for these last precisions.

⁴⁶ Not surprisingly, Thomson can only speculate, listing a number of possible references in older catalogues for Lincoln Cathedral Library, in which one finds vague and, it must be said, inaccurate descriptions by earlier scholars, if in fact they were referring to Lincoln ms 230. Thus, ‘Perhaps Wren Cat. I. 26 (“Quaest.: Theolog.: 8vo”), and therefore acquired by Michael Honywood (otherwise one of B. 5 or B. 24); Garvey D 6. 8 (“Responsa theological”), Apthorp, p. 284 (“Responsa theologica, 8vo”); Wooley, p. 165’: Thomson, Lincoln Cathedral Library, 190. These possible matches seem to me unlikely, since none of these Latin descriptions accords even remotely with the reality of the Lombard's Sentences, even in this primitive version.

⁴⁷ Thomson notes that the hand, which he describes as an ‘elegant book-hand, probably French’, still uses ‘the cedilla and ampersand’: ibid. 189.

⁴⁸ I am very grateful to Tessa Webber for sharing with me her view that the hand is probably that of an English/English-trained scribe and that the manuscript dates to the third quarter of the century. She notes especially the extent to which the scribe uses a straight horizontal bar as the common mark of abbreviation, which would be very unusual in the first half of the century, and the distinctive form of circumflex in the two instances of the punctus circumflexus on fo. 4; the curving arms of the sign contrast with the more common 7-shaped form. She adds, however, that she had seen a form close to this in BL, ms Royal 13 A X.

⁴⁹ The many meticulous corrections of copying mistakes show it to be a copy. The first person language used by the Lombard throughout combined with the absence of any of the usual signs of a student report warrant the conclusion that it is a copy of the Lombard's own lectures.

⁵⁰ ‘sanctum tuum. Timorem desiturum dicit sic: “Timor Domini magnum presidium proficientibus ad salutem, sed pervenientibus foras mittitur. Non enim timent iam amicum, cum ad id quod repromissum est adducti fuerint.” Ex his videtur quod timor non sit in futuro, ergo nec septem dona, quod est contra beatum Ambrosium. Solutio. Ad quod dicendum est: Beda, Augustinus, et Ambrosius contraria non sensisse sed alios usus et alia officia eorum fore in futuro quam nunc sunt insinuasse. Verbi gratia. Timor filialis modo facit timere, ne offendamus et ne separemur ab eo quem diligimus. In futuro est non poterimus vel offendere vel separari. Faciet revereri quod nunc facit in angelis vel et in sanctis animabus. Quidam tamen secundum effectum tantum esse (in cod. ‘ea’) in Christo et in angelis contendunt’ (‘your holiness. He says that fear is going to cease thus: “Fear of the Lord is a great fortress for those going forth to salvation, but is lost for those coming through to the outside. For they no longer fear this friend, when they will have been led forth to that which was promised.” From these words it seems that there will be no fear in the future, therefore neither the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit, which is against blessed Ambrose. Solution. To this it must be said: Bede Augustine, and Ambrose did not hold contrary positions but implied that there will be other uses and other duties for these gifts in the future than there now are. For example. Filial fear now makes us fear, lest we offend and lest we be separated from someone whom we love. In the future it will be such that we will not be able either to offend or be separated. Rather it will cause reverence such as now happens in angels and in holy souls. Nonetheless, certain thinkers contend that this second effect will only be in Christ and the in the angels’): Lincoln, ms 230, fo. 88a; cf. the much expanded and edited version of the same text in Peter Lombard, III Sentences, dist. 34, caps 3.3 and 3.4 (Brady edn [1981], 192, lines 1–21).

⁵¹ ‘Plena timoris distinctio. Quattuor sunt timores: mundanus sive humanus, servilis initialis, castus, filialis sive amicalis. Humanus timor est ut ait Cassiodorus super Psalterium quando “timemus pericula carnis vel amittere bona mundi.” Hic timor malus est et statim deseritur cum mundo. Hunc prohibet Dominus cum dicit: “Nolite timere eos qui occidunt corpus etc.” Timor servilis est ut Augustinus: “cum propter timorem gehennae continet se”’ (‘A full distinction on fear. There are four types of fear: worldly or human, initial servile, chaste, and filial or friendly fear. Human fear is that when, as Cassiodorus says in his work on the Psalms, “we fear dangers for our person or the loss of this world's goods”. This fear is evil and is abandoned with the world. Our Lord prohibits it when he says: “Do not fear those who kill the body etc.” Servile fear occurs when, as Augustine says: “when on account of the fear of Gehenna he restrains himself”’): Lincoln ms 230, fo. 88b; cf. here as well the much expanded and refined version in Peter Lombard, III Sentences, dist. 34, cap. 4.1 (Brady edn [1981], 192, line 22–193, line 18).

⁵² In more than three decades of studying scholastic manuscripts from the period 1150 to 1320 I have never until now seen schedulae ornamented with beautiful initials.

⁵³ ‘Primo, quia, abstractione facta ab omni relatione ad Lombardum, monstrari potest quod versio Burgundionis libri Damasceni De fide orthodoxa solum post mortem beati Eugenii III (8 iulii 1153) absoluta fuerit’ (‘Firstly, since, once one has taken away every possible connection to the Lombard, it can be shown that Burgundio's version of Damascene's book, On orthodox faith, was released only after the death of blessed Eugenius the Third [8 July 1153]’): Brady, prolegomena to Sentences 1, 124*.

⁵⁴ ‘deest enim epistola dedicatoria, quae Burgundionis duobus operibus prioribus praefigitur, et in titulo istius novi operis, etiam in codicibus antiquioribus, Eugenius salutatur ut “beatae memoriae”’ (‘For the dedicatory epistle is lacking, which is prefixed to two prior works of Burgundio, and in the title of this new work, even in the oldest manuscripts, Eugenius is greeted as “of blessed memory”’): ibid.

⁵⁵ ‘Proinde, concludere oportet quod haec versio lucem vidit solum circa finem 1153 vel anno sequenti’ (‘Accordingly, it is necessary to conclude that this version first made its appearance only around the year 1153 or during the following year’): ibid.

⁵⁶ ‘Ex alia parte, non sine influxu huius facti, ut libenter concedimus, iter italicum Magistri nostri mensibus septembri-decembri an. 1154 assignatur, quando ad limina apostolica socius fuit Theobaldi Parisiensis episcopi’ (‘On the other hand, not without the influence of this fact, as we willingly concede, the journey to Italy of our Master must be assigned to the months September through December of the year 1154, when the Lombard was the learned expert of Theobald, bishop of Paris, for an apostolic visit’): ibid.

⁵⁷ ‘Unde sequitur quod terminus post quem Sententiarum (vel saltem libri primi et dist. 1–22 libri tertii, ubi frequentius occurrit nomen et doctrina Damasceni) poni debet initium anni 1155’ (‘Whence it follows that the “terminus post quem” of the Sentences [or at least of the first book and distinctions 1–22 of the third book, where there occurs most frequently the name and teaching of Damascene], must be placed at the beginning of the year 1155’): ibid.

⁵⁸ Riccardo Saccenti reviews at length Burgundio's intellectual biography and agrees with Brady's dates (1154/1155) for the diffusion of the De fide orthodoxa: Un nuovo lessico morale medievale: il contributo di Burgundio da Pisa, Rome 2016, 27–53Google Scholar.

⁵⁹ On the basis of palaeographical data, Saccenti believes that this manuscript was copied in Pisa, probably in the thirteenth century. It was certainly used at the Dominican convent in Pisa. It preserves a version of the Latin translation of De fide orthodoxa that is closely related to Burgundio's original, since it contains the double translation of relevant key terms and passages that Saccenti has identified as the salient feature of Burgundio's method of translation. For a detailed discussion of this feature and of Burgundio's method of translation see ibid. 61–76.

⁶⁰ Saccenti bases his tentative chronology for Burgundio's translation on a reconstruction of events following Pope Eugenius’ unsuccessful dialogue between Greek and Latin theologians in Tusculum in 1146. Like Burgundio, Eugenius was from Pisa and doubtless knew of Burgundio's diplomatic mission to Constantinople in 1136–7. Saccenti speculates that, following the dialogue in Tusculum, Pope Eugenius immediately asked Burgundio to translate into Latin John of Damascus' De fide orthodoxa. Noting that Burgundio was named by Pope Eugenius Iudex sacrii palatii and was thus officially part of the papal court, Saccenti assigns to Burgundio a crucial role in the relations between the papacy and Pisa and situates his work of translation during Burgundio's work on behalf of the papal court, which moved around France during the years 1147–9.

⁶¹ Saccenti now believes that Pope Eugenius iii brought that translation with him to the Council of Reims in March 1148 and that De fide orthodoxa became available in Latin sometime between 1146, at the earliest, and 1150, at the latest. If Saccenti is correct, John Damascene's De fide orthodoxa may have reached France no later than the date of the Council of Reims. It is obvious that it could have reached there earlier and was most likely in Paris as soon as it was available.

⁶² For the abundant evidence supporting this assertion see Clark, ‘An early version of Peter Lombard's lectures’, 223–47.

⁶³ Thomson, Lincoln Cathedral Library, 58.

⁶⁴ Clark, M. J., The making of the Historia scholastica: 1150-1200, Toronto 2015Google Scholar.

⁶⁵ Mynors and Thomson, Hereford Cathedral Library, 13.

⁶⁶ ‘Quae sit materia divinarum Scripturarum iam planum fecimus. Deinde quid ad reparationem hominis pertinuerit manifeste ostendimus. Postea quare Filius Dei adventum suum tam diu distulerit aperte docuimus. Restat nunc de illa materia seriatim tractare ad cuius evidentiam hanc totius mundi in duo ponamus distinctionem id est in id quod fuit ab initio mundi usque [ad Christum add. in marg., therefore a copy that is being corrected, probably at Hereford] et in id quod est a Christo usque ad finem mundi’ (‘What the matter of the sacred Scriptures is we have already made plain. Thereafter we showed manifestly what pertained to the reparation of humankind. Afterwards we taught openly why the Son of God put off so long his coming. It remains now to treat in order the evidence upon which we posit that division of the whole world into two, that is, about that which existed from the beginning of the world up to the time of Christ, and about that which has existed since the time of Christ up to the end of the world’): Hereford ms P.I.1, fo. 42ra.

⁶⁷ ‘Et quia sic totum mundum in duas partes distinximus, prius de sacramentis prioris partis, deinde de reliquiis ordine tractemus. Sed quia de reparatione hominis intendimus, non autem facile animadvertitur reparatio, nisi prius sciatur qualis fuerit lapsus, ideo praemittendum est aliquid de lapsu’ (‘And since in this way we have divided the whole world into two parts, let us first treat about the sacred things of the prior part, and thereafter about everything else in order. But since we shall focus on the reparation of humankind, and since reparation is not easily taken account of, unless it first be known what sort of fall there was, therefore we must first say something about this fall’): ibid. fos 41rb–42va. This passage also shows that, like Hugh, he focused on the theological drama of mankind's fall from grace after his creation by God and the subsequent divine reparation.

⁶⁸ ‘Itaque primum capitulum huius tractatus creationem mundi continebit. Sed quia nichil est cuius ortum, ratio, et legitima causa non procedat, ideo in secunda parte de primordialibus causis dicendum est. In tertia parte de sancta Trinitate scilicet de ipso Deo qui est fons et origo omnium creaturarum. In quarta parte de voluntate Dei, ubi dicemus omnia tam bona quam mala ex voluntate eius eveniant necne. Et si mala ex voluntate eius eveniunt, qualiter dicatur’ (‘And so the first chapter of this treatise will treat comprehensively the creation of the world. But since there is nothing whose origin, reason for being, and legitimate cause does not follow, therefore in the second part there must be a discussion of the primordial causes. In the third part about the holy Trinity, namely about God himself, who is the source and origin of all creatures. In the fourth part about the will of God, where we will discuss whether everything, whether good or evil, comes forth from God's will or not. And if evil things come forth from God's will, how it can be said’): ibid. fo. 42va. As Thomson notes, even though this prologue (excerpted here in part) anounces a twelve-part summa, the lecturer stops at the third part on the Trinity: Mynors and Thomson, Hereford Cathedral Library, 64.

⁶⁹ Two brief examples will have to suffice here. First, his discourse (at Hereford ms P.I.1, fo. 42va) on the perfection of the number six, a topic repeated by Peter Lombard, Peter Comestor and Stephen Langton, is virtually identical to Peter Lombard's in the Versio primitiva. Second, like Peter Comestor, he prefers to speak (at fo. 43va) of the created world as a ‘machina mundi’: ‘divina operatione multiplicata tota mundi machina excreverit’ (‘after the divine working had been multiplied the whole machine of the world grew forth’).

⁷⁰ Until now there has been insufficient evidence to undertake such a stratigraphic investigation. Thus in his The origins of the university: the schools of Paris and their critics, 1100-1215, Stanford 1985, Stephen Ferruolo, in what remains a standard monograph on this subject, after discussing ‘Paris and the expansion of education’ in chapter i and ‘The school of St Victor’ in chapter ii, turns to monastic and humanistic critiques of the scholastic project. He could say little about the development of the Parisian schools after 1141, for the simple fact that such evidence was not available to him for this whole period.

⁷¹ In this regard, it is worth noting that Martin Brett has recently documented Lincoln's possession of what may have been the earliest reported Gratian in England: ‘English law and centres of law studies in the later twelfth century’, in Hernaes, P. (ed.), Archbishop Eystein as legislator: the European connection, Trondheim 2011, 87–102 at p. 89Google Scholar. Brett also notes (p. 94) Robert de Chesney's sending to Hereford to correct a very early copy of Justinian, implying that by this time both Lincoln and Hereford had Gratian, citing The letters and charters of Gilbert Foliot, ed. Morey, A. and Brooke, C. N. L., Cambridge 1965, no. 317Google Scholar. I am grateful to Nicholas Vincent for calling this study to my attention.

⁷² Vincent, N., ‘English kingship: the view from Paris, 1066–1204’, in Van Houts, E. (ed.), Anglo-Norman Studies XL, London 2018, 1–24 at p. 3, citing, at n. 17Google Scholar, Southern, R. W., ‘The place of England in the twelfth-century Renaissance’, in his Medieval humanism and other studies, Oxford 1970, 158–80Google Scholar, first printed in History xlv (1960), 201–16, and, at n. 21, Thomson's response: ‘England and the twelfth-century Renaissance’, Past & Present no. 101 (Nov. 1983), 3–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar, repr. in Thomson, R. M., England and the twelfth-century Renaissance, Aldershot 1998, as ch. xixGoogle Scholar.