^{Note 1 in page 340} In the eighteenth century it was thought there were five different Henrys of Hesse, four of the fourteenth century. Cf. Casimir Oudin, Commentarius de scriptoribus ecclesiasticis (Leipzig, 1722), iii, 1256 ff. And the problem was further complicated by the confusion of these with Henry of Oyta, Henry of Frimaria, and Jean Gerson, whose writings have been assigned now to one, now to another.

^{Note 2 in page 340} See Joseph Aschbach, Geschichte der Wiener Universität (Vienna, 1865), pp. 366–402; B. Bess, art. ‘Heinrich von Langenstein’ in Realencyclopädie für protestantische Theologie und Kirche; H. Hurter, Nomenclator Literarius Theologiae Catholicae (Innsbruck, 1906), ii, 690 ff; R. Cruel, Geschichte der deutschen Predigt (Detmold, 1879), pp. 575–576; Anton Linsenmayer, Geschichte der Predigt in Deutschland (Munich, 1886), p. 461; Otto Hartwig, Untersuchungen über die Schriften Heinrichs von Langenstein (Marburg, 1857).

^{Note 3 in page 340} See especially Hartwig, op. cit., and Hurter, op. cit. ii, 691, n.1.

^{Note 4 in page 341} Cruel, op. cit. p. 597; Linsenmayer, op. cit. p. 102; Hurter, op. cit., ii, 692 (‘si ipsius est‘).

^{Note 5 in page 341} Op. cit., p. 19.

^{Note 6 in page 341} Aschbach, op. cit., p. 393—We have sermones de tempore and sermones de sanctis by Henry of Langenstein; see F. W. E. Roth, ‘Zur Bibliographie des Henricus Hembuche de Hassia, dictus de Langenstein,‘ in Beihefte zum Centralblatt für Bibliothekswesen (Leipzig, 1888–89), ii, 15–16.

^{Note 7 in page 341} Roth, op. cit., pp. 97–118.

^{Note 8 in page 341} The title continues: ex diversis sacrorum doctorum scripturis et principaliter sacritissimi christiane ecclesie doctoris Thome de Aquino ex parvo suo quodam tractatulo recollectus, ubi secundum modum et formam materie presentis procedit. See ‘A Late Medieval Tractate on Preaching,‘ a Translation with Introduction and Notes, by Harry Caplan, in Studies in Rhetoric and Public Speaking in honor of James A. Winans (New York: Century Co., 1926), pp. 61–90. I shall hereafter for brevity refer to this as the Aquinas-tract, and to the other as Henry's.

^{Note 9 in page 341} In a recent letter to me Dr. Georg Leidinger, Director of that library, has verified my observations made in 1929.

^{Note 10 in page 342} Op. cit. ii, 696.

^{Note 11 in page 342} J. A. Fabricius, Bibl. Lat. Med. et Inf. Aet. (Florence, 1858), ii, 203.

^{Note 12 in page 342} Wilhelm Schum, Beschreibendes Verzeichnis der amplonianischen Handschriften-Sammlung zu Erfurt (Berlin, 1887), p. 415.

^{Note 13 in page 342} W. E. Roth, op. cit., lists this (No. 47), without elaboration, among the authentic religious tracts of Henry of Langenstein.

^{Note 14 in page 342} Gustav Haenel, Catalogi Librorum Manuscriptorum (Leipzig, 1830), col. 625.—The correction of Haenel's error was kindly supplied me by Professor Gustav Binz, Chief librarian of the Universitätsbibliothek in Basel. The references to the Skt. Florian and Erlangen MSS. I owe to the courtesy of Father Th. M. Charland, O.P., of the Institut d'études médiévales d'Ottawa.

^{Note 15 in page 343} For example, in the choice of intervocalic t or c, as of vitium or vicium, I have naturally preferred the reading with t.

^{Note 16 in page 343} For example, on the last folio of B one finds the following arrangement of items:

^{Note 17 in page 344} See Cruel, op. cit., pp. 596 ff. Other theorists offer a diverse number of methods. For example, Surgant gives five in his Manuale Curatorum; William of Auvergne, in his De faciebus, three; John of Wales, in his De arte praedicandi, four; and St. Antoninus, in the Summœ sacrae theologiæ, seven. See Caplan, “Classical rhetoric and the mediæval theory of preaching,” in Classical Philology, xxviii, 2 (April, 1933).

^{Note 18 in page 344} For the Aids to preaching see the valuable treatments by Cruel, op. cit., pp. 451–168, and Linsenmayer, op. cit., pp. 168–184.

^{Note 19 in page 344} See Caplan, “The Four Senses of Scriptural Interpretation and the Mediaeval Theory of Preaching,” in Speculum iv, 3 (July 1929), 282–290.

^{Note 20 in page 345} Bk. I, Consideratio ix, fol. 16^v, on the conditions (see p. 349 below) which a theme must fulfill.

^{Note 1 in page 345} Cf. Aquinas-tract, p. 72.

^{Note 2 in page 345} This fanciful etymology I have not found elsewhere.

^{Note 3 in page 346} 2 Sam. 5:5; Vulg. 2 Kings 5:5.

^{Note 4 in page 346} , most probably.

^{Note 5 in page 348} The phrase post illa (verba textus) the preacher would use as a formula for beginning his exposition. See Cruel, op. cit., pp. 123 ff.

^{Note 6 in page 348} Luke 8:5.

^{Note 7 in page 349} Cf. Aquinas-tract, p. 74.

^{Note 8 in page 350} Wrong reference. Ecclus. 41:1. Cf. Aquinas-tract, p. 75.

^{Note 9 in page 350} Vulg. Ps. 33:22; cf. Auth. Vers. 34:21.

^{Note 10 in page 350} Cf. Rev. 20:6.

^{Note 11 in page 350} Sermones 47:2, 3, on Mark 13:32 (“But of that day and that hour knoweth no man”); in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers 6:412, tr. R. G. MacMullen.

^{Note 12 in page 350} Aristotle, Eth. Nie. 3:9.

^{Note 13 in page 350} Wrong reference. Isaiah 38.

^{Note 14 in page 350} 7:40.

^{Note 15 in page 350} 9:15.

^{Note 16 in page 350} Wrong reference. Ex. 16:33.

^{Note 17 in page 351} 129:8.

^{Note 18 in page 351} The meaning of this pro theme is not clear to me; and I know nothing in Aristotle which might resemble it. Mysticized, it apparently implies a comparison between earth and the active, whose predisposition is to react to God's grace; whereas rock is like the inactive, who are characterized by a hard, irresponsive, and unyielding predisposition.

^{Note 19 in page 352} With reference to Luke 10:38 ff., Intravit Iesus. discussed below.

^{Note 20 in page 353} Zech. 2:10.

^{Note 21 in page 353} Matt. 21:5.

^{Note 22 in page 353} Is this perhaps a misquotation of Zech. 2:10: Lauda, et laetare, filia Zion?

^{Note 23 in page 354} Cf. Vulg. 3 Kings (Auth. Vers. 1 Kings) 10:1 ff.

^{Note 24 in page 354} 1 Cor. 9:24.

^{Note 25 in page 354} Not an exact Biblical quotation, in this form of the phrase. Cf., e.g., Mark 6:16, Acts 10:41, Rom. 4:25, 7:4, etc.

^{Note 26 in page 354} Luke 10:38 ff.

^{Note 27 in page 357} Cf. the much fuller treatment of expansion in the Aquinas-tract, p. 76.

^{Note 28 in page 357} Eph. 5:5.

^{Note 29 in page 358} 1 Pet. 5:6.

^{Note 30 in page 358} 11:29.

^{Note 31 in page 358} Gal. 4:26.

^{Note 32 in page 359} Cf. Aquinas-tract, p. 75.

^{Note 33 in page 359} The first Concordance of the Bible was completed in 1230 by the first Dominican cardinal, Hugh of St. Cher, aided, it is said, by 500 Dominicans. Supplying merely an index, by book and chapter, to passages where a word is found, this work formed the basis for revisions made at the Monastery of St. Jacques in Paris: The Concordantiae S. Jacobi or Concordantiae Breves, so called because the wording of passages was omitted, and the Concordantiae Anglicanae Majores, or Maximae, wrought (about 1250), with full quotations, by three Englishmen, John of Darlington, Richard of Stavenesby, and Hugh of Croyndon. Later, the Franciscan Minister-General, Arlotto of Prato, made improvements, and in 1310 Conrad of Halberstadt very materially amended and abridged Hugh's work, retaining only the essential words of a quotation. Conrad aimed “ad commodum non modicum quidem eorum qui vel in cathedra docent vel in ecclesia sermocinando praedicant.” His was the first concordance to be printed (Strassburg, 1470). See J. A. Fabricius, op. cit., i and ii, 381–383; Daunou in Hist. Litt. de la France xix, 38–49: Quétif et Echard, Scriptores Ordinis Praedicatorum (Paris, 1719), i, 194–209; Cruel, op. cit., p. 453; Hurter, op. cit., ii, 339 ff. and 410; F. Kaulen, art. “Bibelconcordanzen,” in Kirchenlexikon, ed. H. J. Wetzerand Benedikt Welte; C. R. Gregory, art. “Concordances” in The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge; J. F. Fenlon, art. “Concordances of the Bible” in Cath. Encyc.

^{Note 34 in page 360} The Tabula auctoritatum et sententiarum bibliae cum concordantiis decretorum et decretalium of Joannes Calderini, professor of Canon Law at Bologna (died 1365). The title of a copy in the British Museum (c. 13. b. 2., Cologne, 1470) reads: Auctoritates decretorum omnem effectum tum textus quam glossarum nuclialiter … in se continentes. The Tabula is a concordance of Biblical citations in the Decretum of Gratian and the decretals. A goodly number of MSS. are extant, mostly in Germany, and at least three editions were printed in that land during the fifteenth century. See Fabricius, op. cit., i and ii, 297; Cruel, op. cit. p. 453; Hurter, op. cit., ii, 659–660; and especially J. F. von Schulte, Die Geschichte der Quellen und Literatur des Canonischen Rechts (Stuttgart, 1875–80), ii, 247–253.

^{Note 35 in page 360} Liber moralitatum elegantissimus magnarum rerum naturalium lumen anime dictus, cum septem apparitoribus necnon sanctorum doctorum orthodoxe fidei professorum poetarum etiam ac oratorum auctoritatibus per modum pharatre secundum ordinem alphabeti collectis feliciter incipit (ed. Augsburg, 1479), on the authority of two MSS. (at Marseilles and Augsburg) regarded by Cruel, op. cit., p. 460, Linsenmayer, op. cit., p. 175, n. 1, and J.-Th. Welter, L'exemplum dans la littérature réligieuse et didactique du moyen âge (Paris-Toulouse, 1927), pp. 341–344 (which see), as the work of Berengarius of Landora (1262-1330), Master General of the Dominican order (1312-17) and Archbishop of Compostela (1317-30). The prologue in the printed editions I have consulted, Augsburg 1479 and 1482 (Hain 10331 and 10333), shows that the editor, the Carmelite Matthias Farinator of Vienna, was largely responsible for the form in which the work was printed. Hurter, op. cit., ii, 614, assigns the authorship (1332) to a Hermann de Gotschah, otherwise unknown, a Canon of Vorau in Steiermark, Austria, but nowhere gives the evidence for this attribution. One of the most learned books of the Middle Ages, it was compiled, with the preacher's needs in view, from innumerable Greek, Latin, Arabic, and Jewish sources that were investigated in many parts of Europe; and with the aid of three translators from Greek and Latin works in natural science. It took the author twenty-nine years to complete (it was begun in 1293 and finished in 1323). It is a mine of all things conceivably of interest to the Middle Ages, used as subjects for moralistic comparison; and was especially popular in Germany, as many MSS., several incunabula, and a German translation of the fifteenth century attest.

For the life of Berengarius—these do not mention the Lumen Animae among his works—see Quétif et Echard, op. cit., i, 514–517; C. Douais, Les Frères Prêcheurs en Gascogne au xiii^me et au xiv^me Siècle (Paris–Auch, 1885), 373–374; Ulysse Chevalier, Répertoire des sources historiques du Moyen Age (Bio-Bibliographie) (Paris, 1905–7) s. Bérenger de Landorre; Enciclopedia Universal Illustrada, s. Landora, Fray Berenguer de; B. M. Reichert, Monumenta Ordinis Fratrum Praedicatorum Historica (Cronica Ordinis Praedicatorum, Rome–Stuttgart, 1897), ii, 1, 107 ff. For Farinator (fl. third quarter of saec. xv), see Chevalier, op. cit.

^{Note 36 in page 361} Most certainly the Summa de exemplis et rerum similitudinibus libris decem constant, by all now attributed to the celebrated Dominican preacher, Joannes Gorinus (di Coppo) of San Gemignano. This small encyclopedia of the natural sciences, composed about the year 1300 for the use of preachers (Incipit summa insignis ac perutilis praedicatoribus de quacumque materia dicturis), was extremely popular in the Middle Ages (especially in Germany) and thereafter well into the seventeenth century. It is a carefully arranged treatise, each book containing a prologue, and alphabetical rubrics divided into paragraphs which present the materials for moralistic comparison; it deals with such diverse subjects as the sky, the elements, metals, stones, vegetables, plants, terrestrial animals, man and his members, dreams, civil and canonical law, arts and crafts, manners of man, and the like. See Cruel, op. cit., p. 460; Quétif et Echard, op. cit., i, 528; T. F. Crane, The Exempta of Jacques de Vitry (London, 1890), p. xciv; Hurter, op. cit., ii, 491; and esp. Welter, op. cit. pp. 340–341. Conrad of Halberstadt later compiled an inferior and abridged Liber Similitudinum Naturalium, but there is no evidence that this work exerted much influence.

^{Note 37 in page 361} Now generally considered the work (completed not long before 1281) of the Dominican Hugh Ripelin, Prior of Strassburg. See Félix Lajard, in Histoire Littéraire de la France xxi (1847), 155–163; Quétif et Echard, op. cit., i, 470; Cruel, op. cit., p. 455; Joseph Schroeder, art. “Hugh of Strasburg,” in Cath. Encyc.: Hurter, op. cit., ii, 383–4; especially Luzian Pfleger, “Der Dominikaner Hugo von Strassburg und das Compendium theologicae veritatis,” in Zeitschr. für kath. Theologie xxviii (1904), 429–440; Martin Grabmann, “Studien über Ulrich von Strassburg,” ibid. xxix (1905), 321–330; and Grabmann, Die Geschichte der scholastischen Methode (Freiburg in Breisgau, 1909–1911), ii, 370–371. This work, called the “classic school text of the Middle Ages,” was later often printed, and several times translated into German, and had a continuous influence for several centuries. It comprises seven books dealing with the nature of Deity, Creation, the Fall, the Incarnation, the Sanctification through Grace, the Sacraments, and the punishment of the wicked and rewards of the blessed when the world shall come to an end. Ulrich Surgant includes this work, the Concordantiae Majores, the Liber Similitudinum, and the Lumen Animae among supplementary books for study by preachers in his influential Manuale Curatorum, Bk. i, Consideratio xxv, fol. 67^r, ed. Basel, 1507.

^{Note 38 in page 361} The Summa Theologica and the Summa contra Gentiles. Cruel, op. cit., p. 460, quoting this passage, mentions only one Summa S. Thomae, but fails to give any information concerning the copy of Henry's tract that he used. That the Summa contra Gentiles was used by preachers is perhaps evinced by the quotation from it, on demons instilling false opinion, in the Lumen Animae, Titulus 37. T.